September 2012 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Land Management 

Lower Sonoran Field Office, Phoenix,Arizona 

LOWER SONORAN 

RECORD OF DECISION & 

APPROVED RESOURCE 

MANAGEMENT PLAN 
MISSION STATEMENT

“The Bureau of Land Management is responsible for stewardship of our public lands. The BLM is 

committed to manage, protect, and improve these lands in a manner to serve the needs of the American 

people. Management is based upon the principles of multiple use and sustained yield of our Nation’s 

resources within the framework of environmental responsibility and scientific technology. These 

resources include recreation, rangelands, timber, minerals, watershed, fish and wildlife habitat,

wilderness, air, and scenic quality, as well as scientific and cultural values.”

BLM/AZ/PL-12/007
LOWER SONORAN RECORD OF DECISION

AND

APPROVED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN

Lead Agency: US Department of the Interior (DOI), Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 

Cooperating

Agencies: Arizona Game and Fish Department, Arizona Department of Transportation

Location: Arizona 

Contacts: Requests for additional information regarding the Record of Decision and Approved Resource 

Management Plan: 

 Emily Garber, Manager, Lower Sonoran Field Office, 623-580-5500

Requests for copies of the document: 

 blm_az_ls_sdnm_plan@blm.gov or call the Phoenix District Office Receptionist 

at 623-580-5500

Project Web site: http://www.blm.gov/az/st/en/prog/planning/son_des.html 

Abstract: The Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan

(ROD/ARMP) is a project of BLM Arizona that supports the BLM’s Mission. The 

Approved RMP was prepared under the authority and regulations implementing the 

Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 Code of Federal Regulations 

1600). It includes broad land use plan decisions that provide the overall direction for 

managing resources and resource uses in the Lower Sonoran Decision Area (LSDA). 

Land use plan decisions are expressed as goals and objectives (desired outcomes), 

allowable uses, and management actions anticipated to achieve desired outcomes. The 

Approved RMP does not include any implementation-level decisions; future 

implementation of the ROD may require additional steps and analysis under the 

National Environmental Policy Act before on-the-ground activities can begin.

The LSDA is in south-central Arizona, mostly south and west of Phoenix, and extends 

south to the United States-Mexico border, west to the Yuma County line, and as far 

east as the town of Globe; it is mostly within Maricopa County and includes portions 

of Pinal, Pima, Yuma, and Gila Counties. The LSDA encompasses approximately 

930,200 acres of BLM-administered land. 

This plan represents years of ongoing coordinated efforts on the part of the BLM 

Phoenix District, Lower Sonoran Field Office staff, BLM Arizona State Office staff, 

representatives of communities in the Planning Area, cooperating agencies, special 

interest and user groups, and hundreds of concerned citizens. The decisions outlined 

in this document will enable the BLM to manage and protect resources on public lands 

within the LSDA to achieve desired future conditions and management objectives, in 

partnership with communities and citizens.

Land use plan decisions identified in the Approved RMP are final and become effective 

upon the Arizona’s State Director’s signing of the ROD.
This page intentionally left blank.
United States Department ofthe Interior 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

Phoenix District 

Lower Sonoran Field Office 

21605 North 7th Avenue 

Phoenix, Arizona 85027 

www.blm.gov/az/ 

TAKE PRID~

INAMERICA 

In Reply Refer To: 

2000/2050 

Dear Reader/Interested Party: 

I am pleased to announce that, after several years ofhard work and collaboration, the 

Lower Sonoran Resource Management Plan (RMP) is complete. This document will 

provide guidance for the management of about 930,200 acres ofFederal surface and 

mineral estate administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Maricopa, 

Gila, Pima, Pinal, and Yuma Counties in central and southern Arizona. It will also 

provide guidance for administration of an additional 210,000 acres ofmineral estate 

within these four Counties. 

The attached Record ofDecision (ROD) and Approved RMP have been prepared in 

accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEP A). The ROD/ Approved RMP is available to 

members ofthe public and will be sent to pertinent local, State, Tribal and Federal 

government entities. The ROD finalizes the proposed decisions presented in the Proposed 

RMP/Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) that was released on June 15, 2012 

and subject to a 30-day protest period that ended on July 16, 2012. Nine protest letters 

with standing were received. The protests were reviewed by the BLM Director in 

Washington, D.C. After careful consideration of all points raised in these protests, the 

Director concluded the responsible planning team and decision makers followed all 

applicable laws, regulations, policies, and pertinent resource considerations in developing 

the proposed plan. Minor adjustments or points of clarification are incorporated into the 

Approved RMP in response to issues raised in the protest process and fmal BLM review. 

These minor changes are discussed in the ROD under the section titled Clarifications and 

Modifications, but the protest review did not result in any significant changes from the 

Proposed RMP. 

The approval ofthis ROD by the BLM Arizona State Director serves as the final decision 

for all land use plan decisions described in the attached Approved RMP. Future 
2 

implementation of land use plan decisions will not be undertaken without suitable further 

NEPA analysis, including appropriate public involvement. 

Notification ofthe approval ofthis ROD/ Approved RMP has been announced via local 

news releases and on the BLM website at: 

http://www.blm.gov/az/st/en/prog/planning/son des.html 

CD-ROM versions ofthe ROD/Approved RMP may be obtained by contacting the Lower 

Sonoran Field Office by phone at (623) 580-5500; by sending a request by email to 

BLM_AZ_ LSFO _ SDNM@blm.gov ; or at the following address: 

Bureau of Land Management 


Lower Sonoran Field Office 


21605 N. 7th Avenue 


Phoenix, Arizona 85027 


A limited number of Hard Copy documents will be available at a later date and may be 

requested from the same locations. 

The BLM is pleased to provide this copy ofthe Lower Sonoran ROD/Approved RMP for 

your reference. We greatly appreciate the efforts of all who contributed to completion of 

this RMP, including many dedicated BLM employees past and present, the State of 

Arizona, Maricopa County, the towns of Buckeye and Gila Bend, tribal communities, and 

numerous Federal and State government agencies that worked closely with us to 

complete this important effort. We also appreciate the extensive public participation 

during this time by local communities, organizations, and individuals. Public input 

informed and improved this planning document. We look forward to continuing our work 

with our partners and citizens as we implement the decisions in this RMP. 

Sincerely, 

Emily Garber 

Field Manager 

Enclosure 
TABLE OF CONTENTS

 
 
September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

1. RECORD OF DECISION................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.2 The Decision.................................................................................................................................. 1-1

1.2.1 Protest Resolution......................................................................................................... 1-2

1.2.2 Clarifications and Modifications ................................................................................. 1-4

1.3 The Alternatives............................................................................................................................ 1-5

1.3.1 Alternatives Considered but Not Analyzed............................................................ 1-5

1.3.2 Alternatives Considered in Detail ............................................................................. 1-6

1.3.3 Environmentally Preferable Alternative.................................................................... 1-9

1.4 Land Use Plan Decisions, Implementation Decisions, and Administrative 

Actions.......................................................................................................................................... 1-11

1.4.1 Land Use Plan Decisions............................................................................................ 1-11

1.4.2 Implementation Decisions......................................................................................... 1-12

1.4.3 Administrative Actions............................................................................................... 1-13

1.5 Management Considerations for Selecting the Approved Plan ....................................... 1-13

1.6 Mitigation Measures................................................................................................................... 1-13

1.7 Plan Monitoring ........................................................................................................................... 1-13

1.8 Implementation of the Management Plan.............................................................................. 1-14

1.9 Public Involvement...................................................................................................................... 1-15

1.9.1 Public Scoping ............................................................................................................... 1-15

1.9.2 Public Review of and Comment on the DRMP/EIS ............................................. 1-15

1.9.3 Public Review of and Protest on the PRMP/FEIS ................................................. 1-15

1.9.4 Agency Consultations – US Fish and Wildlife Service and State 

Historic Preservation Office ..................................................................................... 1-16

1.10 Rationale for Selection of the Approved RMP .................................................................... 1-16

1.11 Availability and Approval of the Plan...................................................................................... 1-17

2. APPROVED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN ............................................................... 2-1

2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1.1 Purpose and Need......................................................................................................... 2-2

2.1.2 Decision Area Description.......................................................................................... 2-2

2.1.3 Scoping Issues................................................................................................................. 2-5

2.1.4 Issues Addressed............................................................................................................ 2-5

2.1.5 Issues Considered but not Further Analyzed ......................................................... 2-7

2.1.6 Planning Criteria........................................................................................................... 2-11

2.1.7 Planning Process........................................................................................................... 2-13

2.1.8 Consultation and Collaboration............................................................................... 2-13

2.1.9 Policy...............................................................................................................................2-18

2.2 Management Decisions.............................................................................................................. 2-18

2.2.1 Air Quality..................................................................................................................... 2-19

2.2.2 Cave Resources............................................................................................................ 2-20

2.2.3 Cultural and Heritage Resources............................................................................. 2-21

2.2.4 Paleontological Resources......................................................................................... 2-27

2.2.5 Soil Resources.............................................................................................................. 2-28
Table of Contents

ii Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

2.2.6 Vegetation Resources................................................................................................. 2-30

2.2.7 Visual Resources.......................................................................................................... 2-35

2.2.8 Water Resources......................................................................................................... 2-39

2.2.9 Wild Horse and Burro Management....................................................................... 2-41

2.2.10 Wilderness Characteristics....................................................................................... 2-41

2.2.11 Wildland Fire Management........................................................................................ 2-45

2.2.12 Wildlife and Special Status Species.......................................................................... 2-54

2.2.13 Lands and Realty .......................................................................................................... 2-70

2.2.14 Livestock Grazing ........................................................................................................ 2-81

2.2.15 Minerals Management................................................................................................. 2-86

2.2.16 Recreation Management ............................................................................................ 2-95

2.2.17 Travel Management.................................................................................................. 2-113

2.2.18 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC).......................................... 2-120

2.2.19 National Byways........................................................................................................ 2-129

2.2.20 National Trails........................................................................................................... 2-130

2.2.21 Fred J. Weiler Green Belt Resource Conservation Area ............................... 2-133

2.2.22 Hazardous Materials and Public Safety ................................................................ 2-134

2.2.23 Scientific Research, Education, and Public Outreach ....................................... 2-136

2.2.24 Resources Education................................................................................................ 2-137

2.2.25 Public Uses and Visitor Information..................................................................... 2-137

2.2.26 Public Safety and Fire Education............................................................................ 2-137

2.3 Public Involvement................................................................................................................... 2-138

2.4 Management Plan Implementation....................................................................................... 2-138

2.5 Plan Evaluation and Maintenance ......................................................................................... 2-139

2.5.1 Plan Evaluation........................................................................................................... 2-139

2.5.2 Plan Maintenance ...................................................................................................... 2-139

2.6 Monitoring and Adaptive Management............................................................................... 2-140

2.6.1 Monitoring.................................................................................................................. 2-140

2.6.2 Adaptive Management ............................................................................................. 2-141

3. GLOSSARY..................................................................................................................... 3-1

4. LIST OF PREPARERS....................................................................................................... 4-1

5. APPENDICES.................................................................................................................. 5-1

TABLES Page

2-1 Cultural and Heritage Site Use Allocation .......................................................................................... 2-21

2-2 Desired Future Conditions for Vegetation Resources..................................................................... 2-30

2-3 VRM Classes............................................................................................................................................... 2-35

2-4 Sonoran Desert Tortoise Habitat by Category .................................................................................2-61

2-5 Lands and Realty Allocations.................................................................................................................. 2-70

2-6 Livestock Grazing Allocations................................................................................................................. 2-81

2-7 Acres of Public Lands Available for Mineral Activity......................................................................... 2-86

2-8 Recreation Allocations............................................................................................................................. 2-95

2-9 Off-Highway Vehicle Area Designations........................................................................................... 2-113

2-10 ACEC Acres............................................................................................................................................. 2-120

4-1 List of Preparers........................................................................................................................................... 4-1
Table of Contents

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan iii

MAPS Page

1 Geographic Units......................................................................................................................................... 1-7

2 Surface Management................................................................................................................................... 2-3

3 Cultural Resource Allocations................................................................................................................ 2-23

4 Visual Resource Management................................................................................................................. 2-37

5 Wilderness Characteristics..................................................................................................................... 2-43

6 Wildlife and Special Status Species........................................................................................................ 2-57

7 Sonoran Pronghorn Classification Areas............................................................................................. 2-59

8 Renewable Energy ..................................................................................................................................... 2-73

9 Land Use Authorizations ......................................................................................................................... 2-75

10 Land Tenure................................................................................................................................................ 2-79

11 Livestock Grazing ...................................................................................................................................... 2-83

12 Mineral Restrictions: Locatables ............................................................................................................ 2-89

13 Mineral Restrictions: Leasables............................................................................................................... 2-91

14 Mineral Restrictions: Mineral Materials................................................................................................ 2-93

15 Recreation Management .......................................................................................................................... 2-97

16 Travel Management................................................................................................................................ 2-115

17 Special Designations............................................................................................................................... 2-121

18 Special Designations Gila River Parcels............................................................................................. 2-127

APPENDICES

A. Best Management Practices and Standard Operating Procedures 

B. Guidelines for Grazing

C. Legal Descriptions of Lands for Disposal 

D. Recreation Settings and Worksheets

E. Possible Easement Locations 

F. Route Evaluation Methodology 

G. Route Mitigations 

H. ACEC Evaluations
Table of Contents

iv Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

This page intentionally left blank. 
September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 1-1 

1. RECORD OF DECISION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

This Record of Decision (ROD) is an approval of the United States (US) Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM’s) proposal to manage the BLM-administered lands in the Lower 

Sonoran Field Office (Lower Sonoran). This proposal is presented in the attached Approved Resource 

Management Plan (Approved RMP). This Approved RMP was described as Alternative E in the Lower 

Sonoran and Sonoran Desert National Monument Proposed Resource Management Plan and Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (PRMP/FEIS), which was released on June 15, 2012. While the 

PRMP/FEIS also addressed management of the Sonoran Desert National Monument Decision Area, this 

ROD applies only to those decisions for management of the Lower Sonoran Decision Area (LSDA). 

The LSDA is in Maricopa, Gila, Pima, Pinal, and Yuma Counties. Population centers in or next to the 

Lower Sonoran area are metropolitan Phoenix and the communities of Goodyear, Buckeye, Gila Bend, 

Ajo, Globe-Miami, Tonopah, Mobile, Maricopa, Casa Grande, and Sells. The decisions in the Approved 

RMP apply only to the BLM-administered lands and subsurface (mineral) estate in the Lower Sonoran

Decision Area. 

This ROD provides an overview of the alternatives considered, a summary of protests received and 

clarifications made in response, management considerations and rationale for the decisions, and an 

overview of public involvement in the planning process.

1.2 THE DECISION

The decision is hereby made to approve the attached RMP for the Lower Sonoran Field Office. The 

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

and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976 (43 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR], 1600). It includes broad 

land use plan decisions that provide the overall direction for managing resources and resource uses in 

the Lower Sonoran Decision Area. Land use plan decisions are expressed as goals and objectives 

(desired outcomes), allowable uses, and management actions anticipated to achieve desired outcomes. 
1. Record of Decision

1-2 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Land use plan decisions identified in the Approved RMP are final and become effective when this ROD is 

signed. The Approved RMP does not include any implementation-level decisions; future implementation 

level decisions to implement the ROD may require additional steps before ground activities can begin.

The decisions included in this ROD and Approved RMP supersede all of the previous BLM land use plans

that guided management within the boundaries of the LSDA. 

1.2.1 Protest Resolution

An environmental impact statement (EIS) was prepared for this Approved RMP, in compliance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. The Approved RMP is nearly identical to the 

Proposed RMP set forth in the Lower Sonoran and Sonoran Desert National Monument PRMP/FEIS, 

published June 2012. 

The BLM received nine protest letters during the 30-day protest period provided for the proposed land 

use plan decisions in the PRMP/FEIS, in accordance with 43 CFR Part 1610.5-2. Protesting parties are 

listed below:

• Arizona State Senator Gail Griffin

• Ronald G. Martin

• Dawn Meidinger, Fennemore-Craig on behalf of Freeport McMoRan Corporation

• Greta Anderson, Western Watersheds Project, and Sandy Bahr, Sierra Club – Grand Canyon 

Chapter

• Michael DeRosier, Beloat Allotment

• The Wilderness Society, Arizona Wilderness Coalition, National Trust for Historic 

Preservation, Archeology Southwest, Sierra Club – Grand Canyon Chapter, Western 

Watersheds Project

• Jason Keith, Conley Allotment

• Ron Henry, Mayor, and Colby Turner, Parks and Recreation Director, Town of Gila Bend

• Patrick Bray, Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association

Protest resolution is the responsibility of the BLM Washington Office, with input from the Lower 

Sonoran Field Office and the Arizona State Office. Once the standing of the protesters was determined, 

protest letters were reviewed for valid protest issues. Valid protest issues are as follows: 

• Land use planning level decisions. Implementation level decisions are not protestable under the 

planning regulations.

• Information already raised in comment at some time during the planning process. No new issues 

can be brought up for protest.

• A concise statement explaining why the State Director’s decision is believed to be wrong. A 

difference of opinion or disagreement is not sufficient to constitute a protest issue. 

Protest issues were parsed out of letters and then combined into common issues. These issues were 

then summarized and responded to as issue groups. While the protest process considered the whole 

letter sent by protesters, only those statements that constituted valid protest issues were responded to.

Responses were then published on the BLM’s website as the Director’s Protest Resolution Report.
1. Record of Decision

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 1-3 

The BLM responded to the following protest issues raised by protesting parties: 

Impacts Analysis: The BLM failed to analyze the direct and indirect effects of the proposed action, 

including the proposed closure of public lands to mineral entry and the effects of Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern (ACECs) and other special management areas on minerals development. 

Cumulative Effects Analysis: The PRMP/FEIS failed to adequately analyze the cumulative effects of the 

proposed action for minerals management and livestock grazing. 

Scoping: The public scoping process for the Lower Sonoran-Sonoran Desert National Monument 

(Lower Sonoran-SDNM) RMP was insufficient as the BLM failed to reinitiate scoping in response to 

significant changes in the Planning Area subsequent to the publication of the Notice of Intent in 2002.

Range of Alternatives: The PRMP/FEIS’s range of alternatives failed to explore the opportunity for the 

enhanced development of mineral resources and to consider an ephemeral grazing alternative.

ACECs: The Cuerda de Lena ACEC did not meet the requisite statutory and regulatory criteria for 

designation, and the BLM failed to fully disclose the proposed management actions and mitigation 

features for the Cuerda de Lena ACEC.

Air Resources: The PRMP/FEIS does not comply with the requirements of Secretarial Order 3289 by 

not adequately analyzing impacts on climate change.

Cultural Resources: The PRMP/FEIS did not take a hard look at impacts on cultural resources under 

NEPA and did not complete Section 106 consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office for 

route designations. 

Fish, Wildlife, Plants, and Special Status Species: The BLM did not complete consultation, as required 

under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.

Lands, Realty: The PMRP/FEIS did not recognize valid existing rights.

Livestock Grazing: The BLM did not take a hard look at impacts from livestock grazing on wildlife and 

special status species, visual resource management, air quality, climate change, vegetation, and 

socioeconomics. Additionally, the BLM did not use the best available information as baseline data for the 

impact analysis. 

Department of the Interior (DOI) Policy for the Integrity of Scientific and Scholarly Activities: During 

the development of the PRMP/FEIS, the BLM violated the Department of the Interior’s Policy for the 

Integrity of Scientific and Scholarly Activities by committing scientific and scholarly misconduct by 

changing data and intentionally omitting data relevant to the impact analysis. 

Administrative Procedures Act: Aspects of the RMP/EIS process violated the Administrative Procedures

Act.
1. Record of Decision

1-4 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Recreation, Visitor Services: The BLM did not analyze the impacts from allowing recreational target 

shooting within the SDNM and arbitrarily proposed to allow recreational target shooting in the SDNM. 

Wilderness Characteristics: The BLM failed to follow agency policy on managing lands with wilderness 

characteristics. 

The BLM Director’s decisions on the protests are summarized in the “Director’s Protest Resolution 

Report, Sonoran Desert National Monument and Lower Sonoran Resource Management Plans,” 

released on September 14, 2012 and available on the BLM Web site. The Director dismissed the 

protests from Senator Gail Griffin, Ronald Martin, and the Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association because 

they contained only comments and no valid protest issues. The Director dismissed protests from 

Michael DeRosier and the Town of Gila Bend because the protests cite only implementation decisions. 

Implementation decisions are not subject to protest under the planning regulations. However, any party 

adversely affected by an implementation decision may appeal such decision to the Interior Board of Land 

Appeals after the ROD is signed. The Director denied the protest from Fennemore-Craig, Western 

Watersheds Project, The Wilderness Society et al., and Jason Keith and provided responses to their 

protests in the Director’s Protest Resolution Report. In summary, the Director concluded that the BLM 

Arizona State Director followed the applicable laws, regulations, and policies and considered all relevant 

resource information and public input in developing the Proposed RMP. Each protesting party was 

notified in writing of the Director’s findings and the disposition of their protests.

The BLM Director resolved the protests without making significant changes to the Proposed RMP, 

though minor clarifications were made and have been explained in the following section.

1.2.2 Clarifications and Modifications

As the result of continued internal review, the BLM made several clarifications between the PRMP/FEIS 

and the Approved RMP. Minor grammatical or editorial edits that were made are not included. 

Terminology in the Approved RMP was clarified when referring to areas with restrictions on fluid and 

locatable minerals and mineral materials development and corrections to the minerals allocation tables. 

The BLM should have provided a citation in the PRMP/FEIS for “Archaeological Resources of the Ajo 

Region: A Cultural Resources Inventory of 2,928 Acres of BLM Land in Western Pima County, Arizona,”

by John M.D. Hooper (2011), and the Darby Wells Village study (“Ajo’s Earliest Visitors, Based on the 

Black Mountain Survey,” edited by Rick Martynec and Jane Thompson, 2005) to further support the 

determination of designating the Cuerda de Lena ACEC. While providing these citations in the PRMP 

would have added to the documentation of the BLM’s determination, the studies only complement and 

support the statements made in the ACEC report and EIS and, thus, would not have had any bearing on 

the outcome of the BLM’s ACEC review or the BLM’s analysis of related environmental concerns. The 

ACEC report was revised to include these new citations (see Appendix H, ACEC Evaluations).

The BLM clarified two recreation management actions (RM-2.7.1 and RM-2.7.2) to note that the actions 

would apply to only Special Recreation Management Areas, not all Recreation Management Areas.
1. Record of Decision

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 1-5 

Seven appendices that were in the PRMP/FEIS have been brought forward and renumbered for the 

Approved RMP, as follows: Appendix A, Best Management Practices and Standard Operating 

Procedures, Appendix B, Guidelines for Grazing, Appendix D, Recreation Settings and 

Worksheets, Appendix E, Possible Easement Locations, Appendix F, Route Evaluation 

Methodology, Appendix G, Route Mitigations, and Appendix H, ACEC Evaluations. 

Appendix C, Legal Descriptions of Lands for Disposal, is a new appendix added to the Approved RMP 

in support of the land tenure decisions.

Some decisions presented in the PRMP/FEIS were repeated in multiple program areas. In the Approved 

RMP, these decisions are cross-referenced between programs.

1.3 THE ALTERNATIVES

NEPA requires the development and consideration of a reasonable range of management alternatives, 

including a No Action Alternative, to analyze impacts and guide decision makers in developing and 

selecting the Approved RMP. All alternatives must be viable and reasonable, must be responsive to 

issues identified by the public, stakeholders, and BLM specialists and managers during the scoping period,

and must meet established planning criteria and applicable federal and state laws, regulations, and BLM 

policies.

1.3.1 Alternatives Considered but Not Analyzed

The following alternatives and management options were considered as possible ways of resolving 

resource management issues and conflicts but were eliminated from detailed analysis; the rationale for 

the alternative’s elimination is provided under each heading.

Public Safety

There was a recommendation to prohibit the carrying of weapons. By law, US citizens may carry 

weapons on or through public lands for a number of legitimate purposes, including hunting and selfprotection. Alternatives for managing recreational target shooting were considered in the PRMP for 

public safety and resource protection purposes, but a prohibition against the possession of firearms is 

not being pursued.

Driving in Washes

A proposal was submitted that driving be allowed in all washes large enough to accommodate a fourwheel-drive vehicle as a long-standing traditional use. This alternative was not carried forward into an 

action alternative because allowing vehicular travel in washes not specifically designated as a BLM asset, 

such as a primitive road, would force drivers to determine whether the wash was open for travel. Such 

ambiguity could lead to situations of unlawful driving and resource damage. The travel route inventories

conducted by the BLM since 2000 include routes in washes. 
1. Record of Decision

1-6 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Land Disposal

The recommendation was to identify for disposal the federal lands bordering the Gila River Indian

Reservation in the Estrella Mountains. While there are lands that border the reservation analyzed in 

detail for disposal among the alternatives, those lands situated in the Sierra Estrella Wilderness and 

within the Anza National Historic Trail (NHT) boundaries cannot be disposed of. They are 

congressionally protected and designated under the Wilderness Act of 1964 and National Trails System 

Act of 1968, respectively. 

Recreation

During public comment, an alternative was suggested to manage Buckeye Hills West as a Special 

Recreation Management Area, with an emphasis on off-highway vehicle (OHV) recreation. The 

commenter suggested developing motorcycle trails, a motorcycle park, a youth size all-terrain vehicle 

(ATV) and motorcycle area, and facilities to accommodate developed OHV use. The area in question 

includes BLM-administered public land, Arizona Game and Fish Department land, and Maricopa County 

parks. The objectives for Buckeye Hills West are being developed by all three agencies involved. 

Management as a motorcycle and ATV recreation area with a youth ATV and motorcycle park on this 

parcel would not be consistent with these objectives. Planning for specific recreation facilities to meet 

area objectives, including those to accommodate motorized forms of recreation, will be conducted as 

part of an implementation plan and is beyond the scope of this RMP. In addition, there currently is no 

legal public access to BLM-administered lands in Buckeye Hills West. Without legal access, the suggested 

recreation management would not be implementable. For these reasons, the BLM found this alternative 

impractical to analyze further.

Livestock Grazing

For livestock grazing allotments in the LSDA, an alternative was considered regarding the potential 

conversion of all, or some, perennial and perennial-ephemeral livestock grazing allotments to strictly 

ephemeral use only. This alternative was not evaluated further because these decisions will be 

determined on an individual allotment basis based on monitoring findings and through a land health 

evaluation (LHE) process, which was not conducted for this plan.

1.3.2 Alternatives Considered in Detail

The general scope and key highlights of each alternative considered in the PRMP/FEIS for the LSDA are

summarized below. The LSDA public lands are divided into six relatively large geographic regions, or 

blocks, dispersed over a large expanse (see Map 1, Geographic Units). The alternatives for the LSDA

include planning-level decisions that will be applicable across the entire area.

Alternative A, No Action Alternative

Alternative A, the No Action Alternative, would have continued current management without change to 

land use, public use, or resource protection management. It would not have addressed issues that were 

unforeseen or nonexistent when the existing management plans were prepared.
1. Record of Decision

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 1-9 

Alternative B

Alternative B identified the greatest extent of public land suitable for the widest potential array of uses 

and would have emphasized opportunities for those uses. It generally emphasized motorized and 

developed recreation. Opportunities to visit remote settings and to experience nonmotorized primitive 

recreation would have been reduced from the current condition. As a result, this alternative required 

the most intensive use management, as well as hands-on resource stabilization and restoration 

measures, as compared to the other alternatives.

Alternative C

This alternative represented an attempt to balance resource protection with human use and influence by 

providing opportunities for a variety of uses, while emphasizing resource protection and conservation. It 

proposes a mix of natural processes and hands-on techniques for resource stabilization and restoration, 

thus reducing the need for intensive use management to avoid or mitigate any adverse effects.

Alternative D

This alternative placed the greatest emphasis on resource protection and conservation, with 

opportunities to visit remote settings and experience nonmotorized primitive recreation. It focused on 

natural processes and other unobtrusive methods for resource stabilization and restoration, so the need 

for both intensive use management and hands-on resource measures would be reduced by the greatest 

extent of all the alternatives.

Alternative E

Alternative E was the BLM’s PRMP for the LSDA. It incorporates elements from each of the other 

alternatives, and offers a unique prescription for managing the LSDA, while providing long-term 

protection and resource conservation. Alternative E balances human use and influence with resource 

protection. 

1.3.3 Environmentally Preferable Alternative

The BLM considers Alternative E to be the environmentally preferable alternative when taking into 

consideration the human (social and economic) environment as well as the natural environment. The US 

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has defined the environmentally preferable alternative as the 

one that will promote the national environmental policy as expressed in Section 101 of NEPA. The six 

broad policy goals for all federal plans, programs, and policies are listed below:

• Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding 

generations.

• Ensure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, aesthetically and culturally pleasing 

surroundings. 

• Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health 

or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences.
1. Record of Decision

1-10 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

• Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage, and maintain, 

wherever possible, an environment that supports diversity and variety of individual choice.

• Achieve a balance between population and resource use, which will permit high standards of 

living and a wide sharing of life’s amenities.

• Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of 

depletable resources.

Compared to the other alternatives analyzed, Alternative E best meets the above NEPA goals for the 

future management of the LSDA. It provides long-term protection and resource conservation, and 

balances human use and influence with resource protection. 

The No Action Alternative, Alternative A, would have no specific special status species or cultural 

resource provisions or allocations, no management actions specific to wildlife movement corridors, and 

no areas managed to protect wilderness characteristics. Grazing would continue to have undesirable 

effects. For these reasons, the No Action Alternative is not preferable from an environmental 

perspective. 

The management decisions in Alternative B identified the areas of the LSDA that would be most suitable 

for the largest number of potential uses and emphasized opportunities for those uses. Alternative B set 

desired outcomes and allocations for resources, including natural, cultural, and visual, while providing for 

appropriate human use and influence and an array of visitor experiences and opportunities. It focused on 

proactive techniques for ecosystem restoration, resource management, and scientific research and likely 

required more intensive use management to avoid or mitigate any adverse effects. However, Alternative 

B has the least amount of resource protections and would not achieve balance between resource uses 

and preserving important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of the LSDA. 

The management decisions in Alternative C represented an attempt to balance resource protection and 

human use and influence. As in Alternative B, it set desired outcomes and allocations for the resources, 

including natural, cultural, and visual. Alternative C proposed a moderate amount of open roads and 

trails and a mix of recreational opportunities. It also proposed a mix of natural processes and proactive

techniques for ecosystem restoration, resource management, and scientific research and would likely 

reduce the need for intensive use management to avoid or mitigate any adverse effects. Alternative C 

does not attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation.

Alternative D placed the greatest emphasis on minimal human use and influence and the maintenance of 

primitive landscapes. It focused on natural processes and other unobtrusive methods for ecosystem 

restoration, resource management, and scientific research, while emphasizing resource protection and 

conservation. As in the other alternatives, Alternative D set desired outcomes and allocations for 

resources, including natural, cultural, and visual, while allowing a lower level of human use. The need for 

both intensive use management and proactive resource stabilization and restoration measures would be 

reduced by the greatest degree under Alternative D. For these reasons, Alternative D did not achieve a 

balance between population and resource use, resource protection that permitted enhancement of 

resource conditions.
1. Record of Decision

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 1-11

Alternative E was the BLM’s PRMP for the LSDA. It incorporated elements from each of the other 

alternatives, offering a unique prescription for managing public use of the Monument, while providing

long-term protection and conservation of resources. Alternative E balanced human use and influence 

with resource protection. The need for both intensive use management and proactive resource 

stabilization and restoration measures would be reduced by an intermediate degree. Overall, Alternative 

E best meets the requirements of Section 101 of NEPA. The BLM has selected Alternative E as the 

environmentally preferable alternative.

1.4 LAND USE PLAN DECISIONS, IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS,

AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

The Approved RMP provides overall direction for management of all resources on BLM-administered 

land in the Lower Sonoran Field Office. Many land use plan decisions are implemented or become 

effective upon publication of the ROD for the Approved RMP and may include desired future conditions, 

land use allocations (allowable uses) or designations, and special designations.

Land use plan decisions represent the desired outcomes and the actions needed to achieve them. Such 

decisions were attained using the planning process found in 43 CFR, 1600, and guide future land 

management actions and subsequent site-specific implementation decisions. When presented to the 

public as proposed decisions, land use plan decisions can be protested to the BLM Director; however, 

they cannot be appealed to the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA).

Implementation decisions and management actions that require additional site-specific project planning, 

as funding becomes available, will require further environmental analysis. Administrative actions are not 

land use planning or implementation decisions but are a key component of the overall plan because they 

describe the BLM’s day-to-day actions to help meet desired future conditions. The BLM will continue to 

involve and collaborate with the public during implementation of the Approved Plan. Brief descriptions 

of the types of decisions are presented below.

1.4.1 Land Use Plan Decisions

Desired Outcomes

Land use plans identify desired outcomes expressed in terms of specific goals and objectives. Goals and 

objectives direct the BLM’s actions in most effectively meeting legal mandates, numerous regulatory 

responsibilities, national policy (including the DOI Strategic Plan goals), State Director guidance (see 43 

CFR, 1610.0-4[b]), and other resource or social needs. Desired outcomes should be identified for and 

pertain to resources (such as natural, biological, and cultural), resource uses (such as energy and 

livestock grazing), and other factors (such as social and economic conditions). Land use plans are 

designed to most effectively meet these desired outcomes through special designations, allowable uses, 

(land use allocations), and management actions.
1. Record of Decision

1-12 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Special Designations

Special designations are designated by Congress for special protection, such as wilderness areas (see the 

Approved Plan). Such designations are not land use plan decisions, but recommendations for designation 

can be made to Congress at the land use plan level. Congress may then act on these recommendations 

at a later time.

BLM administrative designations, such as ACECs, are also considered special designations and can be 

made in the land use plan (see the Approved Plan).

Allowable Uses (Land Use Allocations)

Land use plans must identify uses, or allocations, that are allowable, restricted, or prohibited on the 

public lands and mineral estate. These allocations identify surface lands or subsurface mineral interests 

where uses are allowed, including any restrictions that may be needed to meet goals and objectives. 

Land use plans also identify lands where specific uses are excluded to protect resource values. Certain 

lands may be open or closed to specific uses, based on legislative, regulatory, or policy requirements or 

criteria, to protect sensitive resource values. If land use plan decisions close areas of 100,000 acres or 

greater in size to a principal or major use for two years or more, Congress must be notified of the 

closure upon its implementation, as prescribed in 43 CFR, 1610.6. 

Management Actions

Land use plans must identify the actions anticipated to achieve desired outcomes, including actions to 

maintain, restore, or improve land health. These actions include proactive measures (e.g., those that will 

be taken to enhance watershed function and condition), as well as measures or criteria that will be 

applied to guide day-to-day activities on public land. Land use plans also establish administrative 

designations, such as ACECs, recommend proposed withdrawals and land tenure zones, and 

recommend or make findings of suitability for congressional designations (such as components of the 

National Wild and Scenic Rivers System).

1.4.2 Implementation Decisions

Implementation decisions (or activity level decisions) are management actions tied to a specific location 

that implement land use plan decisions. Implementation decisions generally constitute the BLM’s final 

approval, allowing on-the-ground actions to proceed and require appropriate site-specific planning and 

NEPA analysis. Such decisions may be incorporated into implementation plans (activity or project plans) 

or may exist as stand-alone decisions.

Unlike land use plan decisions, implementation decisions are not subject to protest under the planning 

regulations. Instead, implementation decisions are subject to various administrative remedies, 

particularly appeals to the IBLA (under 43 CFR, 4.410). Where implementation decisions are made as 

part of the land use planning process, they are still subject to the appeals process or other 

administrative review, as prescribed by the specific resource program regulations after the BLM resolves 

the protests to land use plan decisions and decides to adopt the management plan. For example, the 
1. Record of Decision

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 1-13

designation of a specific route is an implementation level decision, rather than a land use plan decision; 

consequently, individual route designations are subject to a separate appeals process. 

The Lower Sonoran ROD and Approved RMP do not include implementation decisions. 

1.4.3 Administrative Actions

Although the BLM’s intent and commitment to accomplish administrative actions is generally addressed 

in an EIS, such activities are not management decisions. Administrative actions are day-to-day activities 

conducted by the BLM, often required by FLPMA, but do not require NEPA analysis or a written 

decision by a responsible official. Examples of administrative actions are mapping, surveying, conducting 

inventory or monitoring, scientific research, other studies, partnering and collaborating with partners, 

developing educational materials, and working with local communities or interest groups.

1.5 MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS FOR SELECTING THE 

APPROVED PLAN

In developing the Approved RMP, the BLM had the discretion to select an alternative in its entirety or to 

combine aspects of the various alternatives that were presented in the DRMP/EIS or the PRMP/FEIS. 

This included considering management approaches that were presented during the comment period that 

do not result in significant changes from what the DRMP/EIS considered. The NEPA Handbook (H-1790-

1) states that “various parts of separate alternatives that are analyzed in the draft can also be ‘mixed and 

matched’ to develop a complete alternative in the final” (see also 43 CFR, 1503.4[a]).

Based on the input received during the planning process, there was both support and opposition to 

many components of the RMP. However, the BLM did not receive comments from federal or state 

agencies or from tribal governments indicating that the PRMP/FEIS was inconsistent with existing plans

or policies. Additionally, no inconsistencies with state plans, policies, or programs were identified during 

the governor’s consistency review of the PRMP/FEIS. The BLM considered all comments and protests 

received on the PRMP and input from the governor’s consistency review. This ROD serves as the final 

decision for the land use plan decisions for the Approved RMP, which will become effective on the date 

this ROD is signed.

1.6 MITIGATION MEASURES

In developing the alternatives, the BLM used a variety of management methods and tools, including 

identifying allowable uses, temporal, spatial, and restrictions on uses, where specific uses will be 

prohibited, and specific actions needed to achieve desired outcomes. Restrictions on uses are seasonal 

closures, limitations on surface disturbance, and application of best management practices (BMPs).

1.7 PLAN MONITORING

BLM planning regulations (43 CFR, Part 1610.4-9) call for monitoring RMPs continually, with a formal 

evaluation done at five-year intervals. Land use plan monitoring is the process of tracking the 
1. Record of Decision

1-14 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

implementation of land use planning decisions (implementation monitoring) and collecting data necessary 

to evaluate the effectiveness of land use planning decisions (effectiveness monitoring). Monitoring is the 

process of following up on management actions and documenting the BLM’s progress toward full 

implementation of the land use plan and the achievement of desired outcomes.

Implementation monitoring is the process of tracking and documenting the implementation of (or the 

progress toward implementing) land use plan decisions. The BLM tracks what management actions have 

been proposed or undertaken to implement land use plan decisions, documents which management 

actions were completed, and sets out what further actions are needed to continue implementing land 

use plan decisions.

Effectiveness monitoring is the process of collecting data and information to determine whether desired 

outcomes (the goals and objectives in the land use plan) are being met or if progress is being made 

toward meeting them, as the allowable uses and management actions are being implemented. The level 

and intensity of monitoring will vary, depending on the sensitivity of the resource or area and the scope 

of the proposed management activity.

Evaluation is the process of reviewing the land use plan and any plan monitoring reports to determine 

whether the Lower Sonoran Approved RMP decisions and NEPA analysis are still valid and whether the 

plan is being implemented. The Lower Sonoran Approved RMP will be evaluated to determine the 

following:

• If decisions remain relevant to current issues

• If decisions are effective in achieving (or making progress toward achieving) desired outcomes

• If any decisions need to be revised

• If any decisions need to be dropped from further consideration

• If any areas require new decisions

The Lower Sonoran Approved RMP will be evaluated at a minimum every five years; special or 

unscheduled evaluations may be required to review unexpected management actions or significant 

changes in the related plans of Indian tribes, other federal agencies, and state and local governments or 

to evaluate legislation or litigation that could trigger an RMP amendment or revision.

1.8 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MANAGEMENT PLAN

Planning decisions of the Approved RMP will begin to be implemented when the ROD is signed. Some 

planning level decisions require immediate action and will be implemented when the ROD and 

Approved RMP are published; other decisions will be implemented over a period of years, based on 

priorities and available funding. The rate of implementation is tied, in part, to the BLM’s budgeting 

process. The Approved RMP will also be implemented in accordance with an adaptive management 

framework.
1. Record of Decision

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 1-15

1.9 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

1.9.1 Public Scoping

The Notice of Intent for the LSDA (formerly known as the Phoenix South Decision Area) was published 

in the Federal Register on December 9, 2002 (Vol. 67, No. 236, Page 72968, [AZ-020-03-1610-DO089A]). The opportunity to comment was also publicized through news releases, mail notification, flyers, 

and other methods. Eleven public scoping meetings were held, and the public was invited to submit 

written comments. Overall, more than 6,000 comments were received on both the Lower Sonoran and 

SDNM Decision Areas during the scoping period. Following scoping, the BLM held additional public 

workshops throughout the Lower Sonoran Field Office to collaborate on planning criteria, RMP goals 

and objectives, the range of alternatives, and preliminary alternatives.

1.9.2 Public Review of and Comment on the DRMP/EIS

The EPA published a Notice of Availability (NOA) of the DRMP/EIS on August 25, 2011. The NOA 

initiated the 90-day public comment period required for planning actions. In preparing the PRMP/FEIS, 

the BLM considered all comments received or postmarked during the public comment period. The 

DRMP/EIS was made available for viewing, downloading, and commenting by a variety of methods, 

including as a PDF on the BLM website, on CD, as paper copies, and on the BLM’s ePlanning system.

The BLM held eight public meetings throughout the Lower Sonoran Field Office in October 2011. 

Meeting locations were in Phoenix, Ajo, Gila Bend, Mesa, Casa Grande, and Buckeye. Over 200 people 

attended the public meetings. The largest number of attendees was from unaffiliated individuals, followed 

by nonprofit organizations, local clubs, and government agencies.

Over 250 organizations, government agencies, industry representatives, and individuals responded 

during the comment period. Most of the written submissions contained multiple comments on different 

topics, and over 500 unique comments were made. Comments on the DRMP/EIS pertained to a number 

of issues, including scope of the document, NEPA adequacy of the baseline data and impact analysis, 

information related to consultation and coordination on the project, and policies and guidance the BLM 

needed to follow. In addition, comments were received on a number of resource topics, including air 

quality, cultural resources, fish and wildlife, livestock grazing, land use and special designations, minerals 

and energy, noise, national scenic and historic trails, recreation, socioeconomics, special status species, 

tribal interests, vegetation, visual resources, and water resources.

1.9.3 Public Review of and Protest on the PRMP/FEIS

A 30-day protest period was provided on the land use plan decisions contained in the PRMP/FEIS, in 

accordance with 43 CFR, Part 1610.5-2. The BLM received nine protest letters that were subsequently 

resolved by the BLM Director, whose decision constitutes final agency action for the DOI. The issues 

raised in the protest letters covered a broad range of topics with differing opinions, sometimes 

completely opposite opinions, on how the protesting party felt that the BLM had erred in the planning 

process. All protests were dismissed or denied. 
1. Record of Decision

1-16 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

1.9.4 Agency Consultations – US Fish and Wildlife Service and State 

Historic Preservation Office

In accordance with the requirements of Section 7 of the ESA, the BLM consulted with the USFWS to 

ensure that the BLM’s proposed action would not jeopardize the continued existence of any listed 

threatened, endangered, or proposed species or critical habitat. The BO on the Lower Sonoran-SDNM 

RMP/EIS project included four conservation recommendations to minimize or avoid possible adverse 

effects on listed species or their critical habitat. See Section 2.1.8, Consultation and Collaboration for 

additional details.

In accordance with the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the BLM 

has consulted with and obtained comment from the Arizona SHPO concerning the content of this RMP. 

These comments have been taken into account by the BLM in development of this RMP, and further 

consultation with the SHPO will take place as specific actions implementing the RMP are developed.

1.10 RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF THE APPROVED RMP 

The PRMP/FEIS described and analyzed five alternatives, including Alternative A (the No Action 

Alternative) and Alternatives B, C, D, and E (the Proposed Alternative), each of which represented 

varying management actions for each resource and resource use for achieving the stated goals and 

objectives. The BLM has the discretion to select an alternative in its entirety, to combine aspects of the 

various alternatives that were presented in the PRMP/FEIS, or to consider management approaches 

resulting from protest resolution. In this PRMP/FEIS, Alternative E has been identified as the Approved 

RMP. 

The Approved RMP uses Alternative E from the PRMP/FEIS with adjustments made due to clarifications 

and edits. Alternative E was chosen because it resolves the major issues while providing for common 

ground among conflicting opinions and multiple uses of public lands in a sustainable fashion. It provides 

the best balance of resource protection and use within legal constraints. The Approved RMP will do the 

following: 

• Satisfy statutory requirements (true for all alternatives)

• Reflect what the BLM believes to be the best combination of actions to achieve the stated goals

• Represent the best solution for the purpose and need, as described in Chapter 1, Purpose and 

Need for the Resource Management Plan

• Provide the best approach to address the key resource and planning issues

• Include input from cooperating agencies, collaborating partners, stakeholders, the public, and 

BLM specialists

The Approved RMP represents the BLM’s final decision; the decisions become final when the 

ROD/Approved RMP is signed. 
I. Record of Decision 

1.1 I AVAILABILITY AND APPROVAL OF THE PLAN 

Copies of the ROD and the Lower Sonoran Approved Resource Management Plan may be obtained by 

viewing or downloading the document from the BLM website at www.blm.gov/az or by obtaining a hard 

copy or CD at the BLM Phoenix District Office, Lower Sonoran Field Office, at 21605 N. 7th Avenue, 

Phoenix, Arizona 85027. Copies will also be available for review at local community libraries. 

Field Manager Recommendation 

Having considered a full range of alternatives, associated impacts, and public and agency input, I 

recommend the adoption and implementation of the Lower Sonoran Approved Resource Management 

Plan. 

Recommended: 

- Datl 

District Manager Concurrence 

I concur with the adoption and implementation of the Lower Sonoran Approved Resource Management 

Plan. 

Concurrence: 

Scott 

Acting 

Cooke 

District 

~~ Manager 

Phoenix District Office 

State Director Approval 

Date 

In consideration of the foregoing, I approve the Lower Sonoran Approved Resource Management Plan. 

Approved: 

Date 

Arizona State Director 

September 20 12 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 1-17 
1. Record of Decision

1-18 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

This page intentionally left blank. 
September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-1 

2. APPROVED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN

2.1 INTRODUCTION

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Phoenix District Office (PDO) has prepared the Lower 

Sonoran Resource Management Plan (RMP) to provide comprehensive current and future management 

of BLM-administered lands in the Lower Sonoran Field Office outside of the Sonoran Desert National 

Monument (SDNM), referred to as the Lower Sonoran Decision Area (LSDA). The LSDA is south of

Phoenix and extends south to the United States-Mexico border, west to the Yuma County line, and as 

far east as the town of Globe; it is mostly within Maricopa County and includes portions of Pinal, Pima, 

Yuma, and Gila Counties. 

This RMP encompasses approximately 930,200 acres of BLM-administered land (Map 2, Surface

Management). 

The RMP was prepared in compliance with the BLM’s planning regulations, Title 43, Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR), 1600, under the authority of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976

(FLPMA). This document also meets the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA), the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing the NEPA (40 CFR, 1500-

1508), and requirements of the BLM’s NEPA Handbook 1790-1. 

This plan represents years of ongoing coordinated efforts on the part of the BLM Phoenix District, 

Lower Sonoran Field Office staff, BLM Arizona State Office staff, representatives of communities in the 

Planning Area, cooperating agencies, special interest and user groups, and hundreds of concerned 

citizens. The decisions outlined in this document will enable the BLM to manage and protect the 

resources on public lands within the LSDA to achieve desired future conditions and management 

objectives, in partnership with communities and citizens.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-2 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

2.1.1 Purpose and Need

Before the Lower Sonoran-Sonoran Desert National Monument planning effort, Planning Area

management was covered in three RMPs and five plan amendments dating from 1983 through 2005. 

Over the nearly 30 years during which these plans were in effect, significant and ongoing changes 

occurred that dramatically altered the natural and social environments in the Planning Area. The RMPs’ 

and amendments’ management decisions did not keep pace with changing circumstances, demographics, 

resource conditions, and policies, such as the following: 

• Unprecedented regional population growth and urban expansion into surrounding public lands 

has increased demand for access to and use of public lands and resources, resulting in increased 

demand for commodities, utilities, renewable energy, communication facilities, transportation, 

and infrastructure on public lands. 

• New recreation technologies have yielded new sports and activities, cutting-edge recreational 

equipment, and distinctive new outdoor opportunities. 

• New legal and BLM policy requirements have resulted in additional or revised management 

responsibilities. 

• New information and understandings of ecological relationships have led to changes in 

management direction.

To address these issues, the Lower Sonoran RMP provides guidance for managing the use of BLMadministered lands and provides a framework for land management actions within the Planning Area. 

The RMP replaces the management guidance of the three previous RMPs and five amendments. 

2.1.2 Decision Area Description

The Lower Sonoran-Sonoran Desert National Monument planning process was conceived as a 

combined effort, analyzing two decision areas, the Sonoran Desert National Monument and the Lower 

Sonoran Field Office area surrounding the SDNM. The consolidated Planning Area encompassed nearly 

8.9 million acres of south-central Arizona and included much of Maricopa County, as well as sections of 

Gila, Pima, Pinal, and Yuma Counties. Population centers in or next to the Planning Area are

metropolitan Phoenix and the communities of Goodyear, Buckeye, Gila Bend, Ajo, Globe-Miami, 

Tonopah, Mobile, Maricopa, Casa Grande, and Sells. 

Unless otherwise identified, the RMP focuses on surface and subsurface acres of BLM-administered

public lands. The BLM is responsible only for the management of public lands within the LSDA. 

While most BLM-administered public lands are consolidated, some small tracts are interspersed with 

other federal, state, or private lands. Other federal land managers are the US Air Force, National Park 

Service (NPS), US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Bureau of Reclamation, and US Forest Service 

(USFS). Some of the large landowners and managers are the Arizona State Land Department for State 

Trust Land, county parks, and the Tohono O’odham Nation, Gila River Indian Community, Salt River 

Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, and Ak-Chin Indian Community. In addition, other agencies may have 

specialized management responsibilities, such as the Arizona Game and Fish Department’s (AGFD), 

which manages wildlife for the state.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-5 

2.1.3 Scoping Issues

Development of this RMP was initiated with publication of a Notice of Intent for the Lower Sonoran 

Decision Area (formerly known as the Phoenix South Decision Area) in the Federal Register on 

December 9, 2002 (Vol. 67, No. 236, Page 72968, [AZ-020-03-1610-DO-089A]). Following scoping, the 

BLM held additional public workshops throughout the Lower Sonoran Field Office to collaborate on 

planning criteria, RMP goals and objectives, the range of alternatives, and preliminary alternatives. One 

of the most important outcomes of the scoping process was the identification of significant issues to be 

addressed in the planning phase. For planning purposes, an “issue” is a matter of controversy or dispute 

over potential land and resource allocations, levels of resource use, production, and related 

management practices. Issues help determine what decisions will be made in the RMP and what the EIS 

must address, as required by NEPA. Based on the more than 6,000 scoping comments received for both 

the Lower Sonoran and SDNM Decision Areas and subsequent analysis and evaluation, six major 

planning issues were identified within the scope of planning. All six issues center on balancing resource 

use and human activity with the mandated level of resource protection.

2.1.4 Issues Addressed

1. How will the BLM manage travel and public access?

Travel management is an important issue for the public and presents a management challenge for the 

BLM. Many who commented during the public scoping process felt that existing roads and trails should 

be kept open for public use and, where necessary, maintained, upgraded, or improved to provide safe 

and efficient public access. Others were opposed to the creation of new roads or believed that 

unnecessary roads should be closed for to protect resources, particularly those roads that might 

fragment wildlife habitat or damage archaeological sites or riparian areas.

Additionally, members of the public expressed concern with the type of motor vehicle use that should 

be allowed on public lands, with viewpoints falling into two general categories: those who valued offhighway vehicle (OHV) use and favored no or minimal further limitations on such use, and those who 

expressed concern for the adverse effects from unregulated or increased OHV activities. The BLM 

considered these issues in the range of alternatives.

2. How will the BLM manage wilderness characteristics in the Decision 

Area?

A number of individuals and groups voiced their concern for protecting areas with wilderness 

characteristics in the LSDA. During the public scoping period, a number of citizen groups and individuals 

suggested additional wilderness designations, including the establishment of new wilderness study areas 

(WSAs) in in both Decision Areas. Other commenters felt that there is already an abundance of 

wilderness, national monuments, wildlife refuges, and other restricted access lands in the region and 

were opposed to additional wilderness-related allocations.

The discussion concerning recommending designation of additional wilderness areas was outside the 

scope of the RMP/EIS. Only Congress can designate wilderness areas; current Department of the 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-6 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Interior (DOI) and BLM policies do not provide for designation of additional WSAs. However, the BLM 

can manage areas that contain wilderness characteristics in order to protect those characteristics, and

this was considered in the alternatives, in compliance with FLPMA and Washington Office Instruction 

Memorandum 2011-154. 

3. How will the BLM address wildlife management, including special status 

species and wildlife water developments in the Decision Area? 

Many of those who provided scoping comments on general wildlife and wildlife habitat also commented 

on special status species. These comments focused on protecting threatened and endangered species 

and their habitats. Some comments were general in nature, while others mentioned particular species 

(e.g., Sonoran pronghorn, cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl, desert tortoise) or management concerns (e.g., 

fawning/nesting sites, impacts of grazing, effects of off-road driving). Comments on this topic specific to 

the LSDA concerned Sonoran pronghorn management in the Ajo area.

Various wildlife-water development programs, initiated in the 1940s and 1950s throughout the western 

United States, have provided sources of freestanding water under the assumption that this is a key 

limiting factor on wildlife populations in arid habitats. Critics have suggested that wildlife water 

developments have not yielded expected benefits and could negatively influence wildlife by increasing 

predation, competition, and disease transmission. The scientific community in Arizona, led by the AGFD, 

is studying whether water developments are necessary for wildlife, what effect developments might have 

on populations of nontarget animals (e.g., predators), and the development of additional wildlife waters. 

Scoping comments received regarding wildlife water developments represent both sides of the debate. 

Some individuals advocated that no new wildlife waters be developed, while others stressed the 

importance of allowing the continued access, maintenance, redevelopment, and construction of wildlife 

waters.

Wildlife corridors have also arisen as an important issue related to wildlife. Due to urban growth, 

existing rights-of-way (ROWs) and the preponderance of wildlife corridors lying outside of BLM 

jurisdiction in the Planning Area, there is concern about maintaining sufficient wildlife movement 

corridors in the LSDA. Addressing and resolving these concerns were considered in the range of 

alternatives.

4. How will livestock grazing be addressed in the Decision Area? 

The scoping process identified livestock grazing as an important issue for a number of people. Many 

comments pertained to better management of livestock grazing or were in favor of ending livestock 

grazing on public lands. There were some who advocated prohibiting certain kinds of grazing (e.g., yearround, domestic animals, stock grazing) and those who advocated prohibiting grazing in certain areas 

(e.g., Sonoran pronghorn and desert tortoise habitat, riparian areas), or under certain conditions (e.g., 

drought, when not sustainable).
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-7 

5. How will renewable and traditional energy facilities and transmission 

corridors be managed?

Given the growth in renewable energy interest in the Sonoran Desert, much concern was expressed 

regarding utility corridors, and some concern was expressed regarding renewable energy, particularly 

utility-scale solar sites. Energy-generating and transmission industries urged the BLM to consider the 

importance of providing additional utility corridors to meet growing demands for electrical energy 

requirements in Arizona. Others urged the BLM to consolidate requests for new transmission lines in 

existing utility corridors and to refrain from granting ROWs for new corridors. One exception to the 

opposition to new corridors was a proposal that new transmission lines be accommodated in corridors 

established within 400 feet of each side of highways. Given public concern and increased demand for 

energy, several alternatives for transmission corridors and land use authorizations were discussed.

6. How will public recreation activities be managed? 

During public scoping, people reported that they enjoy a wide variety of activities in the LSDA, including 

hiking, hunting, sightseeing, camping, observing wildlife, and operating OHVs. They expressed desires for 

continued opportunities for such activities. Many of the comments overlapped with the travel 

management issues, particularly with regard to OHV use. Many expressed concern for the management 

of certain types of recreation to minimize environmental impacts. Some commenters advocated for 

dispersed recreation, while others advocated for the development of various types of recreational 

services (e.g., interpretive sites, restrooms, recreational vehicles areas, equestrian facilities). Some 

individuals advocated the development of nonmotorized recreational opportunities, while others 

preferred motorized forms of recreation. 

While some people indicated that they enjoy recreational shooting in the LSDA, others expressed their 

opposition to recreational shooting due to its resource impacts as well as noise and public safety 

concerns. 

Given the proximity of the LSDA to the Phoenix metro area and the increased participation of people 

pursuing recreation on public lands over time, ineffective management of visitor activities is recognized 

as potentially having profound environmental effects on resources. These possible effects, along with 

potential user conflicts, make appropriate management of recreation crucial to protecting public 

resources. Such decisions as where and what kind of recreation facilities to provide, how to minimize 

potential user conflicts, and what types of recreation settings should be maintained in specific areas were 

addressed in the alternatives.

2.1.5 Issues Considered but not Further Analyzed

The issues identified during public scoping (discussed above) shaped the alternatives carried forward in 

the RMP process. Other issues identified during public scoping were also considered but were not 

analyzed further in the planning process because they fell outside of BLM jurisdiction or were beyond 

the scope of the RMP. The issues and the rationale for not analyzing them further are provided below.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-8 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Water 

Restore water to the rivers. 

Rationale: The BLM does not control water rights on any of the rivers in the Planning Area, and it is 

unlikely that any management action proposed by the BLM could restore water flow. 

Local aquifers are being depleted, and mineral-laden water is being pumped to the surface, polluting waterways 

and killing vegetation. 

Rationale: The BLM does not have the authority to permit or deny pumping of groundwater in Arizona. 

Such authority lies with the Arizona Department of Water Resources.

Biological Resources

Protect and restore native fish populations impacted by dams and nonnative species. 

Rationale: The BLM does not manage any suitable perennial aquatic habitat for native fish species in the 

Planning Area. Streams within the Planning Area are typically dry and flow only in response to storms. 

Livestock Grazing

Increase grazing fees and use the money to hire more staff to study and protect the land. 

Rationale: The BLM has no authority to adjust or change the grazing fee. It is set by a formula contained 

in law, as is the disposition of the fees collected.

Minerals Management

Allow mining in the Monument; do not grant new mineral leases; ensure any new mining claims are valid and 

limit to small-scale operation; study/regulate coal-bed methane wells; limit or prohibit resource use in the 

Monument except for strategic and low-impact mineral extraction. 

Rationale: Lands within the SDNM are closed to mineral development (subject to valid existing rights) by 

SDNM proclamation. There is no coal in either the SDNM or LSDA. 

It is inappropriate that hardrock mining on public lands is governed by outdated laws such as the General Mining 

Law of 1872. 

Rationale: The BLM does not have discretionary authority to disregard existing laws. Rather, a course of 

action that complies with existing laws, such as the General Mining Law of 1872, must be pursued.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-9 

Land Tenure Adjustment and Withdrawals

Use zoning laws to establish a balance between property rights and conservation of natural resources. 

Rationale: The BLM does not have jurisdiction over zoning laws. Rather, local and county governments 

establish zoning laws and control land use through zoning. On the other hand, the potential for 

acquisition, disposal, and exchange of public lands could indirectly affect zoning and development, so 

these are considered further in the RMP.

Allow renewal of the lease for public lands bounded by Mountain View Road on the east, Goldfield Road on the

west, and US 60 on the north near Apache Junction. 

Rationale: The land specified in this comment is under a variety of withdrawals, leases, and permits, 

including a recreation and public purposes (R&PP) lease to the City of Apache Junction for equestrian

and other recreational activities. The R&PP lease will remain in effect for the duration of the lease and 

will not be affected by the RMP.

Corridors, Communications Sites, and Renewable Energy Sites

In the Lower Sonoran Decision Area, do not use the Palo Verde-Devers route as a utility corridor if it would result 

in building additional power lines or pipelines through the Kofa National Wildlife Refuge. 

Rationale: The Kofa National Wildlife Refuge is outside of the Planning Area and is administered by the 

USFWS. It is thus not addressed in this RMP.

Special Area Designations

In the Sonoran Decision Area, designate the Sentinel Plain and Gila Bend Mountains region, Saddle Mountain 

and Palo Verde Hills. Do not designate any additional wildernesses or WSAs; these misguided preservation 

designations have detrimental impacts on wildlife populations because of unwarranted burdens. 

Rationale: Only Congress has the authority to designate wilderness, and the current DOI and BLM 

policy does not provide for designation of additional WSAs. However, the BLM can manage areas that 

contain wilderness characteristics to protect those characteristics, and the BLM considered various 

alternatives for this management.

Designate segments of the Gila River as a wild and scenic river to protect the river itself and the surrounding 

riparian areas. 

Rationale: The Gila River’s eligibility for the National Wild and Scenic River System (NWSRS) was 

assessed in a series of field surveys from 1992 to 2005. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 

authorizes the protection of free-flowing rivers with “outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, 

geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural, or other similar values.” None of the segments of the lower 

Gila River that run through the Planning Area were found to be eligible for the NWSRS.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-10 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Visual Resources

Protect the viewsheds through zoning and other mechanisms. 

Rationale: Local and county governments control land use through zoning; however, the BLM can 

address the protection of viewsheds through other means. The BLM considers viewshed protection 

through the visual resource management program. Various degrees of such protection have been 

incorporated into the alternatives and were considered by the BLM. 

Travel Management

Provide additional motorized public access in wilderness areas for people who are unable to walk long distances. 

Rationale: Wilderness areas are designated by Congress and must be managed in accordance with the 

Wilderness Act of 1964, which expressly prohibits motorized vehicle use by the public for recreation. 

The BLM thus has no authority to develop new or to open old motorized vehicle routes in designated 

wilderness.

Provide or re-open cherry stem access of existing roads in some areas, such as the Cabeza Prieta National 

Wildlife Refuge. 

Rationale: The BLM has no authority to address management of the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife 

Refuge due to the lack of public lands in the refuge; however, the BLM addressed vehicle access and 

route designation. 

Airspace

Consider how wilderness designations could adversely affect military overflights. 

Rationale: As identified above in Section 2.1.4, Issues Addressed, the BLM does not have the authority 

to designate new WSAs or wilderness areas. There would thus be no potential for conflicts to emerge 

between military airspace use and new WSA/wilderness designations. 

Socioeconomics

Include a full identification of the social and economic impacts on all of the approved regional extra-high-voltage 

electric system components. 

Rationale: The EIS evaluated economic impacts of the alternatives, including those regarding corridors 

and ROWs, as needed at a programmatic level to assess the potential environmental impacts. 

Cumulative economic impacts (i.e., the impacts of the alternatives when combined with past, present, 

and reasonably foreseeable actions) were also addressed. A full social and economic impact analysis of 

the regional extra-high-voltage electric system components, however, was beyond the scope of the EIS. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-11

Undocumented Immigrants and Drug Smuggling

Manage illegal immigration and drug smuggling. 

Rationale: BLM law enforcement is predominantly responsible for visitor safety and resource protection. 

US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has the 

mission and responsibility for securing the US border and enforcing federal immigration and drug laws. 

While the BLM can respond to crime and resource impacts from border activity, the jurisdiction of 

illegal immigration and international drug smuggling lies with the CBP and DHS. BLM law enforcement is 

predominantly responsible for visitor safety and resource protection. In coordination with CBP, DHS, 

and state and local law enforcement agencies, the BLM is responsible for the following: 

• Develop integrated resource and law enforcement goals and priorities on National Landscape 

Conservation System (NLCS) units and other borderlands locales

• Coordinate resource rehabilitation and mitigation with deployment of law enforcement 

resources to maximize effectiveness of both within the borderlands

• Monitor smuggling activity levels, resource impacts, and mitigation efforts through existing and 

developing technologies

• Communicate and coordinate effectively with agency partners and the public, including sharing 

funding and intelligence

• Work with partners to identify key areas for increased enforcement, closure, restoration, 

protection, and visitor safety

• Deploy and collaborate on enhanced communication technologies

• Implement coordinated safety measures for agency staff, fire and law enforcement personnel, 

and public visitors

2.1.6 Planning Criteria

Planning criteria are the standards, rules, and guidelines that helped guide the RMP/EIS process. The BLM 

developed planning criteria principally from FLPMA and other applicable laws, as well as by collaborating 

with partner agencies, Native American tribes, and the public. The planning criteria were provided to 

the public for review during the scoping process and were included in the scoping report. General 

planning criteria and criteria specific to planning in the LSDA are presented below.

General Planning Criteria

• The planning process will include an EIS that will comply with NEPA standards. Two records of 

decision will be issued: one for the LSDA and one for the SDNM Decision Area.

• The RMP will be completed in compliance with FLPMA, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 

1973, as amended (16 USC, 1531 et seq.), NEPA, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, 

and all other relevant federal laws and executive orders, as well as the management policies of 

the BLM.

• Where previous planning decisions still apply, those decisions will be carried forward into the 

RMP. The BLM will also use information developed and management alternatives proposed in 

previous studies of the Planning Area, including the proposed Amendment and Environmental 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-12 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Assessment to the Lower Gila North Management Framework Plan and the Lower Gila South 

RMP (BLM 2005a).

• Planning decisions will be made in the context of the best available data, including information 

specific to public lands. Regional contextual data may also be used to identify the regional 

importance of public lands for resource use and protection.

• The planning team will collaborative with the State of Arizona; Maricopa, Pinal, Pima, Gila, and 

Yuma Counties; tribal governments; municipal governments; other federal agencies; the 

Resource Advisory Council; and all other interested groups, agencies, and individuals. Decisions 

in the plans will strive to be compatible with existing plans and policies of adjacent local, state, 

tribal, and federal agencies, consistent with federal law and regulations. Opportunities to 

coordinate management with adjoining landowners for resource protection and public uses will 

be considered.

• The RMP will be developed to be flexible and adaptable to new and emerging issues and 

opportunities. During its implementation, the BLM will continue to work in partnership with the 

public and with local, state, and tribal governments and agencies to identify priority 

implementation projects and to identify and resolve emerging issues.

• Native American tribes will be consulted in accordance with policy, and tribal concerns will be 

given due consideration. The planning process will include the consideration of any impacts on 

Indian trust assets.

• The BLM will consult with the USFWS throughout the planning process, in accordance with 

Section 7 of the ESA and the National Memorandum of Agreement (August 30, 2000), to 

identify conservation actions and measures for inclusion in the plans.

• The BLM will coordinate with the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) 

throughout the planning process.

• The plans will recognize the State’s authority to manage wildlife populations, including hunting 

and fishing, within the Planning Area. The BLM will Coordinate with AGFD, in accordance with 

the statewide memorandum of understanding (MOU; March 1987).

• The plans will set forth a framework for managing recreational and commercial activities in 

order to maintain existing natural landscapes and to provide for the enjoyment and safety of the 

visiting public.

• The lifestyles of area residents, including the wide variety of uses of the public lands, will be 

considered in the RMP.

• Any lands, or interests therein, acquired by the BLM within the Planning Area boundary will be 

managed consistently with the RMP, subject to any constraints associated with the acquisition.

• The RMP will address travel management for the public lands. Areas will be identified as open to 

vehicles, closed to vehicles, or limited to designated roads. Within the SDNM and in other areas 

identified in the RMP, motorized and mechanized routes will be designated.

• The RMP will recognize valid existing rights.

• Federal Geographic Data Committee standards and other applicable BLM standards will be 

followed in the development and management of data.

• Management of existing wilderness will continue. The RMP will not address reduction or 

elimination of existing wilderness, changes in boundaries of existing wilderness, or opening of 

roads or mechanized or motorized access into existing wilderness.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-13

Criteria Specific to the Lower Sonoran

In addition to the general planning criteria noted above, the Lower Sonoran RMP will establish 

management guidance for public lands outside of the SDNM. The Lower Sonoran RMP will replace and 

supersede all other BLM RMPs for the lands covered by the Lower Sonoran RMP.

2.1.7 Planning Process

The Lower Sonoran RMP was initiated under the authority of Section 202(f) of FLPMA and guided by 

BLM planning regulations in 43 CFR, 1600. Additionally, the EIS is subject to Section 202(c) of NEPA and 

guided by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations in 40 CFR, 1500. 

The BLM uses a multistep planning process when developing RMPs, as required by 43 CFR, Part 1600, 

and illustrated in the BLM’s Land Use Planning Handbook. The planning process is designed to help the 

BLM identify the uses of BLM-administered lands desired by the public. The process consider these uses 

to the extent they are consistent with the laws established by Congress and the policies of the executive 

branch of the federal government. The planning process is issue-driven. The BLM used the public 

scoping process to identify planning issues (noted above) to direct the development of the Lower 

Sonoran RMP. The scoping process also was used to introduce the public to planning criteria.

Title II, Section 202, of FLPMA directs the BLM to coordinate planning efforts with Native American 

tribes, other federal departments, and agencies of the state and local governments as part of its land use 

planning process. The BLM is also directed to integrate NEPA requirements with other environmental 

review and consultation requirements to reduce paperwork and delays (40 CFR, Part 1500.4-5). The 

BLM coordinated with Native American tribes and other agencies and was consistent with other plans 

through ongoing communications, meetings, and collaboration with an interdisciplinary team, which 

includes BLM specialists and federal, state, and local agencies.

2.1.8 Consultation and Collaboration

BLM land use planning regulations (43 CFR, 1610.3), FLPMA (43 USC, 1712), and regulations for 

implementing NEPA (40 CFR, 1501.5 and 1501.6) guide the BLM in coordinating and cooperating with 

other federal and state agencies, local governments, and Native American tribes during the land use 

planning process. This collective guidance instructs the BLM to:

• Stay informed of federal, state, local, and tribal plans

• Ensure that it considers these plans in its own planning

• Help resolve inconsistencies between such plans and BLM planning

• Cooperate with other agencies and tribal governments in developing RMPs and NEPA analysis

In accordance with these provisions, the BLM initially informed other federal, state, local, and tribal 

officials of its intent to prepare new RMPs, as detailed in the Scoping Report. Collaboration with these 

agencies continued throughout the planning and EIS process. Agency coordination included reviewing 

numerous plans that provide the policies and guide the activities of these agencies and governments. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-14 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

The BLM has coordinated with federal, state, and county agencies throughout the planning and EIS 

process. The BLM gathered issues, ideas, and concerns and discussed the role of agencies in the process. 

A full listing of the agencies that the BLM coordinated with can be found in the Scoping Report (available

from the BLM Phoenix District Office, Lower Sonoran Field Office). 

A letter introducing the RMP/EIS, identifying data gathering, and offering agencies the opportunity to 

become cooperating agencies in the planning was sent to more than 200 agencies, followed by a 

cooperating agency meeting at the BLM’s Arizona State Office. The meeting agenda included discussions 

on the BLM’s planning process, collaborative planning, the meaning and responsibilities of cooperating 

agency status, and opportunities for involvement in the BLM’s planning process without becoming a 

cooperating agency. The BLM’s goal was to encourage involvement by all interested parties using 

whatever methods the parties wished.

For those agencies that chose to be cooperating agencies, MOUs were developed outlining the roles 

and responsibilities of the cooperating agencies and the BLM throughout the planning process. The BLM 

signed MOUs with the AGFD and Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), discussed below.

Specific Agreements

The BLM and AGFD agreed to cooperative to manage wildlife resources on public lands throughout 

Arizona. The master MOU (AZ-930-0703) between the BLM’s Arizona State Office and the Arizona 

Game and Fish Commission, which sets policy for managing, preserving, and harvesting wildlife and fish, 

established the BLM’s responsibility for managing wildlife habitat on public lands and the AGFD’s public 

trust responsibility to manage fish and wildlife populations through the authority of the Arizona Game 

and Fish Commission. As stated in the MOU, the BLM and the AGFD “consider the management of fish 

and wildlife resources as a high priority and agree to work cooperatively to achieve a shared goal to 

actively manage, sustain, and enhance those resources.”

The BLM, ADOT, and the Arizona Division of Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) agreed to 

establish and improve cooperative relationships (MOU No. AZ-931-0309, Amendment 2). This MOU 

provided for a coordinated approach to accomplish land and resource management, along with 

transportation development and operation management. The MOU is designed to reduce or eliminate 

duplication of work, to establish procedures for streamlining work processes, to ensure that each 

agency is provided with sufficient lead-time, to share available resources, and to develop and execute 

action programs that maximize responsiveness to public needs and concerns. In accordance with the 

MOU, the BLM will coordinate with responsible agencies to design features that minimize the 

fragmenting effect of the planned roadway and to evaluate and incorporate safe and effective wildlife 

crossings. Where planned roadways potentially fragment other resources, the BLM will work with the 

responsible agency to provide continued connectivity for those purposes. The BLM will also work with 

the agency to provide continued safe access to public lands from any developed roadway for recreation 

and other public land users.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-15

Tribal Government-to-Government Consultation

The BLM has a long history of consultation on this RMP, beginning in 2002 until late in 2011. A total of 

17 face-to-face meetings were documented where BLM staff and managers met with tribal staff, 

Legislative Council members, or Tribal Council members about the RMP. 

The BLM began by contacting the following tribes to initiate consultation and invite them to the scoping 

meetings at the start of the RMP process, as well as to participate as a cooperating agency in the 

planning process:

• Ak-Chin Indian Community

• Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation

• Fort Sill Apache Tribe

• Gila River Indian Community

• Hopi Tribe

• Pascua Yaqui Tribe

• Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian 

Community 

• San Carlos Apache Tribe

• Tohono O’odham Nation

• Tonto Apache Tribe

• White Mountain Apache Tribe

• Yavapai-Apache Indian Community

• Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe

A few of these tribes did not respond to any letter or telephone call. 

The BLM met with interested tribes on 17 occasions to describe and discuss the planning process and 

Planning Area. Five formal letters were sent to the Tribal Chairs, with courtesy copies sent to the 

cultural staff at each and every tribal government. These were sent as “return receipt requested.” A few 

reply letters from some tribes were received. Follow-up telephone calls were made to tribal staff in 

order to make sure that the letters and accompanying documents arrived and to inquire whether there 

were any concerns that needed to be addressed. On two occasions, the BLM offered field tours that 

tribal staff and elders attended. These field tours allowed time for discussion of planning issues at 

particular sites and particular broad landscapes. Several telephone calls and e-mails were exchanged at 

various times in order to provide more detailed information or to have a more in-depth discussion. 

Topics covered during consultation included formal consultation, cooperating agency status, and 

community involvement and collaboration. Tribal staff emphasized the importance of ongoing and 

regular consultation and voiced concerns regarding protection of cultural and natural resources, grazing 

management, law enforcement with regard to cultural resource site protection, route access, 

undocumented immigrants, drug smuggling, and possible land exchanges and acquisitions. The BLM kept 

the tribes informed on RMP development throughout the planning process via meetings, telephone 

conversations, letters, faxes, e-mail, personal communication, and news releases, including how to 

participate in commenting on the Draft RMP/Draft EIS. These important topics are issues that will 

continue to be worked on with the tribes throughout plan implementation. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-16 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Section 7 Consultation

In accordance with the requirements of Section 7 of the ESA, the BLM consulted with the USFWS to 

ensure that the BLM’s proposed action would not jeopardize the continued existence of any listed 

threatened, endangered, or proposed species or critical habitat.

The BLM wrote a biological assessment (BA) and held a meeting with the USFWS to explain the 

proposed action and the format used for the effects determinations. The BA discussed the effects on 

four listed species in the Lower Sonoran-SDNM from the Proposed RMP (Alternative E in the Proposed 

RMP/Final EIS). The BLM delivered the completed BA to the USFWS for comments and clarification.

The USFWS reviewed the BA and developed a biological opinion (BO), the purpose of which is to 

prevent unacceptable harm to an ESA-listed species or its habitat. A BO is a scientific judgment about a 

proposed action, not a policy document. The BO on the Lower Sonoran-SDNM RMP/EIS project 

included four conservation recommendations to minimize or avoid possible adverse effects on listed 

species or their critical habitat. The USFWS recommended the following four conservation measures:

Sonoran Pronghorn

1. BLM continue to monitor the condition of fences on and adjacent to BLM lands in the action 

area to address unauthorized cattle use and identify opportunities to improve SPH [Sonoran 

pronghorn] passage across fence lines.

2. BLM coordinate with CBP [Cabeza Prieta Wildlife Refuge] to identify opportunities for 

alternatives to the Bates Well FOB to re-establish a pronghorn movement corridor to the 

Valley of the Ajo from adjacent lands.

Southwestern Willow Flycatcher

1. BLM monitor the condition of fences on BLM lands in the action area to address 

unauthorized cattle use of Gila River bottom lands.

2. BLM participate in planning efforts along the Gila River to integrate BLM efforts with the 

Flood Control District of Maricopa County and local jurisdictions to improve habitat 

conditions along the Gila River. 

Section 106 Consultation

In accordance with the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the BLM 

coordinated with and solicited input from the Arizona SHPO. The BLM and Arizona SHPO followed the 

Arizona Protocol relating to resource management plans; the protocol provides for a phased 

consultation process related to historic, traditional, and cultural resources for an EIS and subsequent 

activities that could tier from a ROD. In accordance with these procedures, the BLM Arizona began 

corresponding with the Arizona SHPO in 2003. The letter described the Lower Sonoran-SDNM 

RMP/EIS and specified the need to consult on information presented in the EIS. 

Over the course of the planning process, the BLM met with or contacted the SHPO to share updates 

and information. In October 2011, the BLM sent a letter to the SHPO detailing the history of the 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-17

planning process and requesting review and comment on the DRMP/EIS. In November 2011, the BLM 

received the SHPO’s comments on the DRMP/EIS regarding impacts on cultural resources and 

associated mitigation outlined in the plan. In accordance with the requirements of Section 106 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act, the BLM has consulted with and obtained comment from the 

Arizona SHPO concerning the content of this RMP. The BLM has taken these comments into account 

during development of this RMP, and further consultation with the SHPO will take place as specific 

actions to implement the RMP are developed.

Federal and Military Coordination

The BLM coordinated with other federal agencies and military installations in the Planning Area, 

including the NPS and US Air Force. The BLM and NPS met to discuss management options in the Ajo 

Block area, specifically regarding land tenure adjustments, land use authorizations, ROWs, borderland 

and associated law enforcement issues, national park access, boundary management, endangered species 

management, recreation, and comprehensive travel management decisions. The BLM coordinated with 

the Base Executive Council and Interagency Executive Committee regarding the planning and military 

involvement for borderlands, travel and recreation management, land restoration, and threatened and 

endangered species management on Luke Air Force Base and the Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range 

military installations, and management of public lands in the Ajo Block, Sentinel Plain, and SDNM.

The BLM also worked with the Borderlands Management Task Force, which coordinates all federal 

agencies involved with borderlands management. The BLM’s responsibility is to manage and protect 

natural resources, protect employees and public land users, and coordinate with all other law 

enforcement agencies (e.g., county, state, and federal agencies, including Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement). Issues discussed included impacts from undocumented immigration, drug and human 

trafficking, and coordinated management and mitigation measures.

Arizona Governor’s Office Coordination

The BLM coordinated and consulted with the Arizona governor and governor’s office and other state 

agencies. The BLM met with ADOT to review regional transportation plans and to discuss ADOT’s 

concerns and questions. Additionally, the BLM had extensive coordination with the AGFD to discuss 

wildlife management, public access route designations, and wildlife movement corridors.

The Arizona governor was given the opportunity to identify any inconsistencies between the proposed 

plan and state or local plans, policies, and programs and to provide recommendations in writing during a 

60-day consistency review period, a requirement of the BLM’s planning process. The governor’s office 

did not note any inconsistency with state policies or plans. 

Local Government

The BLM coordinated and consulted with local governments throughout the planning process. The BLM 

met with the Maricopa County Department of Transportation regarding regional transportation issues, 

including discussion of anticipated highway planning projects. The BLM also met with the Maricopa 

County and Pinal County Park and Recreation Departments to discuss recreation-related land 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-18 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

management coordination for the Saddle Mountain, Buckeye Hills, and San Tan Mountains areas. The 

BLM also met with the Town of Gila Bend regarding its recreation and development interests. 

Additionally, the BLM reviewed numerous county planning documents, including the Pinal County 

Comprehensive Plan, the Pinal County Open Space and Trails Master Plan, and the City of Maricopa’s 

Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan. The BLM’s planning guidance notes that RMPs shall be 

consistent with other federal, state, and local plans to the maximum extent, consistent with federal law 

and FLPMA provisions, and to ensure that consideration is given to those state and local plans relevant 

to the development of land use plans for public lands. The BLM has reviewed these county plans for 

consistency and found that the actions in the RMP are generally consistent with the intent and actions in 

the county plans.

Local governments submitted scoping comments when the BLM initiated the planning effort and 

reviewed and commented on the DRMP/EIS. The BLM will continue to coordinate with local 

governments after the ROD is signed.

Public Outreach and Local Constituency Groups

To provide outreach to the local communities in the Planning Area, the BLM contacted constituency 

groups with interests in several of the planning issues. The BLM contacted several shooting groups to 

discuss the target shooting analysis, including the Table Mesa Coalition, the Arizona State Rifle and Pistol 

Association, and the AGFD. The Table Mesa Coalition provided feedback on the shooting analysis, 

including information on safe shooting practices and distances and areas that should remain open for 

shooting. 

2.1.9 Policy

This plan is consistent with and incorporates requirements identified in various laws, regulations, and 

policies. These include Executive Orders, legislative designations, and court settlements/rulings. The 

policies and decisions that existed before this plan are outside the scope of the plan but have influenced 

the decisions and constrained the alternatives and are needed to understand management of the area.

2.2 MANAGEMENT DECISIONS

This section of the RMP presents the Land Use Allocations, Goals, Objectives, and Management Actions 

established for BLM-administered public lands in the LSDA. Most of the desired future conditions are 

long range and are assumed to require a period of time to achieve. These management decisions are 

presented by program area. Not all types of decisions were identified for each program.

Implementation- or activity-level decisions are those that take action to implement land use plan 

decisions. These types of decisions require appropriate site-specific planning and NEPA analysis. 

Implementation decisions generally constitute the BLM’s final approval allowing on-the-ground actions to 

proceed and are generally appealable to the IBLA under 43 CFR, 4.410. This Approved RMP does not 

contain appealable implementation decisions.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-19

Complete consideration of the RMP also includes administrative actions that outline the objectives, basic 

management policy, and program direction. Administrative actions are not land use plan decisions but 

are day-to-day activities that are not ground disturbing and are an important component when 

considering program activities.

2.2.1 Air Quality

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

AQ-1: Protect, maintain, and improve the quality of air resources associated with 

authorized uses and activities on public lands.

AQ-1.1: Maintain existing air quality and air quality-related values (e.g., visibility) by ensuring that 

authorized uses on public lands comply with and support federal, state, and local laws and 

regulations for protecting air quality.

AQ-1.1.1: State and local agencies and adjacent land managers will be consulted to 

address emissions that affect public lands.

AQ-1.1.2: Appropriate management techniques and practices will be applied to all 

authorized surface-disturbing projects and activities as needed to ensure compliance 

with standards.

AQ-1.2: Apply mitigation measures for uses and activities within and near adjoining 

communities, wilderness areas, and large particulate-matter (PM10) (i.e., dust) nonattainment and 

maintenance areas, especially as they pertain to unpaved roads that traverse public lands.

AQ-1.2.1: Excessive fugitive dust generation from unpaved roads, construction sites, 

recreation activity areas, and other areas will be managed to ensure emissions do not 

exceed air quality standards, particularly those more rigid requirements in 

nonattainment areas.

AQ-1.2.2: Fugitive dust emissions from unpaved roads will be mitigated through 

appropriate control methods, including, but not limited to: 

• Lowering speed limits by creating obstacles such as speed bumps

• Using fugitive dust control measures, such as dust suppressants, gravel, or 

pavement

• Installing cattle guards where unpaved roads meet paved roads

• Reducing vehicle-use intensity or duration, reducing route density, or rerouting 

travel routes to more stable soils

• Limiting the vehicle type on roads or in areas that are susceptible to excessive 

dust due to unstable soils

• Closing high-use areas during high-pollution days

• Closing areas that frequently exceed PM10 standards to noncompliant recreation 

and other projects until mitigation measures are implemented
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-20 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

• Implementing temporary, seasonal, or permanent route closures when other 

methods are unsuccessful at controlling fugitive dust that exceeds regulatory 

limits

Administrative Actions 

• Participate in the Interagency Smoke Program and other programs related to air quality.

• Participate and comment on proposed projects identified as requiring Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration/New Source Review permits for their effects on air quality and affected resources 

within 100 kilometers of wilderness areas. Request that location-specific pre-application 

monitoring be conducted to support the permit review process when appropriate. 

• Review projects requiring non-major permits within 10 kilometers of wilderness areas to 

determine their effects on air quality and affected resources and provide comments to the 

appropriate regulatory agency.

• Participate in the public workshops and provide comments on the Maricopa County or other 

proposed air quality rule changes.

• Work with adjoining land managers and users to mitigate air quality effects on public lands.

• Coordinate with county or municipal authorities to encourage control of fugitive dust emissions 

from unpaved roads that affect attainment of air quality standards.

• Work with federal, state, and local agencies to monitor air quality on public lands, particularly in 

wilderness and other special areas. Air quality monitoring should include visibility, ozone, acid 

deposition, or other relevant air quality indicators.

• Work with federal, state, and local agencies to gather meteorological data, including installing 

meteorological stations on the public lands, as needed and appropriate.

• Encourage research of air quality-related issues.

• Address air quality impacts when planning and executing prescribed burns to comply with 

federal and state air quality standards and adhere to Article 15 of the Arizona Administrative 

Code and State Implementation Plan provisions.

2.2.2 Cave Resources

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

CR-1: Protect and conserve caves and karst resources as they are discovered on the public 

lands.

CR-1.1: Manage caves and karst resources to maintain or enhance their physical integrity and 

scientific interest.

CR-1.1.1: Evaluate and inventory caves and karst resources, as they are discovered, to 

determine if the cave contains significant cultural, scientific, biological, geological, 

hydrological, educational, or recreational values.

CR-1.1.2: Protect and manage significant caves and karst resources for cultural, 

scientific, biological, geological, hydrological, educational, and recreational values.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-21

CR-1.1.3: Public access to all caves within this Decision Area will be by permission of 

the authorized officer unless public entry is signed as open. Federal, state, and local 

government employees operating within the scope of their authorizations will be 

exempt from permit issuance.

2.2.3 Cultural and Heritage Resources 

Allocation Summary 

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

CH-1: Identify, preserve, and protect important cultural resources. Ensure they are 

available for appropriate uses by present and future generations.

CH-1.1: Allocate 90 percent of known and evaluated cultural resource sites to one of five use 

categories: (1) scientific use, (2) conservation for future use, (3) traditional use, (4) public use, or 

(5) experimental use, or classify as “discharged from management,” within one year of recording

the Approved RMP. 

CH-1.1.1: Painted Rock Petroglyph Site (200 acres) will remain a public or scientific use 

site for heritage tourism and interpretation purposes. The site will continue to be 

managed for interpretation and education uses according to the existing project and 

business plans (Map 3, Cultural Resource Allocations).

CH-1.1.2: Retain public lands and acquire available state and private lands and/or 

easements to ensure long-term use, protection, and access to important cultural sites 

that occupy a particular and definitive role in the cultural landscape or are of particular 

importance to local Native American tribes. Emphasize lands located within allocated 

use site categories.. See also LR-2.1. 

CH-1.1.3: All known cultural sites allocated to a use category will be recommended for 

withdrawal from locatable mineral exploration and development and closed to mineral 

material (salables) disposals. See also MM-1.1.1. 

CH-1.1.4: Public use sites will remain open to all leasable minerals, but any lease or 

energy Land Use Authorization (LUA) will contain a no surface occupancy stipulation. 

Table 2-1 

Cultural and Heritage Site Use Allocation

Cultural and Heritage Site Uses BLM Acres

Management 

Action

Painted Rock Petroglyph Site – Public and Scientific Use 200 CH-1.1.1

Butterfield West – Public and Scientific Use 10 CH-1.1.6

Sundad – Public and Scientific Use 73 CH-1.1.6
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-22 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

The typical public use site in the Planning Area will be less than 5 acres. See also MM1.1.12. and LR-1.1.2

CH-1.1.5: Public use sites will be exclusion areas for utility-scale energy development 

and multiuse corridor LUAs. They will be avoidance areas for minor linear and nonlinear 

LUAs and mitigated to be consistent with management objectives. The typical public use 

site in the Planning Area will be less than 5 acres. See also LR-1. 

CH-1.1.6: Sundad (73 acres) and Butterfield West (10 acres; selected segment of the 

Butterfield Overland Stage Route west of the Painted Rock Site), will be allocated as 

public or scientific use sites.

Management prescriptions for public use sites will follow those set forth in the 

applicable special designation sections of the RMP when more restrictive. Inventory, 

recordation, documentation, and preparation of all sites for increased public visitation 

must be accomplished prior to implementing interpretive developments. Sundad will be 

allocated only if critical safety issues are addressed (Map 3, Cultural Resource 

Allocations).

CH-1.2: Encourage appropriate scientific use of cultural resources.

CH-1.2.1: Provide opportunities for scientific research and inventory at selected sites, 

including excavation by qualified researchers.

CH-2: Reduce threats, reduce or prevent damage, and resolve potential conflicts from 

naturally occurring or unauthorized human-caused damage or deteriorations.

CH-2.1: Impacts by erosion, natural processes, or those due to vandalism, visitation, vehicle 

traffic, or other unauthorized human activity will be reduced.

CH-2.1.1: Potential conflicts from other resource uses will be minimized, reduced, or 

unauthorized by complying with Section 106 of the NHPA and using mitigation or 

avoidance strategies as prescribed by law, regulation, or the BLM 8100 Manual.

CH-2.1.2: Sites suffering damage or deterioration resulting from natural or human 

causes will be restored or stabilized. 

CH-2.1.3: Sites will be protected from degradation due to erosion and other natural 

processes by using a wide variety of techniques and tools, such as wash bank 

stabilization, riprap, and vegetation restoration.

CH-2.1.4: Sites damaged by vandalism, excessive visitation, vehicle traffic, or other 

causes will be restored by using signing, fencing, gating, trail rerouting, or other 

measures.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-25

CH-2.1.5: Special recreation permit (SRP) holders will be required to provide 

archaeological site etiquette and resource conservation information to all participants, 

employees, and volunteers associated with permitted activities. See also Special 

Recreation Permits under RM-3.1. 

CH-2.1.6: The number of visitors at cultural or historic sites will be limited to 25 people 

at the site at any one time to emphasize resource protection. Some sites may require 

further limitations to protect the resource. Casual use or group limits for SRPs may be 

higher on a case-by-case basis if determined to be acceptable in site specific evaluations 

and the activity/action can be designed to have a minor or negligible impact on cultural 

resources. See also RM-3.1.16. 

CH-3: Manage assemblages of sites within the Decision Areas as cultural landscapes.

CH-3.1: Distinct cultural landscapes will be described and mapped as defined by human use of 

the environment to protect the physical integrity, enhance visitor experience, and maintain or 

enhance visual settings. Cultural landscapes are a new and holistic land use concept that 

attempts to understand human interaction with each other and their environment through time

on a landscape scale.

CH-3.1.1: The age, function, and interrelationship of sites attributed to historic 

indigenous populations in different environmental settings will be identified when 

possible.

CH-3.1.2: Cumulative impacts on the cultural landscape, as well as impacts on individual 

sites, will be analyzed as part of the project assessment when projects are proposed.

Administrative Actions

State Historic Preservation Office/NHPA

• Continue to regularly communicate with the SHPO to share information and obtain technical 

advice on issues relating to compliance with Sections 106 and 110 of the NHPA, in accordance 

with the Arizona State Protocol.

• Focus proactive (Section 110) inventories on areas defined as Special Cultural Resource 

Management Areas, ACECs, and areas along historic trail routes.

Tribal Consultation and Concerns 

• Continue to consult with the Gila River Indian Community, the Ak-Chin Indian Community, the 

Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, the Tohono O’odham Nation, the Hopi Tribe, the 

Yavapai Prescott Indian Tribe, Fort Yuma-Quechan Tribe, and other interested Indian tribes to 

identify places of traditional importance and associated access needs. Develop measures for 

management and protection of such places that may be identified by tribes during the life of the 

RMP. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-26 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

• Identify sacred areas in consultation with Indian tribes and, where practicable, limit land uses to 

those that do not conflict with ascribed values.

• Honor tribal requests to protect the confidentiality of sensitive information to the extent 

permitted by law.

• Provide opportunities for participation by Indian tribes in research and interpretation.

• Specific management prescriptions for sites allocated to the Traditional Use category will be 

developed in consultation with the Indian tribes to which they are culturally important.

• Restrict public information about the locations of sites that are not allocated to public use as 

allowed by law and regulation.

Research Opportunities

• Complete documentary research and oral histories to gain a better understanding of cultural 

resources from homesteading, mining, ranching, and other historical period activities.

• Establish collaborative research partnerships with academic institutions, tribes, professional and 

nonprofit organizations, vocational organizations, and other entities for an orderly process of 

cultural research, recordation, and education.

• Work with researchers, tribes, interested members of the public, contractors, local 

communities, and published materials to define specific cultural landscapes. Work with tribal 

groups and individuals to define temporal and functional interrelationships among sites within 

certain landscape settings.

• Provide opportunities for training and participation in site documentation, research, protection, 

and education projects by tribal members, students, and volunteers. Ensure adequate 

professional oversight of work conducted by tribal members, students, and volunteers.

Interpretation and Education

• Map and document sites before interpretive development for public use, as needed, to preserve 

archaeological data, plan for interpretive data, and provide a baseline condition assessment for 

monitoring changes resulting from visitor use.

• Complete interpretive plans for public use sites selected for interpretive development.

• Develop interpretive materials and facilities for selected sites. Provide educational opportunities 

to the public, including resource protection and appreciation, education, and stewardship.

• Continue to participate in Arizona Archaeology Awareness Month events and other educational 

outreach programs to highlight the values of cultural heritage resources and the need to protect 

these resources.

• Provide opportunities for tribal and interested public participation in interpretation.

Monitoring

• Continue to work with and support the Arizona Site Steward Program.

• Develop a monitoring scheme to evaluate the condition of cultural resources.

• Implement procedures for systematic monitoring of all sites developed or authorized for public

visitation.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-27

Planning

• The BLM will develop Cultural Resource Project Plans for protection or interpretation projects 

that require precise descriptions of implementation procedures, workforce, scheduling, 

equipment, and supplies. Project planning will be implemented following guidance in the BLM’s 

Manual 8130, Planning for Uses of Cultural Resources.

Special Programs/Cultural Landscapes

• Work with researchers, tribes, concerned members of the public, contractors, local 

communities, and other stakeholders to make use of previously published materials to 

define certain cultural landscapes.

• Develop a strategy to identify, assess, and monitor the viewsheds along the historic trail 

corridor and other important cultural landscapes within ACECs. Use Geographical 

Information System (GIS) technology to create viewshed studies and collect information for 

the monitoring program.

2.2.4 Paleontological Resources

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

PL-1: Protect and manage any paleontological resources, including all vertebrate fossils, 

traces, and invertebrate or plant fossils of paleontological interest, found on public lands 

for scientific, educational, or recreational values.

PL-1.1: Manage paleontological resources to maintain or enhance their physical integrity, 

educational values, and scientific interest while avoiding all surface-disturbing activities to the 

extent possible that will damage paleontological resources.

PL-1.1.1: Collection of all vertebrate fossils and invertebrate and plant fossils of 

paleontological interest will be prohibited without a permit from the BLM authorized 

officer, in accordance with 16 USC, 470aaa et seq. Casual collecting of common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological resources is prohibited unless it is determined by 

the authorized officer that the resources cannot be protected on-site.

PL-1.1.2: Standard discovery stipulations will be included in any permit approval that is 

likely to affect significant paleontological resources. Stipulations will require the user or 

operator to:

• Suspend operations immediately upon discovery of paleontological resources 

that will disturb them

• Contact the authorized officer as soon as reasonably possible 

• Bear the cost of required mitigation
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-28 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

PL-1.1.3: Upon notification of discovery by a permit user or operator, the BLM will: 

• Evaluate the discovery and inform the user/operator within 5 days

• Allow resumption of use/operations only after completion of mitigation

Administrative Actions

• Geologic units will be assigned and entered into the Potential Fossil Yield Classification System 

(per Instruction Memorandum No. 2008-009) using geological maps and professional 

consideration. A separate class ranking will be assigned to each recognized geologic formation 

or member present at the surface, in accordance with the guidelines provided in the Instruction 

Memorandum. 

• All assigned units entered into the Potential Fossil Yield Classification System will be integrated 

onto a GIS-based geologic map.

2.2.5 Soil Resources 

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

SL-1: Ensure watersheds are functioning appropriately and are consistent with Land Health 

Standards. Characteristics of a properly functioning watershed include channels that are 

stable and in balance with the landscape; erosion and sediment deposition appropriate for 

the ecological site; infiltration of surface water in soils sufficient to support desired future 

conditions (DFCs) and minimize erosion from runoff; and flood frequencies, durations, and 

magnitudes appropriate for the landscape.

SL-1.1: Maintain or restore upland, channel, and riparian components of watersheds that help 

stabilize or improve watershed conditions. Major indicators of watershed health include 

maintaining total cover (vegetation and litter) consistent with desired future conditions, riparian 

areas in proper function condition, and erosion and sedimentation rates appropriate to the 

ecological site.

SL-1.1.1: Priorities for restoration will be established for disturbed areas. Priorities will

be based on the potential for soil erosion and loss, damage to cultural or ecologically 

sensitive sites, and effects on water quality and quantity.

SL-1.1.2: Degraded sites will be stabilized and restored to slow or stop accelerated soil 

erosion and sedimentation and limit erosion to the natural rate for the ecological site.

SL-1.1.3: Benefits and risks of retaining the Vekol Valley spreader dike system will be 

evaluated, along with benefits and risks of retaining or implementing vehicle closures in 

areas with eroded or otherwise degraded roads and trails.

SL-1.1.4: Soil erosion at cultural and ecologically sensitive sites will be evaluated. Soil 

erosion or degradation at these sites will be mitigated.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-29

SL-1.1.5: New or redeveloped facilities not related to water management will be 

constructed:

• Outside riparian areas and the 100-year floodplain of washes or water ways. 

Water catchment facilities for wildlife waters could be developed or 

redeveloped in riparian areas or in the 100-year floodplain or if needed to meet 

wildlife objectives and no other options are viable.

• In a manner that avoids changing natural water flow or watershed dynamics, and 

consistent with other resource and public safety goals.

• Existing facilities could be relocated or modified if they are significantly affecting 

watershed or floodplain function. Where water management facilities are 

necessary, the BLM will pursue options that minimize changes to natural water 

flow and watershed dynamics. Any activities in the 100-year floodplain will be 

planned for compliance with any county or federal floodplain regulations.

SL-2: Maintain or improve sensitive soils to avoid accelerated erosion rates.

SL-2.1: Disturbance of sensitive soil surfaces, including those classified as highly susceptible to 

wind and water erosion and those with protective desert pavement or well-developed 

cryptogamic crust, will be avoided. If disturbance occurs, damage will be mitigated.

SL-2.1.1: Developments and ground-disturbing activities will be located away from areas 

of significant desert pavement, cryptogamic crust, and other sensitive or fragile soils that 

are vulnerable to disruption or have high wind or water erosion potential, unless 

project goals cannot be met in another location. Where facilities or projects cannot be 

relocated, mitigation measures will be taken, including application of ground cover, to 

minimize erosion.

SL-2.1.2: The density of roads and trails will be reduced during route designation within 

areas known to have sensitive soils. Closed roads will be rehabilitated. Roads left open 

will be treated to mitigate wind and water erosion. See also TM-1.3.3, TM-2.1, RM-3.1.8, 

and TM-1.3.5. 

Administrative Actions

• Update existing soils database on public lands that were formerly part of the Barry M. 

Goldwater Range (BGR). 

• Implement watershed improvement projects to increase ground cover to reduce erosion, 

sediment yield, and salinity contributions.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-30 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

2.2.6 Vegetation Resources 

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

VM-1: The natural diversity and abundance of native vegetation will occur as expected for 

landform and ecological site.

VM-1.1: Maintain or restore vegetative communities to achieve DFCs as identified in Table 2-2,

Desired Future Conditions for Vegetation Resources. 

Table 2-2 

Desired Future Conditions for Vegetation Resources

Vegetative 

Community*

Acres/Miles in 

Planning Area Desired Future Condition

All N/A

Vegetative communities will provide appropriate cover levels, 

as described in National Resource Conservation Service

Ecological Site Descriptions, to protect soils from wind and

water erosion. This will ensure properly functioning 

watersheds and ecological processes in order to sustain 

healthy biotic populations and communities.

All

Each vegetation community will be maintained within its 

natural range of variation in plant composition, structure, and 

cover at the landscape level. Site potentials (soil, climate, 

topography) establish the natural limits on what can be 

produced in terms of vegetation and related resource values 

like forage, wildlife habitat, and watershed characteristics.

Creosote Bush–

Bursage

597,700 acres LS; 

179,600 acres 

SDNM

The potential of this community is a shrub dominated site 

with desert scrub species, cacti, and annual forbs and grasses.

Palo Verde-Mixed 

Cacti

312,000 acres LS; 

303,300 acres 

SDNM

This vegetative community should consist of more diverse 

vegetative composition and structure than that of the 

creosote bush-bursage community. It includes vegetation 

varying from small shrubs to large trees (such as ironwood, 

palo verde, and mesquite), interspersed with a variety of 

cacti, such as mammalaria (Mammalaria spp.), prickly pear and

cholla (Opuntia spp.), barrel cactus (Ferocactus wislizenii), 

hedgehog (Echinocereus spp.), and saguaro (Carnegiea 

gigantea). Where potential exists, saguaro cactus forests will

support appropriate densities of saguaro, with all age classes 

represented to ensure recruitment.

Riparian 8,800 acres LS; 0 

acres SDNM

Riparian habitats should contain a diversity of native riparian 

obligate trees (such as cottonwood [Populus spp.] and willow 

[Salix spp.]) of various age and size classes and herbaceous 

plants adapted to hydric soils to restore ecological conditions 

and function.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-31

Table 2-2 

Desired Future Conditions for Vegetation Resources

Vegetative 

Community*

Acres/Miles in 

Planning Area Desired Future Condition

ApacherianChihuahuan Upland 

Scrub

3,400 acres LS; 

400 acres SDNM

The potential for this community is a shrubland-dominated 

community consisting of large desert scrub/trees, including 

mesquites, acacias or junipers, and cacti. Perennial grass 

cover is typically low.

Sonoran MidElevation Desert 

Scrub (Woodlands)

1,800 acres LS; 

2,000 acres 

SDNM

This vegetative community should consist of a diverse 

vegetative composition and structure, similar to that of the 

palo verde-mixed cacti community, but with an increase of 

perennial grasses, forbs, and large shrub species (jojoba, 

crucifixion thorn, etc.) due to the increased precipitation.

Mogollon 

Chaparral

1,400 acres LS; 

100 acres SDNM

This vegetative community should consist of woody species, 

such as shrub live oak, mountain mahogany, desert ceanothus, 

and cliffrose, interspersed with an understory of perennial 

grasses, along with small shrub and forb species.

Desert Grassland 0 acres LS; 1,054 

acres SDNM

Manage this plant community as a tobosa (Pleuraphis mutica)-

dominated grassland, while limiting the encroachment of 

mesquites and other shrubs.

Desert Washes 

(xeroriparian)

1,658 miles in the 

LS; 970 miles in 

the SDNM*

This community should have a multilayered vegetative 

structure, as provided by perennial vegetation.

Diverse 

Composition N/A

Diverse vegetative composition and structure will include 

such species as foothills palo verde (Cercidium microphyllum), 

blue palo verde (C. floridum), desert willow (Chilopsis linearis), 

ironwood (Olneya tesota), mesquite (Prosopis spp.), smoke 

tree (Psorothamnus spinosus), and catclaw acacia (Acacia greggii) 

of various sizes and growth forms appropriate to the 

ecological site.

All N/A

Ensure that sufficient bank and floodplain vegetation 

(including along braided channel floodplains) provides for 

hydrologic function of the site.

*The DFCs described are general descriptions of the expected plant community makeup. Site potentials (based on 

ecological sites) and the development of specific desired plant community objectives for each vegetation type 

should be determined through the use of the NRCS ecological site descriptions, rangeland health reference sheets, 

or information collected from reference or comparison areas or a combination of the above. The ecological site 

descriptions that correspond to each vegetation community can be found at http://esis.sc.egov.usda.gov. 

**Based on US Geological Survey 1:100,000 scale topographic quadrangles. 

VM-1.1.1: Activities will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and impacts minimized, 

mitigated, or avoided to achieve land-health standards and vegetation community DFCs.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-32 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

VM-1.1.2: Vegetation treatments could be conducted in order to make progress toward 

achieving land health standards. Treatments will include, but will not be limited to, 

thinning, burning, seeding, transplanting, watering, seasonal closures, and seasonal use 

restrictions.

VM-2: Populations of endangered, threatened, and special status plants will be stable 

and/or increasing and suitable habitat is available for future establishment and 

maintenance of the populations.

VM-2.1: Identify and protect occupied and potential habitats for maintenance, restoration, or 

reestablishment of acuña pineapple cactus and other endangered, threatened, or special status 

plants. Maintain the diversity and properly functioning ecological processes of natural plant 

communities that support rare or special status plant species.

VM-2.1.1: Authorized surface-disturbing activities within occupied acuña cactus habitat 

areas will be minimized, mitigated, or avoided. Currently, the only known locations are 

within the Coffeepot ACEC and the very southern portion of the SDNM.

VM-2.1.2: Authorized surface-disturbing activities within habitat areas of any 

endangered, threatened, or special status plants will be minimized, mitigated, or avoided 

to ensure stable populations.

VM-2.1.3: Implement activities to reduce hazardous fuels or improve riparian habitats 

(prescribed burning or vegetation treatments) within occupied or found-to-be-occupied 

habitat for southwestern willow flycatchers only during the nonbreeding season 

(October 1 to March 31).

VM-2.1.4: Vegetation treatment projects adjacent to occupied or found-to-be-occupied 

habitat will only be conducted when willow flycatchers are not present (October 1 to 

March 31).

VM-2.1.5: Any prescribed fire or vegetation treatment project in occupied or suitable 

marsh habitat will occur only between September 1 and March 15 to avoid the Yuma 

clapper rail breeding and molting seasons.

VM-2.1.6: Mechanical removal of overstory habitat (tamarisk) could occur as early as 

August 15, after the breeding season for Yuma clapper rails.

VM-2.1.7: Herbicide application could occur in Yuma clapper rail habitat. Herbicide drift 

will be minimized by using appropriate drift-inhibiting agents and may include dyes or 

other tracking agents.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-33

VM-3: Noxious and undesirable plant species will not occur on the landscape or, if they 

occur, they will make up a sufficiently small percentage of the vegetative community that 

they do not affect ecological processes.

VM-3.1: Control invasive species using an integrated weed-management approach, including 

prevention, restoration, mechanical, chemical, biological control methods, and prescribed fire, 

where appropriate. See also RM-3.1.18. 

VM-3.1.1: Proposed projects will use practices that minimize the introduction and 

spread of invasive species.

VM-3.1.2: Priority will be assigned to the control of invasive species that have a 

substantial and apparent impact on native plant communities and wildlife. When 

infestations are identified, they will be evaluated for their potential threat and scheduled 

for removal accordingly.

VM-3.1.3: Monitoring for invasive species will focus on likely vectors of invasion, such as 

linear features (roads, canals, railroads, utility corridors, etc.), disturbed areas 

(construction or development areas), and areas where water is available or may pond 

(water-control structures, etc.).

VM-4: Protect native plants from over-collecting and other uses.

VM-4.1: Manage native desert vegetation for commercial and noncommercial uses in accordance 

with the Arizona Native Plant Law and BLM regulations.

VM-4.1.1: Collection of living or dead native plant material for commercial uses could be 

permitted on a case-by-case basis as long as it meets resource objectives.

VM-4.1.2: Collection of reasonable amounts of renewable native plant byproducts, 

including flowers, leaves, fruit, seeds, nuts, cones, and berries, and dead and downed 

native vegetation for non-commercial, personal use will be allowed when conducted in 

accordance with the Arizona Native Plant Law.

VM-4.1.3: Collection of living or dead native vegetation and byproducts that are federally 

listed as threatened and endangered species will not be permitted without a valid and 

current permit issued by the USFWS. 

VM-4.1.4: Collection of living or dead native vegetation and byproducts that are highly 

safeguarded native plants identified in the Arizona Native Plant Law could be permitted 

on a case-by-case basis to achieve resource recovery objectives.

VM-4.1.5: Collection of saguaro cacti skeletons for personal use or campfire burning will 

be prohibited in the Planning Area. See also RM-3.1.11. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-34 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

VM-4.1.6: Woodcutting will not be allowed for commercial or personal use, or campfire 

burning. It may be authorized on a case-by-case basis as needed to meet management 

objectives, such as hazardous fuels reduction or native plant propagation.

VM-4.1.7: The collection of dead, down, and detached wood for personal use and 

campfire burning while camping on public lands will be allowed unless otherwise 

prohibited. 

VM-4.1.8: Removal of all other vegetation material not specifically provided for will be 

prohibited without written authorization. Examples of authorizations include vegetation 

removal for Native American traditional uses, scientific research, educational uses, 

salvage, or meeting management objectives. Authorizations must be in accordance with 

the Arizona Native Plant Law.

VM-4.1.9: Removal of native vegetation for personal use or commercial landscaping may 

be allowed during authorized salvage operations where vegetation is destined to be 

destroyed, with written authorization from the BLM and a permit from the Arizona 

Department of Agriculture in accordance with the Arizona Native Plant Law. Priority 

will be given to utilizing salvage plants for restoration activities on public lands.

VM-5: Native plants will occur at a natural abundance and distribution.

VM-5.1: Rehabilitate native plant communities after land-disturbing activities, where appropriate. 

Rehabilitation will be designed to achieve vegetative conditions (cover, composition, etc.) 

necessary to stabilize the site.

VM-5.1.1: Rehabilitation practices will be used to stabilize and rehabilitate sites impacted 

from new surface-disturbing activities. Long-term restoration will occur through natural 

processes. In most cases, lands previously disturbed by historical uses will be allowed to

recover through natural processes. Sites that may be appropriate for rehabilitation 

practices include:

• Recently disturbed sites that may respond quickly to rehabilitation practices, 

including damage caused by wildfire, immigrant traffic, or other illegal activities

• Severely damaged, rapidly deteriorating, or rapidly expanding sites

• Sites placing adjacent resources at risk

• Sites prone to invasion by nonnative species

• Heavily disturbed sites, such as mining sites

• Sites capable of improving habitat for threatened and endangered species

• Sites with management priorities that require accelerated restoration to meet 

selected management objectives. 

VM-5.1.2: Native plants will be used as the first priority for all rehabilitation projects. 

Noninvasive, nonnative plants may be used in limited urgent situations where it may be 

necessary to protect the resources or when taking no action will further degrade the 

resources. In these situations, short-lived species (i.e., weed-free nurse crop species) 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-35

will be preferentially used and will be combined with native species to facilitate the 

establishment of native species.

VM-5.1.3: Rehabilitation and reclamation plans that describe the site restoration goals 

(taking into consideration the starting condition of the site) and restoration methods 

will be required for all surface-disturbing activities commensurate with the amount of 

surface disturbance.

VM-5.1.4: Preliminary success criteria for a site will be considered achieved when soil 

conditions are stabilized and approximately 50 percent or more of the plant 

composition and cover are present based on appropriate Ecological Site Descriptions. 

Trees and shrubs will be considered established when they have survived (without 

assistance such as watering) for two consecutive years. 

VM-5.1.5: Livestock will not be turned out on rehabilitated sites until it was determined 

by an interdisciplinary team that the reestablished forage could sustain livestock grazing.

Administrative Actions

• Seed from regionally native or sterile alien (nonnative) species of grasses and herbaceous 

vegetation will be used in areas where reseeding is necessary following ground disturbance to 

stabilize soils and prevent erosion by both wind and water.

• Monitoring for invasive species will be prioritized to determine if weeds not immediately being 

treated are becoming a greater threat to the resources of concern.

2.2.7 Visual Resources 

Allocations Summary

Table 2-3 

VRM Classes

The following VRM classes will be allocated for each alternative to 

support management objectives for the various resources, such as 

designated wilderness, areas with wilderness characteristics, NHT 

segments, ACECs, Wildlife Habitat Areas and backcountry

recreation settings. 

VRM Class Acreage Management Action

Class I 91,800 VR-1.1.1

Class II 65,500 VR-1.1.2

Class III 554,800 VR-1.1.2

Class IV 218,100 VR-1.1.2
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-36 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

VR-1: Manage public lands that would maintain scenic quality, natural landscapes, 

undisturbed views, and other high-quality visual resources.

VR-1.1: Visual resources will be managed according to the class objectives set in the Visual 

Resource Inventory Handbook H-8410-1 and BLM Guidelines for a Quality Built Environment.

VR-1.1.1: Designated wilderness areas will be allocated as VRM class I (91,800 acres). 

VR-1.1.2: All other public lands within the Lower Sonoran will be allocated to the VRM 

classes, as depicted in Map 4, Visual Resource Management, and noted below: 

• 65,500 acres as Class II

• 554,800 acres as Class III

• 218,100 acres as Class IV

See also RM-1.1.9, RM-1.2.8, RM-1.3.10, RM-2.1.1.1.5, RM-2.1.1.2.5, RM-2.2.6, RM-2.2.8, 

RM-2.4.5, RM-2.5.8, RM-2.6.5 

VR-1.1.3: All surface-disturbing projects or activities, regardless of size or potential 

impact, will incorporate visual design considerations consistent with the Visual Resource 

Contrast Rating Manual H-8431-1 to meet VRM class objectives for the area. Even 

activities in VRM Class IV will consider designs that help reduce visual contrast between 

a proposed project and landscape settings (color, texture, line, and form).

VR-1.1.4: Measures to mitigate potential visual impacts could include the use of natural 

materials, screening, painting, project design, location sighting, or restoration.

VR-1.1.5: Restoration projects will ensure that visual impacts are minimized in the short 

term (5 years) and that VRM objectives in the project area are met in the long term (life 

of the project) when such projects are a) considered essential for public safety, achieving 

DFCs, or reducing hazardous fuels buildups and b) expected to be visually prominent.

VR-1.1.6: The viewshed of the Juan Bautista de Anza NHT, Painted Rock, Agua Caliente, 

and Ajo Scenic Loop Roads, Highway 238, and Interstate 8 (I-8) will be managed in a 

manner that exceeds or maintains the VRM objectives. VRM and scenic management 

prescriptions will be applied for their preservation and enhancement. The viewshed of 

the Anza NHT will be managed to maintain the historic landscape setting.

VR-2: Maintain night sky condition.

VR-2.1: Manage activities and projects on public lands that will contribute light or air pollution to 

maintain or improve dark, clear skies for stargazing and nighttime military training.

VR-2.1.1: Permanent outdoor lighting will not be allowed in VRM Class I areas.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-39

VR-2.1.2: Development on public lands will be required to use dark-sky-friendly 

technologies in VRM Classes I through IV and in in the Sentinel Plain area to provide 

opportunities for stargazers and amateur astronomers and to maintain conditions 

favorable to nighttime military operations. Measures may include, but will not be limited 

to, directing all light downward, using shielded lights, using only the minimum 

illumination necessary, using lamp types such as sodium lamps (less prone to 

atmospheric scattering), using circuit timers, using motion sensors, or using flight 

proximity detectors.

Administrative Actions

• For all surface-disturbing projects or activities, regardless of size or potential impact, 

incorporate visual design considerations, consistent with the Visual Resource Contrast Rating 

Manual H-8431-1, to meet VRM class objectives for the area

• Participate in regional planning initiatives and comment on proposals for development on 

adjacent non-federal lands to encourage future development to be compatible with VRM 

designations and protection of dark night skies on public lands.

• Develop user facilities (trailheads, nonmotorized trails, campgrounds, roads, utilities, 

interpretive areas) to take advantage of views of scenic and historic landscapes in such a way 

that visual quality is protected.

2.2.8 Water Resources 

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

WR-1: Ensure physical and legal availability of water in sufficient quantity and quality to 

meet the management needs of the LSDA. 

WR-1.1: New water source developments will not adversely affect existing sources and uses. 

This will be determined prior to any new development activity, including issuance of a 

landowner’s permission to drill, required by the Arizona Department of Water Resources.

WR-1.1.1: All proposed new water uses and developments will be assessed to 

determine whether they will adversely affect springs, streams, tinajas, or seeps; decrease 

water availability at existing wells; or conflict with other resource management goals.

WR-1.1.2: The only proposed water developments allowed will be those that are 

consistent with management objectives.

WR-1.1.3: Groundwater exploration and development will be restricted and damage 

mitigated in areas with ecological or cultural resources that are sensitive to disturbance.

WR-1.2: The BLM will take necessary steps to acquire all water rights allowed by law to 

properly manage the Lower Sonoran Planning Area and to protect the natural resources 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-40 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

of the Planning Area. Inventory work and at least one-half of water-rights filings will be 

completed within 5 years of issuing this plan.

WR-1.2.1: Water will be inventoried and appropriate applications and claims filed for 

state water rights for all water sources and beneficial uses on public land, in accordance 

with state law, to ensure water availability to meet management needs and protect 

ecological functions.

WR-2: All surface water in the LSDA will meet appropriate state water quality standards 

or will have state-approved plans for water quality improvement.

WR-2.1: Impaired water quality in stretches of the Gila River that run through the LSDA will be 

improved or corrected within five years; the BLM will commit to the state schedule for water 

quality improvement.

WR-2.1.1: The BLM will implement best management practices for grazing, mining, 

energy development, and other activities that have been specifically established to 

protect streams from nonpoint source pollution.

WR-2.1.2: The BLM will be an active participant as the Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality begins work on the total maximum daily load for the Gila River 

between the Salt River and Painted Rock Reservoir.

Administrative Actions

• Identify, evaluate, and assign priorities for restoring disturbed areas considering the potential for 

soil erosion and loss, damage to cultural or ecologically sensitive sites, and effects on water 

quality and quantity.

• Evaluate proposals for groundwater withdrawals on BLM-administered lands within an Active

Management Area (AMA) in coordination with the Arizona Department of Water Resources 

(ADWR), and incorporate any restrictions or guidelines for the AMA.

• Work with county, state, and federal agencies to monitor surface and groundwater quantity and 

quality on public lands. Correct problems as they are identified.

• Coordinate with the AGFD to be sure all wells within the BGR are registered with ADWR. 

Inventory all water sources on BGR and enter them into the BLM water data management 

system. Coordinate water rights filings for water sources with the US Air Force and AGFD 

(applicable to the three relinquished BGR parcels).
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-41

2.2.9 Wild Horse and Burro Management

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

HB-1: Manage the Painted Rock Herd Area in accordance with the Wild and Free-Roaming 

Horses and Burros Act.

HB-1.1: Manage the Painted Rock Herd Area as a Herd Area, with a target population of zero 

wild horses and burros.

HB-1.1.1: In accordance with the manageability analysis (see Appendix M, Painted Rock 

Herd Manageability Analysis in the Lower Sonoran-SDNM PRMP/FEIS), the Painted Rock 

Herd Area will not be managed as an Herd Management Area. Neither reproducing nor 

nonreproducing herds of wild horses or burros will be permissible. Burros and horses 

will be removed from the herd area as funding is available, with the target of reaching a 

population of zero. Wild horses and burros straying off the herd area onto private lands 

will be treated as nuisance animals and removed, in accordance with 43 CFR, 4720.2. 

2.2.10 Wilderness Characteristics 

Allocations Summary

Under the approved management action, approximately 91,200 acres of BLM lands in LSDA will be 

managed to protect wilderness characteristic. See WC-1.1.1. 

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

WC-1: Areas to be managed to protect wilderness characteristics should retain a high 

degree of naturalness, where the imprint of humans on lands and resources is substantially 

unnoticeable. Furthermore, outstanding opportunities for solitude and primitive or 

unconfined types of recreation should be maintained or enhanced.

WC-1.1: Manage lands managed to protect wilderness characteristics to maintain a high degree 

of naturalness and offer outstanding opportunities for solitude or primitive unconfined 

recreation by reducing impacts on these values, while considering manageability and competing 

resource demands.

WC-1.1.1: Public lands will be allocated as lands managed to protect wilderness 

characteristics, as shown on Map 5, Wilderness Characteristics (91,200 acres). 

WC-1.1.2: Private or state in-holdings, including subsurface, will be acquired when 

available from willing owners.

WC-1.1.3: Lands managed to protect wilderness characteristics will be managed as 

exclusion areas for placement of new utility-scale renewable energy developments. See 

also LR-1. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-42 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

WC-1.1.4: Lands managed to protect wilderness characteristics will be managed as 

avoidance areas for minor and nonlinear LUAs, with the exception for law enforcement, 

public safety, or administrative purposes, as approved by the authorized officer. See also 

LR-1 

WC-1.1.5: Any potential new minor and nonlinear LUAs, and maintenance of existing 

facilities, will be evaluated and allowed under the following circumstances:

• When compatible with maintaining or enhancing wilderness characteristics or 

when needed to protect, manage, or improve natural or heritage resource 

conditions

• When meeting law enforcement, agency, or public safety needs

• When reconstruction, replacement, or major maintenance of existing facilities, 

or development of new projects, is consistent with this plan's objectives, VRM 

classes, and desired recreation, social, and managerial settings

• When the project site can be restored to its previous condition after the 

project is completed. See also LR-1. 

WC-1.1.6: Existing facilities and projects no longer active will be removed, if practicable.

WC-1.1.7: Sites and locales with human-caused disturbances will be rehabilitated, if such 

actions maintain or enhance wilderness characteristics and natural/heritage resources, if 

they are practicable, if they meet management prescriptions and SOPs, and if they are 

addressed in a restoration plan.

WC-1.1.8: Measurement standards will be developed and adopted for:

• Trail conditions

• Facility conditions

• Visitor-to-visitor encounters

• Vegetation changes

• Vegetation and wildlife DRCs

• Other approved activities

WC-1.1.11: Lands managed to protect wilderness characteristics will be designated and 

managed as limited OHV use areas. Motorized vehicle use will be limited to primitive 

routes described in the wilderness inventory findings and generally subject to the 

prescriptions below. When this planning is completed, motorized travel and 

nonmotorized vehicles (e.g., bicycles, other devices for conveyance, and stock-drawn 

carts/wagons) will generally be restricted to designated roads, primitive roads, and trails.

See also TM-1.2. 

• Major arterial vehicle travel routes through wilderness character allocation 

areas will remain open for motorized travel.

• Vehicle routes to range and wildlife developments will remain open to public 

use under most circumstances.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-45

• Vehicle spur roads and vehicle routes in washes will be closed to motorized 

travel and vehicle use.

WC-1.1.12: Public or commercial collection of plant and mineral specimens will be 

prohibited. 

WC-1.1.13: Wheeled game carriers will be allowed. See also TM-1.2.3, TM-1.3.4 

WC-1.1.14: Closed vehicle routes could be converted, where appropriate, for use as 

equestrian and/or hiking trails.

WC-1.1.15: New equestrian and/or hiking trails will be established when consistent with 

this plan's objectives; desired recreation, social, and managerial settings; and VRM 

classes.

WC-1.1.16: Special recreation permits, commercial recreation and vending operations, 

guided hunts, and concession leases will be allowed when they are landscape- and 

wilderness-character, resource-dependent activities, consistent with this plan’s 

objectives; desired recreation, social, and managerial settings; and VRM classes.

Administrative Actions

• Employ the least-impacting methods for project development that can be reasonably applied. 

• Use design methods that cause the facility to blend into the landscape, including consideration of 

site selection and use of a low profile. 

• Design facilities that will require minimal maintenance. 

• Use best management practices to minimize surface and vegetation disturbance during 

construction. 

• Decrease the visual effect of existing facilities during reconstruction, replacement, or major 

maintenance. 

• Establish baseline standards to protect proper levels of recreational and landscape disturbance 

to protect wilderness characteristics.

2.2.11 Wildland Fire Management

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

WF-1: Ensure firefighter and public safety is the highest priority in every fire or fuels 

management activity.

WF-1.1: Set priorities among protecting residences, community infrastructure, and other manmade property and improvements.

WF-1.1.1: Management Response to unplanned ignitions will be full suppression for all 

lands within the LSFO Planning Area. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-46 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

WF-1.1.2: Implement a hazardous fuels reduction program that creates conditions 

conducive for safe and effective firefighting. 

WF-1.1.3: With community partners, implement the Pinal and Pima County Community 

Wildfire Protection Plans. 

WF-1.1.4: With community partners, provide input into the development of the Pima 

and Gila County Community Wildfire Protection Plans.

WF-2: Wildland fuels are managed to protect Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) areas and 

meet resource management objectives.

WF-2.1: Fuels within WUI areas are proactively managed to improve the protection of life and 

property.

WF-2.1.1: Hazardous fuels around communities at risk and utility infrastructure (e.g., 

roads, power lines, and communication sites) within the WUI are reduced using 

mechanical, chemical, biological, and prescribed fire treatments, where applicable. 

WF-2.1.2: Identify, prioritize, and implement WUI fuels treatments in the Planning Area. 

Fuels treatments to reduce wildland fire risk will focus on the WUI areas identified in 

the Planning Area Community Wildfire Protection Plans and those that are developed 

collaboratively with Planning Area partners. 

WF-2.1.3: In consultation with cultural resource specialists, develop fuels treatments to 

protect cultural resources that are susceptible to damage from wildfire. 

WF-2.1.4: Analyze and implement where needed, hazardous fuels reduction in and 

around recreation sites to improve public and firefighter safety.

WF-3: Limit the extent of wildfires and the impact of fire suppression efforts on wildlife, 

plant communities, and natural and cultural features.

WF-3.1: Reduce the frequency of human-caused wildland fires and minimize the total number of 

acres burned within the Planning Area.

WF-3.1.1: Management Response to unplanned ignitions will be full suppression for all 

lands within the Planning Area. 

WF-3.1.2: Identify, prioritize, and implement non-WUI fuels treatments within the 

Planning Area. Prioritization will be given to fuels treatments that maintain areas in Fire 

Regime Condition Class 1 or have the ability to improve areas characterized as Fire 

Regime Condition Class II and III. 

WF-3.1.3: Implement fuels treatments, suppression activities, and prevention activities 

that target reducing the size and number of human-caused wildland fires.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-47

WF-3.2: For all fire management activities (wildfire suppression, prescribed fire, and mechanical, 

chemical, and biological vegetation treatments), a focus will be to maintain or improve habitat 

for federally threatened, endangered, proposed, and candidate (federally protected) species.

WF-3.2.1: Identify and implement post-fire stabilization and rehabilitation actions in 

burned areas to restore a functional landscape to meet the resource management 

objectives. 

WF-3.2.2: Use prescribed fire, chemical, mechanical, manual, and biological treatments in 

areas of the Planning Area that fall in Fire Regimes 2 and 4 to reduce shrub and tree 

components. 

WF-3.2.3: Hazardous fuel reduction projects will be integrated with riparian restoration 

projects to reduce the frequency and the extent of fires along the Gila River, as well as 

to improve the quality and quantity of native riparian vegetation communities. 

WF-3.2.4: Utilize fuels management treatments, including prescribed fire, to manage 

decadent marsh vegetation and improve habitat for Yuma Clapper Rail and other species 

that depend upon cattail and bulrush marsh for foraging and nesting habitat. 

WF-3.2.5: Protect known locations of habitat occupied by federally listed species. 

Minimum impact suppression tactics (MIST) will be followed in all areas with known 

federally protected species or habitat.

WF-3.2.6: Construction of permanent roads, primitive roads, or trails will not be 

permitted during fire-suppression activities in habitat occupied by federally protected 

species. Construction of temporary roads, primitive roads, or trails is approved only if 

necessary for safety or the protection of property or resources, including federally 

protected species habitat. Temporary road construction should be coordinated with the 

USFWS, through the resource advisor.

WF-3.2.7: Crew camps, equipment staging areas, and aircraft landing and fueling areas 

should be located outside of listed species habitats, preferably in locations that have 

previously been disturbed. If camps must be located in listed species habitat, the 

resource advisor will be consulted to ensure habitat damage and other effects on listed 

species are minimized and documented. The resource advisor should also consider the 

potential for indirect effects on listed species or their habitat from the siting of camps 

and staging areas (e.g., if an area is within the water flow pattern, there may be indirect 

effects to aquatic habitat or species located off-site).

WF-3.2.8: Use of motorized vehicles during prescribed burns or other fuels treatment 

activities in suitable or occupied listed species habitat will be restricted, to the extent 

feasible, to existing roads, trails, washes, and temporary fuel breaks or site-access 

routes. If off-road travel is deemed necessary, any cross-country travel paths will be 

surveyed prior to use and will be closed and rehabilitated after the prescribed burn or 

fuels treatment project is completed.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-48 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

WF-3.2.9: Sediment traps or other erosion control methods will be used to reduce or 

eliminate an influx of ash and sediment into aquatic systems.

WF-3.2.10: Use of motorized vehicles during rehabilitation or restoration activities in 

suitable or occupied listed species habitat will be restricted, to the extent feasible, to 

existing roads, trails, or washes, and to temporary access roads or fuel breaks created 

to enable the fire suppression, prescribed burn, or fuels treatment activities to occur. If 

off-road travel is deemed necessary, any cross-country travel paths will be surveyed 

prior to use and will be closed and rehabilitated after rehabilitation or restoration 

activities are completed.

WF-3.2.11: All temporary roads, vehicle tracks, skid trails, and OHV trails resulting from 

fire suppression and the proposed fire management activities will be rehabilitated (water 

bars, etc.) and will be closed or made impassible for future use.

WF-3.2.12: During wildfire suppression, apply MIST within riparian areas. Fire

suppression actions in riparian areas should be prioritized to minimize damage to stands 

of native vegetation from wildfire or suppression operations. To the extent possible, 

retain large, downed woody materials and snags that are not a hazard to firefighters.

WF-3.2.13: In riparian areas, use natural barriers or openings in riparian vegetation 

where possible as the easiest and safest method to manage a riparian wildfire. Where 

possible and practical, use wet fuelbreaks in sandy overflow channels rather than 

constructing fire lines by hand or with heavy equipment.

WF-3.2.14: Construction or development of a crossing for motorized vehicles across a 

perennial stream will not be permitted, unless an established road already exists or 

where dry intermittent sections occur.

WF-3.2.15: Avoid the use of fire retardants or chemical foams in riparian habitats or 

within 300 feet of aquatic habitats, particularly sites occupied by federally protected 

species. Apply operational guidelines, as stated in the Interagency Standards for Fire and 

Fire Aviation Operations (as updated), “Environmental Guidelines for Delivery of 

Retardant or Foam Near Waterways.”

WF-3.2.16: When using water from sources supporting federally protected species, care 

must be taken to ensure adverse impacts on these species are minimized or prevented. 

Unused water from fire abatement activities will not be dumped in sites occupied by 

federally protected aquatic species to avoid introducing nonnative species, diseases, or 

parasites.

WF-3.2.17: If water is drafted from a stock tank or other body of water for fire 

suppression, it will not be refilled with water from another tank, lakes, or other water 

sources that may support nonnative fishes, bullfrogs, crayfish, or salamanders.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-49

WF-3.2.18: Use of containment systems for portable pumps to avoid fuel spills in 

riparian or aquatic systems will be required.

WF-3.2.19: All conservation measures for wildland fire suppression also apply to fuels 

treatment activities (prescribed fire; mechanical, chemical, and biological treatments) in 

riparian, wetland, and aquatic habitats.

WF-3.2.20: Fire management treatments within or adjacent to riparian and aquatic 

habitats will be designed to provide long-term benefits to aquatic and riparian resources 

by reducing threats associated with dewatering and surface disturbance, or by improving 

the condition of the watershed and enhancing watershed function.

WF-3.2.21: For priority fire/fuels management areas (e.g., WUI) with federally protected 

species or designated critical habitat downstream, BLM biologists and other resource 

specialists, as appropriate, in coordination with USFWS and AGFD, will determine:

• The number of acres and the number of projects or phases of projects to occur 

within one watershed per year

• An appropriately sized buffer adjacent to perennial streams in order to minimize 

soil and ash from entering the stream

• Where livestock grazing occurs in areas that have been burned, specialists will

determine when grazing can be resumed. Such deferments from grazing will only 

occur when necessary to protect streams from increased ash or sediment flow 

into streams

WF-3.2.22: To the extent possible, maintain habitat features necessary to support 

breeding populations of the pygmy-owl within their historic range and review ongoing 

fire management activities for effects on essential habitat features needed by cactus 

ferruginous pygmy-owls. Modify activities, where necessary, to sustain the overall 

suitability of the habitat for the owls. Priority will be given to activities in or near 

occupied or recently occupied (within the last 10 years) habitat. 

WF-3.2.23: Implement the conservation measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats.

WF-3.2.24: Except where fires are active in occupied Southwestern willow flycatcher 

habitat, minimize unnecessary low-level helicopter flights during the breeding season 

(April 1 to September 30). Approach bucket dip sites at a 90-degree direction to rivers 

to minimize flight time over the river corridor and occupied riparian habitats. Locate 

landing sites for helicopters at least one-quarter mile from occupied sites to avoid 

impacts on Southwestern willow flycatchers and their habitat.

WF-3.2.25: Minimize use of chainsaws or bulldozers to construct fire lines through 

occupied or found to be occupied listed species habitat, except where necessary to 

reduce the overall acreage of occupied habitat or other important habitat areas that will

otherwise be burned.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-50 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

WF-3.2.26: Avoid developing access roads that will result in fragmentation or a 

reduction in habitat quality for listed species. Close and rehabilitate all roads that were 

necessary for project implementation (see RR-5). 

WF-3.2.27: Prescribed burning will be allowed only within one-half mile of occupied or 

found-to-be-occupied habitat when weather conditions allow smoke to disperse from 

the habitat when Southwestern willow flycatchers may be present (breeding season of 

April 1 to September 30).

WF-3.2.28: The following reasonable and prudent measures, terms, and conditions are 

necessary and appropriate to minimize take of Southwestern willow flycatchers:

• The BLM shall minimize the effects of harassment, harm, and mortality to 

Southwestern willow flycatchers. 

• In cooperation with USFWS and using guidance from the Southwestern willow 

flycatcher recovery plan, the BLM shall incorporate the elements recommended 

for fire risk evaluation and planning into its fire management plans for all current 

flycatcher breeding sites on or adjacent to BLM-administered lands.

• If additional sites become occupied, the BLM shall include them in the yearly fire 

management plans in cooperation with USFWS, prior to the next wildfire 

season.

WF-3.2.29: During fire management activities in habitat occupied by federally protected 

plant species, no staging of equipment or personnel will be permitted within 100 meters 

of identified individuals or populations, nor will off-road vehicles be allowed within the 

100-meter buffer area, unless necessary for firefighter or public safety or the protection 

of property, improvements, or other resources (see FS-7). Primary threats to many of 

these plant species are trampling or crushing from personnel and vehicles.

WF-3.2.30: No prescribed burning will be implemented within 100 meters of identified 

locations or unsurveyed suitable habitat for federally protected and sensitive plant 

populations unless specifically designed to maintain or improve the existing population.

WF-3.2.31: Prior to implementing any fuels treatment activities (prescribed fire, 

vegetation treatments), pre-project surveys will be conducted for paniculate agaves and 

saguaros that may be directly affected by fuels management activities.

WF-3.2.32: Protect long-nosed bat forage plants – saguaros and high concentrations of 

agaves – from wildfire and fire-suppression activities and from modification by fuels 

treatment activities (prescribed fire, vegetation treatments), to the greatest extent 

possible. Agave concentrations are contiguous stands or concentrations of more than 

20 plants per acre. Avoid driving over plants, piling slash on top of plants, and burning 

on or near plants. Staging areas for fire crews or helicopters will be located in disturbed 

sites, if possible.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-51

WF-3.2.33: No seeding/planting of nonnative plants will occur in any wildfire 

rehabilitation site or fuels treatment site with paniculate agaves or saguaros.

WF-3.3: For all fire management activities, efforts will be made to reduce the impacts on natural 

and cultural resources.

WF-3.3.1: Conduct all fire management activities within ACECs and along the Anza 

NHT in a manner that will avoid or minimize degradation of these areas and values that 

have been identified in the respective legislative designations for these areas. 

WF-3.3.2: As part of an integrated vegetation resources management strategy, create 

fuel breaks and complete hazardous fuels reduction activities within the Fred J. Weiler 

Green Belt to protect and restore mesquite bosques and native riparian woodlands. 

WF-3.3.3: Ensure fire management activities in wilderness areas are compatible with the 

applicable wilderness plan. 

Administrative Actions

• Resource advisors from the BLM will be designated to coordinate natural resource concerns, 

including federally protected species. They will also serve as a field contact representative 

responsible for coordination with the USFWS. Duties will include identifying protective 

measures endorsed by the field office manager, and delivering these measures to the incident 

commander; surveying prospective campsites, aircraft landing, and fueling sites; and performing 

other duties necessary to ensure adverse effects on federally protected species and their 

habitats are minimized. On-the-ground monitors will be designated and used when firesuppression activities occur within identified occupied or suitable habitat for federally protected 

species.

• All personnel on the fire (firefighters and support personnel) will be briefed and educated by 

resource advisors or designated supervisors about listed species and the importance of 

minimizing impacts on individuals and their habitats. All personnel will be informed of the 

conservation measures designed to minimize or eliminate take of the species present. This 

information is best identified in the incident objectives.

• The effectiveness of fire-suppression activities and conservation measures for federally 

protected species should be evaluated after a fire when practical and the results shared with the 

USFWS and AGFD. Revise future fire-suppression plans and tactical applications as needed and 

as practical.

• Biologists will be involved in the development of prescribed burn plans and vegetation treatment 

plans to minimize effects on federally protected species and their habitats within, adjacent to, 

and downstream of proposed project sites. Biologists will consider the protection of seasonal 

and spatial needs of federally protected species (e.g., avoiding or protecting important use areas 

or structures and maintaining adequate patches of key habitat components) during project 

planning and implementation.

• Pre-project surveys and clearances (biological evaluations/assessments) for federally protected 

species will be required for each project site before implementation. All applicable conservation 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-52 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

measures will be applied to areas with unsurveyed suitable habitat for federally protected 

species until a survey has been conducted by qualified personnel to clear the area for the 

treatment activity.

• As part of the mandatory fire briefing held prior to prescribed burning, all personnel (firefighters 

and support personnel) will be briefed and educated by resource advisors or designated 

supervisors about listed species and the importance of minimizing impacts on individuals and 

their habitats. All personnel will be informed of the conservation measures designed to minimize 

or eliminate take of the species present.

• When rehabilitating important areas for federally listed species that have been damaged by fire 

or other fuels treatments, the biologist will give careful consideration to minimizing short-term 

and long-term impacts. Someone who is familiar with fire impacts and the needs of the affected 

species will contribute to rehabilitation plan development. Appropriate timing of rehabilitation 

and spatial needs of federally listed species will be addressed in rehabilitation plans.

• Burned area emergency rehabilitation activities and long-term restoration activities should be 

monitored, and the results provided to the USFWS and AGFD. Section 7 consultation for 

burned area emergency rehabilitation activities will be conducted independently, if necessary.

• Develop public education plans that discourage or restrict fires and fire-prone recreation uses 

during high fire-risk periods. Develop brochures, signs, and other interpretive materials to 

educate recreationists about the ecological role of fires and the potential dangers of accidental 

fires.

• Fire suppression and rehabilitation in riparian corridors will be coordinated with the resource 

advisor or qualified biologist approved by the BLM.

• Site-specific implementation plans that include project areas with federally protected aquatic or 

riparian-obligate species will specify fire management objectives and wildland fire-suppression 

guidance, taking into account the special concerns related to these species.

• Develop and implement restoration plans for affected riparian or aquatic areas, including longterm monitoring, to document changes in conditions in the riparian zone and watershed that 

maintain flood regimes and reduce fire susceptibility. Monitor stream water quality and riparian 

ecosystem health to determine effects of wildfire and fire management activities. Coordinate 

efforts and results with the USFWS and AGFD.

• Develop mitigation plans in coordination with the USFWS for fuels treatment projects 

(prescribed fire, vegetation treatments) that may adversely affect cactus ferruginous pygmy-owls 

or their habitat. Mitigation plans for prescribed fire shall limit to the extent practicable the 

possibility that fire will spread to riparian habitats. Mitigation plans will be approved by the 

USFWS.

• The following reasonable and prudent measures, terms, and conditions are necessary and 

appropriate to minimize take of Yuma clapper rail:

o Minimize disturbance to Yuma clapper rails during prescribed fire activities.

o To allow for a better estimate of the number of birds in the affected area, the BLM or 

its designated representative shall conduct surveys of the site to be prescribed burned 

during the breeding season prior to the burn. Since prescribed fires will be conducted 

from September to March, the surveys shall be done the preceding March to May.

• Instruct all crew bosses of fire personnel engaged in wildfire suppression, wildland fire use, 

prescribed fire, and vegetation treatments) in the identification of agave and columnar cacti and 

the importance of their protection.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-53

• Known locations and potential habitat for plant populations will be mapped to facilitate planning 

for wildland fire use, prescribed fires, and vegetation treatments and to ensure protection of 

these populations during fire suppression.

• The BLM will coordinate with the USFWS to delineate buffer areas around plant populations 

prior to prescribed fire and vegetation treatment activities. The BLM will coordinate with the 

USFWS during any emergency response and wildland fire use activities to ensure protection of 

plant populations from fire and fire-suppression activities.

• A mitigation plan will be developed by the BLM in coordination with the USFWS for prescribed 

fires or fuels management projects (mechanical, chemical, biological treatments) within 0.5 mile 

of bat roosts or in areas that support paniculate agaves or saguaros. The mitigation plan will

ensure that effects on bat roosts and forage plants are minimized and will include monitoring of 

effects on forage plants. The plan will be approved by the USFWS.

• BLM personnel should examine concentrations of agaves (including shindagger [Agave schottii]) 

within each proposed fuels treatment area. Personnel should blackline or otherwise protect

from treatments any significant concentrations of agaves that appear to be amidst fuel loads that 

could result in mortality greater than 20 percent (greater than 50 percent for A. schottii). BLM 

personnel should use their best judgment, based on biological and fire expertise, to determine 

which significant agave stands are prone to mortality greater than 20 percent (greater than 50 

percent for A. schottii; see conservation measures FT-1 and FT-3). 

• The BLM should continue to support and cooperate in the investigations of agave relationships 

to livestock grazing and of the effects of prescribed fire on paniculate agaves.

• Coordinate invasive-species management, monitoring, control, and education efforts with the 

appropriate federal, state, county, municipal, and tribal agencies and other partners. Efforts will

be coordinated through the Borderlands Cooperative Weed Management Area and other 

similar groups.

• Conduct floristic surveys and monitoring for populations of sensitive, candidate threatened, 

endangered, rare, or unique species (applicable to the three relinquished BGR parcels).

• Update the existing botanical resources database and vegetation map (applicable to the three 

relinquished BGR parcels).

• Adhere to the intent of the Arizona Native Plant Law, the ESA, and all other applicable laws and 

regulations to protect vegetative resources.

• Focus invasive species monitoring efforts on likely vectors of invasion, such as linear features 

(roads, canals, railroads, utility corridors, etc.), disturbed areas (construction or development 

areas), and areas where water is available or may pond (water control structures, etc.).

• Control of noxious weeds required by law will not be subject to a benefit-cost analysis; 

however, the most economical and efficient method will be analyzed along with the safety of the 

proposed kind of treatment.

• Rehabilitation procedures will follow the Phoenix District Reclamation Plan.

• (Environmental Assessments) Conduct an environmental analysis at the time of the 

pretreatment survey. An interdisciplinary team will review any analysis needed on individual 

projects or group of projects.

• (Cost-Benefit Analysis) Subject land treatments proposed for livestock forage improvement to a 

cost-benefit analysis to ensure total benefits gained will equal or exceed the cost of the 

treatments.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-54 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

• Develop effective interagency and community interactions and cooperation to meet wildland-fire 

and fuel-management strategies and landscape-scale resource condition objectives across 

administrative boundaries.

• Include wildfire hazard mitigation strategies in the Fire Management Plan for the Planning Area 

by identifying appropriate areas for prescribed fire and mechanical, manual, biological, or 

chemical treatments to reduce hazardous fuels to minimize the adverse effects of 

uncharacteristic wildland fires and meet resource objectives. The plan will also identify areas for 

exclusion from fire (through fire suppression), chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments.

• Protect human life (both firefighters and the public) and communities, property, and the natural 

resources on which they depend. Firefighter and public safety are the highest priority in all fire 

management activities.

• Improve public awareness of the role of fire in ecosystem restoration, wildfire risk and 

mitigation strategies and wildfire safe community, preparedness, and response planning. 

2.2.12 Wildlife and Special Status Species

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

WL-1 (Wildlife Habitat Area Management): Manage to encourage habitat availability and 

diversity for wildlife resources so habitats are maintained and/or improving within WHAs, 

where priority species will receive focus when analyzing activities and projects.

WL-1.1: Manage to encourage habitat availability and diversity for wildlife resources so habitats 

are maintained and/or improving within the Gila Bend Mountains WHA, where priority species 

will receive focus when analyzing activities and projects.

WL-1.1.1: Allocate the Gila Bend Mountain WHA (255,700 acres). 

WL-1.1.2: Retain all public lands and acquire private and state lands as available and as 

funds allow, on a willing seller/willing buyer basis to maintain habitat connectivity. See 

also LR-1. 

WL-1.1.3: Maintenance of utility corridors, including vegetation clearing, will be

restricted to the existing authorized LUA corridor.

WL-1.1.4: Motorized vehicle use will be prohibited in washes that are occupied or are 

found to be occupied and in cactus ferruginous pygmy-owls habitat from February 1 to 

August 31 to protect pygmy-owls during the breeding, nesting, and dispersal season. All 

other areas will be limited to existing or designated routes. See also TM-2.1.3, TM-2.1.5

WL-1.1.5: Routes that conflict with resource protection and management could be 

closed, limited by seasonal restrictions, or mitigated to prevent habitat degradation and 

fragmentation. See also TM-2.1.3, TM-2.1.5

WL-1.1.6: Through travel management planning, route densities will be reduced and the 

designation of upland routes will be emphasized. Necessary use of access routes in 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-55

washes will be allowed; however, these access routes may contain seasonal closures. 

See also TM-2.1.3, TM-2.1.5 

WL-1.1.7: All new roads or highways crossing public land will be designed to facilitate 

movement of wildlife and will be mitigated to minimize disturbance. See also TM-2.1.3, 

TM-2.1.5

WL-1.1.8: Priority habitat areas will be maintained during road improvements (e.g., 

altering, upgrading, paving, and widening), and improvements must meet desert tortoise 

protection standards. Mitigation may include at-grade wildlife crossings, wildlife underor overpasses, wildlife-appropriate fencing, speed limits, and other appropriate actions.

See also TM-2.1.3, TM-2.1.5 

WL-1.1.9: The Gila Bend Mountains WHA will be avoidance areas for utility-scale 

renewable energy development. Uses will be concentrated in less sensitive resource 

areas or in areas already disturbed. If no other options exist, activities must be mitigated 

and managed to ensure consistency with management objectives, with an emphasis to 

maintain wildlife habitat and movement connectivity within WHAs. See also LR-1. 

WL-1.1.10: The Gila Bend Mountains WHA will be open for locatable, leasable, and 

salable minerals development. Activities must be mitigated and managed to ensure 

consistency with management objectives, with an emphasis to maintain wildlife habitat 

and movement connectivity within WHAs. Valid existing rights will be respected. 

Existing mineral materials free use permits and community pits will be allowed to 

continue and be reissued upon expiration. See also MM-1.1.4. 

WL-2 (Lesser Long-Nosed Bat): Maintain, protect, and make accessible to lesser longnosed bats roosts and contiguous foraging habitat.

WL-2.1: Protect known roosting habitat for lesser long-nosed bat on public land and maintain 

contiguous foraging habitat at its current range and distribution.

WL-2.1.1: Mitigation could occur for facility development, including those for recreation 

purposes, within 4 miles of known lesser long-nosed bat roosts as long as the action 

does not impact roost sites. In the event that mitigation is not sufficient, the 

development will be relocated at least 4 miles from roost sites.

WL-2.1.2: Activities with the potential to impact lesser long-nosed bats or their habitats 

will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and impacts will be mitigated or avoided.

WL-2.1.3: Medium to high density columnar cactus habitat (30 or more saguaro per 

acre) within 40 miles of known roost sites will be maintained and/or restored.

WL-2.1.4: Protect long-nosed bat forage plants—saguaros and high concentrations of 

agaves—from modification by treatment activities (prescribed fire, vegetation 

treatments) to the greatest extent possible. Saguaros and high concentrations of agaves 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-56 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

will be excluded from treatments. Agave concentrations are contiguous stands or 

concentrations of more than 20 plants per acre.

WL-3 (Sonoran Pronghorn): Protect and enhance Sonoran pronghorn habitat and manage 

to support suitable habitat so it is available for future occupancy based on recovery goals.

WL-3.1: Manage for no net loss in currently occupied Sonoran pronghorn habitats. To the 

extent practicable, protect the creosote-bursage, desert washes (xeroriparian), and palo verde 

mixed cacti communities, which provide nutritious forage that encourage fawn recruitment, 

provide thermal cover, enables predator avoidance, and provides for growth and survival. 

Protect areas that provide for chain-fruit cholla production.

WL-3.1.1: The pronghorn habitat area south of Ajo (see Map 6, Wildlife and Special 

Status Species) will be closed to the public for general recreational use during 

pronghorn fawning, between March 15 and July 15, or as determined annually by the 

Sonoran pronghorn recovery team. Minor nonlinear LUAs will also be prohibited unless 

deemed necessary by the authorized officer. Federal, state, and local government 

employees and BLM permit holders operating within the scope of their authorizations 

will be exempt from the closure. See also AC-1.1.18. 

WL-3.1.2: Portions of the Lower Sonoran will be identified as potential reintroduction 

sites for an experimental/nonessential population of Sonoran pronghorn (see Map 7, 

Sonoran Pronghorn Classification Areas).

WL-3.1.3: Sonoran pronghorn experimental/nonessential populations will be managed to 

achieve recovery goals. Mitigation could be required for activities that may impede 

movements or otherwise disturb the species or habitat.

WL-4 (Southwestern Willow Flycatcher and Yellow-Billed Cuckoo): Manage habitats for 

the Southwestern willow flycatcher and yellow-billed cuckoo so they are maintained and/or 

improving.

WL-4.1: Protect, maintain, and restore Southwestern willow flycatcher and yellow-billed cuckoo

habitats and prevent actions that could harm individuals of the two listed species.

WL-4.1.1: Southwestern willow flycatcher and yellow-billed cuckoo habitats in the Fred 

J. Weiler Green Belt will be maintained and/or restored in coordination with USFWS 

and AGFD.

WL-4.1.2: Recreation activities will be allowed only outside of 0.5 mile of occupied or

found to be occupied habitat when birds may be present (breeding season of April 1 to 

September 30).

WL-4.1.3: Vegetation treatment projects adjacent to occupied or found to be occupied 

habitat will be conducted only when willow flycatchers are not present (October 1 to 

March 31).
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-61

WL-4.1.4: Avoid surface-disturbing activities that will result in fragmentation or a 

reduction in habitat quality for both species.

WL-5 (Yuma Clapper Rail): Manage habitat for the Yuma clapper rail so it is maintained 

and/or improving.

WL-5.1: Maintain and protect riparian and wetland areas with potential or occupied Yuma 

clapper rail habitats.

WL-5.1.1: Yuma clapper rail habitat will be maintained or restored by developing or

engineering projects that will encourage native emergent vegetation.

WL-5.1.2: Vegetation treatment projects in occupied or found to be occupied marsh 

habitat will occur only between September 1 and March 15 to avoid the Yuma clapper 

rail breeding and molting seasons.

WL-5.1.3: Mechanical removal of overstory habitat (tamarisk) will only occur after the 

breeding season for Yuma clapper rails (September 1 to March 15).

WL-6 (Sonoran Desert Tortoise): Manage tortoise habitat so habitats provide sufficient 

forage and shelter for a viable population.

WL-6.1: Achieve the following objectives in desert tortoise habitat, as identified by habitat 

category:

• Category I—Maintain stable viable populations and protect existing tortoise habitat 

values and increase populations where possible.

• Category II—Maintain stable viable populations and halt further declines in tortoise 

habitat values. 

• Category III—Limit tortoise habitat and population declines to the extent possible 

through mitigation. 

• Retain natural shelter sites (boulders or caliche caves or similar features used by 

tortoises for sheltering) in Category I and II desert tortoise habitats. 

• Maintain or restore a diverse mixture of forage species and adequate cover of 

vegetation for desert tortoise habitat, as recommended by the 1988 Rangewide Plan 

(BLM 1988b).

WL-6.1.1: Public lands currently allocated for management as Category I, II, and III Sonoran 

desert tortoise habitat, as described in Table 2-4, Sonoran Desert Tortoise Habitat by 

Category, will be managed according to the objectives listed above.

Table 2-4 

Sonoran Desert Tortoise Habitat by Category

Category BLM Acres

I 24,800 

II 355,700 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-62 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Table 2-4 

Sonoran Desert Tortoise Habitat by Category

III 65,300 

The criteria for Category I tortoise habitat areas are as follows:

• Habitat areas are essential to the maintenance of large viable populations. 

• Conflicts are resolvable. 

• Populations are medium- to high-density or low-density contiguous with 

medium- or high-density. 

• Populations are increasing, stable, or decreasing. 

The criteria for Category II tortoise habitat areas are as follows:

• Habitat areas may be essential to maintenance of viable populations. 

• Most conflicts are resolvable. 

• Populations are medium- to high-density or low-density contiguous with 

medium- or high-density. 

• Populations are stable or decreasing. 

The criteria for Category III tortoise habitat areas are as follows:

• Habitat areas are not essential to maintenance of viable populations. 

• Most conflicts are not resolvable, 

• Populations are low- to medium-density and not contiguous with medium- or 

high-density. 

• Populations are stable or decreasing.

WL-6.1.2: Habitat-management categories and boundaries may be revised as new 

population information becomes available. The criteria that will be used in revising 

categories and boundaries are those in the 1988 Rangewide Plan (BLM 1988b).

WL-6.1.3: No net loss will occur in the quality or quantity of Category I and II desert 

tortoise habitat. Mitigation for impacts will be permissible to achieve no net loss in 

quantity or quality of desert tortoise habitat, in accordance with the Desert Tortoise 

Rangewide Plan and other applicable policy guidance.

WL-6.1.4: In Category I and II tortoise habitats, all motorized competitive speed races 

will be prohibited from March 31 through October 15. All other use requests during 

this time will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and could be denied or adjusted to 

avoid conflict with tortoise activity and habitat. Mitigation for conflicts will be 

permissible to achieve no net loss in quantity or quality of desert tortoise habitat. 

Development and uses must be compatible with wildlife objectives. See also RM-3.1, 

Special Recreation Permits. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-63

WL-6.1.5: Category I and II habitats will be avoidance areas for utility-scale renewable 

energy development and major linear land use authorizations. Uses will be concentrated 

in less sensitive resource areas or in areas already disturbed. If no other options exist, 

activities must be mitigated, in accordance with the Desert Tortoise Rangewide Plan and 

other applicable policy guidance. See also LR-1. 

WL-6.1.6: Minor linear and all nonlinear LUAs will be allowed on a case-by-case basis. 

Mitigation for conflicts will be permissible to achieve no net loss in quantity or quality of 

desert tortoise habitat. Development and uses must be compatible with wildlife 

objectives. See also LR-1.3. 

WL-7.1: Protect cactus ferruginous pygmy-owls from disturbance during the breeding and 

nesting seasons. Maintain or improve a complex, multilayered vegetative structure provided by 

perennial plants within the range of the cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl. Structure should consist 

of approximately 30 percent each of grasses and forbs, shrubs, and trees as dictated by site 

conditions. Maintain current or improve interconnected habitat patches of sufficient quality 

(diversity, density, and structure) and quantity (3 acres or more) to support cactus ferruginous 

pygmy-owls. Maintain sufficient vegetation between patches to allow for dispersal.

WL-7.1.1: Activities will be managed to protect, maintain, or improve occupied, or 

found to be occupied, cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl habitat.

WL-7.1.2: Surface-disturbing activities authorized or permitted by the BLM will be 

avoided within 0.5 mile of a known active cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl nest site from 

February 1 through July 31. All actions will be mitigated and managed to ensure 

consistency with management objectives, with an emphasis on maintaining available

habitat. Development planned to occur within 100 meters (330 feet) of any known 

occupied or found to be occupied cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl nest site will be 

evaluated on a site-specific basis, but significant modification of habitat within these areas 

should be avoided year-round. Uses will be concentrated in less sensitive resource areas 

or in areas already disturbed.

WL-7.1.3: Use of motorized vehicles on routes within washes in the Ajo Block that are 

occupied or found to be occupied by cactus ferruginous pygmy-owls will be prohibited 

from April 15 to August 31 to protect pygmy-owls during their nesting season. 

Exceptions to the prohibitions will be authorized only for personnel constructing, 

maintaining, or repairing facilities or conducting research or surveys or for authorized 

law enforcement or fire-suppression emergencies. See also TM-2.1.3, TM-2.1.5

WL-7.1.4: Treatment of riparian habitat, Sonoran desert/desert scrub, or mesquiteinvaded grasslands under 4,000 feet in elevation that may support nesting cactus 

ferruginous pygmy-owls will occur only during the non-nesting season of August 1 to 

January 31, unless pre-project surveys indicate the area does not support pygmy-owls or 

mitigation plans approved by the USFWS have alleviated negative consequences.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-64 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

WL-8 (General Bats): Manage to encourage the natural abundance and diversity of bat 

habitats so they are stable or increasing.

WL-8.1: Protect bat roosts associated with natural caves and abandoned mine features that are 

necessary to provide roosting locations for existing bat populations and opportunities for 

expansion. 

WL-8.1.1: In cooperation with AGFD, important bat roosts will be protected where 

practicable and mitigation measures will be used to resolve potential resource conflicts.

WL-8.1.2: New water developments will be configured to allow for safe use by bats.

WL-8.1.3: Hazardous mine features occupied by bats will be remediated in coordination 

with the AGFD by installing bat gates or, if other roosts are readily available, by 

backfilling.

WL-9 (Migratory Birds): Manage migratory bird habitats so they are maintained and/or 

improving to meet the needs of migratory birds in general.

WL-9.1: Avoid take of migratory birds (adults, nests, eggs, and chicks) to comply with the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Executive Order 13186, and the BLM-USFWS Memorandum of 

Understanding. 

WL-9.1.1: Applications for activities on public lands will evaluate the effects of the BLM’s 

actions on migratory birds during the NEPA process, if any. Applications also will

identify where take reasonably attributable to agency actions may have a measurable 

negative effect on migratory bird populations, focusing first on species of concern, 

priority habitats, and key risk factors. In such situations, the BLM will implement 

approaches lessening such take.

WL-9.1.2: Burrowing owl artificial habitats will be developed to facilitate 

introduction/transplant of owls in suitable locations.

WL-10 (Raptor Habitats): Manage raptor habitats so they are maintained and/or 

improving to meet the needs of raptors in general.

WL-10.1: Manage activities that could reduce raptor nest production.

WL-10.1.1: Authorized developments, uses, and activities within 0.25 mile of known 

occupied raptor nests will be avoided, relocated, or seasonally limited.

WL-10.1.2: Authorized developments, uses, and activities within 0.5 mile of communal 

raptor nesting areas will be avoided.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-65

WL-10.1.3: All authorized activities will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis within 

active eagle nest territories to comply with Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 

1940. 

WL-11 (Bighorn Sheep/Big Game): Manage bighorn sheep and other big game habitats so 

they are maintained and/or improving.

WL-11.1: Provide water for bighorn sheep and protect them from communicable diseases.

WL-11.1.1: Additional waters may be installed in high elevations of bighorn sheep 

habitat to improve habitat suitability.

WL-11.1.2: Domestic sheep and goat use will be prohibited on all allotments within nine 

miles of bighorn sheep habitat.

WL-12 (Wildlife Movement Corridors): Manage wildlife movement corridors so they 

contain ample habitat to assist wildlife in moving from one area to another in a relatively 

safe manner.

WL-12.1: Manage wildlife movement corridors in a manner that will assist wildlife in safe passage 

from one area to another.

WL-12.1.1: All new roads and primitive roads where average speeds may be greater 

than 45 miles per hour, or highways crossing public land, will be designed to facilitate 

movement of wildlife to reduce mortality of wildlife from vehicle collisions.

WL-12.1.2: Maintenance or expansion of existing roads will incorporate measures to 

maintain or restore wildlife habitat connectivity and will incorporate, where appropriate, 

wildlife underpasses or overpasses.

WL-12.1.3: Existing and/or designated roads and/or trails will be subject to seasonal 

closures if conflicts with wildlife cannot be mitigated.

WL-12.1.4: New surface disturbance within 100 meters of the edge of large washes 

located in the desert washes vegetative community (those depicted on USGS 1:24,000 

maps) will be mitigated as needed to protect the integrity of washes as corridors.

WL-12.1.5: Density of roads, primitive roads, and motorized trails will be limited to 3 

miles of road per section or less within the wildlife movement corridors, in accordance 

with the Habitat Guidelines for Mule Deer (Mule Deer Working Group 2006).

WL-12.1.6: Treatments of invasive plant species will be allowed.

WL-12.1.7: Surface-disturbing activities will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. 

Activities will be concentrated in less sensitive resource areas or in areas already 

disturbed. If no other options are available, actions must be mitigated and managed to 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-66 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

ensure consistency with management objectives, with an emphasis to maintain wildlife 

habitat continuity and movement connectivity. If impacts to wildlife cannot be mitigated, 

the action will be denied.

WL-12.1.8: Wildlife Movement Corridors(WMCs) will be open to all locatable minerals

activities. Exploration and development will be managed through existing regulations. 

Mitigation, terms, and conditions will be applied as necessary to retain or improve 

habitat. See also MM-1.1.4. 

WL-12.1.9: WMCs will be open to all leasable minerals actions, including geothermal 

and sodium, but will be mitigated to allow available habitat no less than 200 meters wide 

as a corridor to facilitate wildlife movement. See also MM-1.1.4. 

WL-12.1.10: WMCs will be open to mineral material sales on a case-by-case basis. 

Preference will be to place the surface disturbance outside of the WMC, but if an area 

within the WMC is unavoidable, mitigation to improve or enhance the habitat will

occur. Development and uses must be compatible with wildlife objectives and not 

detrimental to wildlife or its habitat. If impacts cannot be mitigated, the action will be 

denied. See also MM-1.1.4. 

WL-13 (Priority Species Management Guidance): Manage wildlife habitats so they are 

maintained and/or improved.

WL-13.1: Manage habitats for wildlife species so they are maintained and/or improving to meet 

the needs of wildlife in general.

WL-13.1.1: Reintroductions, transplants, and supplemental stockings of native wildlife 

populations (as defined in BLM Manual 1745 or subsequent guidance) could occur in 

their current or historic range, with collaboration between the AGFD and FWS.

WL-13.1.2: The release of rehabilitated or displaced wildlife on public lands will be 

allowed, which could involve constructing artificial habitats, where appropriate, for 

species that are compatible with other resource-management and use objectives.

WL-13.1.3: Acquisitions of non-federal lands and disposals of federal land that have, or 

potentially have, priority species or habitats will include the potential to: 

• Enhance the conservation and management of threatened, endangered, or 

special status species habitat, riparian habitat, desert tortoise habitat, key big 

game habitat

• Improve the overall manageability of wildlife habitat

• Improve habitat connectivity in and around the WHA and wildlife movement 

corridors. See also LR-2.1. 

WL-13.1.4: The BLM will not transfer (dispose of) from federal ownership the following: 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-67

• Designated or proposed critical habitat for a listed or proposed threatened, 

endangered or special status species

• Lands supporting listed or proposed threatened or endangered species, if such 

transfer will be inconsistent with recovery needs and objectives or conservation 

measures or will likely affect the recovery of the listed or proposed species, and 

lands supporting federal candidate species, if such action will contribute to the 

need to list the species as threatened or endangered. See also LR-2.1. 

WL-13.1.5: Retain Category I and II tortoise habitat, unless it is in the general public 

interest to dispose of them and losses in habitat quality and quantity can be mitigated.. 

See also LR-2.1. Exceptions to the above could occur if:

• The recipient of the lands agrees to protect the species or critical habitat under 

the ESA, such as disposal to a non-federal governmental agency or private 

organization

• If conservation of the habitat will still be achieved and ensured or 

• In a land exchange if a net gain in the value of species habitat or protection is 

achieved

WL 13.1.6: Treatments of invasive species will be allowed to benefit visual resources or 

wildlife habitat unless otherwise restricted.

WL-14 (Wildlife Waters): Provide wildlife with safe, usable, year-round access to water.

WL-14.1: Increase, improve, or maintain the density and distribution of wildlife waters on public 

lands throughout the Planning Area to sustain and enhance wildlife populations across their 

range.

WL-14.1.1: Maintain and redevelop existing and develop additional wildlife waters in 

cooperation with AGFD. Increase the density and/or restore the distribution of wildlife 

waters throughout the Planning Area to sustain and enhance native wildlife populations 

across their range. All existing wildlife waters will be maintained or improved as needed 

to maintain the presence of perennial water for native wildlife. New wildlife waters will

be built when needed to maintain, restore, or enhance native wildlife population 

numbers or distributions.

WL-14.1.2: In the event that range water developments are no longer needed for 

livestock use, the BLM, in consultation with the AGFD, will determine if the water 

development will be beneficial to meet wildlife distribution goals or other objectives. If it 

is deemed that the water development is not useful for such purposes, the water source 

will be removed.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-68 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

WL-15 (Nonnative Invasive Animal Species Guidance): Manage to reduce or eliminate 

undesirable nonnative animal species so they do not occur in the Decision Areas or so their 

presence does not adversely affect ecological processes.

WL-15.1: Limit the distribution and abundance of invasive animal species to current levels. 

Reduce the impact of invasive species on native ecosystems from current levels.

WL-15.1.1: Nonnative, invasive animal species will not be allowed except for biological 

controls for which peer-reviewed scientific literature states that the introduced species 

will have no detrimental effects on any native wildlife or plant species in the Planning 

Area.

Administrative Actions

• Work in partnership with AGFD to manage wildlife and wildlife habitat to achieve AGFD’s 

wildlife population goals. Cooperatively develop Habitat Management Plans to meet Sikes Act

requirements and address site-specific habitat management objectives consistent with other 

natural resource objectives. Wildlife management activities administered by AGFD include, but 

are not limited to, surveys, telemetry, transplants, water management, vegetation restoration 

and enhancement, invasive species control, research, law enforcement activities, setting and 

administering hunting permits, and other wildlife or habitat management projects, as identified in 

the master MOU between the Arizona Game and Fish Commission and the BLM.

• Work in partnership with AGFD to manage wildlife and wildlife habitat to achieve AGFD’s 

wildlife population goals and other activities, as identified in the master MOU between AGFD 

and the BLM.

• Work with other landowners within wildlife movement corridors to maintain or improve 

vegetative connectivity and prevent actions that will obstruct the movement of wildlife through 

the areas. Fences may be removed when no longer needed or when other options meet the 

need and as funding and opportunities allow.

• Emphasize maintaining and restoring ecological connectivity through land acquisition, 

partnerships with local landowners, and vegetation resources. If opportunities for wildlife 

movement cannot be adequately maintained, then mitigation to maintain isolated wildlife 

populations will be adopted. 

• Eliminate unauthorized grazing by cattle, sheep, goats, burros, and other nonnative animals and 

construct wildlife-passable fences where unauthorized use is a problem. Fences may be removed 

when no longer needed or other options meet the need and as funding and opportunities allow.

• Livestock waters will provide safe usable water for wildlife, where possible. As funding and 

opportunities permit, existing facilities will be modified for safe wildlife use. The aboveground 

height of livestock troughs and tanks will not exceed 20 inches. The BLM will install wildlife 

escape ladders in each facility and provide ramps for small bird and mammal access as funding 

permits. Storage tanks will be configured to reduce evaporation and prevent wildlife from 

drowning.

• The BLM will contact the appropriate USFWS biologist as soon as practical once a wildfire starts 

and a determination is made that a federally protected species or its habitat could be affected by 

the fire or by fire-suppression activities.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-69

• The USFWS will work with the BLM during the emergency response to apply the appropriate 

conservation measures.

• If conservation measures cannot be applied during the suppression activities, the BLM will

consult with the responding agency after the fact on any suppression actions that may have 

affected the federally protected species or its habitat.

• If conservation measures are adhered to, the BLM will report on the actions taken and the 

effects on the species and its habitat following the fire, but no further consultation on that 

incident will be required.

Threatened and Endangered Species

• The BLM will initiate formal Section 7 consultation with USFWS on all actions that may affect 

federal listed threatened and endangered species or critical habitat, as required by the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended.

• The ESA of 1973, as amended, provides for the protection of threatened and endangered and 

proposed threatened and endangered species of plants and animals. Specifications of the ESA 

pertain to the Lower Sonoran Decision Area. BLM Manual 6840 prescribes conservation 

measures for threatened and endangered species, including conservation measures for fire 

management activities and species-specific conservation measures. To a large extent, these 

measures have been built in to the RMP alternatives evaluated in this FEIS.

• Monitor existing populations and inventory for additional populations of threatened and 

endangered species as funding permits.

Wildlife Species

• Maintain and develop a proactive public education program on the desert tortoise and its habitat 

requirements, including participation in public events with tortoise habitat information.

• Continue to work with and support other agencies and public entities in desert tortoise 

conservation.

• Coordinate invasive animal species control and education efforts with AGFD.

• Follow management prescriptions for livestock grazing allotments in the Woolsey Peak and 

Signal Mountain wilderness areas, as provided for in the wilderness management plans or, if 

different, as described in Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing 

Administration evaluations.

• Design fences to reduce adverse impacts on wildlife movement. Specifications in BLM Manual 

1741 and in local BLM directives will be used. The BLM will consult with AGFD on the design 

and location of new fences. Where existing fences in wildlife habitat do not meet BLM 

specifications, they will be modified according to BLM Manual 1741 when they are scheduled for 

replacement or major maintenance, as funding permits. Special consideration will be given to 

placement, type, and installation of fences in Category I and II desert tortoise habitat to facilitate 

desert tortoise movement, dispersal, and protection. Before installing facilities, the BLM will

conduct a site evaluation for special status and state-protected animals and will develop 

mitigation to protect these species and their habitats. Such mitigation might include project 

relocation, redesign, and abandonment.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-70 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

• Inventory for federally listed, proposed, and candidate species. Implement monitoring programs 

on known populations of listed, proposed, and candidate species and other special status species 

(as defined in BLM Manual 6840) to document population levels and status. Where monitoring 

finds threats to these populations, actions will be taken to protect the species and their habitats.

• Standardize desert tortoise management throughout its habitat. Management will be consistent 

with the following documents:

o Desert Tortoise Habitat Management on Public Lands: A Range-Wide Plan (BLM 1988b)

o Strategy for Desert Tortoise Habitat Management on Public Lands in Arizona, 

Instruction Memorandum No. AZ-91-16 (BLM 1990a)

o Strategy for Desert Tortoise Habitat Management on Public Lands in Arizona: New 

Guidance on Compensation for the Desert Tortoise, Instruction Memorandum No. AZ92-46 (BLM 1992)

o Instructional Memorandum No. 94-018 Ephemeral Grazing Policy in Desert Tortoise 

Habitat Supplemental Guidance for Desert Tortoise Compensation, Instruction 

Memorandum No. AZ-99-008 (BLM 1999)

o Desert Tortoise Mitigation Policy, Instruction Memorandum No. AZ-2009-010 (BLM 

2009) 

• Establish additional desert tortoise study plot(s) or other monitoring methods, as necessary. 

Read plots at 5-year intervals, or as necessary and as funding permits.

2.2.13 Lands and Realty 

Allocations Summary

Table 2-5 

Lands and Realty Allocations

Allocation

Management 

Action

Utility-Scale Renewable Energy Avoidance and Exclusion Areas (Acres)

Acres avoided (moderate and high 

sensitivity conflict areas) 499,900 LR-1.1.2

Acres excluded (prohibited areas) 394,200 LR-1.1.1

Utility Corridors (Width/Length Miles)

El Paso Natural Gas 1.0/34.8 LR-1.2.1

Palo Verde to Devers 1.0/8.8 LR-1.2.1

San Diego Gas and Electric 1.0/21.5 LR-1.2.1

Palo Verde-Kyrene 1.0/7.6 LR-1.2.1

Liberty-Gila Bend 1.0/9.2 LR-1.2.1

Interstate 8 1.0/20.5 LR-1.2.1

Tucson Electric Power 1.0/15.6 LR-1.2.1

Interstate 10 1.0/1.0 LR-1.2.1

Multiuse utility corridor widths and lengths are measured as they cross BLM-administered lands only. 

Multiuse utility corridors are simply referred to as utility corridors within Alternative A and will not 

include transportation facilities.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-71

Table 2-5 

Lands and Realty Allocations

Allocation

Management 

Action

Minor Linear and Nonlinear Avoidance and Exclusion Areas (Acres)

LUA Avoidance Area 344,800 LR-1.3.2

LUA Exclusion Area 295,100 LR-1.3.1

Communication Sites

Oatman Communication Site LR-1.3.4, LR-1.3.5

Land Tenure (Acres)

Disposal 36,600 LR-2.1.1

R&PP Leased 2,800 LR-2.1.2

Acquisition Private and state 

lands will be 

acquired as available 

and as funds allow, 

on a willing 

seller/willing buyer 

basis.

LR-2.1.4, LR-2.1.5, 

LR-2.1.6

Retention 896,300 LR-2.1.10

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

LR-1: Manage lands and realty actions to effectively support public needs and resource 

management objectives.

Additional management actions relevant to Land Use Authorizations are found at CH-1.1.5, WC-1.1.3, 

WC-1.1.4, WC-1.1.5, WL-1.1.2, WL-1.1.9, WL-6.1.5, RM-1.2.9, RM-1.2.10, RM-2.7.1. 

LR-1.1 (Utility-scale Renewable Energy Development LUAs): Authorize utility-scale renewable 

energy development LUAs in locations that are found to be suitable due to limited conflicts with 

other management objectives. 

LR-1.1.1: Utility-scale renewable energy development LUAs will be excluded on lands 

that fall under the “prohibited” areas (refer to Map 8, Renewable Energy). See also RM1.3.11, RM-2.7.3, AC-1.1.9, NT-1.1.7. 

LR-1.1.2: Utility-scale renewable energy development LUAs will be avoided on lands that 

fall under the “high and moderate sensitivity” conflict areas (refer to Map 8, Renewable 

Energy). See also CH-1.1.4, RM-2.7.4, RM-2.7.5, AC-1.1.10. 

LR-1.2 (Major Linear LUAs): Authorize major linear LUAs in locations that utilize designated 

multiuse utility corridors effectively (refer to Map 9, Land Use Authorizations). 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-72 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

LR-1.2.1: Eight 1-mile-wide, multiuse, utility corridors will be designated, in which all 

compatible major linear utility LUAs will be allowed, unless otherwise specified by the 

authorizing official. The corridors are listed below: 

• El Paso Natural Gas (section from Ajo, AZ, to the Tohono O’odham Nation will

be removed)

• Palo Verde-Devers

• San Diego Gas and Electric

• Palo Verde-Kyrene

• Liberty-Gila Bend

• Interstate 8

• Tucson Electric Power (section from Ajo, AZ, to Tohono O’odham Nation will

be removed)

• Interstate 10

LR-1.2.2: Major linear LUAs may be authorized on case-by-case basis outside designated 

multiuse utility corridors if they are due and necessary in connecting a generating facility 

to the closest designated multiuse utility corridor. See also AC-1.1.10. 

LR-1.2.3: Portions of the El Paso Natural Gas, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Tucson 

Electric Powers Multiuse Utility Corridors will adhere to the decisions and interagency 

operating procedures set forth in the Approved Resource Management Plan 

Amendments/Record of Decision (ROD) for Designation of Energy Corridors on BLM 

Administered Lands in 11 Western States (2009).

LR-1.3 (Minor Linear and Nonlinear LUAs): Authorize minor linear and nonlinear LUAs in 

locations that minimize resource impacts, are compatible with multiple use objectives, and do 

not compromise the existing rights of current holders (refer to Map 9, Land Use 

Authorizations). See also WL-6.1.6, RM-1.3.12, NT-1.1.8. 

LR-1.3.1: Proposed minor linear and nonlinear LUAs will be prohibited in areas 

designated as LUA Exclusion Areas, unless they allow for:

• Access to private property in holdings when there is no other reasonable access 

alternative across non-federal land

• Authorized emergency, public safety and administrative uses 

• Uses that will further enhance the goals and objectives of the allocation, as 

permitted by the authorizing official

Exclusion areas for minor linear and nonlinear LUAs include:

• Designated wilderness areas

• The Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail

• The Fred J. Weiler Green Belt (PLO 1015 lands)

• Sentinel Plain (military land relinquished to the BLM with restrictions related to 

public safety)
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-77

• ACECs

• VRM Class I lands

LR-1.3.2: Proposed minor linear and nonlinear LUAs will be strongly discouraged in 

areas designated as LUA Avoidance Areas, unless they allow for or are:

• Authorized emergency, public safety, and administrative uses

• Uses that are compatible with the purpose for which the allocation was 

designated by meeting the restrictions set forth by the underlining program area 

allocation

• Not feasible on lands outside the avoidance area

LUA Avoidance Areas for minor and nonlinear LUAs include:

• Anza NHT Management Areas

• Developed campgrounds and recreation sites

• BLM threatened and endangered species habitats, including Sonoran desert 

tortoise habitats

• Lands managed to protect wilderness characteristics

• VRM Class II lands

• Fred J. Weiler Green Belt (non-PLO 1015 lands

• Cultural sites allocated to a use category (such as public and conservation use 

sites)

• High-potential segments of the Butterfield Overland Stage Route

LR-1.3.3: Proposed minor linear and nonlinear LUAs will continue to be authorized on 

an as needed case-by-case basis in areas outside of LUA Avoidance and Exclusion areas.

LR-1.3.4: Oatman Mountain will be designated as a communication site.

LR-1.3.5: Communication facilities will be encouraged to be authorized within the 

designated Oatman Mountain Communication Site.

LR-1.3.6: Apiary special-use permits (a nonlinear LUA) will not be authorized within 

0.25 mile of a developed recreation facility or water sources, such as livestock waters 

and springs.

LR-2: Manage land tenure to meet natural resource management objectives and

community needs and to promote agency efficiency. 

LR-2.1: Determine interests in lands for consolidation, retention, disposal, and acquisition. 

Evaluate land tenure actions in accordance with the criteria established in the Arizona Land 

Tenure Adjustment Strategy. See also management actions CH-1.1.2, WL-13.1.3, WL-13.1.4, 

WL-13.1.5, AC-1.1.1, NT-1.1.3, and NT-1.1.20. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-78 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

LR-2.1.1: Approximately 36,800 acres (including San Tan Regional Park) will be suitable 

for disposal via any disposal method, including patent, through the R&PP Act on a caseby-case basis (Map 10, Land Tenure and Appendix C, Legal Descriptions of Lands for 

Disposal). 

LR-2.1.2: Land interests disposed of through the R&PP Act will be evaluated on a caseby-case basis. 

LR-2.1.3: Disposal of 1,140 acres of R&PP leased lands near the city of Apache Junction 

to the city of Apache Junction will continue via any disposal method on a case-by-case 

basis.

LR-2.1.4: Non-federal interests for acquisition will be targeted on a case-by-case basis, 

with an emphasis on acquiring lands that adjoin or are near existing public lands that will

increase the continuity of public lands, facilitate proper management, or protect an 

existing use.

LR-2.1.5: Acquisition by donation and purchase will be considered when willing parties 

or available funds exist.

LR-2.1.6: All acquisitions will be negotiated with willing landowners only and will have to 

be in the public interest.

LR-2.1.7: Public lands bordering the Gila River Indian Reservation, which are identified 

as being suitable for disposal (as shown on Map 10, Land Tenure), will be available for 

disposal only to local, state, federal, or tribal governmental entities.

LR-2.1.8: The BLM will continue to eliminate split-estate situations by acquiring nonfederal subsurface estates that lie beneath federal lands when there is a willing seller.

LR-2.1.9: The BLM will continue to eliminate split-estate situations by disposing of 

federal subsurface estates when there are no known mineral values. 

LR-2.1.10: The BLM will not dispose of any subsurface mineral estates that lie under 

BLM-administered surface estate.

LR-2.1.10: Approximately 896,300 acres of BLM-administered land will be retained by 

the BLM.

Administrative Actions

• Continue to coordinate with the Maricopa County Department of Transportation (MCDOT), 

the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), Pinal County, Pima County, the ADOT, and 

the Federal Highway Administration for transportation activities that may affect public lands.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-81

• Cooperate with the Western Utility Group and other industry groups to facilitate the exchange 

of information and coordinate planning efforts between federal agencies and utility providers 

throughout the western US.

• Whenever possible, promote energy transfer efficiency and support alternative energy sources, 

such as the use of photovoltaic cells (solar energy) and wind power.

• Promptly communicate new designations for land use, resource protection, safety, and security 

to the public and other agencies, as necessary.

• Utility-scale renewable energy land use authorizations within designated multiuse utility 

corridors shall not conflict with existing and potential future linear facilities.

2.2.14 Livestock Grazing 

Allocations Summary

Table 2-6 

Livestock Grazing Allocations

Allocation BLM Acres Management Action

Available Acres 830,200 GR-1.1.1

Unavailable Acres1 100,000 GR-1.1.1

Total Acres 930,200 

Total Proposed 

(AUMs2) 17,541 GR-1.1.2

1Unavailable acres include approximately 58,700 acres of grazing allotments that have 

been closed (e.g., Cameron Allotment, Fred J. Weiler Green Belt, Sentinel Plain, 

other Ajo parcels, land leases, etc.) and approximately 41,200 acres that are 

otherwise unallocated or unavailable for grazing within the Lower Sonoran Decision 

Area. 

2Animal Unit Month (AUM) means the amount of forage necessary for the sustenance 

of one cow or its equivalent for a period of 1 month.

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

GR-1: Manage livestock grazing in the Lower Sonoran Decision Area to provide for 

multiple uses while maintaining healthy ecosystems. 

GR-1.1: Livestock grazing use and associated practices will be managed in a manner consistent 

with other multiple use needs and other desired resource condition objectives to ensure that 

the health of rangeland resources and ecosystems are maintained or improved. Management will

achieve, or make significant progress toward achieving, Land Health Standards and produce a 

wide range of public values, such as wildlife habitat, livestock forage, recreation opportunities, 

clean water, and functional watersheds.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-82 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

GR-1.1.1: Approximately 830,200 acres of BLM-administered lands are allocated and 

available for livestock grazing, as shown in Table 2-6 and Map 11, Livestock Grazing. 

Approximately 100,000 acres of BLM-administered lands will not be available for grazing.

GR-1.1.2: All allotments that are currently available to grazing will remain open to 

grazing under their current classifications and permitted AUMs (17,541 AUMs), as 

reflected in Table 2-6. 

GR-1.1.3: The portions of the Santa Rosa Allotment south of I-8 and outside SDNM

boundaries will remain available for livestock grazing if fencing is built to exclude SDNM 

from the allotment. 

GR-1.1.4: The portion of the Big Horn allotment south of I-8 and outside of the SDNM 

will remain available for livestock grazing if fencing is built to exclude SDNM from the 

allotment.

GR-1.1.5: The portion of the Table Top allotment south of I-8 and outside of SDNM, 

will be unavailable for livestock grazing.

GR-1.1.6: The portion of the Table Top allotment north of I-8, outside SDNM, will be 

classified as perennial-ephemeral. The authorized grazing preference permitted use will

be 148 AUMs. 

GR-1.1.7: All existing water developments will be evaluated and modified, as necessary, 

to provide the maximum benefit and minimum impact to priority wildlife and special 

status species.

GR-1.1.8: Grazing management on allotments categorized as “Maintain” and “Improve” 

may include rest rotation, deferred rotation, deferred, seasonal, short duration, or

other management practices to be implemented where needs are identified through 

monitoring. On “Custodial” allotments, grazing systems or season of use will be 

coordinated with the permittee, Arizona State Land Department, and/or Natural 

Resources Conservation Service.

GR-1.1.9: If grazing availability or classification differs for the Big Horn, Conley, Lower 

Vekol, Hazen, Beloat, and Arnold allotments outside versus inside the SDNM

boundaries, fencing or other control mechanisms will be installed to allow for 

management of SDNM lands separately from the rest of the allotment before grazing 

could continue.

GR-1.1.10: Allotments may be classified as ephemeral, in accordance with the Special 

Ephemeral Rule published December 7, 1968, through Rangeland Health Assessments 

during the permit renewal process. The BLM has established criteria and standard 

operating procedures (SOPs; see Appendix A, Best Management Practices and 

Standard Operating Procedures), based upon the Special Rule through which allotments 

can be classified and managed as ephemeral. These criteria include:
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-85

• Rangelands are within the hot desert biome. 

• Average annual precipitation is less than eight inches. 

• Rangelands produce less than 25 pounds per acre of desirable perennial forage. 

• The vegetative community is composed of less than five percent desirable forage 

species. 

• The rangelands are generally below 3,500 feet in elevation. 

• Annual production is highly unpredictable and forage availability is of a short 

duration. 

• Usable forage production depends on abundant moisture and other favorable 

climatic conditions. 

• Rangelands lack potential to improve existing ecological status and produce a 

dependable supply of forage through intensive rangeland management practices.

GR-1.1.11: The Arizona Guidelines for Grazing Administration, as approved in the 

Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing Administration 

(1997), will apply where appropriate to all livestock grazing activities (Appendix B). 

GR-1.1.12: Land not allocated for livestock use will remain unallocated for this use and 

its forage and other vegetation will be reserved for wildlife and nonconsumptive uses. 

GR-1.1.13: If an evaluation of land health standards identifies an allotment where land 

health standards cannot be achieved under any level or management of livestock use and 

where current grazing use has been identified as the causal factor, then decisions 

identifying those areas as available for livestock grazing will be revisited.

GR-1.1.14: Should a livestock grazing permit be relinquished, the allotment and 

associated resources and public uses will be evaluated to determine the appropriate 

allocation of available forage.

GR-1.1.15: One-time travel off designated routes may be approved with written 

authorization from the authorized officer to access sick or injured livestock. See also 

TM-1.3.3. 

GR-1.1.16: Construction of new livestock waters in Category I and Category II desert 

tortoise habitat and in bighorn sheep habitat will be addressed on a case-by-case basis.

GR-1.1.17: Range improvement permits and cooperative range improvement 

agreements shall specify the standards, design, construction, and maintenance criteria 

for the range improvements and other additional conditions and stipulations or 

modifications deemed necessary. The extent, location, and timing of such actions will be 

based on allotment-specific management objectives adopted through the evaluation 

process, interdisciplinary development, and analysis of proposed actions and funding.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-86 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Administrative Actions

• Existing range developments in areas not allocated for livestock use may be removed if not 

necessary for management of other resources.

• Develop a monitoring plan for allotments as needed to determine and track ecological condition 

and trend.

2.2.15 Minerals Management 

Allocations Summary

Table 2-7 

Acres of Public Lands Available for Mineral Activity

Locatable Minerals

Allocation Acreage Management Action

Withdrawn 164,000 MM-1.1.8 

Recommended for withdrawal 2,300 MM-1.1.7

Remaining open 921,000 MM-1.1.7 

Leasable Minerals

Closed 166,300 MM-1.1.11 

Open with No Surface Occupancy 

stipulation 23,800 MM-1.1.12 

Open with special stipulations 263,700 MM-1.1.12 

Open with standard stipulations 633,500 MM-1.1.12 

Salable Minerals

Closed 319,800 MM-1.1.14 

Open with special stipulations 169,900 MM-1.1.14 

Open with standard stipulations 597,600 MM-1.1.14

Total BLM minerals/BLM surface 1,087,300 acres

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

MM-1: Provide opportunities for exploration and development of energy and mineral 

resources.

MM-1.1: Utilize mineral potential determinations (high, medium, and low) during the evaluation 

of all proposed actions for all resources. Reduce or mitigate hindrances to mineral development, 

particularly in areas of moderate to high potential. Mitigate impacts to other resource values.

MM-1.1.1: Minerals activities will be managed to provide maximum protection for other 

resources, while attempting to allow sufficient mineral development to occur to meet 

public demand. See also CH-1.1.3, 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-87

MM-1.1.2: Should lands now closed to mineral activity be opened, these lands, including 

the mineral estate, will be managed in a manner consistent with the decisions made in 

this plan.

MM-1.1.3: On split-estate lands, where the BLM manages the federal mineral estate but 

the surface is not in federal ownership, the BLM will manage the minerals in accordance 

with existing laws and regulations, while providing the surface owner input into the 

management process.

MM-1.1.4: Within ACECs, the WHA, WMCs, SCRMAs, SRMAs, ERMAs, and lands 

managed to protect wilderness characteristics, minerals-related actions will be approved 

in a manner and with mitigation that maintains the resource values for which the special 

designation or allocation was made, while not denying valid existing rights for locatable 

minerals. Leasable or salable minerals actions will be severely restricted or prohibited, 

depending on the management allocation. See also WL-1.1.10, WL-12.1.8, WL-12.1.9, 

WL-12.1.10, RM-1.3.7, RM-2.7.2, RM-3.1.3, AC-1.1.11, AC-1.1.26. 

MM-1.1.5: The following areas will remain closed to all forms of mining, including 

locatable mineral entry, under the mining laws, mineral leasing, and mineral material 

disposals for the life of the plan:

• Designated wilderness areas

• Fred J. Weiler Green Belt RCA (PLO 1015 lands) (see also GB-1.5 and GB-1.6) 

• Painted Rock Dam power site withdrawal area

• Sentinel Plain withdrawal area

• Bureau of Reclamation withdrawn lands

• Lands leased under the R&PP Act, including San Tan Mountains Regional Park

Locatable Minerals

MM-1.1.7: All BLM-administered lands will be open to locatable mineral entry under the 

mining laws (approximately 921,000 acres), except the following areas, which will be 

recommended for withdrawal unless otherwise noted (approximately 2,300 acres, Map 

12, Mineral Restrictions: Locatables): 

• Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail and Management Area

• Select high potential route segments of the Butterfield Trail

• Painted Rock Campground and Petroglyph Site

• Quartz Peak trailhead

• Sundad and Butterfield West proposed Public Use Sites (not more than 5 acres 

each)

• Gunsight Wash Campground

See also AC-1.1.27. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-88 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

MM-1.1.8: Approximately 164,000 acres of BLM-administered lands will remain 

withdrawn from mineral entry.

Leasable Minerals (fluid energy minerals, including geothermal resources, and sodium)

MM-1.1.9: All BLM-administered lands not withdrawn or segregated from minerals 

actions will be open for mineral leasing in accordance with resource management 

objectives, except for lands with existing segregations or withdrawals (Map 13, Mineral 

Restrictions: Leasables). Approximately 166,300 acres are closed to leasing.

MM-1.1.10: Leases will be issued for fluid energy minerals with appropriate stipulations: 

• Approximately 23,800 acres are open with no surface occupancy stipulation.

• Approximately 263,700 acres are open with special stipulations.

• Approximately 633,500 acres are open with standard stipulations. 

Site-specific actions will be addressed, such as geophysical exploration, approval or 

disapproval of applications for permit to drill, well siting, tank-battery placement, and 

pipeline routing, on a case-by-case basis and include appropriate restrictions or 

conditions of approval. See also CH-1.1.4, AC-1.1.25. AC-1.1.32, NT-1.1.5. 

MM-1.1.11: Mineral-use authorizations for nonenergy leasables will be issued for 

prospecting permits, exploration licenses, preference-right leases, competitive leases, 

lease modifications, and use permits subject to appropriate restrictions and stipulations 

to protect other resources.

Mineral Material Disposals (Salables)

MM-1.1.12: All BLM-administered lands not recommended for withdrawal or segregated 

from minerals actions will be open to discretionary mineral materials disposal via sales 

or free-use permits on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with resource management 

objectives (Map 14, Mineral Restrictions: Mineral Materials): 

• Approximately 169,900 acres are open with special stipulations. 

• Approximately 597,600 acres are open with standard stipulations. 

Those lands unavailable for mineral materials disposal unless otherwise noted are as 

follows (approximately 319,800 acres): 

• Lands with existing segregations or withdrawals (see MM-1.1.6) 

• Quartz Peak trailhead

• Portions of the Gila River Terraces and Lower Gila Historic Trails SCRMA and 

ACEC

• Cuerda de Lena, Saddle Mountain, and Coffeepot ACECs

• Desert tortoise Categories I and II habitats (if no-net-loss stipulation is not met) 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-95

• Within 0.25 mile of known active cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl nest site from 

February 1 through August 31

• See also WC-1.1.10, CH-1.1.3, NT-1.1.6, RM-1.2.7, RM-2.6.4, and AC-1.1.12, 

AC-1.1.33, NT-1.1.6. 

MM-1.1.13: Common-use areas and community pits will be established. Exploration for, 

and disposal of, mineral materials will also be allowed through exploration permits, freeuse permits, and competitive and noncompetitive sales, subject to appropriate 

restrictions and stipulations to protect other resources.

2.2.16 Recreation Management 

Allocations Summary

Table 2-8 

Recreation Allocations

Recreation Management 

Area/Zone BLM Acres Management Action

SRMAs

Buckeye Hills East Trails SRMA 25,800 RM-1.1

Gunsight Wash SRMA 2,500 RM-1.2

Painted Rock SRMA 9,600 RM-1.3

Subtotal SRMA Acres 37,900 (4%)

ERMAs

Ajo ERMA 177,700 RM-2.1

Ajo Desert Zone 149,800 RM-2.1.1.2

Ajo Gateway Zone 27,900 RM-2.1.1.1

Arlington Trails ERMA 60,600 RM-2.2

Buckeye Hills West ERMA 22,100 RM-2.3

Gila Bend Mountains ERMA 259,700 RM-2.4

Lower Gila Historic Trails 

ERMA* 42,600 RM-2.5

Saddle Mountain ERMA 47,500 RM-2.6

Subtotal ERMA Acres 610,200 (66%)

Undesignated Lands 282,100 (30%) RM-3.1.1

Total Acres 930,200 (100%)

* There’s no longer a Gila River RMZ; it is now incorporated within Lower Gila Historic Trails ERMA. 

The Painted Rock Mountains SRMA was deleted from all alternatives in the PRMP.

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

RM-1: Provide quality recreation opportunities and experiences derived from public land 

resource values which are responsive to visitor demand and where these values are 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-96 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

recognized as the primary resource management consideration above all others.

See Appendix D, Recreation Settings and Worksheets.

RM-1.1 (Buckeye Hills East Trails SRMA): To provide local residents with motorized and 

nonmotorized recreation trail opportunities in the natural open spaces, accommodating a range 

of skill levels for various distances located within an hour’s drive of their local communities. 

Through the life of the plan, at least 85% of sampled visitors report satisfaction with their 

recreational experience.

RM-1.1.1: The Buckeye Hills East Trails SRMA will be designated (25,800 acres) for a 

balanced mix of motorized and nonmotorized recreation opportunities adjacent to the 

communities of Buckeye, Avondale, and Goodyear (Map 15, Recreation Management). 

Single-track trails will be maintained with developed loop opportunities, where 

appropriate. The physical, social, and administrative recreation settings will be managed 

for 100% Community Interface. See Appendix D, Recreation Settings and Worksheets. 

RM-1.1.2: If needed to meet management objectives, the SRMA, or specific sites within 

it, will potentially be designated as a Special Management Area (SMA). An Individual 

Special Recreation Permit (ISRP) program may be established to allow for special 

management and resource protection, if needed to meet the objectives for the area. Fee 

sites will be established in accordance with Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act 

(FLREA). A business plan will be prepared and approved before implementation, and 

fees will be established as needed for operational management of the site.

RM-1.1.3: Partnerships may be authorized through a Cooperative Management 

Agreement. Through this agreement, partners could be authorized to share in the 

operational management of the area and in the collection and management of fees in 

accordance with FLREA.

RM-1.1.4: When designated, the travel system will predominately consist of roads 

maintained at levels 1 to 3. Access roads could be maintained at level 5. The area will

provide single-track trail opportunities for motorcycle and equestrian trail riders.

RM-1.1.5: Up to six staging, parking, and/or training areas may be developed with 

standard and expanded amenity facilities, such as gravel surfacing or other soil hardening 

for dust control, picnic tables, and fire rings (up to 30 acres). One large staging area 

could be developed not to exceed 10 acres.

RM-1.1.6: Primitive roads and/or trails, especially connector and loop routes, will be 

developed for a diversity of users. Existing single-track trails will be used as appropriate 

to provide for those user experiences. 

RM-1.1.7: In the Buckeye Hills East Trails SRMA, competitive motorized and 

nonmotorized speed events, including motorcycle “enduros” or equestrian endurance 

rides, will be considered on a case-by-case basis, and the recreation and resource 

objectives of the area must be retained. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-99

RM-1.1.8: Vehicle-based camping will be limited to existing or designated sites, or as 

determined by subsequent activity-level planning. See also AC-1.1.31. 

RM-1.1.9: The Buckeye Hills East Trails SRMA will be managed mostly for VRM Class IV 

(Map 4, Visual Resource Management). See also VR-1.1.2. 

RM-1.2 (Gunsight Wash SRMA): Provide structured managed camping where there is a high 

demand from long-distance winter visitors seeking a remote, primitive, winter camping 

experience and access to adjacent BLM-administered lands. Through the life of the plan, at least 

90% of sampled visitors report satisfaction with their camping experience.

RM-1.2.1: The Gunsight Wash SRMA will be designated (T14S, R5W, Sections 2-4 and 

9-11; 2,500 acres) to provide visitors with recreational vehicle (RV) and primitive 

camping, social gathering, and hiking experiences with sightseeing/touring, photography, 

and wildlife viewing on the adjacent BLM-administered and other federal lands (Map 15, 

Recreation Management). The physical, social, and administrative recreation settings will

be managed as 100% Front Country. See Appendix D, Recreation Settings and 

Worksheets. 

RM-1.2.2: The camping stay in the Gunsight Wash SRMA will be limited to no more than 

14 days within any 28 consecutive days. All other rules and restrictions pertaining to this 

standard camping rule will apply. 

RM-1.2.3: When designated, the travel system will predominately consist of roads 

suitable for two-wheel-drive access for RVs, with at least 80 percent maintained at levels 

3 to 5 to provide access for dispersed camping and motorized sightseeing and hiking 

opportunities. 

RM-1.2.4: The Gunsight Wash SRMA will be recommended for withdrawal from 

locatable minerals exploration and development and closed to leasable minerals actions, 

seismic exploration, and mineral material disposals.

RM-1.2.5: The Gunsight Wash SRMA, or specific sites within it, will potentially be 

designated as an SMA. An ISRP program may be established to allow for special 

management and resource protection if needed to meet the objectives for the area. Fee 

sites will be established in accordance with FLREA. A business plan will be prepared and 

approved before implementation, and fees will be established as needed for operational 

management of the site.

RM-1.1.6: Controlled access, such as a center turning lane on Highway 85, will be 

secured with ADOT.

RM-1.2.7: Standard and expanded amenity infrastructure will be provided at the 

campground, such as restrooms, ramadas, picnic tables, individual campsites with fire 

pits, and improved road systems.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-100 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

RM-1.2.8: The SRMA will be managed for VRM Class III (Map 4, Visual Resource 

Management). See also VR-1.1.2. 

RM-1.2.9: The SRMA will be an exclusion area for utility-scale renewable energy 

developments and major linear LUAs. See also LR-1. 

RM-1.2.10: The SRMA will be an avoidance area for minor linear and all nonlinear LUAs. 

See also LR-1. 

RM-1.2.11: In the Gunsight Wash SRMA, competitive motorized speed events will be 

prohibited. 

RM-1.2.12: Firewood collection will be prohibited within 0.25 mile of the signed 

campground. Burning of Saguaro skeletons and wooden pallets will be prohibited. 

RM-1.2.13: The developed area, as signed, will remain closed to target shooting, in 

accordance with state and federal regulations. 

RM-1.3 (Painted Rock SRMA): To provide structured managed camping where there is a high 

demand from national and international winter visitors seeking a remote, primitive, winter 

camping experience near an adjacent petroglyph site day-use area, and access to adjacent public 

lands, which provide cultural and historic attractions of regional, national, and international 

interest. Through the life of the plan, at least 90% of sampled visitors report satisfaction with 

their camping experience.

RM-1.3.1: The Painted Rock SRMA will be designated (T4S, R7W, Sections 30-32; T4S, 

R8W, Sections 13, 24, 25; T5S, R7W, Sections 5-8, 17, 20; and T5S, R8W, Sections 1-3, 

10-12; approximately 9,800 acres). The approximate 300-acre Petroglyph Site and 

Campground (T5S, R8W, Sections 1 and 2) will be retained as day-use and campground 

fee sites for winter visitor camping. Visitors will experience RV and primitive camping, 

social gathering, petroglyph and historical trail viewing, interpretive exhibit viewing, 

picnicking, hiking, and motorized exploring adjacent to natural landscapes. The adjacent 

9,500 acres will continue to provide the camping closure buffer around the campground 

with limited off-highway vehicle access offering visitors a more backcountry experience 

for wildlife viewing and hunting (Map 15, Recreation Management). The physical, social, 

and administrative recreation settings will be managed for 100% Front Country for the 

entire SRMA. See Appendix D, Recreation Settings and Worksheets. 

RM-1.3.2: The Painted Rock Petroglyph Site and Campground will be retained as 

campground and day-use fee sites in accordance with FLREA and the approved business 

plan. Fees will be adjusted or established as needed to meet business plan objectives.

RM-1.3.3: At the designated campground, the camping stay limit will be 14 days, except 

from October 1 to April 30, when the stay limit will be increased to 90 days.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-101

RM-1.3.4: Public lands adjacent to the developed campground and day-use area, as 

defined in RM-1.2.1, will remain closed to camping and motorized off-highway vehicle 

use, except designated/signed open roads, primitive roads, and trails. The following 

persons, operating within the scope of their official duties, are exempt from the 

provisions of this closure: employees of the BLM, Arizona Game and Fish Department, 

and local and federal law enforcement and fire protection personnel. Access by 

additional parties may be allowed but must be approved in advance in writing by the 

BLM authorized officer. 

RM-1.3.5: Pursuant to the American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 and 

Executive Orders 13007 and 13084, visitor use fees at Painted Rock Petroglyph Site and 

Campground will be waived upon request for Native Americans visiting the site for the 

purpose of engaging in activities of traditional cultural importance. 

RM-1.3.6: When designated, the travel system will consist of roads suitable for twowheel-drive RVs and passenger cars, with at least 90% maintained at levels 3 to 5. Roads 

away from the immediate vicinity of the site will be maintained at levels 1 to 3 for more 

backcountry driving experiences. 

RM-1.3.7: The Painted Rock Petroglyph Site and Campground (approximately 300 acres) 

will be recommended for withdrawal from locatable minerals exploration and 

development and will remain closed to leasable minerals, seismic exploration, and 

mineral material disposals. See also MM-1.1.7. 

RM-1.3.8: Select public lands adjacent to the Painted Rock Petroglyph Site and 

Campground (approximately 6,100 acres) will remain open to all nonrenewable leasable 

minerals actions (including geothermal and sodium), but any lease will contain a No 

Surface Occupancy stipulation. These acres will also be closed to mineral material 

disposals. See also MM-1.1.13. 

RM-1.3.9: The remaining public lands in the SRMA not identified above (approximately 

3,400 acres) will be open to all mineral activities. See also MM-1.1.1. 

RM-1.3.10: The petroglyph site and campground area will be managed for VRM Class IV 

(Map 4, Visual Resource Management). See also VR-1.1.2. 

RM-1.3.11: The petroglyph site and campground area (300 acres) will be exclusion areas 

for utility-scale renewable energy developments and major linear LUAs. The remaining 

public lands in the SRMA will be available unless otherwise excluded. See also LR-1.1.1. 

RM-1.3.12: The petroglyph site and campground will be avoidance areas for minor linear 

and all nonlinear LUAs (300 acres). The remaining public lands in the SRMA will be 

available unless otherwise excluded. See also LR-1.3.1 and LR-1.3.2. 

RM-1.3.13: In the Painted Rock SRMA, competitive motorized speed events will be 

prohibited. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-102 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

RM-1.3.14: Firewood collection will be prohibited within 0.25 mile of the signed 

campground and day-use area. Burning Saguaro skeletons and wooden pallets will be 

prohibited. 

RM-1.3.15: The developed area, as signed, will remain closed to target shooting, in 

accordance with state and federal regulations.

RM-1.5 The San Tan Mountains area will be managed as a recreational park under a Recreation 

and Public Purposes Act Lease (Map 15, Recreation Management). 

RM-2: Provide recreation opportunities and experiences derived from public land resource 

values which are responsive to visitor demand and where recreation use and program 

investments are commensurate with the management of other resources and resource 

uses while sustaining the principal recreation activities and associated qualities and 

conditions of the area. Manage recreation resources in cooperation with local communities 

in areas with recreation-dependent economies.

RM-2.1 (Ajo ERMA): To provide local and seasonal residents of Ajo close-to-home recreational 

destination opportunities on BLM-administered lands in the Lower Sonoran Desert. The Ajo 

ERMA (also known as the Ajo Block) is surrounded by the US Air Force Barry M. Goldwater 

Range, Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Area, the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, and 

the Tohono O’odham Nation. A sense of freedom is provided the residents, in comparison to 

the other land use agencies that require permits or formal requests. The area contributes to the 

residents’ quality of life, the local economy, and management support of the surrounding 

sensitive natural and cultural resources. The ERMA is divided into two recreation management 

zones with discreet management focus and uses. Through the life of the plan, at least 85% of 

sampled visitors indicate they were satisfied with their recreational experience in the area.

RM-2.1.1: The Ajo ERMA will be designated (177,700 acres) for local recreation 

opportunities that highlight the surrounding BLM-administered lands (Map 15, 

Recreation Management).

RM-2.1.1.1 (Ajo Gateway RMZ): Provide local and seasonal residents of Ajo open 

natural spaces to enjoy recreational activities predominately for motorized activities, 

as well as nonmotorized opportunities, on BLM-administered lands bordering the 

Ajo community. Activities include motocross bike riding, mountain biking, and hiking 

in a system of primitive roads and trails just outside of town.

RM-2.1.1.1.1: The Ajo Gateway RMZ will be designated (27,100acres) for local 

recreation opportunities that highlight the surrounding BLM-administered lands 

(Map 15, Recreation Management). The physical, social and administrative 

recreation settings will be managed for 100% Community Interface.

RM-2.1.1.1.2: When designated, the travel system will predominately consist of 

roads suitable for two-wheel drive, maintained at levels 1 to 3, with up to 5 

percent (6 to 9 miles) of the route network maintained at level 5 to provide 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-103

access for dispersed camping and motorized sightseeing and hiking 

opportunities. 

RM-2.1.1.1.3: Visitor and management infrastructure will generally be moderate 

in scope and scale but may include developed facilities, which will include a 

system of primitive roads and trails that meet the desired recreation setting.

RM-2.1.1.1.4: The Ajo Scenic Loop road will be designated during travel 

management planning to interpret and educate local and seasonal visitors on 

adjacent public lands.

RM-2.1.1.1.5: The area will be managed mostly for VRM Class IV (see Map 4, 

Visual Resource Management). See also VR-1.1.2. 

RM-2.1.1.1.6: In the Ajo Gateway RMZ, competitive motorized and 

nonmotorized speed events, including motorcycle enduros and equestrian 

endurance rides, will be considered on a case-by-case basis, and the recreation 

and resource objectives of the area must be retained. 

RM-2.1.1.2 (Ajo Desert RMZ): To provide local and regional visitors with 

undeveloped, primitive, and self-directed recreational experiences that allow for 

motorized as well as nonmotorized recreational opportunities. Activities include 

driving for pleasure, hunting, mountain biking, hiking, camping, exploring, 

photography, and equestrian use.

RM-2.1.1.2.1: The Ajo Desert RMZ will be designated (149,800 acres) for selfdirected recreation opportunities in the foothills and mountains within the Ajo 

Block (Map 15, Recreation Management). The physical, social, and 

administrative recreation settings will be managed for 15% Front Country, 82%

Backcountry, and 3% Passage. 

RM-2.1.1.2.2: When designated, the travel system will predominately consist of 

roads maintained at levels 1 to 3. Major access roads and pullouts could be 

maintained at level 5.

RM-2.1.1.2.3: Parties/Individuals may occupy any one site or multiple sites within 

a 25-mile radius on public lands not closed or otherwise restricted to camping 

for a total period of not more than seven (7) days within a 28 day period. When 

the seven- (7) day limit has been reached, the party must move 25 miles from 

the site of last occupation, or off public land. The authorized officer may give 

written permission for extension of the seven- (7) day limit.

RM-2.1.1.2.4: Visitor and management infrastructure will generally be few in 

number, but developed facilities, such as trailheads, could be established when 

linked to primitive trail systems that meet the desired recreation setting.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-104 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

RM-2.1.1.2.5: The area will be managed for VRM Classes II and III (Map 4, Visual 

Resource Management). See also VR-1.1.2. 

RM-2.1.1.2.6: In the Ajo Desert RMZ, competitive motorized speed events will

be prohibited. Competitive nonmotorized speed events, such as equestrian 

endurance rides, will be considered on a case-by-case basis, and the recreation 

and resource objectives of the area must be retained. 

RM-2.2 (Arlington Trails ERMA): To manage BLM-administered lands in the area west of 

Arlington and north of the Gila Bend Mountains for local and regional visitors seeking a 

dispersed or family-oriented motorized recreation experience, including off-highway vehicle 

driving for various vehicle types and skill levels, camping, exploring, and sightseeing in a remote 

Sonoran Desert landscape. Through the life of the plan, at least 80% will indicate that they are 

very satisfied with their recreational experience in the area.

RM-2.2.1: The Arlington Trails ERMA will be designated (60,600 acres) for familyoriented motorized recreational opportunities on BLM-administered lands (Map 15, 

Recreation Management). The physical, social, and administrative recreation settings will

be managed for 100% Front Country.

RM-2.2.2: When designated, the travel system will predominately consist of roads 

maintained at levels 1 to 3 to allow for backcountry, primitive driving experiences, with 

approximately 10% maintained at level 3 (approximately 19 miles) and up to 30% 

maintained at level 5 (approximately 60 miles) to allow for two-wheel-drive access.

RM-2.2.3: Up to 25 miles of new primitive roads and/or primitive trails may be 

constructed as needed to connect loop routes to provide a variety of motorized 

opportunities for family riding experiences and user groups. Existing roads could be 

realigned to improve resource management or public safety. See also TM-2.1.3. 

RM-2.2.4: Up to two staging, parking, and/or training areas, not to exceed 10 acres each, 

will be developed with standard and expanded amenity facilities, such as gravel surfacing 

or other soil hardening for dust control, picnic tables, and fire rings.

RM-2.2.5: Vehicle-based camping will be limited to existing or designated sites, or as 

determined by subsequent activity-level planning. See also AC-1.1.31. 

RM-2.2.6: The area will be managed mostly for VRM Class IV (Map 4, Visual Resource 

Management). See also VR-1.1.2. 

RM-2.2.7: In the Arlington Trails ERMA, competitive motorized and nonmotorized 

speed events, including motorcycle enduros or equestrian endurance rides, will be 

considered on a case-by-case basis, and the recreation and resource objectives of the 

area must be retained. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-105

RM-2.2.8: If needed to meet management objectives, the ERMA, or specific sites within 

it, will potentially be designated as an SMA. An ISRP program may be established to 

allow for special management and resource protection if needed to meet the objectives 

for the area. Fee sites will be established in accordance with FLREA. A business plan will

be prepared and approved before implementation, and fees will be established as 

needed for operational management of the site. 

RM-2.3 (Buckeye Hills West ERMA): To provide dispersed recreational opportunities adjacent 

to the Maricopa County Buckeye Recreation Area Regional Park and the Robbins Butte State 

Wildlife Area. The ERMA will be managed in partnership with the Arizona Game and Fish 

Department and Maricopa County for motorized and nonmotorized activities, including offhighway vehicle touring, hiking, sightseeing, wildlife viewing, photography, and hunting. Through 

the life of the plan, at least 80% will indicate that they are very satisfied with their recreational 

experience in the area.

RM-2.3.1: The Buckeye Hills West ERMA will be designated (25,800 acres) in 

partnership with Maricopa County and Arizona Game and Fish Department (Map 15, 

Recreation Management). The ERMA will be managed for motorized and nonmotorized 

recreational opportunities on BLM-administered lands adjacent to the Maricopa County 

Buckeye Hills Recreation Area Regional Park and the nearby Robbins Butte State 

Wildlife Area.

RM-2.3.2: The physical, social, and administrative recreation settings will be managed for 

100% Front Country. See Appendix D, Recreation Settings and Worksheets. 

RM-2.3.4: If needed to meet management objectives, the ERMA, or specific sites within 

it, will potentially be designated as a Special Management Area (SMA). An ISRP program 

may be established to allow for special management and resource protection if needed 

to meet the objectives for the area. Fee sites will be established in accordance with 

FLREA. A business plan will be prepared and approved before implementation, and fees 

will be established as needed for operational management of the site. 

RM-2.3.5: Partnerships may be authorized through a Cooperative Management 

Agreement, including Maricopa County and the Arizona Game and Fish Department. 

Through this agreement, partners could be authorized to share in the operational 

management of the area and in the collection and management of fees, in accordance 

with FLREA. 

RM-2.3.6: When designated, the travel system will predominately consist of roads 

maintained at levels 1 to 3. Any access roads will be maintained at level 5.

RM-2.3.7: Overnight camping will be prohibited, unless specifically authorized.

RM-2.2.8: The Buckeye Hills West ERMA will be managed mostly for VRM Class III 

(Map 4, Visual Resource Management) See also VR-1.1.2. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-106 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

RM-2.3.9: Primitive roads or primitive trails may be developed to provide connector and 

loop routes for a diversity of users and provide trail connections to nearby county and 

state parks.

RM-2.3.10: In the Buckeye Hills West ERMA, competitive motorized and nonmotorized 

speed events will be prohibited. 

RM-2.4 (Gila Bend Mountains ERMA): To provide local and regional visitors with dispersed, selfdirected, recreation opportunities and experiences in a remote and undeveloped Sonoran 

Desert landscape, which includes two wilderness areas. Activities include off-road vehicle 

driving, camping, hiking, hunting, and sightseeing. Through the life of the plan, at least 85% will

indicate that they are very satisfied with their recreational experience in the area.

RM-2.4.1: The Gila Bend Mountains ERMA will be designated (259,700 acres,) for 

visitors from western Maricopa County primarily seeking dispersed, undeveloped 

recreation experiences in a remote backcountry setting (Map 15, Recreation 

Management). To better manage dispersed recreation opportunities, the BLM may 

provide major investments in visitor services; however, investments in visitor facilities 

will be moderate to minor. The physical, social, and administrative recreation settings 

will be managed for 15% Front Country, 83% Backcountry, and 2% Passage.

RM-2.4.2: When designated, 90% of the motor vehicle travel system will consist of 

primitive roads and trails maintained at level 1 to provide a rugged primitive motorized 

experience, with up to 3% maintained at levels 3 to 5 (approximately 11 to 16 miles) to 

allow for two-wheel-drive access. See also TM-2.1.3. 

RM-2.4.3: Standard camping amenities, interpretive displays, and improved access will be 

constructed at the Sundad public use site to facilitate visitation.

RM-2.4.4: Areas of disturbance greater than 2 acres will be rehabilitated to natural 

condition, and group limits may be established to prevent further resource degradation. 

RM-2.4.5: The Gila Bend Mountains ERMA will be managed mostly for the following 

VRM Classes (Map 4, Visual Resource Management): Class I in Wilderness Areas; Class 

II in lands managed to protect wilderness characteristics; Class III in remaining areas, 

other than the multiuse utility corridor which is Class IV. See also VR-1.1.2. 

RM-2.4.7: In the Gila Bend Mountains ERMA, competitive motorized speed events, 

including motorcycle enduros, will be prohibited. Competitive nonmotorized speed 

events, such as endurance rides, will be analyzed on a case-by-case basis, and the 

resource and recreation objectives of the area must be retained. 

RM-2.5 (Lower Gila Historic Trails ERMA): To provide recreation and educational opportunities 

and experiences to local, regional, and national visitors who seek to discover, tour, and learn 

about the Juan Bautista de Anza NHT, the historic Butterfield Overland Stage Route, and 

Mormon Battalion trails that intersect the NHT corridor, in addition to the area’s rich cultural 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-107

and natural history and resources. Through the life of the plan, at least 85% of sampled visitors 

report satisfaction with their recreational experience

RM-2.5.1: The Lower Gila Historic Trails ERMA will be designated (42,600 acres) with 

an emphasis on balanced recreation experiences (Map 15, Recreation Management). 

The physical, social, and administrative recreation settings will be managed for 100% 

Front Country. See Appendix D, Recreation Settings and Worksheets. 

RM-2.5.2: When designated, the motorized vehicle travel system will consist primarily of 

primitive roads maintained at levels 1 to 3, with up to 10% of the route network 

maintained at level 5 to provide two-wheel-drive passenger car access to public use 

cultural sites, day-use, and camping facilities. See also TM-2.1.3. 

RM-2.5.3: Visitor and management infrastructure will respond to demand for facilities

and access to the Juan Bautista de Anza NHT, Butterfield Overland Stage Route, and 

other high-intensity trail segments and cultural properties.

RM-2.5.4: Facilities may be developed as needed for visitor use or public safety at public 

use sites, such as Butterfield West, or other areas as identified. Infrastructure will be 

modest in scope and scale but could include expanded amenities as needed. 

RM-2.5.5: Allowable land use authorizations and discretionary minerals activities will be 

determined by the applicable allocation decisions established for the Anza NHT and 

Management Area and Lower Gila Terraces and Historic Trails ACEC prescriptions. 

RM-2.5.6: In the Lower Gila Historic Trails ERMA, competitive motorized speed events 

will be prohibited. Competitive nonmotorized speed events, such as endurance rides, 

will be analyzed on a case-by-case basis, and the resource and recreation objectives of 

the area must be retained. 

RM-2.5.7: Vehicle-based camping will be limited to existing or designated sites, or as 

determined by subsequent activity-level planning. See also AC-1.1.31. 

RM-2.5.8: The Lower Gila Historic Trails ERMA will be managed mostly for the VRM 

Class III (Map 4, Visual Resource Management):See also VR-1.1.2 

RM-2.6 (Saddle Mountain ERMA): To balance the recreation visitor demands with the other 

resources in the area for which the area is designated as an ACEC, including cultural, wildlife, 

and scenic qualities. Residents and regional visitors seek a primarily nonmotorized trail 

experience with limited motorized access to explore, discover, and view the outstanding scenic 

landscapes, unique geologic features, and cultural and wildlife resources of the area. Through the 

life of the plan, at least 85% of sampled visitors report satisfaction with their recreational 

experience.

RM-2.6.1: The Saddle Mountain ERMA will be designated (47,500 acres) with an 

emphasis on primarily nonmotorized recreation experiences in balance with other 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-108 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

resource values and uses (Map 15, Recreation Management). The physical, social, and 

administrative recreation settings will be managed for 5% Community Interface, 77% 

Front Country, 17% Back Country and 1% Passage Zone. See Appendix D, Recreation 

Settings and Worksheets. 

RM-2.6.2: When designated, the travel system will emphasize primitive access to 

nonmotorized trail opportunities. Roads will predominately be maintained at level 1, 

with up to 10 percent maintained at level 3 (approximately 9 miles). See also TM-2.1.3

RM-2.6.3: Nonmotorized trails will be developed or converted from motorized roads to 

meet demand for hiking, equestrian, and mountain biking. Primitive roads will be 

developed only if needed to redirect motorized use from the Saddle Mountain.

RM-2.6.4: The area will be closed to mineral material disposals and exploration. See 

also MM-1.1.14. 

RM-2.6.5: The area will be managed for VRM Classes II, III, and IV. VRM II will be in the 

lands managed to protect wilderness characteristics, VRM III in the higher elevations, 

and VRM IV in the foothills along corridors and the north end of the SRMA. See also 

VR-1.1.2. 

RM-2.6.6: In the Saddle Mountain ERMA, SRPs will not be authorized for motorized 

competitive speed events. Competitive nonmotorized speed events, such as endurance 

rides, will be analyzed on a case-by-case basis, and the resource and recreation 

objectives of the area must be retained. 

RM-2.6.7: Motorized technical and specialized uses, such as rock-crawling and rockhopping, will be prohibited.

RM-2.6.8: Vehicle-based camping will be limited to existing or designated sites or as 

determined by subsequent activity-level planning. See also AC-1.1.31. 

RM-2.6.9: Facilities may be developed as needed for visitor use or public safety as 

needed. Infrastructure will be modest in scope and scale but could include expanded 

amenities as needed. 

RM-2.7 (Common-To-All RMAs): Through the life of the plan, 85% of sampled visitors report 

satisfaction with their recreation experience.

RM-2.7.1: SRMAs will be avoidance areas for all land use authorizations unless otherwise 

limited (such in developed campgrounds). If no other option is available, recreation 

objectives and experiences will be priority when evaluating proposals. Potential impacts 

will be mitigated to ensure targeted recreation outcomes are retained, as described in 

the Appendix D, Recreation Settings and Worksheets. See also LR-1. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-109

RM-2.7.2: SRMAs will be open to all minerals activities unless otherwise limited (such as 

in developed campgrounds). Recreation objectives and experiences will be priority when 

evaluating proposals. Potential impacts will be mitigated to ensure targeted recreation 

outcomes are retained, as described in Appendix D, Recreation Settings and 

Worksheets. See also MM-1.1.4. 

RM-2.7.3: Utility-scale renewable energy development will be prohibited in all Back 

Country recreation settings within RMAs. See also LR-1.1.1. 

RM-2.7.4: SRMAs will be high sensitivity conflict areas (avoidance areas) for utility-scale 

renewable energy developments in all recreation settings, other than Backcountry. 

Projects will be considered and evaluated only if no other option exists and potential 

impacts could be mitigated to ensure recreation outcomes are retained. See also LR1.1.2. 

RM-2.7.5: ERMAs will be moderate sensitivity conflict areas (avoidance areas) for utilityscale renewable energy developments in all recreation settings other than Backcountry. 

Projects may be considered and evaluated if potential impacts could be mitigated to 

ensure recreation outcomes are retained. See also LR-1.1.2. 

RM-2.7.6: SRPs, including vending, will be authorized on a case-by-case basis, in 

accordance with 43 CFR, 2930, guidance presented in the SRP section and Appendix 

A, Best Management Practices and Standard Operating Procedures. 

RM-2.7.7: As sites are developed, other restrictions will become effective, as set forth in 

other areas of this plan for developed recreation sites (e.g., firewood, firearm 

restrictions). See also AC-1.1.20. 

RM-3: Manage public lands to allow for basic recreation uses and resource stewardship 

needs. Visitor health and safety would be addressed as needed; use and user conflicts would 

be kept to a minimum; special recreation permits would be processed in compliance with 

the primary resource uses of the areas; and recreation impacts to cultural and natural 

resources would be mitigated as needed.

RM-3.1 (General Recreation): Through the life of the plan, 85% of sampled visitors report 

satisfaction with their recreation experience.

RM-3.1.1: 282,100 acres are undesignated lands. 

General Recreation Management Actions and Allowable Uses

RM-3.1.2: The Sentinel Plain area will be designated and managed as a Special 

Management Area. Access to the area will require the Barry M. Goldwater Air Force 

Range entry and public safety permit (for the BLM, these are managed as Individual 

Special Recreation Permits). 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-110 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

RM-3.1.3: All future developed recreation sites not identified in this plan will also be 

recommended for withdrawal from locatable mineral entry and closed to mineral 

material disposals. Lands will be open to mineral leasing with No Surface Occupancy 

stipulations. (Campgrounds excluded, the average developed recreation site in the 

Planning Area will be less than 10 acres.) See also MM-1.1.4. 

RM-3.1.4: All proposed management actions will conform to the settings described for 

each recreation allocation. 

Camping, Parking, Facilities, and Other

RM-3.1.5: Camping on all lands open to the public will be allowed, in accordance with 43 

CFR, 8365, unless otherwise closed.

RM-3.1.6: Except where otherwise specified (e.g., Painted Rock Campground SRMA and 

Ajo Desert ERMA), camping will continue to be limited to no more than 14 days within 

28 consecutive days, and, after the 14th day of occupation, the camper will be required 

to move outside of at least a 25-mile radius of the previous location until the 29th day 

since initial occupation.

RM-3.1.7: Self-contained or vehicle-based camping will be permitted within 100 feet of 

the centerline of designated or existing routes. Cross-country motorized travel to 

campsites will not be permitted. 

RM-3.1.8: When engaged in vehicle-based camping and parking along roads and primitive 

roads, visitors will be strongly encouraged through visitor information, education, and 

signing to select and use existing camp and parking sites that show clear evidence of 

prior use. Existing and suitable sites are indicated or evidenced by the following: vehicle 

access to the site, lack of vegetation, bare mineral soils, and other dispersed campsite 

amenities, such as fire rings. Existing vehicle parking and camping sites must be large 

enough to accommodate the group size without increasing the disturbed area. 

RM-3.1.9: Camping facilities and length-of-stay limits will be developed and adjusted to 

sustain the prescribed settings and attain the desired objectives of the RMA(s) or 

undesignated lands for dispersed camping or managed camping areas. See also AC1.1.19. 

RM-3.1.10: Long-term visitor areas will not be designated.

RM-3.1.11: Collection of saguaro cacti skeletons for personal use or campfire burning 

will be prohibited. The burning of wood pallets in developed recreation sites is also 

prohibited to prevent the accumulation of nails and staples at campsites. See also VM4.1.5. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-111

RM-3.1.12: The collection of dead, down, and detached wood for personal or campfire 

use while camping on public lands will be allowed. Collection of wood may be restricted 

in the future if needed as determined through monitoring. 

RM-3.1.13: Collection of firewood will be prohibited within 0.25 mile of developed 

recreation sites. 

Recreational Target Shooting

RM-3.1.14: Discharge of firearms will be allowed on BLM public lands except as 

specifically restricted in this land use plan or prohibited by federal and state law. This 

activity may be restricted or prohibited in specific areas in the future where public safety 

and resource conflicts are found to exist or become identified. For the safety of visitors 

and to avoid undue degradation of natural resources, visitors are encouraged to follow 

best management practices, as outlined in Appendix A, Best Management Practices and 

Standard Operating Procedures. 

Special Recreation Permits

Additional management action relevant to SRPs are found at CH-2.1.5, WL-6.1.4 

RM-3.1.15: At the discretion of the authorized officer, SRPs will be authorized on a

case-by-case basis as outlined in 43 CFR, 2930, in subsequent policies and guidance 

(See Appendix A, Best Management Practices and Standard Operating Procedures), 

and in the decisions below.

RM-3.1.16: Organized groups over 75 people conducting noncommercial and 

noncompetitive recreational activities and events will require a permit, unless otherwise 

specified in RMAs or designated sites, where carrying capacities are established in 

subsequent implementation-level plans (such as in wilderness plans), or when special 

management and monitoring are determined to be needed. See also CH-2.1.6. 

RM-3.1.17: Certified weed-free feed will be required for all equestrian and stock animal 

uses authorized under SRPs.

RM-3.1.18: Unless otherwise restricted in RMAs, competitive motorized and 

nonmotorized speed events will be authorized on a case-by-case basis unless specifically 

prohibited. Routes will be evaluated for sustainability for speed racing activities, both 

motorized and nonmotorized, during travel management planning. 

RM-3.1.19: Competitive motorized speed racing will be prohibited in Passage recreation 

settings (within Backcountry settings). 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-112 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Paintball Activities

RM-3.1.20: Paintball activities will not be allowed in wilderness areas, ACECs, and 

SRMAs. Paintball activities will be allowed beyond 0.25 mile of any established facility or 

site, campground, residence, trailhead, road, staging area, special designation, and other 

areas as posted. Paintball activities will be restricted in accordance with any applicable 

local and state law.

Geocaching Activities

RM-3.1.21: An SRP will not be required if the geocaching activity is noncommercial, 

complies with land use decisions and designations, does not award cash prizes, is not 

publicly advertised, poses minimal risk for damage to public land or related water 

resource values, and generally requires no monitoring.

RM-3.1.22: The placement of geocaches is prohibited in archaeological and raptor 

nesting sites. Virtual caches may be allowed within archaeological sites with prior 

written authorization from the authorized officer.

Administrative Actions

• Coordinate with partners and nearby landowners/managers to develop joint campgrounds on 

and off public lands to provide for public camping needs.

• Develop partnerships and volunteer opportunities with local clubs, organizations, and 

communities to maintain and monitor routes, recreation sites, and other areas.

• Develop brochures, maps, and information sheets to disseminate recreation use information to 

the public. 

• Coordinate with adjoining landowners; Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal Counties; and local 

communities to enhance visitor and resident safety, improve resource protection, and manage 

recreation use and access that is compatible with protecting resources.

• Plan, designate, and develop recreation areas, routes, trails, tours, and management strategies 

through interdisciplinary plans with community and user input. Project plans will establish use 

indicators and standards for monitoring and evaluation. All development must be compatible 

with SRMAs, VRM classes, and resource management objectives. Areas may be developed as 

needed for the following purposes:

o Protecting resources

o Improving visitor safety

o Maintaining desired recreational setting and experiences
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-113

2.2.17 Travel Management 

Allocations Summary

Table 2-9 

Off-Highway Vehicle Area Designations 

Designation BLM Acres Management Action

Open 0 TM-1.1

Closed 91,100 TM-1.2.1

Limited to designated routes 839,100 TM-1.3.2 

Total 930,200

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

TM-1: All public land is classified as open, closed, or limited, per 43 CFR, 8342.1. 

TM-1.1: No areas within the LSDA will be allocated for open motorized vehicle use (zero 

acres).

TM-1.2: Manage areas for resource protection, conservation, restoration, and public safety using 

the OHV area allocation closed.

TM-1.2.1: Approximately 91,100 acres remain closed to motorized use in designated 

wilderness. 

TM-1.2.2: Camping will be allowed in closed areas when accessed by non-motorized 

non-mechanized means. 

TM-1.2.3: The use of wheeled game carriers will be prohibited in wilderness areas. 

Elsewhere, nonmotorized, hand-powered, wheeled game carriers will be permitted to 

travel cross-country for the purpose of retrieving downed game. Retrieval of downed 

game by cross-country motor vehicle use is prohibited. See also WC-1.1.13 

TM-1.3: Manage areas by structuring travel for visitor use and enjoyment, resource protection, 

conservation, and restoration using the OHV area allocation limited over the lifetime of the 

plan. 

TM-1.3.1: The 40-acre parcel in T12S, R6W, Sec.4 used for motocross riding will be 

managed the same as the surrounding area where motorized and mechanized vehicles 

will be restricted to designated routes and maintain the “motocross experience” area. 

Local partners will be obtained to monitor use and provide training in environmental 

stewardship to users of the area and provide on-site management.

TM-1.3.2: Approximately 839,060 acres will be limited to existing roads and trails (based 

on current BLM route inventories) until such time as route designations are completed. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-114 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

When this is completed, travel will be restricted to designated roads, primitive roads, 

and trails. Nonmotorized vehicles (e.g., bicycles, other devices for conveyance, and 

stock drawn carts/wagons) will be limited to designated roads, primitive roads and trails. 

TM-1.3.3: One-time travel off designated routes may be approved with written 

authorization from the authorized officer to access sick or injured livestock. Use of 

vehicles for livestock herding in a cross-country manner is prohibited. See also GR-1.1.5. 

TM-1.3.4: The use of motorized or mechanized vehicles off designated routes will be 

prohibited in OHV areas designated as limited to designated routes, closed for 

motorized vehicles, and in all travel-management areas designated for nonmotorized 

vehicles, except as noted below:

• Per Arizona BLM policy, motorized vehicles will be allowed to pull off 100 feet 

on either side of the centerline of a designated route for vehicle passing, 

emergency stopping, parking or camping, as long as soils, drainages, and woody 

vegetation are not damaged. This use shall be monitored on a continuing basis. If 

monitoring results show effects that exceed limits of acceptable change, 

motorized vehicles will not be allowed to pull off a designated route 100 feet on 

either side of the centerline.

• Outside of wilderness, hand-powered, nonmotorized, wheeled game carriers 

will be allowed to travel cross-country for the purpose of retrieving downed 

game. See also WC-1.1.13 

• Motorized cross-country use will be permitted only with written authorization

from the BLM authorized officer, or when necessary for emergency situations 

involving public health and safety.

TM-1.3.5: Retrieval of downed game by cross-country motor vehicle use is prohibited.

TM-1.3.6: Travel within the Painted Rock camping closure area (Map 16, Travel 

Management) is limited to designated routes. 

TM-1.4: Secure legal access to public lands at all designated entry points to public land within ten 

years of completing route designations. 

TM-1.4.1: The BLM will enter into access agreements for long-term legal access.

TM-1.4.2: The BLM will acquire easements or real property from willing sellers or other 

jurisdictions as necessary to maintain or reestablish access to public lands. The locations 

are identified in Appendix E, Possible Easement Locations, and will be prioritized to 

maintain the preliminary or existing road and trail network. See also NT-1.1.12. 

TM-1.4.3: Access to public lands along urban interface areas will be limited to designated 

legal access routes, as established by travel management planning. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-117

TM-2: Public use, resource management, and regulatory needs are met by development of 

a travel management plan and implementation of a comprehensive travel management 

and transportation system.

TM-2.1: Complete the designation of roads, primitive roads, and trails within 5 years of plan 

completion.

TM-2.1.1: Develop Travel Management Plans for specific travel management areas to 

accomplish final route designations within five years of RMP approval. In general, Travel 

Management Area boundaries will correspond to the boundaries set forth in this plan. 

TM-2.1.2: A standardized method for route analysis will be employed following 

established selection criteria and proposing route designations. An example of such a 

process is shown in Appendix F, Route Evaluation Methodology. 

TM-2.1.3: Criteria to guide route designations will be established based on management 

actions for recreation, wildlife, vegetation, cultural resources, lands/realty, mining, and 

other resources or resource uses, as appropriate (see Appendix A, Best Management 

Practices and Standard Operating Procedures, Travel Management subsection). See also 

the following decisions to be considered when determining future route designations: 

WC-1.1.11, WL-1.1.4, WL-1.1.5, WL-1.1.6, WL-1.1.7, WL-1.1.8, WL-7.1.3, RM-2.2.3, 

RM-2.4.2, RM-2.5.2, RM-2.6.2, AC-1.1.8, AC-1.1.13, AC-1.1.21, and AC-1.1.22. 

TM-2.1.4: Mitigation strategies will be identified and used to reduce the impacts of travel 

routes and their use on the resources. Examples of typical actions are shown 

in Appendix G, Route Mitigations. 

TM-2.1.5: Route-designation decisions will be incorporated into planning for all 

resources or resource uses and will be based on the route networks portrayed on final 

designation maps and written guidance contained within travel management plans. This 

will include the management actions from WL-1.1.4, WL-1.1.5, WL-1.1.6, WL-1.1.7, 

WL-1.1.8, and WL-7.1.3. 

TM-2.1.6: New permanent or temporary routes may be added to route networks to 

address changed conditions or demands (including access to areas for minerals 

extraction, rights-of-way, recreation developments, etc.) following NEPA-compliant 

analyses. In addition to Standard Operating Procedures outlined in Appendix A, 

priority for approval of new routes will include:

• Access replacing existing routes and involving lower environmental impact

• Selection of a low environmental impact route from among alternatives 

considered

• Routes to be added to the network of designated routes

• Routes needed temporarily that will require rehabilitation after the need for 

access has ended
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-118 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

TM-2.1.7: Ensure recreation objectives and settings prescribed in the Recreation section 

and the RAC Guidelines for OHV Management will be met when designating routes 

within travel management areas (TMAs). 

TM-2.1.8: Casual and authorized recreational uses of the travel system will be addressed 

when authorizing actions. Where major arteries in the recreational route network will

be truncated or considerably altered by the authorization, mitigation will be required. 

TM-2.1.9: Competitive motorized and non-motorized speed events are established 

based on management actions for recreation and other resources or resource uses. See 

the following management actions for details: RM-1.1.7, RM-1.2.11, RM-1.3.13, RM2.1.1.1.6 RM-2.1.1.2.6, RM-2.2.7, RM-2.3.10, RM-2.4.7, RM-2.5.6, RM2.6.6, RM-3.1.18, 

RM-3.1.19, and NB-2.1.3. 

TM-2.1.10: Develop long distance roads, primitive roads, or trails that connect 

communities, adjacent lands, and areas of interests.

TM-2.1.11: Delineate areas where community interests or a manageable geographic 

boundary exists, and address landscape issues in a programmatic manner. 

TM-3: Manage the travel management system to protect resources and maintain desired 

recreation experiences. 

TM-3.1: Determine the compatibility of emerging issues, such as new vehicle technology or new 

or proposed recreation uses or use areas, such as technical vehicle-use sites or motorcycleobserved trials. Proposals for using new recreation technologies or activities will be evaluated 

and a decision made to proceed or deny the use or proposal as funding and staffing allows.

TM-3.1.1: Technical vehicle use sites or other specialized recreation sites will be 

delineated through activity level planning including travel management plan development. 

TM-3.1.2: Technical vehicle use sites will be evaluated and established on a case-by-case 

basis with community and user input. Sites will be developed as needed to ensure visitor 

safety and access, meet enthusiast needs, improve recreation experiences, and 

increasing recreation opportunities. Site plans will establish limits of acceptable change 

indicators and standards. All sites will be compatible with social and managerial 

recreation settings and VRM standards; will satisfy biological and ecological land health 

standards; will protect or mitigate cultural resources; and will meet water quality 

standards for influenced drainages and watersheds.

TM-3.1.3: Travel management assets or their maintenance intensity shall not be changed 

without NEPA and a travel plan amendment. Road maintenance activities can only be 

completed with approval of the authorized BLM officer. This includes all permitted 

activities that use designated routes, such as ranching, mining, and other authorized 

activities. See also NB-1.1.4.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-119

TM-3.1.4: Adjustments to the designated route network may be requested by the public 

following the process set forth in Appendix F, Route Evaluation Methodology. 

TM-3.1.5: Areas affected by legal off-route travel, such as law enforcement pursuit and 

wildfire suppression, will be restored within one year of the incident.

TM-3.1.6: Establish the travel system as an asset and consider its values when 

authorizing land use actions and other activities. All land use authorizations, permits, and 

other activities will be required to use designated routes. The BLM will authorize new 

roads or cross-country use for land use authorizations only as a last resort and/or on a 

case-by-case basis. 

Administrative Actions

• The development of standards for monitoring the route system will be directed by compliance 

with laws, regulations, and travel management plan goals and objectives. 

• Agreements with local interest groups and communities will be established for long-term route 

maintenance and community support.

• Participate in regional or municipal transportation planning and promote appropriate legal access 

consistent with the land use plan.

• Establish a framework for reviewing the travel management program and make necessary 

changes to meet land health standards, area management, and recreation goals.

• Casual and authorized recreational uses of the travel system will be addressed when authorizing 

actions. Where major arteries in the recreational route network will be truncated or 

considerably altered by the authorization, mitigation will be required. 

• Consider adjustments to route designations, including adding, removing, and redeveloping 

routes and access, when necessary. Criteria for route designation adjustments can be found 

in Appendix F, Route Evaluation Methodology and Appendix A, Best Management Practices 

and Standard Operating Procedures, Travel Management subsection.

• Develop brochures, maps, access guides, and information sheets to disseminate targeted 

recreation opportunity information to the public.

• Develop and maintain a monitoring system to support implementation and management of 

motorized and nonmotorized use of the public lands, including routes and access points.

• Create an acquisition plan, including a list of parcels where legal access needs to be secured.

• Implement route-mitigation techniques when designing and implementing the route system.

• Identify and manage for a wide range of issues in travel management areas. 

• In areas where access permits are required, coordinate with other agencies that issue use 

permits on public lands to provide reasonable access for their permitted activities. For example, 

the BLM and AGFD will coordinate hunter access into permit-required access areas for hunters 

with valid hunting licenses for the affected hunting unit.

• Promote the establishment of additional areas open to motorized and/or nonmotorized vehicle 

use outside of public lands if regional public demand for off-road motorized and/or 

nonmotorized vehicle recreation will support such activities. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-120 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

• Support the development and implementation of regional or municipal transportation plans that 

protect or promote appropriate legal access to public lands and are consistent with resource 

and use objectives.

• Establish relationships and enter into agreements with local OHV groups and other groups and 

communities for long-term route maintenance and community support.

• Respect valid existing rights. 

• Sign routes and associated access points as needed to identify public lands and disseminate 

information. 

• Partner with neighboring BLM offices, counties, municipalities, and user groups to identify, plan, 

implement, and maintain long-distance motorized routes and nonmotorized trail systems.

• Apply route-mitigation techniques when designing and implementing the route system.

• Assess the level of success in managing designated access points and proliferation of 

unauthorized routes at least bi-yearly. 

• Conduct condition assessments of designated and unauthorized routes and associated access 

points relative to the standards prescribed by the travel management plan.

• Identify use patterns, including the types, frequency, intensity, and distribution of authorized and 

unauthorized travel and transportation activities.

• Improve visitor compliance with outdoor ethics through education.

• Identify public-safety issues related to the travel system.

• Publish policies and procedures for travel-system administration.

• As part of the travel management implementation, develop fences, signs, gates, and other 

methods to manage access, address public safety concerns, and eliminate use of vehicles off 

designated routes.

2.2.18 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) 

Allocations Summary

Table 2-10

ACEC Acres

ACEC Name BLM Acres

Management 

Action

Coffeepot Botanical 8,900 AC-1.1.14 

Cuerda de Lena 58,500 AC-1.1.17

Lower Gila Terraces and Historic Trails 82,500 AC-1.1.23 

Saddle Mountain 48,500 AC-1.1.29

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

AC-1: Provide increased protection for resources of substantial significance and value, 

which include specific cultural resources, outstanding and scenic features, and priority and 

special status species, while continuing to provide the public access to enjoy these 

resources. See Map 17, Special Designations, and Appendix H, ACEC Evaluations. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-123

Common to All ACECs

AC-1.1.1: All public lands within the ACEC will be retained and private and state lands will be 

acquired as parcels become available and funds allow, on a willing seller/willing buyer basis. See 

also LR-2.1. 

AC-1.1.2: Core roadless areas will be maintained for wildlife, while new facilities, including 

motorized routes, nonmotorized trails, and trailheads that concentrate or increase use in these 

areas, will be avoided.

AC-1.1.3: Maintaining and managing the biological, geological, and cultural resources will be 

emphasized and given priority. 

AC-1.1.4: Areas will be managed to protect the natural landscape and visual values that provide 

the visitor with an opportunity to appreciate the character of the area.

AC-1.1.5: Opportunities for recreation will be provided, with an emphasis on undeveloped 

dispersed recreation, where it is compatible with protecting the natural and cultural resources. 

AC-1.1.6: The visual and scenic values of the area will be managed to maintain the natural 

character, including designating appropriate visual resource management (VRM) classes.

AC-1.1.7: Treatments of invasive species will be allowed within the ACECs if they can be 

designed to have a minor or negligible impact on resource values within the ACEC.

AC-1.1.8: The construction of nonmotorized trails will be permitted if they are consistent with 

ACEC and resource objectives and do not conflict with botanical resources or wildlife and 

threatened and endangered species management. See also TM-2.1.3. 

AC-1.1.9: ACECs will be exclusion areas for utility-scale renewable energy development and 

exploration and multiuse utility corridors. See also LR-1.1.1

AC-1.1.10: New major linear LUAs will be excluded outside of the corridors. Utilities will be 

required to be installed underground within the existing multiuse utility corridors to retain the 

viewshed. See also LR-1.2.2.

AC-1.1.11: ACECs will be open to all locatable and leasable minerals exploration and 

development unless otherwise restricted. (For leasable minerals only, Lower Gila Terraces and 

Historic Trails ACEC is open with No Surface Occupancy, and Cuerda de Lena is closed 

February 1 to September 15.) See also MM-1.1.4. 

AC-1.1.12: ACECs will be closed to mineral material disposals, including free use permits, 

except for the former free use site in the Saddle Mountain ACEC (see AC-1.1.46). See also MM1.1.14. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-124 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

AC-1.1.13: The route system will be designed to minimize impacts on the relevance and 

importance values for which the ACEC was designated. Motorized vehicle routes that conflict 

with the values in the Importance and Relevance descriptions will be closed, limited, or 

mitigated. New route construction will not be allowed except as needed for resource 

protection, public safety, emergency, or other administrative uses, as determined by the 

authorized officer. See also TM-2.1.3. 

Coffeepot Botanical ACEC

AC-1.1.14: The Coffeepot Botanical ACEC designation of approximately 8,900 acres will be 

retained to protect the outstanding botanical diversity of the native and rare plant communities, 

such as the acuña cactus. All management actions (including remaining open to lands and 

minerals actions) will be the same, except the ACEC will not be closed to OHV use.

AC-1.1.15: Livestock facilities will not be developed where they will increase livestock use 

within an area of known or newly discovered populations of acuña cactus. Livestock facilities 

could be developed to improve natural resource conditions by improving livestock distribution. 

Adaptive management and best management practices will be utilized to avoid conflicts with 

wildlife resources. 

AC-1.1.16: Existing range improvements will remain in place unless the improvement is no

longer needed for livestock operations or wildlife water distribution. 

Cuerda de Lena ACEC

AC-1.1.17: 58,500 acres will be designated as the Cuerda de Lena ACEC. Its purpose will be to 

protect the endangered Sonoran pronghorn; habitat for other wildlife species, including the 

cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl; and to protect cultural resources. 

AC-1.1.18: In addition to the exclusions addressed in the common to all section, the ACEC will

be closed to the public for general recreational use during pronghorn fawning, between March 

15 and July 15, or as determined annually by the Sonoran pronghorn recovery team. Minor 

nonlinear LUAs will also be prohibited unless deemed necessary by the authorized officer. 

Federal, state, and local government employees and permit holders operating within the scope 

of their authorizations will be exempt from the closure. See also WL-3.1.1. 

AC-1.1.19: Camping will be limited to dispersed and undeveloped sites. See also RM-3.1.9. 

AC-1.1.20: Developed recreational sites will be prohibited within the ACEC, except for small, 

unintrusive information and interpretation facilities. See also RM-2.7.7. 

AC-1.1.21: Tertiary, single-track, and reclaimed vehicle routes that fragment habitat will be 

closed; however, access will be provided for administrative use and public safety. See also TM2.1.3, TM-2.1.5. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-125

AC-1.1.22: Routes in washes will be prohibited, except to provide legal access for law 

enforcement and other authorized use. New travel routes in washes will be prohibited. New 

routes will be considered only if deemed necessary for emergency or other authorized 

administrative uses. See also TM-2.1.3, TM-2.1.5. 

Lower Gila Terraces and Historic Trails ACEC

AC-1.1.23: 82,500 acres will be designated as the Lower Gila Terraces and Historic Trails ACEC

(Map 17, Special Designations and Map 18, Special Designations Gila River Parcels). 

AC-1.1.24: Public use sites will be allocated if they could be designed to have negligible or minor 

impacts.

AC-1.1.25: The ACEC will remain open to all leasable minerals actions, but any lease will

contain a No Surface Occupancy stipulation. See also MM-1.1.12. 

AC-1.1.26: Portions of the ACEC will be closed to seismic exploration and mineral material 

disposals. The remaining portion of the ACEC will be open to mineral material disposals; 

however, surface disturbance will be minimized where possible through mitigation measures and 

special stipulations. See also MM-1.1.4. 

AC-1.1.27: Selected parcels along the historic trails corridor within the ACEC will be 

recommended for withdrawal from locatable mineral exploration and development. See also 

MM-1.1.7. 

AC-1.1.28: Scientific research, including excavation, that enhances our understanding of the 

cultural resources would be permitted and encouraged if an approved research design is used 

and is conducted by a qualified researcher to BLM standards. 

Saddle Mountain ACEC

AC-1.1.29: 48,500 acres will be designated as the Saddle Mountain ACEC.

AC-1.1.30: Sites containing natural or cultural resources or geological and wildlife resources will

be developed for interpretation and environmental education when research opportunities and 

resource values can be protected.

AC-1.1.31: Vehicle-based camping will be limited to existing or designated sites. See also RM1.1.8, RM-2.2.5, RM-2.5.7, and RM-2.6.8. 

AC-1.1.32: The ACEC will be open to leasable minerals exploration and development. Surface 

disturbance will be minimized where possible through mitigation measures and special 

stipulations. See also MM-1.1.12. 

AC-1.1.33: The ACEC will be closed to mineral material disposals, with the exception of the 

former free use permit site (Courthouse Pit; T2N, R7W, Sec. 31). A new permit could be 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-126 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

allowed, provided the proposed disturbance area remains within the previously authorized area.

See also MM-1.1.14. 

Administrative Actions

Inventory

• Perform proactive cultural inventories on ACECs, with a special emphasis on the Lower 

Gila Terraces and Historic Trails ACEC and the Saddle Mountain ACEC, and thoroughly 

document the cultural resources.

Monitoring

• Continue to work with and support the Arizona Site Steward Program to ensure adequate

monitoring of the sites on the ACECs.

• Implement procedures for systematic monitoring of selected cultural sites within the 

ACECs.

Restoration

• Perform mitigation and/or landscape restoration in priority areas of the ACECs, where 

incompatible activities have altered the natural and cultural landscape and visual settings.

Research

• Complete documentary research and oral histories to gain a better understanding of the 

cultural history of the ACECs, relative to homesteading, mining, ranching, and prehistoric

archaeological occupations.

Interpretation and Education

• Develop interpretive materials and facilities for selected sites and topics.

• Provide educational materials and opportunities to the public pertaining to the ACEC 

resources.

Tribal Consultation

• Continue to consult with the Gila River Indian Community, the Ak-Chin Indian Community, 

the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, the Tohono O’odham Nation, the Hopi 

Tribe, Fort Yuma – Quechan Tribe, and other interested Indian tribes to identify places of 

traditional importance and to collaborate on issues and projects affecting the ACECs.

Partnerships

• Coordinate with partner groups, interest groups, interested individuals, local communities, 

and other stakeholders on ACEC issues and projects.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-129

2.2.19 National Byways 

Allocations Summary

Approximately 21 miles of Agua Caliente Road will be evaluated as a potential BLM National 

Backcountry Byway (NB-1.1.1, Map 17, Special Designations). 

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

NB-1: Provide opportunities for the American public to see and enjoy unique scenic and 

historic landscapes on public lands deemed to have state or national significance.

NB-1.1: Identify and evaluate potential roads that meet nomination criteria for BLM National 

Scenic or Backcountry Byway designation.

NB-1.1.1: Approximately 21 miles of Agua Caliente Road will be evaluated as a potential 

BLM National Backcountry Byway (Map 17, Special Designation).

NB-2: Promote regional development of eco- and recreational tourism through 

designation of BLM National Scenic and Backcountry Byways and by managing public lands 

along potential byway corridors to protect the quality of scenic values.

NB-2.1: Maintain open space and the undeveloped natural character of landscapes within the 

specified byway corridor. Desert landscapes provide visitors with unique scenic and backcountry 

experience while traversing the diverse Sonoran Desert, including saguaro cactus stands, rugged 

mountains, and vast valleys. These landscapes also offer glimpses of traditional western uses, 

including historic trail corridors, mining, agriculture, and ranching.

NB-2.1.1: Surface-disturbing uses and activities along byways will exceed or at minimum 

maintain the visual quality consistent with the established VRM setting through project 

design or mitigation. See also VR-1.1.2. 

NB-2.1.2: Protective measures will be provided in wildlife-movement corridors to 

protect wildlife. Measures may include setting speed limits, installing speed bumps or 

other speed-limiting devices, and installing cautionary signs.

NB-2.1.3: No motorized competitive speed events will be authorized on the byways.

NB-1.1.4: Road design and maintenance will be coordinated with the county to retain 

the character of the byway and ensure it remains suitable for passenger car- and truckbased sightseeing. Prescriptions will include:

• No paving

• No widening beyond existing widths unless required for public safety

• Stabilize road surfaces to maintain air quality

• Install speed-limit, directional, and vehicle-safety signs where appropriate
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-130 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

See also TM-5.1.3. 

2.2.20 National Trails 

Goals, Objectives, Management Actions

NT-1: Manage the Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail corridor through the 

LSFO through focused management strategies.

NT-1.1: Manage the historic trail corridor on the Lower Sonoran Field Office to enhance the 

experience of visitors and to maintain the integrity of the historic trail and associated trail sites 

and the visual setting throughout the life of the plan.

NT-1.1.1: The Juan Bautista de Anza NHT (Anza NHT) corridor will be managed 

consistent with the NPS management plan and in cooperation with the NPS (Map 17, 

Special Designations). 

NT-1.1.2: Allocate two Juan Bautista de Anza NHT Management Areas (Map 17, Special 

Designations). 

NT-1.1.3: Retain public lands and acquire available state and private lands and/or 

easements to ensure long-term use, protection, and access to areas along the Anza 

NHT corridor and within the two Anza NHT Management Areas. Lands along the Anza 

NHT corridor and within the two Anza NHT Management Areas shall not be made 

available for Recreation and Public Purposes Act sales or leases, agricultural entries, or 

state grants and shall be classified for retention, in accordance with 43 CFR, 2400. See 

also LR-2.1. 

NT-1.1.4: The Painted Rock Petroglyph Site and the adjacent segment of Anza NHT will

be allocated to public use for heritage tourism and interpretation.

NT-1.1.5: The Anza NHT corridor and the Anza NHT Management Areas will remain 

open to leasable minerals exploration and development actions, but any proposed action 

will contain a No Surface Occupancy stipulation. See also MM-1.1.12. 

NT-1.1.6: The Anza NHT corridor and the Anza NHT Management Areas will be closed 

to all mineral material disposals. See also MM-1.1.14. 

NT-1.1.7: The Anza NHT corridor and the two Anza NHT Management Areas will be 

an exclusion area for major utility-scale renewable energy development and new major 

linear LUAs. In the Lower Sonoran Field Office, utility development could continue on a 

case-by-case basis in existing utility multiuse corridors and only if impacts are 

determined to have a negligible to minor effect on resources.

NT-1.1.8: The Anza NHT corridor will be an exclusion area for all minor linear and 

nonlinear LUAs, except as described in Section 2.11.1, Lands and Realty. LUAs will be 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-131

mitigated to be consistent with management objectives and prescriptions and only if 

impacts are determined to have a negligible to minor effect to resources. 

NT-1.1.9: Identify and obtain rights-of-way on selected areas along the Anza NHT 

corridor and within the two Anza NHT Management Areas to support National Trail 

purposes and further trail management objectives.

NT-1.1.10: Cultural sites along the NHT and the Anza NHT Management Areas will be 

identified and developed as allocated in the appropriate use categories and according to 

management actions and prescriptions identified in the Cultural and Heritage Resources 

section for all use categories.

NT-1.1.11: Recreation opportunities will be provided consistent with the Anza NHT 

objectives. Facilities will be developed and placed outside the trail corridor to protect 

resource values, provide for visitor safety, and support selected use opportunities. 

Facilities will be developed within the trail corridor only when needed to protect trail 

integrity and resources or to establish an Anza NHT recreation retracement route. 

NT-1.1.12: Access points and routes needed to access the Anza NHT corridor and the 

two Anza NHT Management Areas will be identified and prioritized during travel 

management planning. Legal access will be secured within 5 years of route designation to 

ensure public access to the areas. See Appendix E, Possible easement locations and 

TM-1.4.2. 

NT-1.1.13: The Anza NHT corridor and the two Anza NHT Management Areas will be 

managed in concert with the Lower Gila Terraces and Historic Trails ACEC as 

identified in the Cultural and Heritage Resource and Recreation Management sections.

See also RM-2.5.5 and Lower Gila Terraces and Historic Trails ACEC section.

NT-1.1.14: The historic landscape and visual values of the Anza NHT corridor and the 

two Anza NHT Management Areas will be protected to provide the visitor with an 

opportunity to appreciate the historic character of the area. 

NT-1.1.15: Vegetation will be rehabilitated and restored in the Anza NHT corridor and 

the two Anza NHT Management Areas, consistent with the natural resource restoration 

objectives to restore or maintain the integrity of the landscape. 

NT-1.1.16: A strategy will be developed to encourage scientific and historical research 

within the Anza NHT corridor and the two Anza NHT Management Areas as 

appropriate with management prescriptions and only if designed to have a negligible or 

minor effect on resources.

NT-1.1.17: Scientific and historical studies of cultural landscapes, sites, historic trails, and 

other resources, including excavation, will be allowed by qualified researchers on a caseby-case basis within the Anza NHT corridor and the two Anza NHT Management Areas 

and with written authorization from the BLM. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-132 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

NT-1.1.18: Heritage tourism will be allowed at the Painted Rock Petroglyph Site and 

along the Anza NHT auto route when such use is compatible with protecting the 

cultural and historical resources and visual values. 

NT-1.1.19: The Anza NHT auto route will be marked and promoted as appropriate and 

consistent with Cultural and Heritage Resource, Recreation Management, and Travel 

Management actions designations and prescriptions identified in this plan. See also 

Sections 2.2.3, 2.2.16, and 2.2.17. 

Administrative Actions

Inventory

• Perform field inventories and document and map historic trail resources and associated cultural 

resources along the Anza NHT.

• Perform recreational inventories along the Anza NHT to identify high potential sites and 

segments. Make determinations of suitability for installation of recreational trail tread and 

interpretive developments.

• Perform viewshed analysis on selected Anza NHT segments, with priority given to high potential 

route segments.

• Collect GPS data to Federal Trails Data Standards on the Anza NHT resources and use GIS 

mapping (BMP).

Monitoring

• Perform condition assessments on selected segments of the Anza NHT, with a priority on the 

high potential route segments.

• Implement procedures for systematic monitoring of the Anza NHT management corridor, 

including associated sites and trail resources.

Restoration

• Perform mitigation and/or landscape restoration in priority areas along the Anza NHT, where 

incompatible activities have altered the historic landscape and visual setting of the trail.

Research

• Perform archival research on the history and subsequent uses of the Anza NHT.

• Establish collaborative partnerships with academic institutions, professional and nonprofit 

organizations, individual scholars, tribes, and other entities to perform research on Anza NHTrelated topics.

Interpretation and Education

• Develop interpretive materials and facilities for selected sites.

• Provide educational materials and opportunities to the public pertaining to the Anza NHT.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-133

Tribal Consultation

• Continue to consult with the Gila River Indian Community, the Ak-Chin Indian Community, the 

Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, the Tohono O’odham Nation, the Hopi Tribe, Fort 

Yuma – Quechan Tribe, and other interested Indian tribes to identify places of traditional 

importance.

Partnerships

• Coordinate with partner groups, interest groups, interested individuals, local communities, 

and other stakeholders on Anza NHT issues and projects.

• Consult and collaborate with the NPS, the administrator of the Anza NHT.

2.2.21 Fred J. Weiler Green Belt Resource Conservation Area 

GB-1: The Fred J. Weiler Green Belt will be a productive and functioning riparian system 

supporting healthy, diverse, and abundant populations of wildlife and riparian-dependent 

wildlife and plant species, with an emphasis on migratory birds.

GB-1.1: The Fred J. Weiler Green Belt will continue to be managed as an Resource 

Conservation Area as designated in 1970 (63,000 acres). Manage it to support migratory birds

and other native wildlife and plant species.

GB-1.2: The Green Belt will be managed consistent with the Lower Gila Terraces and Historic 

Trails ACEC (see Map 17, Special Designations and Map 18, Special Designations Gila River 

Parcels). 

GB.1.3: The use of mechanical, chemical, and biological treatment methods will be coordinated 

with AGFD and USFWS to remove invasive plants, such as tamarisk, in the Green Belt for the 

purposes of restoring ecological conditions and function and reducing fuel hazards.

GB.1.4: The Green Belt will be managed with an emphasis on protection and restoration, and 

treatments will focus on reestablishment of willows and cottonwoods, as well as other riparian 

vegetation, to support migratory game birds and other wildlife species.

GB-1.5: The existing withdrawal for locatable mineral entry and all public land laws within the 

PLO 1015 portions of the Green Belt will remain in effect. See also MM-1.1.5. 

GB-1.6: The Green Belt will be closed to mineral leasing and mineral material disposals, including 

sales and free use permits. The three community pits (Buckeye Hills in T1S, R3W. Secs. 20 and 

30; T1S, R4W, Sec. 25) will be terminated, and the former free use site (Narramore Pit in T1S, 

R3W, Sec. 24) will not be available for reauthorization. See also MM-1.1.5. 

GB-1.7: The Green Belt will be an exclusion area for utility-scale renewable energy development 

and exploration and major linear LUAs (multiuse utility corridors). See also LR-1.1.1 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-134 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

GB-1.8: The Green Belt will be an avoidance area for minor LUAs and utility-scale renewable 

energy development and exploration and multiuse utility corridors. See also LR-1.1.2 and LR1.3.2. 

GB-1.9: The portions of the Green Belt outside of the PLO 1015 lands will be an avoidance area 

for minor linear and nonlinear LUAs. Permits will be approved on a case-by-case basis if 

management objectives of the area are mitigated. See also LR-1.3.2. 

2.2.22 Hazardous Materials and Public Safety 

PS-1: Manage hazards and public use to protect public health and safety.

PS-1.1: Identify naturally occurring or man-made public safety hazards on public lands and take 

appropriate action to protect public health and safety.

PS-1.1.1: Priorities for remediation of physical safety hazards will be set using the 

following criteria:

• Where a death or injury has occurred

• Where site is on or in immediate proximity to a recreation site or a known high 

use area

• Where a formal risk assessment has determined a high or extremely high risk 

level

• The site is eligible for listing in the Abandoned Mines Cleanup Module of 

Protection and Response Information System

PS-1.1.2: Priorities for remediation due to water quality issues will be set using the 

following criteria:

• The state has identified the watershed as a priority based on water laws or 

regulations, threat to public health or safety, or threat to environment

• The project is a collaborative effort among multiple agencies or jurisdictions

PS-1.1.3: Post signs to identify hazardous situations when warranted to protect public 

safety. Emphasize the risks to visitors of entering public lands and taking responsibility 

for their own safety.

PS-1.1.4: If illegal activities threaten the safety of the public or BLM employees, or 

damage Monument objects, areas can be closed to access by the authorized officer. The 

area can be closed for up to 90 days, pending a study or review of the level of impacts, 

and longer term actions may be necessary to provide public safety

PS-1.1.5: The Sentinel Plain area south of I-8 is restricted to entry by permit only to 

protect the public from possible unexploded ordnance. 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-135

PS-2: Protect public safety by dealing with all hazardous materials and solid wastes on 

public lands.

PS-2.1: Investigate all reported hazardous materials and solid waste sites. Plan necessary 

containment and/or cleanup responses on a case-by-case basis as soon as possible upon report.

PS-2.1.1: Establish priorities for investigating releases and planning/implementing 

responses, based on the order in which releases are discovered, unless other factors, 

such as the immediacy of the public health threat, elevate the response urgency.

PS-2.1.2: Identify the probable scope of needed containment and cleanup.

PS-2.1.3: Rank all sites according to relative priority for treatment planning and action. 

Priorities to consider include:

• High levels of heavy metals in waste

• Groundwater or surface-water quality degradation

• Ongoing, active resource damage

• Safety hazards near established recreation areas or other areas frequented by 

public land users

• Other site-specific factors

PS-2.1.4: Inspect mining and milling sites to determine appropriate management for 

hazardous materials.

PS-2.1.5: Conduct active investigations to identify potentially responsible parties and 

recover planning, containment, cleanup, monitoring, investigation, and enforcement 

costs associated with spill/release responses.

PS-2.1.6: Complete site-specific inventories when lands are being disposed of or 

acquired. It is departmental policy to minimize potential liability of the DOI and its 

bureaus by acquiring property that is not contaminated, unless directed by Congress, 

court mandate, or as determined by the Secretary of the Interior. 

PS-3: Minimize or eliminate the potential for intentional or accidental releases of 

hazardous materials or wastes and solid waste.

PS-3.1: Pursue locations of solid waste and wildcat dump sites. Remove hazardous materials and 

solid waste, remediate, and, if appropriate, restore sites.

PS-3.1.1: Investigate all reported hazardous materials and solid waste sites.

PS-3.1.2: Establish a reporting system and encourage other agencies and citizens to 

report suspected spill and dump sites or suspected dumping activities.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-136 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

PS-3.1.3: Establish an inventory of known historic and active mining sites and other areas 

on public lands where hazardous materials or solid wastes are known or suspected to 

be present.

PS-3.1.4: Evaluate all BLM actions (including land use authorizations, mining and milling 

activities, and unauthorized land uses) for their potential to prevent production or 

dumping of hazardous or solid wastes on public lands by doing the following:

• Minimize releases of hazardous materials through compliance with current 

regulations

• Identify appropriate mitigation for activities associated with all types of 

hazardous materials and waste management and all types of fire management

Administrative Actions

• Provide public safety information through BLM visitor-use brochures, websites, the BGR/Cabeza 

Prieta National Wildlife Refuge (NWR)/Sand Tank Mountains visitor-entry permit system, and 

various direct contacts with members of the public. Include information on hazards associated 

with abandoned mines, recreational shooting, unexploded ordnance, smuggler and 

undocumented alien (UDA) traffic, other criminal activities, natural resource conditions, or 

other conditions.

• Post signs in the field to identify certain hazardous situations when warranted to protect public 

safety. Emphasize visitor acceptance of the risks of entering public lands and responsibility for 

their own safety.

• To reduce human-caused fires, the BLM will undertake education, enforcement, and 

administrative fire prevention measures. Education measures will include various outreach 

efforts, including a signing program, information as to the natural role of fire within local 

ecosystems, and participation in fairs, parades, and public contacts. Enforcement will be 

accomplished by providing training opportunities for employees interested in fire cause 

determination. Administration includes expanded prevention and education programs with 

other cooperating agencies.

2.2.23 Scientific Research, Education, and Public Outreach 

The BLM will work with partners in agencies, academia, and other organizations to develop an effective 

environmental education and outreach strategy to enhance public understanding and appreciation of 

public land resources and to help the BLM achieve its mission and the desired outcomes of this PRMP.

The BLM will support existing educational and interpretive programs and initiatives, such as Project 

Archaeology, Leave No Trace, Tread Lightly!TM, Project Learning Tree, and other proven national, state, 

regional, and local programs. An emphasis will be placed on reuse of existing educational materials.

Additionally, the BLM will work with partners to pursue interpretation and environmental education 

opportunities, outreach, development, and implementation of on-site and off-site programs for adults 

and children. The office will work with willing staff from schools, school districts, and other learning 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-137

institutions to develop curricula that incorporate various learning styles in program design and delivery 

and focus on the BLM’s mission.

To help disseminate information to the public, websites, brochures, maps, access guides, and information 

sheets will be developed. BLM personnel will also participate in public events, such as fairs and open 

houses, with information and displays showing public land management. Information will emphasize 

Leave No Trace and Tread Lightly!TM practices.

Topics may include:

• Resource protection and management 

• Recreational and public access

• Land use ethics

• Recreational target shooting

• OHV rules and regulations

• Public safety

• Fire

• OHV and special recreation vehicle information

• Other information as needed

2.2.24 Resources Education

Throughout the area, (with particular focus on sensitive resource areas, including ACECs, the WHA, 

Special Cultural Resource Management Areas, and threatened and endangered species habitat), emphasis

will be placed on resource importance through interpretation, education, signing, and/or brochures. 

A public education program will accomplish the following:

• Provide information about resources and their importance

• Provide information directly related to procedures to be followed if sensitive resources are 

found 

• Provide safety information to the public and identify any resource protection actions required 

for public use

• Specify any pertinent fines for resource damage

2.2.25 Public Uses and Visitor Information

Visitor information will be developed to guide recreational uses in the LSDA. Information could include 

identifying recreational opportunities, locations where certain uses are or are not appropriate, an 

appreciation and respect for other public land users and uses, and methods to avoid conflict.

2.2.26 Public Safety and Fire Education

Educational material will be available regarding public safety, definitions of hazardous materials and solid 

wastes, and regulations controlling the use and disposal of hazardous materials and solid wastes on 

public lands. Methods to disseminate information may include brochures at recreational sites, websites, 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-138 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

signs at known or likely dumping sites, BGR/Cabeza Prieta NWR/Sand Tank Mountains visitor entry 

permit system, and various types of direct contact with visitors. Information on hazards associated with 

abandoned mines, recreational shooting, unexploded ordnance, smuggler and UDA traffic, natural 

resource, or other conditions also may be included.

To protect public safety, when warranted, signs will be posted to identify certain hazardous situations.

Visitor acceptance of the risks of entering public land and responsibility for their own safety will be 

emphasized.

The BLM will undertake education, enforcement, and administrative fire prevention mitigation measures 

to reduce human-caused fires. Education measures may include various media, including signs, 

information on the natural role of fire within local ecosystems, participation in fairs or parades, and 

other public contacts. Enforcement will be accomplished by providing training opportunities for 

employees interested in fire cause determinations. Administration includes expanded prevention and 

education programs with other cooperating agencies.

2.3 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

The BLM will continue to work with existing partners, to cultivate new partnerships, and to seek the 

views of the public. It will use such techniques as news releases, website postings, and mass mailings to 

ask for participation and to inform the public of new and ongoing management actions and site-specific 

planning, with opportunities and time frames for comment. The public is encouraged to contact the BLM 

(Phoenix District Office, Lower Sonoran Field Office, at 21605 N. 7th Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85027) 

and request that their names be placed in the field office mailing list, along with their specific area of 

interest (e.g., wildlife, cultural resources, socioeconomics) for plan implementation. The public may also 

make this request by calling (623) 580-5500. 

The BLM will also continue to coordinate, both formally and informally, with the numerous federal and 

state agencies, Native American tribes, local agencies, and officials interested and involved in the 

management of public lands in the Lower Sonoran Field Office.

2.4 MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

The RMP will be implemented as funding and workforce allow. Most of the land use plan decisions are 

effective on approval of this document, but some decisions will take a number of years to implement on 

the ground. Implementation monitoring will track which decisions have been implemented and when.

After issuing the ROD/Approved RMP, the BLM will establish implementation priorities based on the 

goals, objectives, and management actions detailed in the RMP. The implementation planning process will 

assist BLM managers and staff in preparing budget requests and in scheduling work priorities. However, 

the proposed schedule must be considered tentative and will be affected by future funding, changing 

program priorities, nondiscretionary workloads, and cooperation by partners and external publics.

Periodic review of the implementation plan will provide consistent tracking of accomplishments. It will 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-139

provide information that can be used to develop annual budget requests to continue implementation, as 

plan implementation is a continuous and active process. 

Interdisciplinary impact analysis on implementation actions will be based on the PRMP/FEIS and other 

applicable EISs. If the analysis prepared for site-specific projects finds potential for significant impacts not 

already described in an existing EIS, another EIS or a supplement to an existing EIS may be warranted.

Site-specific environmental analyses and documentation (including the use of categorical exclusions and

determinations of NEPA adequacy, where appropriate) may be prepared for one or more projects, in 

accordance with management objectives and decisions established in the approved land use plan. In 

addition, the BLM will ensure that the environmental review process includes evaluation of all critical 

elements, including cultural resources and threatened and endangered species, and that it completes

required USFWS Section 7 consultations and coordination with the SHPO.

2.5 PLAN EVALUATION AND MAINTENANCE

2.5.1 Plan Evaluation

Evaluation is a process in which the plan and monitoring data are reviewed to determine if management 

goals and objectives are being met and if management direction is sound. Land use plan evaluations 

determine the following:

• If decisions are being implemented

• If mitigation measures are satisfactory

• If there are significant changes in the related plans of other entities

• If there is new data of significance

• If decisions should change through amendment or revision

Monitoring data gathered over time is examined and used to determine whether management actions 

are meeting objectives. Conclusions are then used to make recommendations on whether to continue 

current management or to identify what changes need to be made in management practices to meet 

RMP objectives.

The BLM will use land use plan evaluations to determine if the decisions in the RMP, supported by the 

accompanying NEPA analysis, are still valid in light of new information and monitoring data. The RMP 

will generally be evaluated every five years, unless unexpected actions, new information, or significant 

changes in other plans, legislation, or litigation triggers an evaluation. Evaluations will follow the 

protocols established by the BLM’s Land Use Planning Handbook (H-1601-1) and 43 CFR, Part 1610.4-9, 

or other appropriate guidance in effect at the time of the evaluation.

2.5.2 Plan Maintenance

Land use plan decisions and supporting information can be maintained to reflect minor changes in data, 

but maintenance is limited to refining, documenting, and/or clarifying previously approved decisions. 

Some examples of maintenance actions are as follows: 
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-140 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

• Correcting minor data, typographical, mapping, or tabular data errors

• Refining baseline information as a result of new inventory data (e.g., changing the boundary of an 

archaeological district, refining the known habitat of special status species, or adjusting the 

boundary of a fire management unit based on updated fire regime condition class inventory, fire 

occurrence, monitoring data, and/or demographic changes)

• Applying an existing fluid mineral lease stipulation to a new area prior to the lease sale, based on 

new inventory data (e.g., apply an existing protective stipulation for tortoise to a newly 

discovered tortoise habitat area.)

Plan maintenance will be documented in supporting records. Plan maintenance does not require formal 

public involvement, interagency coordination, or the NEPA analysis required for making new land use 

plan decisions.

2.6 MONITORING AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

2.6.1 Monitoring

The BLM expects that new information gathered from field inventories and assessments, research, other 

agency studies, and other sources will update baseline data and/or support new management techniques, 

BMPs, and scientific principles. Monitoring the RMP involves tracking the implementation and 

effectiveness of land use plan decisions (implementation monitoring) identified in Section 2.2, 

Management Decisions. Implementation monitoring tracks the completion of land use plan decisions, 

whereas effectiveness monitoring helps determine whether completion of land use plan decisions 

achieves anticipated desired outcomes. If implementation of land use plans does not achieve anticipated 

desired outcomes, adaptive management may be necessary.

Management actions identified for the Lower Sonoran Field Office are based on studies and the best 

scientific and commercial information available, but conditions may change over time. Experience has 

shown that implemented management actions can be improved as new technology and new information 

become available. It is also possible that changes in land use will require a different management action 

to protect the resources. To address the changing conditions and provide management flexibility using 

BMPs, the Lower Sonoran Field Office will monitor and evaluate the RMP using a process that provides 

the optimum means of checking the effectiveness of management actions. This process will measure the 

effectiveness of existing actions by monitoring these actions and applying the results of new scientific 

research. To do this, the process will analyze the current resource conditions resulting from 

implemented actions and will identify and recommend alternatives or modified actions, as necessary, to 

reach established objectives and goals.

Because capability to conduct the process at the optimum level can vary from year to year, the actions 

to be monitored will be prioritized. If monitoring indicates the goals and objectives are not being met, 

the adaptive management process will be implemented to adjust actions and improve resource 

condition.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 2-141

2.6.2 Adaptive Management

Adaptive management (AM) is a system of management practices based on clearly identified outcomes,

monitoring to determine if management actions are meeting outcomes, and, if not, facilitating

management changes that will best ensure that outcomes are met or to reevaluate the outcomes. The 

Lower Sonoran Field Office will implement the AM process for decisions appropriate to be adapted in 

order to meet resource goals and objectives. Monitoring, reports, documents, and timelines associated 

with the AM process will be subject to Lower Sonoran Field Office budget and staffing constraints.
2. Approved Resource Management Plan

2-142 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

This page intentionally left blank. 
September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-1 

3. GLOSSARY

ABIOTIC: The nonliving, material components of the environment, such as air, rocks, soil, water, coal, 

peat, and plant litter. See BIOTIC.

ACCELERATED EROSION: Soil loss above natural levels resulting directly from human activities. 

Because of the slow rate of soil formation, accelerated erosion can permanently reduce plant 

productivity.

ACQUIRED PUBLIC LANDS: Lands in federal ownership that the government obtained as a gift or 

by purchase, exchange, or condemnation. See PUBLIC LANDS.

ALLOTMENT: An area of land designated and managed for the grazing of livestock where one or 

more operators are authorized to graze their livestock. An allotment generally consists of federal 

rangelands but may include intermingled parcels of private, state, or federal lands. The BLM stipulates 

the number of livestock and season of use for each allotment.

ANIMAL UNIT: One mature (1,000 pound) cow or the equivalent based upon 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 one month.

ANNUAL PLANT: A plant that completes its life cycle and dies in one year or less. Also see 

PERENNIAL PLANT.

AQUATIC HABITAT (COMPONENTS): Habitats confined to streams, rivers, springs, lakes, 

ponds, reservoirs, and other water bodies.

AQUIFER: A water-bearing bed or layer of permeable rock, sand, or gravel capable of yielding large 

amounts of water.
3. Glossary

3-2 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

ARCHAEOLOGICAL FEATURE: A non-portable object not recoverable from its matrix (usually in 

an archeological site) without destroying its integrity. Examples are rock paintings, hearths, post holes, 

floors, and walls.

AREA OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (ACEC): A designated area on public 

lands where special management attention is required (1) to protect and prevent irreparable damage to 

fish and wildlife; (2) to protect important historic, cultural, or scenic values, or other natural systems or 

processes; or (3) to protect life and safety from natural hazards.

ARIZONA STANDARDS FOR RANGELAND HEALTH AND GUIDELINES FOR

GRAZING ADMINISTRATION: Standards and guidelines developed collaboratively by BLM and the 

Arizona Resource Advisory Council (RAC) to address the minimum requirements of the Department of 

the Interior’s final rule for Grazing Administration, effective Aug. 21, 1995.

ASSETS (TRAVEL MANAGEMENT): An engineering term utilized to describe roads, primitive 

roads, and trails that are included in Facility Asset Management System (FAMS). Assets are maintained 

through the maintenance program.

AUTHORIZED OFFICER: Any employee of the BLM who has been delegated the authority to 

perform duties related to public lands, public purposes, conveyances, hazardous substances, and solid 

wastes.

BACK COUNTRY BYWAY: A component of the national scenic byway system which focuses 

primarily on corridors along backcountry roads which have high scenic, historic, archeological, or other 

public interest values. The road may vary from a single track bike trail to a low speed, paved road that 

traverses back country areas (BLM Handbook H-8357-1, B 2).

BACK COUNTRY SETTING: Areas with undeveloped, primitive, and self-directed visitor 

experience without provisions for motorized or mechanized access, except for identified routes.

BENEFIT (RECREATION/SOCIETAL): A benefit is defined as an improved condition or the 

prevention of a worse condition. Benefits of leisure and recreation engagements can be realized by 

individuals (e.g., improved physical and psychological well-being), groups of individuals (strengthened 

bonds among family and friends), communities (economic gain from tourism), society (the cumulative 

effects of individual and group benefits), and the environment (a result of a stronger environmental ethic 

among individuals).

BIG GAME: Large species of wildlife that are hunted, such as elk, deer, bighorn sheep, and pronghorn.

BIGHORN SHEEP HABITAT: Area is open to non-vehicular traffic year around (e.g., hiking, biking, 

and equestrian). Restrictions vary by location and are listed in RMP. Typically, roads are closed during 

lambing season (January 1 through June 30).

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT: Information prepared by or under the direction of a federal agency 

to determine whether a proposed action is likely to harm threatened or endangered species or 

designated critical habitat, jeopardize the existence of species that are proposed for listing, or adversely 
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-3 

modify proposed critical habitat. Biological assessments must be prepared for major construction 

activities. The outcome of a biological assessment determines whether formal Section 7 consultation or 

a conference is needed. Also see BIOLOGICAL OPINION.

BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY (BIODIVERSITY): The full range of variability within and among living 

organisms and the ecological complexes in which they occur. Biological diversity encompasses 

ecosystem or community diversity, species diversity, and genetic diversity.

BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION: The gathering and evaluation of information on proposed 

endangered and threatened species and critical and proposed critical habitat for actions that do not 

require a biological assessment. Also see BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT.

BIOLOGICAL OPINION: A document that includes the following- (1) the opinion of the US Fish and 

Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service as to whether a federal action is likely to 

jeopardize the existence of a species listed as threatened or endangered or destroy or adversely modify 

designated critical habitat; (2) a summary of the information on which the opinion is based; and (3) a 

detailed discussion of the effects of the action on listed species or designated critical habitat.

BIOLOGICAL VEGETATION TREATMENT: Methods of vegetation treatment that employ living 

organisms to selectively suppress, inhibit, or control herbaceous and woody vegetation. Examples of 

such methods include insects; pathogens; and grazing by cattle, sheep, or goats.

BIOTIC: Pertaining to life or living; the living components of the environment. Also see ABIOTIC.

BRAIDING: A pattern of an interlacing or tangled network of several branching and reuniting stream 

channels separated by branch islands or channel bars.

BROWSE: The part of leaf and twig growth of shrubs, woody vines, and trees available for animal 

consumption. 

CANCELLED/CANCELLATION: A permanent termination of a grazing permit, grazing lease, 

grazing preference, free-use grazing permit, or other grazing authorization in whole or in part. 

CANDIDATE SPECIES: Species not protected under the Endangered Species Act, but being 

considered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service for inclusion on the list of federally threatened and 

endangered species. 

CASUAL USE (MINING): Mining that only negligibly disturbs federal lands and resources and does 

not include the use of mechanized earth moving equipment or explosives or motorized equipment in 

areas closed to off-highway vehicles. Casual use generally includes panning, nonmotorized sluicing, and 

collecting mineral specimens using hand tools.

CASUAL USE (RECREATION): Non-commercial or non-organized group or individual activities on 

public land that do the following: Comply with land use decisions and designations (i.e. special area 

designations), do not award cash prizes; are not publicly advertised; pose minimal risk for damage to 

public land or related water resources; and generally require no monitoring. If the use goes beyond 
3. Glossary

3-4 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

those conditions, the activity should be treated as any other organized recreational group or 

competitive activity or event for which BLM will require the event organizer to obtain a special 

recreation permit (SRP).

CASUAL USE OF MINERAL MATERIALS: Extracting mineral materials for limited personal 

(noncommercial) uses. 

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION: A category of actions (identified in agency guidance) that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and for which neither an 

environmental assessment nor an EIS is required (40 CFR 1508.4).

CATTLE GUARD: A device placed in a road, usually a grate or series of metal bars placed 

perpendicular to the flow of traffic, which allows free passage of vehicles but which livestock will not 

cross.

CHANNEL: A natural or artificial watercourse with a definite bed and banks to confine and conduct 

continuously or periodically flowing water.

CHEMICAL VEGETATION TREATMENTS: The applying of chemicals to control unwanted 

vegetation.

COMMUNICATION SITE: An area of Public Land or National Forest System lands designated for 

communications use through the land and resource management planning process.

COMMUNITY: A collective term used to describe an assemblage of organisms living together; an 

association of living organisms having mutual relationships among themselves and with their environment 

and thus functioning at least to some degree as an ecological unit.

COMPETITIVE RACES: For purposes of this plan, all competitive events that have an element of 

speed as a component, including, motorcycle enduros, OHV desert racing, and equestrian endurance 

rides.

COMPOSITION: The proportions of various plant species in relation to the total on a given area. It 

may be expressed in terms of cover, density, weight, etc.

COOPERATING AGENCY: Assists the lead federal agency in developing an environmental 

assessment or EIS. The Council on Environmental Quality regulations implementing NEPA define a 

cooperating agency as any agency that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise for proposals covered 

by NEPA (40 CFR 1501.6). Any federal, state, local government jurisdiction with such qualifications may 

become a cooperating agency by agreement with the lead agency.

CORRIDOR: See DESIGNATED MULTIUSE UTILITY CORRIDOR.

COVER: (1) Plants or plant parts, living or dead, on the surface of the ground; (2) plants or objects 

used by wild animals for nesting, rearing of young, escape from predators, or protection from harmful 

environmental conditions.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-5 

CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANTS: Air pollutants for which acceptable levels of exposure can be 

determined and for which an ambient air quality standard has been set. Examples of such pollutants are 

ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and PM10 and PM2.5. 

CRITICAL HABITAT, DESIGNATED: Specific parts of an area (1) that are occupied by a federally 

listed threatened or endangered plant or animal at the time it is listed and (2) that contain physical or 

biological features essential to the conservation of the species or that may require special management 

or protection. Critical habitat may also include specific areas outside an area occupied by a federally 

listed species if the Secretary of the Interior determines that these areas are essential for conserving the 

species.

CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUES: The irreplaceable qualities that are embodied in cultural 

resources, such as scientific information about prehistory and history, cultural significance to Native 

Americans and other groups, and the potential to enhance public education and enjoyment of the 

Nation’s rich cultural heritage. Section 1 of the National Historic Preservation Act states that “the 

preservation of this irreplaceable heritage is in the public interest so that its vital legacy of cultural, 

educational, aesthetic, inspirational, economic and energy benefits will be maintained and enriched for 

future generations of Americans.”

CULTURAL RESOURCE: A location of human activity, occupation, or use identifiable through field 

inventory, historical documentation, or oral evidence. Cultural resources include archaeological and 

historical sites, structures, buildings, objects, artifacts, works of art, architecture, and natural features 

that were important in past human events. They may consist of physical remains or areas where 

significant human events occurred, even though evidence of the events no longer remains. And they may 

include definite locations of traditional, cultural, or religious importance to specified social or cultural 

groups. 

CULTURAL RESOURCE DATA: Cultural resource information embodied in material remains such 

as artifacts, features, organic materials, and other remnants of past activities. An important aspect of 

data is context, a concept that refers to the relationships among these types of materials and the 

situations in which they are found.

CULTURAL RESOURCE DATA RECOVERY: The professional application of scientific techniques 

of controlled observation, collection, excavation, and/or removal of physical remains, including analysis, 

interpretation, explanation, and preservation of recovered remains and associated records in an 

appropriate curatorial facility used as a means of protection. Data recovery may sometimes employ 

professional collection of such data as oral histories, genealogies, folklore, and related information to 

portray the social significance of the affected resources. Such data recovery is sometimes used as a 

measure to mitigate the adverse impacts of a ground-disturbing project or activity.

CULTURAL RESOURCE INTEGRITY: The condition of a cultural property, its capacity to yield 

scientific data, and its ability to convey its historical significance. Integrity may reflect the authenticity of a 

property’s historic identity, evidenced by the survival or physical characteristics that existed during its 

historic or prehistoric period, or its expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period 

of time.
3. Glossary

3-6 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

CULTURAL RESOURCE INVENTORY (SURVEY): A descriptive listing and documentation, 

including photographs and maps of cultural resources. Included in an inventory are the processes of 

locating, identifying, and recording sites, structures, buildings, objects, and districts through library and 

archival research, information from persons knowledgeable about cultural resources, and on-the-ground 

surveys of varying intensity.

Class I: A professionally prepared study that compiles, analyzes, and synthesizes all available data on an 

area’s cultural resources. Information sources for this study include published and unpublished 

documents, BLM inventory records, institutional site files, and state and National Register files. Class I 

inventories may have prehistoric, historic, and ethnological and sociological elements. These inventories 

are periodically updated to include new data from other studies and Class II and III inventories.

Class II: A professionally conducted, statistically based sample survey designed to describe the probable 

density, diversity, and distribution of cultural properties in a large area. This survey is achieved by 

projecting the results of an intensive survey carried out over limited parts of the target area. Within 

individual sample units, survey aims, methods, and intensities are the same as those applied in Class III 

inventories. To improve statistical reliability, Class II inventories may be conducted in several phases 

with different sample designs.

Class III: A professionally conducted intensive survey of an entire target area aimed at locating and 

recording all visible cultural properties. In a Class III survey, trained observers commonly conduct 

systematic inspections by walking a series of close-interval parallel transects until they have thoroughly 

examined an area.

CULTURAL RESOURCE PROJECT PLAN: For cultural resource projects, a detailed design plan 

that defines the procedures, budget, and schedule for such activities as structure stabilization, 

recordation, interpretive development, and construction of facilities such as trails. These plans include 

estimates on workforce, equipment, and supply needs.

CULTURAL SITE: A physical location of past human activities or events, more commonly referred to 

as an archaeological site or a historic property. Such sites vary greatly in size and range from the 

location of a single cultural resource object to a cluster of cultural resource structures with associated 

objects and features.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS: As stated in 40 CFR 1508.8, “...is the impact on the environment which 

results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such 

other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions 

taking place over a period of time.”

DATA RECOVERY: See CULTURAL RESOURCE DATA RECOVERY.

DECISION RECORD: A manager’s decision on a categorical exclusion review or an environmental 

assessment. Comparable to the record of decision for an environmental impact statement, the decision 

record includes- (1) a finding of no significant impact, (2) a decision to prepare an environmental impact 

statement, or (3) a decision not to proceed with a proposal. 
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-7 

DEFERMENT: A period of non-grazing during part of the growing season (see REST ROTATION).

DEFERRED ROTATION GRAZING: Moving grazing animals to various parts of a range in 

succeeding years or seasons to provide for seed production, plant vigor, and seedling growth.

DESERT TORTOISE HABITAT CLASSIFICATIONS: Three categories of desert tortoise

habitat based on population, viability, size, density, and manageability and derived from BLM inventories 

of desert tortoise habitat throughout the planning areas between 1989 and 1999. The categories are as 

follows:

Category I. Medium to high tortoise density. Habitat area essential for maintaining large, viable 

populations. 

Category II. Low to moderate tortoise density. Habitat is manageable.

Category III. Isolated patches of good habitat exist but are difficult to manage. Most management 

conflicts are not resolvable.

DESIGNATED MULTIUSE UTILITY CORRIDOR: See MULTIUSE UTILITY CORRIDOR

DESIRED FUTURE CONDITION: A detailed description of the particular resource condition to be 

achieved sometime in the future. These serve as resource standards which management is intended to 

achieve. These are analogous to resource objectives.

DESIRED OUTCOMES: A type of land use plan decision expressed as a goal or objective.

DESIRED PLANT COMMUNITY (DPC): The plant community that has been determined through 

a land use or management plan to best meets the plan’s objectives for a site. A real, documented plant 

community that embodies the resource attributes needed for the present or potential use of an area, 

the desired plant community is consistent with the site’s capability to produce the required resource 

attributes through natural succession, management intervention, or a combination of both.

DESTINATION RECREATION-TOURISM MARKET: National or regional recreation-tourism 

visitors and other constituents who value public lands as recreation-tourism destinations. Major 

investments in facilities and visitor assistance are authorized within SRMAs where the BLM’s strategy is 

to target demonstrated destination recreation-tourism market demand. Here, recreation management 

actions are geared toward meeting primary recreation-tourism market demand for specific activity, 

experience, and benefit opportunities. These opportunities are produced through maintenance of 

prescribed natural resource setting character and by structuring and implementing management, 

marketing, monitoring, and administrative actions accordingly.

DEVELOPED RECREATION SITES AND AREAS: Those sites and areas that contain structures 

or capital improvements primarily used by the public for recreation purposes. Such sites or areas may 

include such features as: delineated spaces for parking, camping, or boat launching; sanitary facilities; 

potable water; grills or fire rings; or controlled access.
3. Glossary

3-8 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

DIKE: (1) An upright or steeply dipping sheet of igneous rock that has solidified in a crack or fissure in 

the earth’s crust; (2) a human-made structure used to control stream flow.

DISPERSED RECREATION: Recreation that does not require developed sites or facilities.

DISPOSAL: See LAND DISPOSAL.

DRAINAGE AREA: Area or watershed that drains naturally to a particular point on a river, stream, 

or creek.

DRAINAGE BASIN: Drainage system that consists of a surface stream or body of impounded surface 

water together with all tributary surface streams and bodies of impounded surface water.

EASEMENT: The right to use land in a certain way granted by a landowner to a second party.

ECOLOGICAL CONDITION: See ECOLOGICAL SITE RATING (ECOLOGICAL CONDITION/ 

ECOLOGICAL STATUS).

ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY: The quality of a natural unmanaged or managed ecosystem in which 

the natural ecological processes are sustained, with genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity assured for 

the future.

ECOLOGICAL SITE: A distinctive kind of land that has specific physical characteristics and that 

differs from other kinds of land in its ability to produce a characteristic natural plant community.

ECOLOGICAL SITE DESCRIPTIONS: Descriptions of the following characteristics of an 

ecological site- soils, physical features, climatic features, associated hydrologic features, plant 

communities possible on the site, plant community dynamics, annual production estimates and 

distribution of production throughout the year, associated animal communities, associated and similar 

sites, and interpretations for management.

ECOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY: The basic inventory of present and potential vegetation on 

BLM rangeland.

ECOLOGICAL SITE RATING (ECOLOGICAL CONDITION/ ECOLOGICAL STATUS): 

The present state of vegetation of an ecological site in relation to the potential natural community for 

the site. Independent of the site’s use, the ecological site rating is an expression of the relative degree to 

which the kinds, proportions, and amounts of plants in a community resemble those of the potential 

natural community. The four ecological status classes correspond to 0-25 percent, 25-50 percent, 51-75 

percent, or 76-100 percent similarity to the potential natural community and are called early-seral, midseral, late-seral, and potential natural community, respectively.

ECOSYSTEM: Organisms, together with their abiotic environment, forming an interacting system and 

inhabiting an identifiable space.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-9 

ENDANGERED SPECIES: Any animal or plant species in danger of extinction throughout all or a 

significant portion of its range as designated by the US Fish and Wildlife Service under the Endangered 

Species Act. 

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA): As per 40 CFR 1508.9:

“(a) Means a concise public document for which a federal agency is responsible that serves to:

Briefly provide sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an environmental 

impact statement or a finding of no significant impact.

Aid an agency’s compliance with the Act when no environmental impact statement is necessary.

Facilitate preparation of a statement when one is necessary.

(b) Shall include brief discussions of the need for the proposal, of alternatives as required by section 102 

(2) (E), of the environmental impacts of the proposed action and Alternatives, and a listing of agencies 

and persons consulted.”

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS): As per 40 CFR 1508.11 “means a detailed 

written statement as required by section 102 (2) (C) of the Act” (referring to the National 

Environmental Policy Act.)

EPHEMERAL RANGELAND: Areas of the hot desert biome (region) that do not consistently 

produce enough forage to sustain a livestock operation but may briefly produce unusual volumes of 

forage that may be utilized by livestock.

EXCAVATION: The scientific examination of an archaeological site through layer-by-layer removal 

and study of the contents within prescribed surface units, e.g. square meters.

EXISTING PARKING, STAGING, AND CAMPING AREAS AND DISTURBED AREAS: 

Sites and areas previously used for overnight stays, parking and staging. Existing sites must have bare 

mineral earth areas clear of vegetation, other indications include tent pads, camp fire rings, camper and 

vehicle pullouts, rock alignments and other signs of overnight and long-term use and occupation.

EXTENSIVE RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREA (ERMA): A public lands unit identified in 

land use plans containing all acreage not identified as a SRMA. Recreation management actions within an 

ERMA are limited to only those of a custodial nature.

EXTIRPATED SPECIES: A locally extinct species; a species that is no longer found in a locality but 

exists elsewhere.

FEDERAL LAND POLICY AND MANAGEMENT ACT (FLPMA): The act that (1) set out, for 

the Bureau of Land Management, standards for managing the public lands including land use planning, 

sales, withdrawals, acquisitions, and exchanges; (2) authorized the setting up of local advisory councils 

representing major citizens groups interested in land use planning and management, (3) established 
3. Glossary

3-10 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

criteria for reviewing proposed wilderness areas, and (4) provided guidelines for other aspects of public 

land management such as grazing.

FINE PARTICULATE MATTER (PM2.5): Particulate matter that is less than 2.5 microns in 

diameter.

FIRE INTENSITY: The rate of heat release for an entire fire at a specific time.

FIRE MANAGEMENT: The integration of fire protection, prescribed burning, and fire ecology 

knowledge into multiple use planning, decision making, and land management.

FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN: A plan that defines a program to manage wildland and prescribed fires 

and documents the fire management program in the approved land use plan.

FIRE SUPPRESSION: All the work of extinguishing or confining a fire, beginning with its discovery.

FIRE SUPPRESSION RESOURCES: People, equipment, services, and supplies available or 

potentially available for assignment to incidents.

FLOODPLAIN: Nearly level land on either or both sides of a channel that is subject to overflow 

flooding.

FORAGE: All browse and herbage that is available and acceptable to grazing animals or that may be 

harvested for feed.

FORB: An herbaceous plant that is not a grass, sedge, or rush. 

FRAGILE SOILS: Soils having a shallow depth to bedrock, minimal surface layer of organic material, 

textures that are more easily detached and eroded, or are on slopes over 35 percent.

FREE USE PERMIT: A permit that allows the removal of mineral materials from public lands free of 

charge to any federal, state, or territorial agency, unit, or subdivision.

FRONT COUNTRY SETTING: Front Country offers the main setting and locations for intensive 

resource-dependent recreation uses and facilities. Motorized and mechanized vehicles must remain on 

existing or designated routes. The lands are generally natural in appearance and may see minor to 

moderate alterations over the life of the land use plan due to land use authorizations and BLM 

management actions.

FUEL LOAD (IN FIRE SUPPRESSION): The oven-dry weight of fuel per unit area usually 

expressed in tons/acre.

FUEL LOADING: The amount of fuel present expressed by weight of fuel per unit area.

FUEL MOISTURE CONTENT (IN FIRE SUPPRESSION): The water content of a fuel 

expressed as a percentage of the fuel’s oven-dry weight. For dead fuels, which have no living tissue, 
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-11

moisture content is determined almost entirely by relative humidity, precipitation, dry-bulb temperature, 

and solar radiation. The moisture content of live fuels is physiologically controlled within the living plant.

FUGITIVE DUST: Dust particles that are introduced into the air through certain actions such as soil 

cultivation or vehicles crossing open fields or driving on dirt roads or trails.

FUNCTIONING WATERS (WILDLIFE): A well, catchment, spring, reservoir, or other feature 

(human made or natural) that provides a reliable source of potable water on a year-long basis. For such 

a source of water to be considered functional, the quality and quantity of water must be sufficient to 

sustain native wildlife populations in the local area. For example, a reservoir that fills up during monsoon 

rains but goes dry in a few weeks is not functional from a wildlife standpoint.

FUNDAMENTALS OF RANGELAND HEALTH: As Described in 43 CFR 4180, the conditions in 

which (1) rangelands are in proper functioning physical condition, (2) ecological process are supporting 

healthy biotic populations and communities, (3) water quality is meeting state standards and BLM 

objectives, and (4) special status species habitat is being restored or maintained.

GENETIC DIVERSITY: The variation in genes in a population pool that contributes to the ability of 

organisms to evolve and adapt to new conditions.

GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS): An information system that integrates, stores, 

edits, analyzes, shares, and displays geographic information for informing decision making.

GOAL: The desired state or condition that a resource management policy or program is designed to 

achieve. Broader and less specific than objectives, goals are usually not measurable and may not have 

specific dates by which they must be reached. Objectives are developed by first understanding one's 

goals.

GRANT: A document authorizing the use of public or federal lands for the construction, operation, 

maintenance, and termination of a project.

GRAZING CAPACITY (CARRYING CAPACITY): The highest livestock stocking rate possible 

without damaging vegetation or related resources. Grazing capacity may vary from year to year or in the 

same area because of fluctuating forage production.

GRAZING CYCLE: The amount of time required for livestock to rotate completely through all the 

pastures under an allotment management plan.

GRAZING DISTRICT: The specific area within which the public lands are administered under section 

3 of the Taylor Grazing Act of June 1934, as amended (43 USC 315). Public lands outside grazing district 

boundaries are administered under section 15 of the Act.

GRAZING PERMIT/LICENSE/LEASE: A written document authorizing use of the public lands 

within an established grazing district. Grazing permits specify all authorized use, including livestock 

grazing, suspended use, and conservation use. Permits also specify the total number of AUMs 

apportioned, the area authorized for grazing use, or both.
3. Glossary

3-12 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

GRAZING PREFERENCE: A superior or priority position against others for the purpose of receiving 

a grazing permit or lease. This priority is attached to base property owned or controlled by the 

permittee or lessee.

GRAZING PRIVILEGES: The use of public land for livestock grazing under permits or leases.

GRAZING REST: Any period during which no livestock grazing is allowed within an area.

GRAZING SEASON: An established period for which grazing permits are issued.

GRAZING SYSTEM: A systematic sequence of grazing use and non-use of an allotment to meet 

multiple use goals by improving the quality and amount of vegetation.

GROUND COVER: See COVER.

GROUND LITTER: See LITTER.

GROUNDWATER: Subsurface water and underground streams that supply wells and springs. Use of 

groundwater in Arizona does not require a water right, but must only be “reasonable.” Groundwater is 

separated from surface water by the type of alluvium in which the water is found. Water in the younger, 

floodplain alluvium is considered surface water. Water in the older, basin-fill alluvium is considered 

groundwater.

GROUNDWATER RECHARGE: Adding water to an aquifer, a process that occurs naturally from 

the infiltration of rainfall and from water flowing over earth materials that allow it to infiltrate below the 

land surface.

HABITAT: An area that provides an animal or plant with adequate food, water, shelter, and living 

space.

HABITAT FRAGMENTATION: Process by which habitats are increasingly subdivided into smaller 

units resulting in their increased insularity and losses of total habitat area.

HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN: A site-specific wildlife habitat plan.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (HAZMAT): An all-encompassing term that includes hazardous 

substances; hazardous waste; hazardous chemical substances; toxic substances; pollutants and 

contaminants; and imminently hazardous chemical substances and mixtures that can pose an 

unreasonable risk to human health, safety, and property.

HERBACEOUS: Of, relating to, or having the characteristics of a vascular plant that does not develop 

woody tissue.

HERD AREA (HA): Geographic areas of the public lands identified as habitat used by wild horses 

and/or wild burros at the time the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 was enacted.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-13

HERITAGE TOURISM: Programs that seek to stimulate economic development by promoting the 

use of historic properties. Management concerns include ensuring the long-term preservation and 

sustainable use of properties. Best-management practices also encourage economic partnerships 

between the BLM and the state, tribal and local tourism programs.

HIGH POTENTIAL HISTORIC SITE: Those historic sites related to the route of the National 

Historic Trail, or sites in close proximity thereto, which provide opportunity to interpret the historic 

significance of the trail during the period of its major use. Criteria for consideration as high potential 

sites include historic significance, presence of visible historic remnants, scenic quality, and relative 

freedom from intrusion. (From Section 12 of The National Trails System Act).

HIGH POTENTIAL ROUTE SEGMENT: Those segments of a trail which would afford high quality 

recreation experience in a portion of the route having greater than average scenic values or affording an 

opportunity to vicariously share the experience of the original users of a historic route. (From Section 

12 of The National Trails System Act).

HISTORICAL SITE: A location that was used or occupied after the arrival of Europeans in North 

America (ca. A.D. 1492). Such sites may consist of physical remains at archaeological sites or areas 

where significant human events occurred, even though evidence of the events no longer remains. They 

may have been used by people of either European or Native American descent.

HYDRIC: Characterized by, relating to, or requiring an abundance of moisture.

HYDROLOGIC CYCLE: The circuit of water movement from the atmosphere to the earth and its 

return to the atmosphere through various stages or processes, such as precipitation, interception, 

runoff, infiltration, percolation, storage, evaporation, and transpiration.

IGNEOUS ROCK: Rock, such as granite and basalt, which has solidified from a molten or partially 

molten state.

IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS: Decisions that take action to implement land use plan decisions; 

generally appealable to Interior Board of Land Appeals under 43 CFR 4.410.

INDICATORS: Elements of the human environment affected, or potentially affected, by a change 

agent. An indicator can be a structural component, a functional process or an index. A key indicator 

integrates several system elements in such a way as to indicate the general health of that system.

INFILTRATION: The downward entry of water into the soil or other material.

INFRASTRUCTURE: The set of systems and facilities that support a region or community’s social 

and economic structures. Examples of such systems include energy, transportation, communication, 

education, medical service, and fire and police protection.

INHOLDING: Parcels of land owned or managed by someone other than BLM but surrounded in part 

or entirely by BLM-administered land.
3. Glossary

3-14 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM: A team of varied land use and resource specialists formed to provide 

a coordinated, integrated information base for overall land use planning and management.

INTERESTED PUBLIC: An individual, group, or organization that has submitted a written request to 

the authorized officer to be provided an opportunity to be involved in the decision-making process for 

the management of livestock grazing on specific grazing allotments or has submitted written comments 

to the authorized officer regarding the management of livestock grazing on a specific allotment. 

INVASIVE SPECIES (INVADERS): Plant species that were either absent or present only in small 

amounts in undisturbed portions of a specific range site’s original vegetation and invade following 

disturbance or continued overuse.

KEY AREA: A key area is a relatively small portion of an allotment selected because of its location, 

proximity to water, livestock and wildlife habitat values, and value as a long-term monitoring point. 

KEY FORAGE SPECIES: Forage species whose use serves as an indicator of the degree of use of 

associated species.

LAND DISPOSAL: A transaction that leads to the transfer of title to public lands from the federal 

government.

LANDFORM: A discernible natural landscape that exists as a result of geological activity such as a 

plateau, plain, basin, or mountain.

LANDS MANAGED TO PROTECT WILDERNESS CHARACTERISTICS: An allocation 

resulting from a land use plan management decision for the purpose of protecting lands with wilderness 

characteristics. A wider range of actions and activities may be allowed than can occur in designated 

wilderness.

LAND TENURE ADJUSTMENT: The transfer of land or interest in land (e.g., easement) between 

the United States and private individuals, entities, state or local governments.

LAND USE ALLOCATION: The identification in a land use plan of the activities and foreseeable 

development that are allowed, restricted, or excluded for all or part of the planning area, based on 

desired future conditions.

LAND USE AUTHORIZATION (LUA): The BLM’s authorization; through leases, permits, and 

easements; of uses of the public land. Land use authorizations may allow occupancy, recreational 

residences and cabin sites, farming, manufacturing, outdoor recreation concessions, National Guard 

maneuvers, and many other uses.

LAND USE PLAN: A set of decisions that establish management direction for land within an 

administrative area as prescribed under the planning provisions of FLPMA; an assimilation of land-useplan-level decisions developed through the planning process outlined in 43 CFR 1600, regardless of the 

scale at which the decisions were developed. The term includes both Resource Management Plans and 

Management Framework Plans.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-15

LEASABLE MINERALS: Minerals whose extraction from federally managed land requires a lease and 

the payment of royalties. Leasable minerals include coal, oil and gas, oil shale and tar sands, potash, 

phosphate, sodium, and geothermal steam.

LEASE: An authorization to possess and use public lands for a fixed period of time.

LEAVE NO TRACE: A nationwide (and international) program to help visitors with their decisions 

when they travel and camp on America’s public lands. The program strives to educate visitors about the 

nature of their recreational impacts as well as techniques to prevent and minimize such impacts.

LITTER: The uppermost layer of organic debris on the soil surface, essentially freshly fallen or slightly 

decomposed vegetal material.

LIVESTOCK/KIND OF LIVESTOCK: The species of domestic livestock, i.e., cattle, sheep, horses, 

burros, and goats.

LOCATABLE MINERALS: Minerals that may be acquired under the Mining Law of 1872, as 

amended.

LOCATION: The act of taking or appropriating a parcel of mineral land, including the posting of 

notices, the recording thereof when required, and marking the boundaries so they can be readily traced.

LUA AVOIDANCE AREA: Areas with sensitive resource values where minor linear and non-linear 

land use authorizations would be strongly discouraged and therefore “avoided.”

LUA EXCLUSION AREAS: Areas with sensitive resource values where minor linear and non-linear 

land use authorizations would not be authorized.

MAINTENANCE (ROAD): From BLM 9100 Manual: The work required keeping a facility in such a 

condition that it may be continuously utilized at its original or designed capacity and efficiency, and for 

its intended purposes. Road or trail maintenance actions include (a) signage, (b) minor repairs, e.g. 

correction of drainage, erosion, or vegetation interference problems. Upon performance of condition 

assessment, maintenance could also be construed as (c) allowing road or trail to remain in present state 

for regular and continuous use.

MAINTENANCE INTENSITIES: Maintenance intensities provide a range of consistent objectives 

and standards for the care and maintenance of BLM routes based on identified management objectives 

consistent with land-use planning resource management objectives. These intensities provide operational 

guidance to field personnel on the appropriate intensity, frequency, and type of maintenance activities 

that should be undertaken to keep the route in acceptable condition and provide guidance for the 

minimum standards of care for the annual maintenance of a route. Four levels of objectives and 

standards are provided which are labeled as follows: Level 0 (routes to remove from transportation 

system), Level 1 (low intensity) , Level 3 (moderate intensity) and Level 5 (high intensity).
3. Glossary

3-16 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

MAJOR LINEAR LAND USE AUTHORIZATION: Land use authorizations that include 

transmission lines (consisting of 115 kV or higher), water and gas pipelines (greater than 10 inches in 

diameter), roads (wider than 200 feet), as well as significant canals.

MANAGEMENT ACTIONS/PRACTICES (FROM RANGELAND STANDARDS & 

GUIDES): Actions or practices that improve or maintain basic soil and vegetation resources. Rangeland 

practices typically consist of watershed treatments (planting, seeding, burning, rest, vegetation 

manipulation, grazing management) in an attempt to establish desired vegetation species or communities.

MANUAL VEGETATION TREATMENTS: The use of hand-operated power tools and hand tools

to cut, clear, or prune herbaceous and woody plants. In manual treatments, workers cut plants above 

ground level; pull, grub, or dig out plant root systems to prevent later sprouting and regrowth; scalp at 

ground level or remove competing plants around desired vegetation; or place mulch around desired 

vegetation to limit the growth of competing vegetation. Manual vegetation treatments cause less ground 

disturbance and generally remove less vegetation than prescribed fire or mechanical treatments. 

MECHANICAL VEGETATION TREATMENTS: The use of mechanical equipment to suppress, 

inhibit, or control herbaceous and woody vegetation. The BLM uses wheeled tractors, crawler-type 

tractors, mowers, or specially designed vehicles with attached implements for such treatments.

MINERAL ENTRY: The filing of a claim on public land to obtain the right to any minerals it may 

contain.

MINERALIZATION: Evidence of the presence of minerals.

MINERAL MATERIAL DISPOSAL: The disposal through sale or free use permit of sand, gravel, 

decorative rock, or other materials defined in 43 CFR 3600.

MINERAL MATERIALS: Materials such as common varieties of sand, stone, gravel, pumice, pumicite, 

and clay that are not obtainable under the mining or leasing laws but that can be acquired under the 

Mineral Materials Act of 1947, as amended.

MINING DISTRICT: An area, usually designated by name, with described or understood boundaries, 

where minerals are found and mined under rules prescribed by the miners, consistent with the Mining 

Law of 1872. 

MINOR LINEAR LAND USE AUTHORIZATIONS: Land use authorizations which consist of 

transmission lines (consisting of 115 kV or less), water and gas pipelines (less than 10 inches in 

diameter), roads (less than 200 feet wide), and other minor utility systems.

MONITORING: The periodic observation and orderly collection of information to determine (1) the 

effects of resource management actions by tracking changing resource trends, needs, and conditions; and 

(2) the effectiveness of actions in meeting management objectives.

MOTORIZED TRAIL: A designated route that allows the use of motorcycles.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-17

MULTIPLE USE: A combination of balanced and diverse resource uses that considers long-term 

needs for renewable and nonrenewable resources including recreation, wildlife, rangeland, timber, 

minerals, and watershed protection, along with scenic, scientific, and cultural values.

MULTIUSE UTILITY CORRIDOR: The BLM’s preferred route for placing MAJOR LINEAR LAND 

USE AUTHORIZATION for utilities (i.e. pipelines and power lines) and transportation (i.e. highways and 

railroads).

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (NEPA): The federal law, effective January 1, 

1970, that established a national policy for the environment and requires federal agencies to become 

aware of the environmental ramifications of their proposed actions, to fully disclose to the public 

proposed federal actions and provide a mechanism for public input to federal decision-making, and to 

prepare environmental impact statements for every major action that would significantly affect the 

quality of the human environment.

NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT OF 1966, AS AMENDED (NHPA): A federal 

statute that established a federal program to further the efforts of private agencies and individuals in 

preserving the Nation’s historic and cultural foundations. The National Historic Preservation Act 

authorized the National Register of Historic Places, established the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation and a National Trust Fund to administer grants for historic preservation, and authorized 

the development of regulations to require federal agencies to consider the effects of federally assisted 

activities on properties included on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL: One of the three categories of national trails defined in the 

National Trails System Act of 1968 that can only be established by act of Congress and are administered 

by federal agencies, although part or all of the land base may be owned and managed by others. National 

historic trails are generally more than 100 miles long and follow as closely as possible and practicable the 

original trails or routes of travel of national historic significance. Their purpose is identifying and 

protecting the historic route and its remnants and artifacts for public use and enjoyment.

NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL CORRIDOR CONCEPT: Federal Trails Data Standards (FTDS) 

have been developed in order to describe several types of components of National Historic Trails. The 

codes NHT1, NHT2, and NHT3 are the labels used to describe these aspects. The National Historic Trail 

corridor may be comprised of two or even three of these aspects. 

NHT1 is defined as the Congressionally designated NHT route and any associated NHT heritage sites. 

NHT2 is defined as the historic route and sites where history occurred. 

NHT3 is defined as the recreation aspect of the National Trail: where the trail and/or sites can be used 

for interpretive and recreational purposes.

NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL MANAGEMENT AREA: This is an allocation based on the 

congressionally designated NHT route (NHT1), BLM inventories, and GIS view shed analysis. A National 

Historic Trail Management Area encompasses the area identified along a portion of the National 

Historic Trail that meets certain criteria. The area must include a segment of National Historic Trail that 
3. Glossary

3-18 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

qualifies as a “high potential route segment” and/ or has a “high potential historic site” within or along it 

(NHT2). The width of the National Historic Trail Management Area is defined as an area extending to 

the visual horizon from the NHT corridor on either side.

NATIONAL MONUMENT: An area designated to protect objects of scientific and historic interest 

by public proclamation of the President under the Antiquities Act of 1906, or by Congress for historic 

landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, or other objects of historic or scientific interest on public 

lands. Designation also provides for the management of these features and values.

NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT: A group of significant archaeological, historical, or architectural 

sites, within a defined geographic area, that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. 

NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES: Cultural resource properties that meet the 

National Register criteria and have been determined eligible for nomination to the National Register of 

Historic Places because of their local, state, or national significance. Eligible properties generally are 

older than 50 years and have retained their integrity. They meet one or more of four criteria- (a) 

associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; (b) 

associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; (c) embody the distinctive characteristics of a 

type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master; and (d) have yielded, 

or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES: The official list, established by the National 

Historic Preservation Act, of the Nation’s cultural resources worthy of preservation. The National 

Register lists archeological, historic, and architectural properties (i.e. districts, sites, buildings, structures, 

and objects) nominated for their local, state, or national significance by state and federal agencies and 

approved by the National Register Staff. The NPS maintains the National Register.

NATIONAL WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS SYSTEM: A system of nationally designated rivers 

and their immediate environments that have outstanding scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife, 

historical, cultural, and other similar values and are preserved in a free-flowing condition. The system 

consists of three types of streams- (1) recreation—rivers or sections of rivers that are readily accessible 

by road or railroad and that may have some development along their shorelines and may have 

undergone some impoundments or diversion in the past, (2) scenic—rivers or sections of rivers free of 

impoundments with shorelines or watersheds still largely undeveloped but accessible in places by roads, 

and (3) wild—rivers or sections of rivers free of impoundments and generally inaccessible except by 

trails with watersheds or shorelines essentially primitive and waters unpolluted.

NATIVE DIVERSITY: The diversity of species that have evolved in a given place without human 

influence. 

NATIVE SPECIES: A species that is part of an area’s original flora and fauna.

NITROGEN OXIDES (OXIDES OF NITROGEN, NO2): A general term for compounds of nitric 

oxide (NO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and other oxides of nitrogen. Nitrogen oxides are typically 

created during combustion and are major contributors to smog formation and acid deposition. NO2 is a 

criteria air pollutant and may have many adverse health effects.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-19

NON-ATTAINMENT AREA: An area in which the level of a criteria air pollutant is higher than the 

level allowed by the federal standards. A single area may have acceptable levels of one criteria air 

pollutant but unacceptable levels of one or more other criteria air pollutants. Therefore, an area can be 

both attainment and nonattainment at the same time.

NON-FUNCTIONAL: Riparian-wetland areas are considered to be in nonfunctioning condition when 

they don't provide adequate vegetation, landform, or large woody debris to dissipate stream energy 

associated with high flows and thus are not reducing erosion, improving water quality, or other normal 

characteristics of riparian areas. The absence of certain physical attributes, such as a flood plain where 

one should be, is indicators of nonfunctioning conditions.

NON-LINEAR LAND USE AUTHORIZATIONS: LUAs that are not linear in fashion and do not 

exceed five acres of total surface disturbance. These LUAs do not produce or store more than 100 

MW.

NOXIOUS WEED: The Federal Noxious Weed Act, 1974 (PL 930629) defines a noxious weed as, 

“any living stage (including seeds and reproductive parts) of a parasitic or other plant of a kind which is 

of foreign origin, is new to or not widely prevalent in the US, and can directly or indirectly injure crops, 

other useful plants, livestock, poultry or other interests of agriculture, including irrigation, navigation, 

fish and wildlife resources, or the public health.”

OBJECTIVES: The planned results to be achieved within a stated time period. Objectives are 

subordinate to goals, narrower in scope, and shorter in range. Objectives must specify time periods for 

completion, and products or achievements that are measurable. See also GOAL.

OBLIGATE: Essential, necessary, unable to exist in any other state, mode, or relationship.

OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE (OHV): 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; (4) vehicles in official use; and (5) any combat or combat support vehicle when used 

for national defense.

OFF ROAD: Cross country travel between designated routes.

OFF-ROAD VEHICLE (ORV): See OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE (OHV).

ON ROAD: Travelling on designated routes.

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES: The remains of plants and animals preserved in soils and 

sedimentary rock. Paleontological resources are important for understanding past environments, 

environmental change, and the evolution of life.
3. Glossary

3-20 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

PARTICULATE MATTER: Fine liquid or solid particles suspended in the air and consisting of dust, 

smoke, mist, fumes, and compounds containing sulfur, nitrogen, and metals. Also see PM2.5 

PARTICULATES and PM10 PARTICULATES.

PASSAGE SETTING: Passage setting provides a motorized travel corridor traversing the Back 

Country setting. This corridor is 200 feet wide (100 feet each side), centered on a motorized travel 

route designated for public use, and is available for management infrastructure in response to resource 

concerns and visitor demand. The lands are generally natural in appearance and may see minor to 

moderate alterations over the life of the land use plan due to land use authorizations and BLM 

management actions.

PASTURE: A grazing area that is separated from other areas by fencing or natural barriers.

PERENNIAL PLANT: A plant that has a life cycle of three or more years. Also see ANNUAL 

PLANT.

PERENNIAL STREAM: A stream that flows from source to mouth throughout the year; a stream 

that normally has water in its channel at all times.

PERMIT: A short-term revocable authorization to use public lands for specified purposes.

PERMITTED USE: The forage allocated by, or under the guidance of, an applicable resourcemanagement plan for livestock grazing in an allotment under a permit or lease and is expressed in animal 

unit months (AUMs).

PERMITTEE: A person or company permitted to graze livestock or conduct commercial recreation 

on public land.

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.

PLANT SUCCESSION: The process of vegetation development by which an area becomes 

successively occupied by different plant communities of higher ecological order.

PLANT VIGOR: The relative wellbeing and health of a plant as reflected by its ability to manufacture 

enough food for growth and maintenance.

PM10 PARTICULATES: A criteria air pollutant consisting of small particles with an aerodynamic 

diameter of 10 microns or less. Their size allows them to enter the air sacs deep within the lungs where 

they may be deposited in have adverse health effects. These particles include dust, soot, and other tiny 

bits of solid materials in the air.

PM2.5 PARTICULATES: Tiny particles with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns or less. These 

particles penetrate most deeply into the lungs.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-21

POPULATION: A group of interbreeding organisms of the same kind occupying a particular space; a

group of individuals of a species living in a certain area.

POTENTIAL NATURAL COMMUNITY (PNC): The stable biotic community that would become 

established on an ecological site if all succession stages were completed without human interference 

under present environmental conditions. The PNC is the vegetation community best adapted to fully 

use the resources of an ecological site.

PRESCRIBED FIRE (BURNING): The planned applying of fire to rangeland vegetation and fuels 

under specified conditions of fuels, weather, and other variables to allow the fire to remain in a 

predetermined area to achieve such site-specific objectives as controlling certain plant species; 

enhancing growth, reproduction, or vigor of plant species; managing fuel loads; and managing vegetation 

community types.

PRIMITIVE RECREATION: Recreation that provides opportunities for isolation from the evidence 

of humans, a vastness of scale, feeling a part of the natural environment, having a high degree of 

challenge and risk, and using outdoor skills. Primitive recreation is characterized by meeting nature on 

its own terms, without comfort or convenience of facilities.

PRIMITIVE ROAD: A linear route managed for use by four-wheel drive or high-clearance vehicles. 

Primitive roads do not normally meet any BLM road design standards.

PRIMITIVE ROUTE: Any transportation linear feature located within areas that have been identified 

as having wilderness characteristics and not meeting the wilderness inventory road definition. 

PRIORITY HABITAT: Includes fish and wildlife habitats requiring protective measures and/or 

management guidelines to ensure habitat availability.

PRIORITY WILDLIFE SPECIES: Includes fish and wildlife species requiring protective measures 

and/or management guidelines to ensure their perpetuation. Moreover, priority wildlife species includes 

State Endangered, Threatened, Sensitive, and Candidate species; animal aggregations considered 

vulnerable; and those species of recreational, commercial, or tribal importance that are vulnerable.

PROPERLY FUNCTIONING CONDITION: Riparian-wetland areas are functioning properly when 

enough vegetation, landform, or large woody debris is present to dissipate stream energy associated 

with high water flows, thereby reducing erosion and improving water quality; filter sediment, capture 

bed-load, and aid floodplain development; improve floodwater retention and groundwater recharge; 

develop root masses that stabilize stream banks against cutting action; develop diverse ponding and 

channel characteristics to provide the habitat and the water depth, duration, and temperature necessary 

for fish production, waterfowl breeding, and other uses; and support greater biodiversity. The 

functioning condition of riparian-wetland areas is influenced by geomorphic features, soil, water, and 

vegetation.

Uplands function properly when the existing vegetation and ground cover maintain soil conditions 

capable of sustaining natural biotic communities. The functioning condition of uplands is influenced by 

geographic features, soil, water, and vegetation.
3. Glossary

3-22 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

PUBLIC LANDS: 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.

RANGE IMPROVEMENT: An authorized physical modification or treatment which is designed to 

improve production of forage; change vegetation composition; control patterns of use; provide water; 

stabilize soil and water conditions; restore, protect and improve the condition of rangeland ecosystems 

to benefit livestock, wild horses and burros, and fish and wildlife. Range improvements may be structural 

or nonstructural. A structural improvement requires placement or construction to facilitate the 

management or control the distribution and movement of animals. Such improvements may include 

fences, wells, troughs, reservoirs, pipelines, and cattle guards. Nonstructural improvements consist of 

practices or treatments that improve resource conditions. Such improvements include seedings; 

chemical, mechanical, and biological plant control; prescribed burning; water spreaders; pitting; chiseling; 

and contour furrowing.

RANGELAND: A kind of land on which the native vegetation, climax, or natural potential consists 

predominately of grasses, grass like plants, forbs, or shrubs. Rangeland includes lands revegetated 

naturally or artificially to provide a plant cover that is managed like native vegetation. Rangelands may 

consist of natural grasslands, savannas, shrub lands, moist deserts, tundra, alpine communities, coastal 

marshes, and wet meadows. 

RANGELAND STUDIES: Any study methods accepted by the authorized officer for collecting data 

on actual use, utilization, climatic conditions, other special events, and trends to determine whether 

management objectives are being met.

RAPTORS: Birds of prey.

RECORD OF DECISION: A document signed by a responsible official recording a decision that was 

preceded by the preparing of an environmental impact statement.

RECREATIONAL TARGET SHOOTING: The discharge of any firearm for any lawful, recreational 

purpose other than the lawful taking of a game animal. Recreational target shooting does not include 

firearms use employed in accordance with state hunting regulations and policy regarding recreational 

target shooting does not apply to hunters in pursuit of game with firearms that are being employed in 

accordance with such regulations.

RECREATION AND PUBLIC PURPOSES ACT of 1926 (44 Stat. 741, as amended; 43 USC 869 

et seq.): An act of Congress that allows lease or acquisition of public land to be used for recreation or 

public purposes by local government entities (county or city governments) and nonprofit organizations.

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 non-participating 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.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-23

RECREATION MANAGEMENT ZONES (RMZs): Subunits within a SRMA or ERMA managed for 

distinctly different recreation products. Recreation products are comprised of recreation opportunities, 

the natural resource and community settings within which they occur, and the administrative and service 

environment created by all affecting recreation-tourism providers, within which recreation participation 

occurs.

RECREATION NICHE: The place or position within the strategically targeted recreation-tourism 

market for each SRMA that is most suitable (i.e., capable of producing certain specific kinds of recreation 

opportunities) and appropriate (i.e., most responsive to identified visitor or resident customers), given 

available supply and current demand, for the production of specific recreation opportunities and the 

sustainable maintenance of accompanying natural resource and/or community setting character.

RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES: Favorable circumstances enabling visitors’ engagement in a 

leisure activity to realize immediate psychological experiences and attain more lasting, value-added 

beneficial outcomes.

RECREATION OPPORTUNITY SPECTRUM (ROS): One of the existing tools for classifying 

recreation environments (existing and desired) along a continuum ranging from primitive, low-use, and 

inconspicuous administration to urban, high-use, and a highly visible administrative presence. This 

continuum recognizes variation among various components of any landscape’s physical, social and 

administrative attributes; and resulting descriptions (of existing conditions) and prescriptions (of desired 

future conditions) define recreation setting character. Descriptions of settings follow:

Primitive:

• Remoteness: An area designated by a line generally 3 miles from all open roads, railroads, and 

motorized trails.

• Evidence of Humans: Setting is essentially an unmodified natural environment. Evidence of 

humans would be unnoticed by an observer wandering through the area.

• Evidence of trails is acceptable but should not exceed standard to carry expected use.

• Structures are extremely rare.

• Social: Usually less than six parties per day encountered on trails and less than three parties 

visible at campsites.

• Managerial: Onsite regimentation is low with controls primarily offsite.

Semi-primitive Nonmotorized: 

• Remoteness: An area designated by a line generally 1⁄2 mile from any road, railroad, or trail open 

to public motorized use. (The guideline for applying the 1⁄2 mile criterion is to use 1⁄2 mile except 

where topographic or physical features closer than 1⁄2 miles adequately screen out the sights and 

sounds of humans and make access more difficult and slower. For example, if a ridge is 1⁄4 mile 

from the road, use the ridge instead of the 1⁄2 mile.) 

• Any roads, railroads, or trails within the semi-primitive nonmotorized areas will have the 

following characteristics:

• Closed to public motorized use, and 
3. Glossary

3-24 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

• Are reclaimed, or in the process of reclaiming (when reclaiming will harmonize with the natural 

appearing environment). Some examples are old logging roads, old railroad beds, old access 

routes to abandoned campsites, temporary roads, and gated roads that are used for occasional 

administrative access.

• Evidence of Humans: Natural setting may have subtle modifications that would be noticed but 

not draw the attention of an observer wandering through the area.

• Little or no evidence of primitive roads and the motorized use of trails and primitive roads.

• Structures are rare and isolated.

• Social: Usually 6-15 parties per day encountered on trails and six or fewer parties visible from 

campsite.

• Managerial: Onsite regimentation and controls present but subtle.

Semi-Primitive Motorized:

• Remoteness: An area designed by a line generally 1⁄2 mile from open better than primitive roads. 

(The guideline for applying the 1⁄2 mile criterion is to consistently use 1⁄2 mile where topographic 

or physical features closer than 1⁄2 mile adequately screen out the sights and sounds of humans, 

e.g. a ridge 1⁄4 mile from the road).

• Contains open primitive roads that are not maintained for the use of standard passenger-type 

vehicles, normally OHVs and high-clearance vehicles, e.g. an old pickup with high clearance. 

These open roads are generally tracks, ruts, or rocky-rough surface and upgraded and not 

drained. The roadbeds and cuts are mostly vegetated with grass or native material unless they 

are too rocky for vegetation. The roads harmonize with the natural environment. Examples 

include old logging roads from before specified road years, old revegetated railroad beds, old 

access roads to abandoned home-sites, temporary logging roads that are revegetated, and low 

standard administrative roads (normally used for access to wildlife openings).

• Evidence of Humans: Natural setting may have moderately dominant alterations but would not 

draw the attention of motorized observers on trails and primitive roads within the area. Any 

closed improved roads must be managed to revegetate and harmonize with the natural 

environment. 

• Strong evidence of primitive roads and the motorized use of trails and primitive roads.

• Structures are rare and isolated.

• Social: Low to moderate contact frequency.

• Managerial: Onsite regimentation and controls present but subtle.

Roaded Natural:

• Remoteness: No criteria.

• Evidence of Humans: Natural setting may have modifications, which range from being easily 

noticed to strongly dominant to observers within the area. But from sensitive travel routes and 

use areas these alterations would remain unnoticed or visually subordinate.

• There is strong evidence of designed roads, highways, or both.

• Structures are generally scattered, remaining visually subordinate or unnoticed to the sensitive 

travel route observer. Structures may include utility corridors or microwave installations.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-25

• Social: Frequency of contact is- Moderate to High on roads; Low to Moderate on trails and away 

from roads.

• Managerial: Onsite regimentation and controls are noticeable but harmonize with the natural 

environment. 

Rural:

• Remoteness: No criteria.

• Evidence of Humans: Natural setting is culturally modified to the point that it is dominant to the 

sensitive travel route observer. This setting may include pastoral, agricultural, intensively 

managed wild landscapes, or utility corridors. Pedestrian or other slow-moving observers are 

constantly within view of culturally changed landscape.

• There is strong evidence of designed roads, highways, or both.

• Structures are readily apparent and may range from scattered to small dominant clusters, 

including utility corridors, farm buildings, microwave installations, and recreation sites.

• Social: Frequency of contact is: Moderate to High developed sites, on roads and trails, and water 

surfaces; Moderate away from developed sites.

• Managerial: Regimentation and controls obvious and numerous, largely in harmony with the 

human-made environment.

Urban: 

• Remoteness: No criteria.

• Evidence of Humans: Setting is strongly structure dominated. Natural or natural appearing 

elements may play an important role but be visually subordinate. Pedestrian and other slow 

moving observers are constantly within view of artificial enclosure of spaces.

• There is strong evidence of designed roads and/or highways and streets.

• Structures and structure complexes are dominant.

• Social: Large numbers of users onsite and in nearby areas.

• Managerial: Regimentation and controls obvious and numerous.

RECRUITMENT: The increase in population caused by natural reproduction or immigration.

RENEWABLE ENERGY: Energy which comes from natural resources such as sunlight, wind, rain, 

tides, and geothermal heat, which are renewable (naturally replenished).

RESOURCE ADVISORY COUNCIL (RAC): A citizen-based group of 10 to 15 members chartered 

under the Federal Advisory Committee Act and appointed by the secretary of the interior to forward 

advice on public land planning and management issues to the BLM. Council membership reflects a 

balance of various interests concerned with the management of the public lands and users of the public 

lands.

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP): The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (43 

CFR 1601.0-5 (k)) details the form and contents of an RMP. It generally establishes that the document 

will provide guidance on:
3. Glossary

3-26 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

• Land areas for limited, restricted or exclusive use; designation, including ACEC designation; and 

transfer from Bureau of Land Management Administration;

• Allowable resource uses (either singly or in combination) and related levels of production or 

use to be maintained;

• Resource condition goals and objectives to be attained;

• Program constraints and general management practices needed to achieve the above items;

• Need for an area to be covered by more detailed and specific plans;

• Support action, including such measures as resource protection, access development, realty 

action, cadastral survey, etc., as necessary to achieve the above;

• General implementation sequences, where carrying out a planned action is dependent upon 

prior accomplishment of another planned action; and

• Intervals and standards for monitoring and evaluating the plan to determine the effectiveness of 

the plan and the need for amendment or revision.

• It is not a final implementation decision on actions which require further specific plans, process 

steps, or decisions under specific provisions of law and regulations.

REST: See GRAZING REST.

RESTORATION (CULTURAL RESOURCE): The process of accurately reestablishing the form 

and details of a property or portion of a property together with its setting, as it appeared in a particular 

period of time. Restoration may involve removing later work that is not in itself significant and replacing 

missing original work. Also see STABILIZATION (CULTURAL RESOURCE).

REST-ROTATION GRAZING: A grazing system in which one part of the range is ungrazed for an 

entire grazing year or longer while other parts are grazed for a portion or all of a growing season. 

Distinguished from deferment, in which non-use occurs only during part of the grazing season (see 

DEFERMENT). 

RIGHT-OF-WAY: A permit or easement that authorizes the use of lands for certain specified 

purposes, commonly for pipelines, roads, telephone lines, or power lines.

RIPARIAN: Pertaining to or situated on or along the bank of streams, lakes, and reservoirs.

RIPARIAN AREA: A form of wetland transition between permanently saturated wetlands and upland 

areas. Riparian areas exhibit vegetation or physical characteristics that reflect the influence of permanent 

surface or subsurface water. Typical riparian areas include lands along, adjacent to, or contiguous with 

perennially and intermittently flowing rivers and streams, glacial potholes, and the shores of lakes and 

reservoirs with stable water levels. Excluded are ephemeral streams or washes that lack vegetation and 

depend on free water in the soil.

ROAD (Travel Management definition): A linear route declared a road by the owner, managed for 

used by low-clearance vehicles having four or more wheels, and maintained for regular and continuous 

use.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-27

ROAD (Wilderness Inventory definition): A route that has been improved and maintained by 

mechanical means to insure relatively regular and continuous use. Refer to BLM IM 2011-154, 

Attachment 1 for additional description of this definition.

ROADSIDE: A general term denoting the area adjoining the outer edge of the road.

ROTATIONAL GRAZING: A grazing system that involves scheduled movement of grazing animals 

from one pasture to another. Utilizing rotational grazing can improve livestock distribution while 

incorporating rest period for new forage.

ROUTE: represents a group or set of roads, trails, and primitive roads that represents the BLM 

transportation system. Generically, components of the transportation system are described as “routes”.

RUNOFF: Precipitation, snow melt or irrigation water that appears in uncontrolled surface streams or 

rivers.

SALABLE MINERALS: Common variety minerals on public lands, such as sand and gravel, which are 

used mainly for construction and are disposed of by sales or special permits to local governments.

SCIENTIFIC DATA RECOVERY: See CULTURAL RESOURCE DATA RECOVERY.

SCOPING: An early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed in an 

environmental impact statement and the significant issues related to a proposed action.

SEASONAL GRAZING: A grazing system that allows livestock grazing on a particular area for only 

part of the year.

SEASON OF USE: The time period when livestock grazing is permitted on a given range area as 

specified in the grazing permit.

SECTION: 640 acres, 1 mile square.

SECTION 2920 PERMIT: Revocable authorizations, for up to three years to permit land uses that 

involve either little or no land improvement or construction, or investment which can be amortized 

within the terms of the permit. A permit conveys no possessory interest. The authorized officer may 

renew it at his/her discretion or revoke it in accordance with its terms or the provisions of 43 CFR 

2920.9-3. There are no limitations on the amount of land that maybe included in a permit; however, the 

area should be limited to the size justified.

SECTION 7 CONSULTATION: The requirement of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act that 

all federal agencies consult with the US Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries 

Service if a proposed action might affect a federally listed species or its critical habitat. 

SEDIMENT: Solid material that originates mostly from disintegrated rocks and is transported by, 

suspended in, or deposited from water. Sediment includes chemical and biochemical precipitates and 

decomposed organic material such as humus.
3. Glossary

3-28 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

SEDIMENTARY ROCKS: Rocks, such as sandstone, limestone, and shale, that are formed from 

sediments or transported fragments deposited in water.

SEDIMENTATION: The process or action of depositing sediment.

SEDIMENT LOAD (SEDIMENT DISCHARGE): The amount of sediment, measured in dry weight 

or by volume, which is transported through a stream cross-section in a given time. Sediment load 

consists of sediment suspended in water and sediment that moves by sliding, rolling, or bounding on or 

near the streambed.

SEDIMENT TRANSPORT: The movement of mineral and organic solid materials in a stream.

SEDIMENT YIELD: The amount of sediment removed from a watershed over a specified period, 

usually expressed as tons, acre-feet, or cubic yards of sediment per unit of drainage area per year.

SEEPS: Wet areas, normally not flowing, arising from an underground water source.

SENSITIVE SOILS: Soil types prone to erosion, such as from surface disturbing activities and vehicle 

use, and have a low soil loss tolerance rate. A tolerable soil loss is the maximum annual amount of soil, 

which can be removed before the long term natural soil productivity is adversely affected based on the 

Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) (Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs web site, 

http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/engineer/facts/00-001.htm last visited 2/21/2012).

SHOULDER: The portion of the roadway contiguous to the travel way for accommodation of stopped 

vehicles.

SIKES ACT OF 1974: A federal law that promoted federal-state cooperation in managing wildlife 

habitats on both BLM and Forest Service lands. The act requires BLM to work with state wildlife 

agencies to plan the development and maintenance of wildlife habitats and has as its main tool the 

habitat management plan.

SOIL ERODIBILITY: The predisposition of a particular soil to be transported by wind or water if it is 

disturbed and exposed to the elements.

SOIL INFILTRATION: The ability of soil to absorb moisture that falls on it as precipitation.

SOIL MOISTURE STORAGE: The water content stored in a soil.

SOIL PRODUCTIVITY: The capacity of a soil in its normal environment to produce a specified plant 

or sequence of plants under a specified system of management.

SOIL STABILITY: A qualitative term used to describe a soil’s resistance to change. Soil stability is 

determined by intrinsic properties such as aspect, depth, elevation, organic matter content, parent 

material, slope, structure, texture, and vegetation.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-29

SOIL STRUCTURE: The physical constitution of soil material as expressed by size, shape, and the 

degree of development of primary soil particles and voids into naturally or artificially formed structural 

units. 

SPECIAL CULTURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AREA (SCRMA): An area containing 

cultural resources that are of special importance for public use, scientific use, traditional use or other 

uses as defined in BLM Manual 8110.4.

SPECIAL RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREAS (SRMAs): 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). Both 

land use plan decisions and subsequent implementing actions for recreation in each SRMA are geared to 

a strategically identified primary market: destination, community, or are undeveloped.

SPECIAL RECREATION PERMIT (SRP): An authorization that allows for specific nonexclusive 

permitted recreational uses of the public lands and related waters. SRPs are issued to control visitor 

use, protect recreational and natural resources, provide for the health and safety of visitors, and 

accommodate commercial recreational uses.

SRP TYPES AND DEFINITIONS: 

Commercial Use: The activity, service, or use is commercial if: 

• Any person, group, or organization makes or attempts to make a profit, receive money, 

amortize equipment, or obtain goods or services, as compensation from participants in 

recreational activities occurring on public lands led, sponsored, or organized by that person, 

group, or organization;

• Anyone collects a fee or receives other compensation that is not strictly a sharing of actual 

expenses, or exceeds actual expenses, incurred for the purposes of the activity, service, or use;

• There is paid public advertising to seek participants; or 

• Participants pay for a duty of care or an expectation of safety.

Competitive Use: Any organized, sanctioned, or structured use, event, or activity on public land in which 

two or more contestants compete and either or both of the following elements apply:

• Participants register, enter, or complete an application for the event;

• A predetermined course or area is designated;

• Or, one or more individuals contesting an established record such as for speed or endurance.

Organized Group Activity and Event Use: A structured, ordered, consolidated, or scheduled event on, 

or occupation of, public lands for the purpose of recreational use that is not commercial or competitive.

Vending: The sale of goods or services, not from a permanent structure, associated with recreation on 

the public lands or related waters, such as food, beverages, clothing, firewood, souvenirs, filming or 

photographs (video or still), or equipment repairs.
3. Glossary

3-30 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES: Plant or animal species listed as threatened, endangered, candidate, or 

sensitive by federal or state governments. By policy, the BLM has certain responsibilities for all special 

status species. BLM sensitive species are not covered by any other “safety net” of status designation; 

therefore, the Arizona BLM Sensitive Species List does not include species that are already federally 

listed or state listed.

SPLIT-ESTATE: Land whose surface rights and mineral rights are owned by different entities.

STABILIZATION (CULTURAL RESOURCE): Protective techniques usually applied to structures 

and ruins to keep them in their existing condition, prevent further deterioration, and provide structural 

safety without significant rebuilding. Capping mud-mortared masonry walls with concrete mortar is an 

example of a stabilization technique. Also see RESTORATION (CULTURAL RESOURCE).

STABILIZATION (SOIL): Chemical or mechanical treatment to increase or maintain the stability of 

a mass of soil or otherwise improve its engineering properties.

STAGING AREA: An area where participants in an activity gather and make final preparations for the 

activity.

STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR RANGELAND HEALTH: See ARIZONA 

STANDARDS FOR RANGELAND HEALTH AND GUIDELINES FOR GRAZING ADMINISTRATION.

STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS: Areas may be open to leasing or available for 

permitted uses with no specific management decisions defined in a Resource Management Plan; 

however, these areas are subject to lease or permit terms and conditions as defined on the 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) or land use authorization permit.

STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER (SHPO): The official within and authorized by 

each state at the request of the Secretary of the Interior to act as liaison for the National Historic 

Preservation Act. Also see NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT OF 1966, AS AMENDED 

(NHPA).

STIPULATION: A condition of lease or permit issuance that provides a level of protection for other 

resource values or land uses by restricting surface disturbing activities during certain times or locations 

or to avoid unacceptable impacts, to an extent greater than standard lease terms or regulations. A 

stipulation is an enforceable term of the lease contract or land use authorization, supersedes any 

inconsistent provisions of the standard lease form, and is attached to and made a part of the lease or 

permit. Stipulations further implement BLM’s regulatory authority to protect resources or resource 

values. Stipulations are developed through the land use planning process.

STOCKING RATE: The number of specific kinds and classes of animals grazing or using a unit of land 

for a specific time period. Stocking rates may be expressed as a ratio, such as of animal units/section, 

acres/animal unit, or acres/animal unit month.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-31

STOCK TANK (POND): A water impoundment created by building a dam, digging a depression, or 

both, to provide water for livestock or wildlife.

STREAM BANK: The portion of a stream channel that restricts the sideward movement of water at 

normal water levels. The stream bank’s gradient often exceeds 45° and exhibits a distinct break in slope 

from the stream bottom.

STREAM BANK STABILITY: A stream bank’s relative resistance to erosion, which is measured as a 

percentage of alteration to stream banks.

STRUCTURAL DIVERSITY: The diversity of the composition, abundance, spacing, and other 

attributes of plants in a community.

SUBSURFACE: Of or pertaining to rock or mineral deposits which generally are found below the 

ground surface.

SUCCESSION: See PLANT SUCCESSION.

SUPPLEMENTAL WILDERNESS VALUES: Resources not required for an area to be designated 

a wilderness but that are considered in assessing an area’s wilderness potential. Such values include 

ecological, geologic, and other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value.

SURFACE-DISTURBING ACTIVITY: Surface-disturbing activities are those that normally result in 

more than negligible disturbance to public lands and accelerate the natural erosive process. Surface 

disturbance may, but does not always, require reclamation. These activities normally involve use or 

occupancy of the surface, cause disturbance to soils and vegetation, and are usually caused by motorized 

or mechanical actions. They include, but are not limited to: the use of mechanized earth-moving 

equipment; truck-mounted drilling and seismic exploration equipment; off-road vehicle travel in areas 

designated as limited or closed to off-road vehicle use; vegetation treatments; construction of facilities 

such as power lines, pipelines, oil and gas wells; recreation sites, improvements for range and wildlife; 

new road construction; and use of pyrotechnics and explosives. Surface disturbance is not normally 

caused by casual-use activities. Activities that are not considered surface-disturbing include, but are not 

limited to: livestock grazing, cross-country hiking, minimum impact filming, and vehicular travel on 

designated routes.

TAKE: As defined by the Endangered Species Act, “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, 

capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.”

TARGET SPECIES: Plant species to be reduced or eliminated by a vegetation treatment. 

TEMPORARY NON-USE: The authorized withholding, on an annual basis, of all or a portion of 

permitted livestock use in response to a request of the permittee or lessee.

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 BLM and to achieve standards for 
3. Glossary

3-32 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

rangeland health and ensure conformance with guidelines for grazing administration. See also 

STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

THREATENED SPECIES: Any plant or animal species likely to become endangered within the 

foreseeable future throughout all or a part of its range and designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service under the Endangered Species Act. Also see ENDANGERED SPECIES.

TINAJA: A small pool in a rocky hollow, usually along an ephemeral water course where it runs 

through exposed bedrock that holds water into the dry season.

TRAIL: (Interagency definition) Linear route managed for human powered, stock, or off highway vehicle 

forms of recreation or for historic or heritage values. Trails are not generally managed for use by four 

wheel drive or high clearance vehicles.

Sonoran Desert National Monument Trail Definition: Linear route managed for foot, horseback, and 

pack stock. Motorized and mechanized forms of travel are prohibited, except for wheeled game carriers 

and handcarts.

Designated Wilderness Area Trail Definition: Linear route managed for travel by foot, horseback and, 

pack stock. Mechanized forms of travel (e.g. mountain bikes, wheeled game carriers, handcarts, and hang 

gliders) are prohibited in wilderness areas. Motorized travel is prohibited.

TRAILHEAD: The terminus of a hiking, horse, or bicycle trail accessible by motor vehicle and 

sometimes having parking, signs, a visitor register, and camping and sanitary facilities.

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM: Represents the sum of the BLM’s recognized inventory of linear 

features (roads, primitive roads, and trails) formally recognized, designated, and approved.

TRAVEL MANAGEMENT AREAS (TMA): The TMAs are polygons or delineated areas where 

travel management (either motorized or nonmotorized) needs particular focus. These areas may be 

designated as open, closed, or limited to motorized use and will typically have an identified or designated 

network of roads, trails, ways, and other routes that provide for public access and travel across the 

planning area. All designated travel routes within TMAs should have a clearly identified need and 

purpose as well as clearly defined activity types, modes of travel, and seasons or times for allowable 

access or other limitations. 

TREAD LIGHTLY!TM: A not-for-profit organization whose mission is to increase awareness of ways 

to enjoy the great outdoors while minimizing human impacts.

TREND: The direction of change, over time, either toward or away from desired management 

objectives.

UNAUTHORIZED USE: Any use of the public lands not authorized or permitted.

UNDERSTORY: Plants growing under the canopy of other plants. Understory usually refers to 

grasses, forbs, and low shrubs under a tree or brush canopy.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-33

UNDEVELOPED RECREATION-TOURISM MARKET: National, regional, and/or local 

recreation-tourism visitors, communities, or other constituents who value public lands for the 

distinctive kinds of dispersed recreation produced by the vast size and largely open, undeveloped 

character of their recreation settings. Major investments in facilities are excluded within SRMAs where 

the BLM’s strategy is to target demonstrated undeveloped recreation-tourism market demand. Here, 

recreation management actions are geared toward meeting primary recreation-tourism market demand 

to sustain distinctive recreation setting characteristics; however, major investments in visitor services 

are authorized both to sustain those distinctive setting characteristics and to maintain visitor freedom to 

choose where to go and what to do—all in response to demonstrated demand for undeveloped 

recreation.

UPLANDS: Lands at higher elevations than the alluvial plain or low stream terrace; all lands outside 

the riparian-wetland and aquatic zones.

URBAN INTERFACE (WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE): The line, area, or zone where 

structures and other human development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland or vegetation. 

This interface creates conflicts and complicates fighting wildfires and conducting prescribed burns, as 

well as all other natural resource management activities.

USABLE FORAGE: That portion of the forage that can be grazed without damage to the basic 

resources; may vary with season of use, species, and associated species.

UTILITY CORRIDOR: The BLM’s preferred route for placing land use authorizations for major linear 

utilities (i.e. pipelines and power lines). See also DESIGNATED MULTIUSE UTILITY CORRIDOR.

UTILITY-SCALE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT: Utility-scale renewable energy

facilities (managed as a land use authorization), where the proponent has signed a purchase power 

agreement with a utility company to sell power. These facilities typically produce more than 100 MW.

UTILIZATION (FORAGE): The proportion of the current year’s forage consumed or destroyed by 

grazing animals. Utilization is usually expressed as a percentage.

VALID EXISTING RIGHTS: Locatable mineral development rights or land use authorizations that 

existed when the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) was enacted on October 21, 1976. 

Some areas are segregated from entry and location under the Mining Law to protect certain values or 

allow certain uses. Mining claims that existed as of the effective date of the segregation may still be valid 

if they can meet the test of discovery of a valuable mineral required under the Mining Law. Determining 

the validity of mining claims located on segregated lands requires BLM to conduct a valid existing rights 

determination.

VANDALISM (CULTURAL RESOURCE): Malicious damage or the unauthorized collecting, 

excavating, or defacing of cultural resources. Section 6 of the Archaeological Resources Protection Act 

states that “no person may excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or deface any archaeological 

resource located on public lands or Indian lands...unless such activity is pursuant to a permit issued 

under section 4 of this Act.”
3. Glossary

3-34 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

VEGETATION STRUCTURE: The composition of an area’s vegetation--plant species, growth 

forms, abundance, vegetation types, and spatial arrangement.

VEGETATION TREATMENTS: Treatments that improve vegetation condition or production. Such 

treatments may include seedings; prescribed burning; or chemical, mechanical, and biological plant 

control.

VEGETATION TYPE: A plant community with distinguishable characteristics.

VIABILITY: The capability of living, developing, growing, or germinating under favorable conditions.

VIEWSHED: The entire area visible from a viewpoint.

VISITOR DAY: 12 visitor hours, which may be aggregated continuously, intermittently, or 

simultaneously by one or more people.

VISUAL ASPECT: The visual first impression of vegetation at a particular time or seen from a specific 

point. 

VISUAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (VRM): The planning, design, and implementing of 

management objectives to provide acceptable levels of visual impacts for all BLM resource management 

activities.

VISUAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (VRM) CLASSES: Categories assigned to public lands 

based on scenic quality, sensitivity level, and distance zones. There are four classes. Each class has an 

objective which prescribes the amount of change allowed in the characteristic landscape.

Class I: (Preservation) provides for natural, ecological changes only. This class includes wilderness areas, 

some natural areas, some wild and scenic rivers, and other similar sites where landscape modification 

should be restricted.

Class II: (Retention of the landscape character) includes areas where changes in any of the basic 

elements (form, line, color, or texture) caused by management activities should not be evident in the 

characteristic landscape.

Class III: (Partial retention of the landscape character) includes areas where changes in the basic 

elements caused by management activities may be evident in the characteristic landscape. But the 

changes should remain subordinate to the existing landscape character.

Class IV: (Modification of the landscape character) includes areas where changes may subordinate the 

original composition and character. But the changes should reflect what could be a natural occurrence in 

the characteristic landscape.

WATER DEVELOPMENTS: Construction of artificial, or modification of natural water sources to 

provide reliable, accessible water for livestock, wildlife, or people.
3. Glossary

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 3-35

WATER QUALITY: Term used to describe the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of 

water in respect to its suitability for a particular purpose.

WATER RIGHT: The right to use a specific quantity of water occurring in a water supply, on a 

specific time schedule, at a specific place and putting it to a specific beneficial use.

WATERSHED (CATCHMENT): A topographically delineated area that is drained by a stream 

system, that is, the total land area above some point on a stream or river that drains water past that 

point. The watershed is a hydrologic unit often used as a physical-biological unit and a socioeconomicpolitical unit for planning and managing natural resources.

WATERSHED CONDITION (WATERSHED HEALTH): The comparison of watershed

processes to normal or expected measurements of properties such as soil cover, erosion rate, runoff 

rate, and groundwater table elevation; an assessment or categorization of an area by erosion conditions, 

erosion hazards, and the soil moisture/temperature regime.

WATERSHED FUNCTION: The combination of processes attributed to watersheds as part of the 

hydrologic cycle, including interception of rain by plants, rocks, and litter; surface storage by the soil; 

groundwater storage; stream channel storage; soil evaporation; plant transpiration; and runoff. These 

processes affect the following properties of the watershed: runoff rate, water infiltration rate, soil 

building rate, soil erosion rate, groundwater recharge rate, groundwater discharge rate, water table 

elevation, and surface water discharge. These properties in turn affect plant communities through soil 

attributes, including soil parent material, soil moisture, and nutrients; stream and rivers through flooding 

duration and magnitude, as well as sediment load, which structures the dimension, pattern, and profile of 

channels; and lakes and reservoirs through sedimentation and nutrient input.

WEED: Any plant that interferes with management objectives. A weed may be native or non-native, 

invasive or passive, or non-noxious. 

WETLANDS: An area that is inundated or saturated by surface or ground water often and long 

enough to support and that under normal circumstances supports a prevalence of vegetation typically 

adapted for life in saturated soil. Wetlands include marshes, shallows, swamps, lake shores, bogs, 

muskegs, wet meadows, estuaries, cienegas, and riparian areas.

WILD AND SCENIC RIVER CORRIDOR: See NATIONAL WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS 

SYSTEM.

WILDCAT DUMPSITE: A non-permitted dumping on federally managed land.

WILDERNESS CHARACTERISTICS: Attributes defined in Section 2(c) of the Wilderness Act, 

including the area’s size, its apparent naturalness, and its outstanding opportunities for solitude or a 

primitive and unconfined type of recreation. Wilderness characteristics may also include supplemental 

values such as ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value 

that may be present but are not required.
3. Glossary

3-36 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Naturalness: The degree to which an area generally appears to have been affected primarily by the 

forces of nature with the imprint of people’s work substantially unnoticeable.

Solitude: The state of being alone or remote from others; isolation. A lonely or secluded place.

Primitive and Unconfined Recreation: Nonmotorized, non-mechanized (except as provided by law), and 

undeveloped types of recreation activities.

WILDFIRE: The unplanned ignition of a wildland fire (such as a fire caused by lightning, volcanoes, 

unauthorized and accidental human-caused fires) and escaped prescribed fires.

WILD FREE-ROAMING HORSES AND BURROS: Wild horses and burros are managed in a 

manner that assures significant progress is made toward achieving the Land Health Standards for upland 

vegetation and riparian plant communities, watershed function, and habitat quality for animal 

populations, as well as other site-specific or landscape-level objectives, including those necessary to 

protect and manage Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species.

WILDLAND FIRE: A general term describing any non-structure fire, other than prescribed fire, that 

occurs in the wildland. Wildland fires are categorized into two distinct types:

Wildfires- unplanned ignitions or prescribed fires that are declared wildfires.

Prescribed Fires- Planned ignitions.

WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE (WUI): Areas where human structures and natural fuels 

interface or intermix with each other. This interface occurs mainly within 66 to 200 feet of houses, 

where fire most directly threatens houses and where a defensible zone can be developed.

WILDLIFE: A broad term that includes birds, reptiles, amphibians, and non-domesticated mammals.

WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS (WHAs): An area that offers feeding, roosting, breeding, nesting, 

and refuge areas for a variety of wildlife species native to an area. Referred to as Wildlife Management 

Areas in prior plans.

WITHDRAWAL: Withholding an area of federal land from settlement, sale, location, or entry under 

some or all of the general land laws, for the purpose of limiting activities under those laws in order to 

maintain other public values in the area or reserving the area for a particular public purpose or program; 

or transferring jurisdiction over an area of federal land, other than property governed by the Federal 

Property and Administrative Services Act, from one department, bureau, or agency to another 

department, bureau, or agency. See also SEGREGATION.

XERORIPARIAN: An area in a drainage that supports plant species more characteristic of uplands 

than wetlands, but that is more densely vegetated than areas removed from the drainage. Any flows in 

these channels are characteristically ephemeral but water may also be subsurface and the drainage may 

not flow.
September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 4-1 

4. LIST OF PREPARERS

[= Gill Sans MT / 11pt / bold / Small Caps / Title Case / exactly 14pt line spacing / no indentation] 

DO NOT DELETE THIS PAGE from the MS Word file, as this is what marks Heading 1 for the 

table of contents. (Do delete this page later from the Adobe Acrobat [pdf] file.) 
4. List of Preparers

4-2 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

THROW THIS PAGE AWAY & DELETE FROM PDF
September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 4-1 

4. LIST OF PREPARERS

Table 4-1

List of Preparers

Name Degree Role

Preparers: 2011 DRMP/EIS and 2012 PRMP/FEIS

Bureau of Land Management, Management Team

Angelita S. Bulletts B.S., Anthropology Phoenix District Manager (Former)

Emily Garber M.A., Anthropology; B.A., Anthropology Lower Sonoran Field Manager

Richard B. Hanson B.S., Park and Recreation Resources

Sonoran Desert National Monument 

Manager and Recreation/Wilderness

Bureau of Land Management, Interdisciplinary Team

Brian Achziger Fire Science Fire Management Officer – Phoenix 

District Office

Barbara Albiston B.S., English Writer/Editor – Boise District Office

Don Applegate B.S., Recreation Resources Management Recreation Program Lead – Arizona 

State Office

Leah Beaudoin Baker M.A., Global Environmental Policy; B.S., 

Biology

Planning and Environmental 

Coordinator – Phoenix District Office

Mike Behrens M.S., Forest Science/Fire Ecology; B.S., 

Forest Science

Fire Management Officer – Phoenix 

District Office (Former)

Jameson Belke B.S., Geography/Cartography GIS Specialist – Phoenix District Office 

(Former)

Thomas V. Bickauskas B.S., Manufacturing Engineering 

Technology

Travel Management Coordinator – 

Hassayampa Field Office

Steve Bird B.S., Wildlife Sciences Wildlife Biologist – Sonoran Desert 

National Monument

Cheryl Blanchard B.A., Anthropology

Cultural Resources – Lower Sonoran 

Field Office
4. List of Preparers

4-2 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Table 4-1

List of Preparers

Name Degree Role

Todd Calico

B.I.S., Natural Resources Management 

and Environmental Studies, GIS 

Certificate

GIS Specialist – Arizona Strip Office

Bill Coulloudon B. S., Rangeland Management Range Management Specialist – Arizona 

State Office

David Eddy B.S., Geology Geologist – Hassayampa Field Office

Andrea Felton M.S., Range and Wildlife Management; 

B.A., English

Rangeland Management Specialist — 

Lower Sonoran Field Office

Sharisse Fisher B.S., Geography GIS Specialist – Phoenix District Office

Penny Foreman B.S., Business Management; B.S., 

Recreation and Tourism Management

Lower Sonoran-SDNM RMP Project 

Manager – Lower Sonoran Field Office

Chris Garbo M.U.E.P, Urban & Environmental 

Planning; B.S., Regional Development

Planning and Environmental Assistant – 

Lower Sonoran Field Office (Former)

Jeff Garrett B.S., Geology Mining Law Program Lead – Arizona 

State Office

Jo Ann Goodlow M.P.M., Planning Management Reality Specialist– Lower Sonoran Field 

Office

Chris Horyza B.S., Forestry and Range Management

Arizona BLM Planning and 

Environmental Program Lead – Arizona 

State Office

Michael Johnson M.A., Anthropology; B.A. Anthropology Deputy Preservation Officer – Arizona 

State Office

Byron Lambeth B.S., Rangeland Management Rangeland Resources – Lower Sonoran 

Field Office (Former)

Mariano Lanza B.S., Environmental Technology 

Management and Engineering

Surface Protection Specialist, Hazardous 

Materials, Public Safety – Lower 

Sonoran Field Office

Matthew Magaletti M.U.E.P., Urban and Environmental 

Planning; B.S., Planning

Realty Specialist/Assistant Planning and 

Environmental Coordinator – Lower 

Sonoran Field Office (Former)

Ken Mahoney B.S., Leisure Studies, Park Planning & 

Resource Management

National Landscape Conservation 

System Coordinator – Arizona State 

Office

Elroy Masters B.A., Biology State Fish and Wildlife Program Lead – 

Arizona State Office

Joshua Mays B.S., Wildlife and Restoration Ecology Biological Science Technician – Lower 

Sonoran Field Office (Former)

Roger Oyler B.S., Agriculture, Range Science

Arizona Wild Horse and Burro Program 

Lead – Arizona State Field Office
4. List of Preparers

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 4-3 

Table 4-1

List of Preparers

Name Degree Role

David G. Proffitt M.U.E.P., Urban & Environmental 

Planning; B.A. English

Writer/Editor & Assistant 

Environmental Planner – Lower Sonoran 

Field Office (Former)

William J. Ragsdale B.S., Agriculture

Outdoor Recreation Planner – Lower 

Sonoran Field Office

Jim Renthal M.S., Watershed Management Soil, Water, Air, Riparian Program Lead 

– Arizona State Office

David L. Scarbrough B. S., Forestry

Outdoor Recreation Planner – Sonoran 

Desert National Monument

Paul Sitzmann B.A., Ecology and Evolutionary Biology

Range Technician – Phoenix District 

Office, Wildlife Biologist Agua Fria 

National Monument

Michael Werner B.S., Natural Resources Realty Specialist – Arizona State Office

Ammon Wilhelm B.S., Fish and Wildlife Management Wildlife Biologist – Kingman Field Office

EnviroSystems Management

2011 DRMP/EIS

Lilian Jonas Ph.D., Sociology; M.A., Applied 

Sociology; B.S., Biology

Writer/Editor

Environmental Management and Planning Solutions, Inc., Interdisciplinary Team

2012 PRMP/FEIS and RODs/Approved RMPs

Angie Adams B.A., Biology Transportation, Recreation

David Batts M.S., Natural Resource Planning; B.S., 

International Development

Socioeconomics

James Bode B.A., Environmental Studies Socioeconomics; Technical Editing

Amy Cordle B.S., Civil Engineering Air Quality, Climate Change

Annie Daly B.A., Environmental Studies Fire Management, Hazardous Materials

Zoe Ghali

M.S., Environmental Physiology; 

Interdisciplinary Certificate in 

Environmental Policy; B.S., Biology

Socioeconomics

Holly Prohaska M.S., Environmental Management; B.A., 

Marine Science / Biology Public Outreach, Project Management

Laura Long M.A., 2010, Media and Communications; 

B.A., 2004, English Literature

Technical Editor

Carol-Anne Murray M.A., Anthropology; B.A., Anthropology Project Manager, Cultural Resources, 

Paleontology, Tribal Interests

Katie Patterson J.D., Environmental Law; B.A., 

Environmental Policy Air Quality, Climate Change

Jennifer Thies M.S., Resource Management; B.S., 

Conservation and Resource Studies

Lands and Realty

Drew Vankat M.S., Environmental Policy and Planning; 

B.Ph., Urban and Environmental Planning Travel Management, Recreation
4. List of Preparers

4-4 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Table 4-1

List of Preparers

Name Degree Role

Jennifer Whitaker

M.S., Project Management; B.S., Public 

Affairs, Concentration Natural Resource 

Management

Mineral Resources

Kate Wynant B.A., Environmental Studies; Spanish Visual Resources Management

Meredith Zaccherio M.S., Biology; B.S., Biology; B.S., 

Environmental Science

Plants and Wildlife

Preparers: 2006 Administrative Draft

Bureau of Land Management, Management Team

Teresa A. Raml B.S., Wildlife Biology

Phoenix District Manager (Former); 

District Manager – California Desert 

District

Marshall Kevin Harper M.A., Archaeology Lower Sonoran Field Manager (Former)

Ralph Costa B.S., Engineering

Lower Sonoran Acting Associate Field 

Manager for Lands and Minerals 

(Retired)

Eugene Dahlem M.S., Zoology

Sonoran Desert National Monument 

Manager (Retired)

Karen Kelleher M.E.M., Landscape Ecology

Sonoran Desert National Monument 

Manager (Former)

Bureau of Land Management, Interdisciplinary Team

Jim Andersen B.S., Natural Resource Management Lead Realty Specialist – Hassayampa 

Field Office

Camille Champion M.S., Environmental Sciences; B.S., 

Geology

Lands and Realty – Lower Sonoran Field 

Office (Former)

William Crolly A.S., Forest Technician, Technical Fire 

Management

Fire Management – Phoenix District 

Office (Former)

Joseph Dixon M.A., Geology; B.A., Geology

Mineral Resources – Sonoran Desert 

National Monument (Former)

Lin Fehlmann B.S., Secondary Education, Biological 

Resources

Water Rights – Arizona State Office 

(Retired)

Helen Graham B.S., Biology Fire Management – Phoenix District 

Field Office (Former)

Genevieve Johnson M.U.E.P., Urban and Environmental 

Planning; B.S., Conservation Biology

Project Manager, Socioeconomics – 

Lower Sonoran Field Office (Former)

Glenn Joki B.S., Engineering Studies Fire Management – Phoenix District 

Office (Retired)

James Maes B.S., Mechanical Engineering

Air Quality, Hazardous Materials, Public 

Safety – Lower Sonoran Field Office 

(Former)

Angel Mayes A.A., General Studies Realty Specialist – Sonoran Desert 

National Monument (Former)
4. List of Preparers

September 2012 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan 4-5 

Table 4-1

List of Preparers

Name Degree Role

Sally Olivieri A.S., Forest Technician Geographic Information Systems and 

Mapping – Kingman Field Office

Demetrius Purdie-Williams B.S., Technology

Geographic Information Systems and 

Mapping – Phoenix District Office 

(Former)

Kirk N. Rentmeister B.S., Geology Geologist – Hassayampa Field Office 

(Former)

Gregg Simmons B.S., Forest Management 

BLM State Planning and Environmental 

Coordinator – Arizona State Office 

(Retired)

Lori Young B.S., Wildlife Management Wildlife Biologist – Sonoran Desert 

National Monument (Former)

EnviroSystems Management, Interdisciplinary Team

Sunny Bush M.T., Hazardous Materials and Waste 

Management; B.A., English

Hazardous Materials, Public Health and 

Safety

Debra Duerr B.A., Urban Planning Project Manager, Visual Resources

URS Corporation, Interdisciplinary Team

Kirsten Erickson M.A., Public History and US History; 

B.A., History Cultural and Heritage Resources

Jennifer Frownfelter

M.S., Environmental Management, Public 

Policy; B.S., Environmental, Population, 

and Organismic Biology, Environmental 

Conservation

Lands and Realty

Jeff Johnson M.S., Plant Biology; B.S., Plant Biology Biological Resources, Fire and Fuels 

Colleen Mahoney None Administrative Support

Peter Martinez

M.A., Geography Information 

Management; B.S., Environmental 

Geography

Database and Web Applications

Brad Norling M.S., Zoology and Physiology; B.S., 

Wildlife Biology Biological Resources

Dave Palmer M.A., Geology; B.S., Geology Minerals, Geological and Paleontological 

Resources, Cave Resources

Meg Quarrie B.A., Liberal Arts Administrative Support 

Ryan Rausch M.S.E.L., Environmental Law; B.A., 

Biology

Project Coordinator, Water Resources, 

Soils

Patty Renter

Geography, Visual Basic, Introduction to 

ArcView, Computer information 

Systems 

Geographic Information Systems

Gene Rogge M.A., Anthropology; B.A., Anthropology Cultural and Heritage Resources

Cindy Smith B.S., Liberal Arts and Sciences Principal-in-Charge
4. List of Preparers

4-6 Lower Sonoran Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan September 2012

Table 4-1

List of Preparers

Name Degree Role

Barbara Sprungl M.B.A., Business Administration; B.S., 

Chemical Engineering Air Quality

Brock Tunnicliff

Ph.D., Natural Resource Management; 

M.S., Watershed Hydrology; B.S., Forest 

Ecology

Wilderness Characteristics, Travel 

Management, Special Designations, 

Recreation

Leslie Watson B.S., Zoology Biological Resources

Sandy Weir B.S., Geography Socioeconomics

Jessica Wellmeyer M.S., Geology; B.S., Geology Water Resources and Soils

Jen Wennerlund

M.S., Geography; B.S., Geography, 

Cartography, Remote Sensing, Land Use 

Planning

Geographic Information Systems 

Manager
A%%5(9I$7,216
A

A