Highland Ridge, Mount Grafton, 

South Egan Range, and Far South 

Egans Wilderness 

Final Wilderness Management Plan and 

Environmental Assessment 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Land Management 

Nevada State Office 

Ely District Office 

August 14, 2013 
BLM/NV/EL/EA/11-07+1792 

Cover Photo: Highland Ridge aspens 
Table of Contents
 

MAPS .............................................................................................................................................. IV
 

TABLES ............................................................................................................................................ IV
 

APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................... IV
 

A. INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................1
 

B. WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ...........................................10
 

C. WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT ACTIONS.........................................................................12
 

MANAGEMENT OF NOXIOUS AND NON-NATIVE INVASIVE WEEDS.........................................................................................17
 

MANAGEMENT OF LIVESTOCK GRAZING ...........................................................................................................................18
 

MANAGEMENT OF SMALL-SCALE SURFACE DISTURBANCES ..................................................................................................20
 

MANAGEMENT AND DESIGNATION OF TRAILS....................................................................................................................22
 

MANAGEMENT OF VEHICLE ACCESS POINTS AND DESIGNATION OF STAGING AREAS .................................................................26
 

MANAGEMENT OF SIGNS...............................................................................................................................................28
 

MANAGEMENT OF VEGETATION RESTORATION..................................................................................................................30
 

MANAGEMENT OF WILDLIFE ..........................................................................................................................................32
 

MANAGEMENT OF HERD AREAS .....................................................................................................................................35
 

MANAGEMENT OF FIRE SUPPRESSION, FUELS AND EMERGENCY STABILIZATION AND REHABILITATION ..........................................36
 

PROTECTION OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND HISTORIC PROPERTIES ..............................................................................40
 

MANAGEMENT OF RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES ...............................................................................................................42
 

VISITOR EDUCATION, INTERPRETATION AND LAW ENFORCEMENT..........................................................................................46
 

COMMERCIAL USE RESTRICTIONS....................................................................................................................................47
 

MANAGEMENT OF RESEARCH.........................................................................................................................................48
 

MANAGEMENT OF VALID EXISTING RIGHTS.......................................................................................................................49
 

MILITARY OPERATIONS .................................................................................................................................................50
 

INTERAGENCY RELATIONSHIP - GREAT BASIN NATIONAL PARK ..............................................................................................50
 

D. MONITORING PROGRAM ...................................................................................................55
 

E. PLAN EVALUATION .............................................................................................................56
 

F. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION....................................................................................................56
 

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................58
 

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................59
 

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION & THE NO ACTION ALTERNATIVES............................................................................62
 

WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT PLAN ACTIONS.....................................................................................................................63
 

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ........................................................................................70
 

EFFECTS ANALYSIS........................................................................................................................................................73
 

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS..................................................................................................................................................94
 

MONITORING PROGRAM...............................................................................................................................................96
 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT .....................................................................................................................96
 

CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION ..............................................................................................97
 

LIST OF PREPARERS & REVIEWERS ....................................................................................................98
 

REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................99
 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA iii] 
Maps
 

MAP 1: OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................................3
 

MAP 2: CURRENT CONDITIONS ON HIGHLAND RIDGE WILDERNESS .........................................................13
 

MAP 3: CURRENT CONDITIONS ON MOUNT GRAFTON WILDERNESS........................................................14
 

MAP 4: CURRENT CONDITIONS ON SOUTH EGAN RANGE WILDERNESS....................................................15
 

MAP 5: CURRENT CONDITIONS ON FAR SOUTH EGANS WILDERNESS .......................................................16
 

MAP 6: TRAILS HIGHLAND RIDGE WILDERNESS..........................................................................................24
 

MAP 7: TRAILS SOUTH EGAN RANGE WILDERNESS ....................................................................................25
 

MAP 8: SITE SPECIFIC HIGHLAND RIDGE WILDERNESS...............................................................................51
 

MAP 9: SITE SPECIFIC MOUNT GRAFTON WILDERNESS .............................................................................52
 

MAP 10: SITE SPECIFIC SOUTH EGAN RANGE WILDERNESS .......................................................................53
 

MAP 11: SITE SPECIFIC FAR SOUTH EGANS WILDERNESS...........................................................................54
 

MAP 12: FIRE MANAGEMENT UNITS ..........................................................................................................75
 

MAP 13: FIRE REGIME CONDITION CLASS ..................................................................................................76
 

Tables 

TABLE 1: RANGE DEVELOPMENTS IN WILDERNESS ....................................................................................19
 

TABLE 2: SITE SPECIFIC PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE ACCESS ROUTES .....................................................19
 

TABLE 3: MAINTENANCE LEVELS FOR CHERRY STEM ROUTES ...................................................................27
 

TABLE 4: LOCATIONS TO OBTAIN EASEMENTS ...........................................................................................50
 

TABLE 5: RESOURCE CONCERNS/SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITIES ...............................................................71
 

TABLE 6: FIRE MANAGEMENT UNITS..........................................................................................................74
 

TABLE 7: BIG GAME HABITAT......................................................................................................................78
 

TABLE 8: GRAZING ALLOTMENTS................................................................................................................81
 

TABLE 9: NEVADA BLM SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES.......................................................................................87
 

TABLE 10: SUMMARY DEVELOPMENTS IN WILDERNESS............................................................................93
 

Appendices 

APPENDIX A: IDENTIFIED RANGE DEVELOPMENTS...................................................................................101
 

APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIONS OF PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS PRESENT WITHIN WILDERNESS ........105
 

APPENDIX C: SUMMARY OF EXISTING WATER RIGHTS WITHIN WILDERNESS. ........................................107
 

APPENDIX D: WILDERNESS CONDITION CLASSES. ....................................................................................116
 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA iv] 
A. Introduction
 

Background 

The United States Congress established the National Wilderness Preservation System to assure that an 

increasing population, accompanied by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does not occupy and 

modify all areas within the United States. Wilderness designation is intended to preserve and protect certain 

lands in their natural state. Only Congress, with Presidential approval, may designate areas as Wilderness. The 

Wilderness Act of 1964 defines wilderness character, the uses of wilderness, and the activities prohibited 

within its boundaries. 

Wilderness areas provide a contrast to lands where human activities dominate the landscape. No buffer zones 

are created around wilderness to protect them from the influence of activities on adjacent land. Wilderness 

areas are managed for the use and enjoyment of the American people in a manner that will leave them 

unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, for their protection, preservation of their wilderness 

character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and enjoyment as 

wilderness. 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) policy requires the development of a management plan that will: Protect 

wilderness character and values, provide for visitor use and enjoyment, require the “Minimum Tool” to 

accomplish resource objectives inside wilderness, and allow for special provisions as provided by legislation. 

Wilderness character is described in terms of: undeveloped, untrammeled, natural, outstanding opportunities 

for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation, and other unique or supplemental qualities. 

BLM Manual 8561 (Wilderness Management Plans) requires that wilderness areas be managed pursuant to a 

specific management plan. This Environmental Assessment analyzes the environmental and social impacts of 

the proposed Wilderness Management Plan (WMP) and one alternative, a “no-action” alternative. 

Highland Ridge, Mount Grafton and the South Egan Range Wilderness areas were added to the National 

Wilderness Preservation System by the White Pine County Conservation, Recreation and Development Act in 

December 2006 (Public Law 109-432, December 20, 2006; WPCCRDA). The Far South Egans Wilderness 

area was designated in the Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, and Development Act of 2004 (Public 

Law 108-424, November 30, 2004; LCCRDA). See Map 1 (Page 3). 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 1]
 
Scope and Purpose of the Wilderness Management Plan 

This WMP provides the primary management direction for the Highland Ridge, Mount Grafton, South Egan 

Range and Far South Egan Wilderness areas. Given their comparable natural resources and similar broad 

management issues, it is appropriate to incorporate the administration of the four areas into a single plan. 

Management direction will be guided by statutes, regulations, manuals, policy, guidelines and other plans 

referenced in this document. 

Wilderness Characteristics 

The Wilderness Act of 1964 defines wilderness and mandates that the primary management direction is to 

preserve wilderness character. Although wilderness character is a complex idea and was not explicitly defined 

in the Wilderness Act, wilderness character is commonly defined as: 

 Untrammeled ─ area is unhindered and free from modern human control or manipulation. 

 Natural ─ area appears to have been primarily affected by the forces of nature. 

 Undeveloped ─ area is essentially without permanent improvements or human occupation and 

retains its primeval character. 

 Outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation ─

area provides outstanding opportunities for people to experience solitude or primeval and unrestricted 

recreation, including the values associated with physical and mental inspiration and challenge. 

Additionally, wilderness areas may contain supplemental values such as; ecological, geological, or other 

features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value. However, these values need not be present for an 

area to meet the definition of wilderness. 

This wilderness management plan preserves the areas’ characteristics by: 

 Identifying the conditions and opportunities for which the wilderness areas would be managed. 

 Creating specific directives for managing resources and activities existing or occurring in wilderness. 

 Identifying management needs outside of, and immediately adjacent to the wilderness areas, including 

signing, staging areas, and access points. 

The WMP contains current comprehensive descriptions of the wilderness areas and proposed management 

actions, directives, and guidelines that relate to specific wilderness management categories. An Environmental 

Assessment follows the WMP in this document, which fully describes and analyzes the potential impacts 

relating to proposed management actions, directives and considered alternatives. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 2]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 3]
 
 

This page intentionally left blank 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 4]
 
Location / Boundaries 

The BLM administers all surface and sub-surface land within the four wilderness areas. The Wilderness areas 

are administered under authority and provisions of: 

 The Wilderness Act of 1964 

 The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 

 Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, and Development Act of 2004 

 White Pine County Conservation, Recreation and Development Act 2006 

The Bureau of Land Management, Ely District Office, has primary management responsibility for all four areas. 

Current conditions for each wilderness area are displayed in Maps 2-5. 

These four wilderness areas lie along the Lincoln County - White Pine County border in Nevada. Highland 

Ridge Wilderness is entirely within White Pine County. Mount Grafton Wilderness extends into Lincoln and 

White Pine counties; the South Egan Range Wilderness in both and also extends into Nye County; and the Far 

South Egans Wilderness is in Nye and Lincoln Counties. 

Highland Ridge Wilderness spans 68,622 acres and ranges in elevation from 6,070 feet to 10,825 feet. One 

component of the WPCCRDA, in addition to wilderness designation, was the transfer of administrative 

jurisdiction for the land surrounding the Great Basin National Park from the U.S. Forest Service to the Bureau 

of Land Management, including the portions designated as Highland Ridge Wilderness. 

The Mount Grafton Wilderness covers 78,743 acres with elevations of 6,000 feet to 10,991 feet on the top of 

the peak for which the area is named. Mount Grafton is the highest peak on BLM-managed lands in Nevada. 

The South Egan Range Wilderness encompasses 67,214 acres and ranges from 5,000 feet to 9,616 feet. Lastly, 

the Far South Egans Wilderness contains 36,384 acres ranging in elevation from 5,800 feet to 9,823 feet. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 5]
 

Wilderness Overview (General Setting) 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Parcels of private property exist within and adjacent to the Mount Grafton Wilderness. The South Egan 

Range and Highland Ridge Wilderness areas have several adjacent parcels and the Far South Egans Wilderness 

has no parcels of private land adjacent. 

Topography and Vegetation 

The topography of the four wilderness areas is similar: massive limestone cliffs cut through with canyons. The 

typical vegetative composition consists of sagebrush that covers the lower elevations while singleleaf pinyon 

and Utah juniper grow on the slopes. Pockets of aspen can be found in Highland Ridge and Mount Grafton 

Wilderness areas. Bristlecone and Limber pine are found at the higher elevations of each wilderness. Small 

stands of ponderosa pine occur in the Far South Egans Wilderness. 

The four wilderness areas covered in this plan lie within the Central Basin and Range ecoregion (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency). This ecoregion is, as defined by the EPA, “internally drained and is 

characterized by a mosaic of xeric basins, scattered low and high mountains, and salt flats” and “are covered 

by Great Basin sagebrush or saltbush-greasewood vegetation that grow in Aridisols”. Aridisols are a category 

of soil classification characterized by very low amounts of moisture and organic matter. 

Wildlife 

Many species inhabit the wilderness that are representative of the diverse characteristics of the area such as 

Rocky Mountain elk, Mule deer, Pronghorn antelope, Bobcat, Mountain lion, Pinyon jay, Clark’s nutcracker, 

Mountain bluebird, Green-tailed towhee, Golden eagle, Cooper’s hawk and Ferruginous hawk. Numerous 

reptiles, invertebrates and other small creatures are found throughout the area. 

Water sources include a few developed and undeveloped springs. Two perennial streams flow out of Mount 

Grafton Wilderness. A few wildlife water developments exist for the maintenance of large game populations, 

and are administered by the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW) and the BLM. The region’s varying 

climate and elevation provide important habitat for a variety of wildlife. No federally listed wildlife species are 

known to occur, however some BLM and state sensitive species are likely to occur. 

Fire 

The historic fire regime of these areas has been highly variable. Fires were frequent in lower elevation 

sagebrush communities and spread to the adjacent pinyon-juniper woodland while infrequent relatively smallscale high severity fires characterized the pinyon-juniper woodland. Increased distribution and density of the 

pinyon-juniper woodland, coupled with the presence of introduced non-native annual grasses, predominately 

cheatgrass has increased the frequency of large, intense fires. The intensity of these fires can lead to further 

dominance by exotics, thereby altering the fire regimes and succession, resulting in a feedback loop. 

Mount Grafton Wilderness burned 2,449 acres in 2007, South Egan Range burned 7,238 acres in 2012 and in 

2000 Highland Ridge had a 952 acre fire. Numerous smaller fires have burned in all four wilderness areas. 

Current fire management objectives are management of wildland and prescribed fires in the treatment of 

vegetation communities and watersheds to achieve the desired range of condition for these and other 

resource programs. 

Grazing 

Active grazing permits existed at the time of wilderness designation and are authorized to continue under the 

direction of the Congressional Grazing Guidelines. There are portions of 20 grazing allotments in the four 

wilderness areas. Most of the human developments are associated with range developments (fences, pipelines 

and spring developments) for the support of livestock grazing. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 6]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cultural Resources 

Fossils found throughout the wilderness areas offer a glimpse into life hundreds of million years ago when the 

area was at the bottom of a sea. Prehistoric cultural resources abound and include lithic scatters and 

prehistoric camp sites. More recent human occupation by early settlers is evidenced by the presence of 

various historic resources such as glass bottles, metal cans, barbed wire, arbor-glyphs, mill sites, and mining 

sites. 

Recreation 

Recreational activities in the four wilderness areas include hiking, rock climbing, wildlife viewing, hunting, 

trapping, photography, horseback riding and backpacking. Further, Whipple Cave, within Far South Egans, is a 

popular recreational destination for spelunking (caving). 

Human-caused disturbances, in the form of off-road vehicle routes, existed within these areas at the time of 

wilderness designation. They have since undergone route decommissioning and initial rehabilitation. The total 

for Highland Ridge Wilderness is 59 miles, Mount Grafton Wilderness contains 105 miles, the South Egan 

Range Wilderness has 40 miles, and the Far South Egans Wilderness has 3 miles of former vehicle routes. 

There are a several cherry stem routes (a road that is excluded from the designated wilderness by a nonwilderness corridor having designated wilderness on both sides) associated with each wilderness. 

Mineral Resources 

The wilderness areas were withdrawn from mineral entry upon wilderness designation. There are no mining 

claims and no mineral leases or substantial mining disturbances exist in the wilderness area other than historic. 

A more comprehensive description of the environment is incorporated into the Affected Environment section 

in the Environmental Assessment (EA) that analyzes the impacts of implementing the proposed WMP. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 7]
 
General Management Situation 

Wilderness Issues 

This WMP was prepared to address issues that were identified through internal and public scoping. Internal 

scoping was done via meetings and written communications with BLM resource specialists from 2009 to 2013. 

Public scoping was conducted in the form of workshops, meetings, written letters, email, and by BLM staff. 

All issues and concerns were considered during the development of the alternatives described in the EA, 

following this plan. Relevant issues to be addressed in this WMP that were identified through public scoping 

relate to wilderness characteristics and are as follows: 

Opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation 

 Recreational hunting increasing in wilderness; prohibit hunting camps (public or outfitter and guide) 

from blocking access to trails, trailheads, cherry stem roads, etc. 

 Educate and enforce camping stay limit on public lands. 

 Cherry stems and routes that access the wilderness boundary should be maintained. 

 Explore interconnectivity of trails in Great Basin National Park and interagency information on 

trailhead signs. 

 Trail designations and maintenance standards. 

 Climbing and caving regulations in wilderness. 

Protecting and enhancing the undeveloped and natural appearance of the wilderness areas 

 Process of consideration for the installation or removal of wildlife water developments inside 

wilderness. 

 Defining vegetation restoration. 

Preserving naturalness, primeval character and influence of the wilderness areas 

 Conversion of closed routes in Great Basin National Park and adjacent wilderness (e.g. Decathon 

Canyon). 

 Maintenance of water rights and associated facilities (e.g. ditches, gauging station) for grazing, irrigation 

or other purposes. 

 Managing access and necessary maintenance of existing authorized range facilities inside wilderness. 

 Evaluate grazing on land acquired from US Forest Service in Highland Ridge Wilderness. 

 Delineate policy regarding purchasing or acquisition of private parcels should the opportunity arise. 

 Establish access methods and schedule to inholdings. 

 Seek easements across private property to cherry stem routes (e.g. Cappy’s Diggins/North Creek 

(west) route). 

Managing supplemental values of the wilderness 

 Determine eligibility and management of historical structures. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 8]
 
 

 

 

 

 

Wilderness Management 

 Reduce illegal motorized use in wilderness associated with various activities (e.g. shed antler collection, 

hunting or game retrieval). 

Certain issues identified during public scoping are already addressed in existing planning documents or policy, 

and are not within the scope of this Plan. They are listed below: 

o	 Suppression of human-caused fires – standard operating procedures are addressed in the Ely Fire 

Management Plan. 

o	 Amending wilderness boundaries or cherry-stemmed routes – Wilderness boundaries are designated 

by Congress and legislation would have to be enacted to authorize any changes. 

Mount Grafton Wilderness 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 9]
 
B. Wilderness Management Goals and Objectives
 

Managing Wilderness is guided by four primary goals defined in BLM wilderness management planning manual 

(BLM Manual 8561) Appendix 1. The goals provide general direction, and are refined into specific objectives. 

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

future. Management action(s) are based on these objectives. This section outlines the goals and objectives that 

guide this WMP. 

Goal 1 

Provide for the long-term protection and preservation of the areas’ wilderness character under a principle of 

non-degradation. The areas’ natural condition, opportunities for solitude, opportunities for primitive and 

unconfined types of recreation, and any ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, 

scenic, or historic value present will be managed so that they would remain unimpaired. 

Objectives 

	 Preserve the primeval character and influence of the wilderness by allowing fire as a natural process 

of disturbance and succession where the ecosystem is fire-dependent; manage fire where it 

threatens wilderness character and/or natural ecological conditions or processes; prevent fire 

where it threatens human life or property. 

	 Manage wildlife habitat to support healthy, viable, and naturally distributed wildlife populations in an 

effort to retain the areas’ natural and primeval character. 

	 Maintain native plant distribution and abundance through the reduction of noxious and non-native 

invasive species in an effort to retain the areas’ natural and primeval character. 

	 Protect and preserve the outstanding archaeological and historic resources of these areas while 

allowing for visitor enjoyment of those resources. 

Goal 2 

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

unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness. The wilderness resource would be dominant in all 

management decisions where a choice must be made between preservation of wilderness character and visitor 

use. 

Objectives 

	 Provide for the use and enjoyment of the wilderness areas while maintaining outstanding opportunities 

for primitive recreation, including solitude, through minimal visitor use regulations and minimal on-the

ground developments. 

 Utilize education and interpretation as a proactive approach in managing visitor activities that may 

impact preservation of the wilderness character. 

 Prevent unauthorized motorized vehicle travel through the management of vehicle access points. 

­

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 10]
 
Goal 3 

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

and safely accomplish the objective of a project approved for the preservation of wilderness character. The 

chosen tool, equipment, or structure should be the one that least degrades wilderness values temporarily or 

permanently. Management would seek to preserve spontaneity of use and freedom from regulation to the 

greatest extent possible. 

Objective 

 Implement proposed actions as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the 

areas as wilderness and to have the least impact to wilderness characteristics. 

Goal 4 

To manage activities (e.g. grazing of livestock and commercial services) allowed under the Special Provisions of 

the Wilderness Act (Section 4(d)) and subsequent laws in a manner that would prevent unnecessary or undue 

degradation of the areas’ wilderness character. Special Provisions are the exception rather than the rule; 

therefore, emphasis is placed on maintaining wilderness character. 

Objectives 

 Allow for special provision land uses determined by the Wilderness Act, Lincoln County Conservation, 

Recreation and Development Act or White Pine County Conservation, Recreation and Development 

Act while minimizing developments, degradation to naturalness, and other impacts to wilderness 

resources. 

 Maintain or enhance the natural appearance of the wilderness areas by removing unnecessary facilities 

and minimizing or restoring human-caused surface disturbances. 

 Assess potential commercial services of the wilderness areas for their economic importance and 

prevent negative impacts on wilderness characteristics. 

Management Strategy 

This plan has been designed to serve as the management guidance for Highland Ridge, Mount Grafton, South 

Egan Range and Far South Egans Wilderness areas is to maintain or improve the natural, near-pristine 

conditions present today while rehabilitating existing and future human-caused disturbances. 

An interdisciplinary team developed the management strategy. The objectives and associated management 

actions were designed to help meet the goals of preserving wilderness character, while providing protection of 

cultural resources, primitive recreational opportunities, solitude and the continuation of accepted uses 

permitted by the Wilderness Act. 

The planned actions and monitoring of their effectiveness are designed to ensure that the characteristics that 

define these wilderness areas remain stable or improve. Management objectives will be re-evaluated 

periodically maintained, and updated as needed. 

Current local conditions and expectations were identified before developing management actions. Inventory, 

monitoring, and research are important aspects to meet the objectives of this plan. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 11]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C. Wilderness Management Actions
 

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

management objectives, current situation and assumptions, and wilderness-specific issues that were identified 

through internal and external scoping. Except for site-specific proposed actions, management actions are the 

same for all areas because of similar management issues. 

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

Horses and Burros, have specific plans that guide their programs that individually address the management 

goals and activity plans. This WMP considers all related resources involved in wilderness. Non-wilderness 

resource programs have been evaluated to ensure conformity with wilderness management goals and 

objectives. Management actions are described on the following pages. While all of the management actions 

provide wilderness specific direction, several outline site-specific management actions. 

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

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

supplemental to, and consistent with Wilderness laws, regulations, and policies, which must be further 

consulted in the event of unforeseen issues. 

Bristlecone Pine stump in Highland Ridge Wilderness 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 12]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 13]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 14]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 15]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 16]
 
 

Management of Noxious and Non-Native Invasive Weeds 

The management ideal is to sustain only native species in wilderness. Noxious weeds in Nevada are classified 

by the Nevada Department of Agriculture and the Plant Protection Act (2000) administered by the USDA 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). 

Spotted knapweed (Centaurea stoebe ssp. Micranthos, noxious, Category A) has been documented in the Mount 

Grafton Wilderness. Further, several weed species have been identified along boundaries or cherry-stem 

roads in Highland Ridge and South Egan Range: Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens,), hoary cress (Cardaria 

draba, noxious), salt cedar (Tamarix ramosissima), black henbane (Hyoscyamus niger), dalmatian toadflax (Linaria 

dalmatica) and poison hemlock (Conium maculatum). Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum, invasive) is documented in 

the South Egan Range Wilderness, though may be found in varying degrees in each wilderness. 

The potential exists for further infestations of these species, and others, coming from surrounding areas. 

Different management techniques may be required for each non-native, invasive species based on effectiveness 

as determined by plant biology, minimum tool requirements and impact to the wilderness resource. 

When noxious and invasive weeds are found, emphasis would be placed on controlling small infestations with 

the potential to spread and displace native plants. Treatments for large infestations (as determined by the BLM 

Ely District Weeds Program) would be considered separately. Seeding and transplant projects will follow 

standards presented in the Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation section (Page 37). Vegetation 

Treatments Using Herbicides on Bureau of Land Management Lands in 17 Western States Programmatic EIS 

BLM 2007 and BLM Ely District weed management protocols will guide the use of herbicide treatments. The 

Ely District Integrated Weed Management Plan and Environmental Assessment (DOI-BLM-NV-L000-2009­

0010-EA) has also analyzed the effects of treatments in wilderness. Treatments will be prioritized in the 

following order, though it is likely that treatment combinations would be necessary in some situations: 

1.	 Manual removal with hand tools if weeds could be controlled or eradicated without causing resprouting, without soil disturbance leading to expansion of noxious or non-native invasive species, and 

where infestations are of a size manageable by hand crews. 

2.	 Herbicides applied by backpack and pack stock equipment, where manual removal is not effective. 

3.	 Biological control agents approved by the APHIS where infestations are of such size that eradication by 

manual removal or herbicides is not feasible. Current possibilities consist of a stem-boring weevil for 

Dalmatian toadflax. 

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

impacts are quickly and readily rehabilitated and where the infestation is of such size that herbicide 

cannot be effectively applied without motorized equipment. When a Minimum Requirements Analysis 

determines that motorized equipment is recommended, site-specific National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) analysis would be required. 

5.	 Reseeding treated areas preferably with native species of local genetic stock following standards 

outlined under the Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation heading (See Page 37). 

6.	 Alternative treatments, such as targeted grazing by livestock, would be considered. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 17]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Management of Livestock Grazing 

There are three grazing allotments that overlap Mount Grafton Wilderness, seven allotments within Highland 

Ridge Wilderness, eight allotments within South Egan Range Wilderness and two allotments within Far South 

Egans Wilderness. Two of the grazing allotments in Highland Ridge Wilderness (Lexington and Chokecherry) 

were closed to grazing at the time of the wilderness designation, and therefore remain closed to grazing in 

perpetuity. 

Although grazing is considered a trammeling activity, the Wilderness Act explicitly allows this activity to occur 

where it existed prior to wilderness designation. BLM Manual 6340 (Management of Designated Wilderness 

Areas) states, “Where grazing of livestock has been authorized by a grazing permit or grazing lease for land within a 

wilderness, and the use was established before Congress established the wilderness area, under Section 4(d)(4)(2) of 

the Act it “shall be permitted to continue subject to such reasonable regulations as are deemed necessary by the 

[administering agency]. ... Grazing management activities, including the construction, use, and maintenance of livestock 

management developments, must comply with the BLM grazing regulations 43 CFR 4100, as well as this manual.” 

Grazing would continue under federal regulations for the grazing allotments in the four wilderness areas and 

meet the Mojave – Southern Great Basin Resource Advisory Council and Northeastern Great Basin Resource 

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

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

Activities and the necessary facilities used to support livestock grazing will be permitted to continue in 

wilderness. Structures and installations used for livestock management existing at the time of designation may 

be maintained. Inspection and routine maintenance of range developments would be accomplished by foot or 

horseback, as needed. Motorized vehicles may be authorized for major maintenance when transporting 

equipment or parts which cannot be transferred by foot or pack stock. These decisions are made during the 

grazing permitting process with the use of a Minimum Requirements Decision Guide (MRDG), completed in 

conjunction with the associated NEPA analysis, through which alternatives are analyzed to determine the 

method that least impacts wilderness character while remaining consistent with the rule of practical necessity 

and reasonableness in supporting the livestock grazing program. If the grazing permit has not yet been 

renewed, the use of motorized equipment or vehicles for maintenance or reconstruction of range 

developments would be evaluated through MRDG analysis and a separate NEPA evaluation. 

Developments would be removed if deemed unnecessary by the BLM and permittee following a 

comprehensive evaluation process. Range developments that appear to have been abandoned would receive 

an administrative record review and additional field reconnaissance in order to determine usage. A BLM Range 

Specialist and Archaeologist would be consulted to determine if historical or cultural designation is warranted. 

All projects involving ground disturbing activities will be subject to Section 106 consultation. If it is 

determined, after consultation with the permittee, that a development is abandoned and not of historical or 

cultural value, it would be removed by BLM personnel or authorized volunteers. 

In the case of an emergency, the permittee may be authorized to use motor vehicles in addition to their 

scheduled range development maintenance and livestock management access, provided the permittee notifies 

the BLM at the onset of the emergency or immediately thereafter. This would be stated as a term or 

condition of the grazing permit. An emergency is defined as any unpreventable or reasonably unforeseeable set 

of circumstances which, without immediate action, would likely result in the death of livestock or result in 

long-term or irreversible impact to the wilderness resource. 

Administrative routes are routes identified for the purpose of allowing permittees access to existing grazing 

facilities. These will be managed for limited use by the permittee. A gate or bollard, signed as administrative 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 18]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fence Pipeline Reservoir Range developments (#) (#) (#) 

Mount Grafton 18 6 7 3 

South Egan Range 12 7 5 0 

Highland Ridge 11 4 0 0 

Far South Egans 1 1 0 0 

Total 42 18 12 3 

 

 

 

access, may be installed at the start of select administrative access routes to prevent unauthorized vehicle use. 

The permittees and BLM staff would maintain access keys. Administrative access routes would not be 

decommissioned; they may be maintained to the condition at the time of designation as wilderness on a case 

by case basis in order to provide access for permittees. 

Current known range developments (shown in Table 1), as well as any yet to be discovered range 

developments identified during monitoring that are determined to be necessary to the continuation of the 

grazing program may be kept and maintained. 

Table 1: Range Developments in Wilderness 

Site-Specific Actions 

These existing range developments, fence and pipeline across the four wilderness areas would be kept and 

maintained. Maps 2-5 show existing range developments. Appendix A shows the full list of known 

developments. A site specific Range EA addressing the maintenance of range facilities will include analysis and 

decisions regarding range facilities within designated wilderness. 

Table 2. Site-Specific Proposed Administrative Access Routes. (See Map 8, Page 51) 

 

 

Wilderness Area Allotment Access Need Access Location Length 

(mi) 

Highland Ridge 

Murphy Wash Troughs and pipeline along John’s Wash 

T11N 

R68E 

Sec. 25-36 

4.1 

Murphy Wash Cedar Cabin Spring trough, pipeline 

T 11 N, 

R 69 E, 

Sec. 27, 28 

0.3 

Hamblin Valley Supplemental drop locations along southeastern edge T 10 N, R 70 E 

Section 31 1.3 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 19]
 
 

Management of Small-Scale Surface Disturbances 

Small-scale disturbances fall into two categories with common characteristics: small-site disturbances 

(including dispersed campsites and abandoned developments, and mine sites); and linear disturbances created 

by motorized vehicle traffic that are largely denuded of vegetation. The Wilderness Disturbance Reclamation 

Environmental Assessment (EA) (NV-040-05-010), and the White Pine County Wilderness Ground 

Disturbance Reclamation Environmental Assessment (NV-040-08-17), as well as the EA associated with this 

plan, may be referenced for rehabilitation following decommissioning of former vehicle routes and 

rehabilitating small-site disturbances. 

All reclamation activities will be in accordance with the 2008 Ely District Approved Resource Management 

Plan’s Best Management Practices (Appendix A, Section 1). Work will be completed by BLM staff, contractors, 

and/or volunteers. All actions in wilderness will require a Minimum Requirements Analysis to determine the 

action and activity. Actions would include and generally be conducted in the following order as needed: 

1. Decompaction: Working the top few inches of the entire disturbed surface to relieve soil compaction. This 

action would be completed with the use of non-motorized hand tools (soil spades, spading forks, McCloud 

rakes, pulaskis, shovels, horse-drawn implements, etc.). 

2. Scarifying/Pitting: Loosening and texturizing the impacted, disturbed surface in random locations to better 

capture water, organic debris, and wind-blown seeds, thereby stimulating natural re-vegetation. This would be 

done with non-motorized hand tools. 

3. Recontouring: Reconfiguring/shaping the route to blend it with the adjacent, relatively undisturbed 

landscape. This would involve the creation of small hummocks and banks, where appropriate, to mimic the 

surrounding landscape. Berms would be pulled in and the soil distributed across the disturbed surface. Vehicle 

tracks would be raked. This would lessen visual contrasts and provide a surface for natural revegetation. This 

action would be completed with the minimum tool utilizing a MRDG. 

4. Vertical Mulching: Dead and down vegetation is "planted" to obscure the visible portions of the disturbance. 

Additional dead vegetation, rock material and other organic matter may be distributed over the worked 

surface to decrease visual contrasts, create sheltered sites to aid in natural revegetation, and add organic 

debris. Dead and down vegetation and other materials would be gathered from areas near to the disturbances 

by hand. 

5. Erosion Control: Placing sterile weed-free straw bales or creating light terracing/berms to reduce erosion 

and create barriers to vehicles on steep slopes. This is especially effective on hill climbs. The straw bales break 

down over time and provide additional organic debris to the reclamation site. Bales would be brought in by 

hand or horseback to the worksite. 

6. Desert varnish colorant: Spraying disturbed rock surfaces to simulate the coloration of the surrounding 

desert varnish. Desert varnish colorants are chemical compounds comprised of manganese, salts and other 

ingredients used to simulate the natural desert varnish that occurs on rock surfaces in arid environments. This 

substance would be applied sparingly, with the use of a backpack sprayer, and only on disturbed rock surfaces 

that contrast sharply with the surrounding landscape. 

7. Vegetative Restoration: This would involve planting, transplanting and/or seeding necessary to help stabilize 

soil, speed overall vegetative recovery and camouflage evidence of disturbances. All seed would be locally 

collected or native species scattered on reclaimed surfaces to accelerate natural revegetation. This action 

would be completed by non-motorized hand tools. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 20]
 
 

Monitoring will be performed to assess the need for additional rehabilitation work utilizing photo points that 

would be established at the time of rehabilitation and retaken annually thereafter. Repeat treatments would 

occur on a case-by-case basis. 

Large surface disturbances, such as those that may be caused by heavy machinery, would be rehabilitated by 

the entity (e.g. individual, agency, or company) causing them. They would be responsible for developing a 

rehabilitation plan and conducting any necessary environmental analysis. 

Site-Specific Action 

Currently, there are 207 miles of linear disturbance across the four wilderness areas: 58.9 miles in Highland 

Ridge Wilderness, 39.8 miles in the South Egan Range Wilderness, 105.6 miles in Mount Grafton Wilderness 

and 2.9 miles in the Far South Egans Wilderness, which is approximately 207 acres of surface disturbance, 

total. Except for designated administrative access routes and designated hiking and equestrian trails, all former 

vehicle routes, including future disturbances, would be decommissioned over time. Based on monitoring 

results, repeat treatments may occur. These routes are displayed on Maps 2 – 5. 

Far South Egan Wilderness 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 21]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Management and Designation of Trails 

All trails under this plan would follow the direction outlined in BLM Manual 6340: 

Existing trails must be evaluated to determine if they are the minimum necessary to preserve wilderness character. 

Trails may be relocated or closed and restored as a result of the evaluation. The evaluation should include closure or 

consideration of conversion to hiking trails of any existing motorized routes, abandoned logging roads, old firebreaks, 

etc. 

A. New trails may be constructed only if they are needed to preserve wilderness values and resources and will 

not significantly impair the degree of naturalness or solitude in the area. Trails must not be constructed with 

treads of more than 24 inches in width except where a wider trail is justified to protect the wilderness resource. 

Trails should follow natural contours where possible and result in minimum disturbance to soil and ground 

cover. Trail location and design standards should minimize the need for trail installations such as water bars. 

Minimum reassurance markers such as rock cairns would be used, some limbing may occur to protect 

resources. 

B. Where possible, trailhead/access points should be located well outside the wilderness boundary to reduce 

their impact upon the wilderness area. 

C. Construction techniques should always give first consideration to using native materials found within the 

wilderness (e.g. logs, rocks, etc.) A Minimum Requirements Analysis will be used to determine the necessity of 

using any non-natural materials for trail construction (e.g. sawn lumber, plastic pipe, landscaping fabric etc.) 

Designated trails may be maintained or rerouted where they are causing or anticipated to cause damage to 

wilderness character. 

Monitoring for new user-created hiking paths would specifically occur in high use areas, and at all vehicle 

access points near former vehicle routes. As new user-created paths are discovered, they would be evaluated 

for impacts to wilderness character (including cultural and biological resources), and the management 

objectives of this WMP. Monitoring would inventory all paths and identify paths with different levels of 

impacts, such as social trails to primitive camping areas, cut vegetation, or other evidence of use. New usercreated hiking paths may be either rehabilitated or retained, when appropriate. When a user-created hiking 

path is retained, it may be rerouted, improved, or maintained to follow designated trail standards as outlined 

in this section to make the trail compatible with protecting resources while preserving wilderness character. If 

not designated as a trail, new user-created trails would be rehabilitated. 

Site-Specific Action 

Some historic trails (6.5 miles) on Highland Ridge Wilderness, which were developed when the area was 

managed by the US Forest Service, will be maintained to primitive standards. One trail, at the end of the John’s 

Wash cherrystem, will head northerly and up to Highland Ridge and into Great Basin National Park. A portion 

of this trail follows the ridgeline which serves as the BLM-National Park Service (NPS) boundary. A second 

trail will lead from the end of the Decathon cherrystem and connect to a primitive route in the National Park. 

See Map 6. These primitive trails would be established, with no construction occurring on NPS lands. Future 

coordination with the NPS may lead to establishing interconnectivity of trails with the park. See the 

Relationship with Great Basin National Park section for further information. 

In the South Egan Range Wilderness there are two primitive historic equestrian trails which cross the 

wilderness: the Hendrix Trail (4.5 miles) and the Reid Trail (approximately 3 miles). These two primitive trails 

will be marked on the ground intermittently with rock cairns. Portions may need to be re-routed to reduce 

erosion on steep slopes. See Map 7. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 22]
 
 

The Whipple Cave Trail in Far South Egans Wilderness would be designated as a hiking trail to access Whipple 

Cave. The trail would be approximately 300 feet and would follow the current existing path to the cave 

entrance. 

Whipple Cave Trail 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 23]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 24]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 25]
 
Management of Vehicle Access Points and Designation of Staging Areas 

The wilderness areas, while only occasionally visited during the majority of the year, are visited more heavily 

during hunting season (August through December). Several access points are used for entry. Access points 

are defined as locations along wilderness boundaries where concentrated entry occurs; this could be where a 

road dead ends at the wilderness boundary or along a boundary road. Several access points exist around each 

wilderness, including Dupont Creek and Cottonwood Canyon on Mount Grafton Wilderness. 

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

improvements should be made in order to protect wilderness character. These access points may be defined 

by creating vehicle turn-around at or before the wilderness boundary to help deter motorized or mechanized 

vehicles from continuing into wilderness. Vehicle turn-around would be limited to 0.5 acre, within the 100

foot buffer off the road, and would not extend into wilderness. 

Additional staging areas could be constructed when necessary to accommodate vehicle parking, visitation and 

to protect wilderness character. This is a location with more concentrated use than an access point, such as a 

trailhead. The area of disturbance would be no more than 1 acre per staging area and would not extend into 

wilderness. Vehicle barriers could be constructed outside of wilderness where natural obstacles are not 

adequate to prevent vehicles from crossing into wilderness. Barriers could include the following: wilderness 

signs, a berm associated with turn-around, small rocks and/or vegetation placement or restoration, large 

boulders moved by heavy equipment, posts, fences and/or gates. As necessary, BLM appropriate land use 

authorization or right-of-ways would be obtained. 

Cherry stems 

A cherry stem is a road that is excluded from the designated wilderness by a non-wilderness corridor having 

designated wilderness on both sides. Where determined feasible, roads adjacent to and accessing the 

wilderness areas, such as cherrystem and administrative access routes, would be maintained in the condition 

that existed at the time of wilderness designation. Using a trail maintenance approach, the installation of water 

bars to control the flow of water, as opposed to blading or culvert installation, would be utilized. See Table 3 

below. 

Site-Specific Action 

Mount Grafton Wilderness would have three staging areas: North Creek (east side), Robber’s Roost and 

North Creek (west side). Whipple Cave staging area will be designated for Far South Egans Wilderness. See 

Maps 8 and 11. Numerous access points are found around each wilderness. 

The Cave Valley Ranch, which owns several inholdings on the western side of the Mount Grafton Wilderness, 

is managing these inholdings with a private conservation easement. This conservation easement prohibits new 

road construction, and any new development on those parcels. An additional goal of the ranch is to use only 

non-motorized, traditional forms of travel or transport on their private parcels. Therefore, the trailhead has 

been established on the North Creek cherrystem (west side) to support this effort. 

 

­

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 26]
 
 

Table 3: Maintenance Levels for Cherry Stem Routes 

Wilderness Engineered Two Track 

Murphy’s Wash 

John’s Wash 

Big Spring Wash 

Decathon Wash 

South Fork Chokecherry 

Robber’s Roost 

Robber’s Roost Spring 

North Creek (East side) 

Campbell Spring 

None 

Long Canyon 

Robber’s Roost (Jeep Trail) 

Cappy’s Diggin’s/North Creek 

(West side) 

Geyser Spring 

Dupont Creek 

SW Mine Site 

Cave Valley Well 

Sawmill Well None 

Parker Spring 

Sheep Pass Canyon (lower half) 

Blue Spring 

West Parker Spring 

Travis Spring 

Little Geyser Spring 

Sheep Pass Canyon 

(upper half) 

Wildcat Canyon 

ATV 

Highland Ridge None 

Mount Grafton 

Far South Egans 

SouthEgan Range 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 27]
 
 

Management of Signs 

The wilderness boundary will be identified by markers along the boundary roads and cherry stem routes. 

Boundary markers (e.g. carsonite posts) delineate most boundary edges. 

Directional signs, key entrance signs and information kiosks have been placed around all four wilderness area 

under Wilderness Signs & Information Kiosks CX (DOI-BLM-NV-L000-2009-003-CX). See Maps 8-11. 

Directional signs, placed along minor routes and entrances to cherry stems, direct visitors to wilderness 

access points or staging areas. These signs will also help to both identify legal driving routes and reduce illegal 

vehicle intrusions. 

Key entrance signs state the name of the wilderness, and were placed where visitors are likely to come into 

contact with the wilderness boundary. Both directional and key entrance signs are larger than the boundary 

markers. 

Kiosks will be one or two-paneled information signs placed at staging areas, access points, or on major roads. 

These signs will provide regional and local information regarding wilderness, natural and cultural resources, 

regulatory information, and interpretation. These signs will direct visitor use away from sensitive resources. 

Additionally, certain kiosks may include visitor surveys with collection boxes. Signs will be installed to manage 

for changing needs. 

At trailheads, signs would be installed stating “This trail is open to hikers, horses. Closed to motor vehicles 

and motorized equipment.” At locations where there is visitor access along former vehicle routes, carsonite 

markers will be posted stating “Restoration Site: This area is being rehabilitated to protect the wilderness 

environment.” or similar signage. Steel posts would be placed at routes which are receiving repeated illegal 

trespass or sign vandalism. 

Site-Specific Action 

An additional sign, not covered in the above CX, would be placed at the staging area for Whipple Cave. It will 

provide information in an interpretive format on cave formations. Additional interagency signs at trailheads on 

Highland Ridge Wilderness may be considered. 

A junction sign will be added in the cherry stem at Big Spring Wash / Decathon road junction. 

A regional kiosk panel would be placed on the Patterson Silver State Off-Highway Vehicle Trailhead. There is 

a three-panel kiosk in place at this trailhead and one panel on wilderness (map and information) would be 

installed on it. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 28]
 
 

Examples of signs 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 29]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Management of Vegetation Restoration 

Vegetation treatments considered in wilderness will be conducted in compliance with the 6340 manual: 

Manipulation of vegetation through prescribed fire, chemical application, mechanical treatment, or 

introduced biological agents, is normally not permitted. Exceptions may include emergencies, actions 

taken to recover a federally listed threatened or endangered species, control of non-native species, and 

restoration actions where natural processes alone cannot recover the area from past human 

intervention. All management activities must be designed to strive towards natural vegetative 

composition and processes that reflect what would likely have developed with minimal human influence. 

When a vegetation treatment is deemed appropriate following an environmental analysis and a Minimum 

Requirements Analysis, management activities would emphasize protection and enhancement of wilderness 

character. Projects that attempt to restore native vegetation and enhance the resiliency of impaired vegetation 

communities with objectives that fall within the bounds of maintaining or improving wilderness character 

would be considered. The ‘Natural’ quality of wilderness character may be enhanced by vegetation treatment 

so long as it is the minimum necessary to preserve wilderness character. Naturalness is degraded by the 

effects of modern people on the ecological systems inside the wilderness since the time the area was 

designated as wilderness, such as fire suppression. 

Several tree species found within the Highland Ridge, Mount Grafton, South Egan Range and Far South Egans 

Wilderness areas are relatively rare in the Great Basin. Both ponderosa pine stands and aspen stands are 

remnants from the Pleistocene era when ponderosa and aspen was a much more widespread species in the 

Great Basin. Today they are only found in physically and disjoint populations at higher elevations. Due to the 

scarcity and potential risk to these systems they would receive higher priority for evaluation and treatment. 

Ponderosa stands which historically were maintained by disturbance, generally wildfire, as open, pure stands 

often are becoming encroached by other conifer species, specifically singleleaf pinyon pine and Utah juniper. 

The resulting stands are much denser than what would occur with a natural disturbance regime with many 

more ladder fuels that puts these remnant ponderosa pine stands at risk of high severity, high intensity and 

high mortality wildfires. The increased density also puts the ponderosa pine trees at an increased risk of 

mortality due to insects, especially mountain pine beetle. Drought also plays a factor in more stress to the 

trees and lowers the natural ability of the trees to survive an insect attack. Upper elevations on the Pinyon 

and Juniper Woodlands, and other vegetative communities that support pinyon and juniper, are adjacent to 

the vegetative communities that support Bristlecone Pine (Pinus longaeva). While often thought of being 

present on very high elevation, low productivity rocky sites within the wilderness areas being analyzed the 

Bristlecone Pines can be found intermixed with Limber Pine (Pinus flexilis) on sites that support 

sage species and various perennial grasses. In these systems the historic fire regime was for low intensity fine 

scale fires. Understory vegetation is typically sparse and direct contact of the tree by fire is low to minimal. 

According to the LANDFIRE Biophysical setting model for Inter-Mountain Basins Subalpine Limer-Bristlecone 

Pine Woodland only 27 percent of the fires that occur within this vegetative community are stand replacing 

fires with an average fire interval of 143 years. The increase in Pinyon and Juniper in the vegetative 

communities that are adjacent to these stands as well as intermixed within these stands have the potential to 

increase both fire intensity and severity leading to a potential increase of tree mortality for all species present. 

The fate of quaking aspen stands is also in question due to an altered natural disturbance regime, as well as 

herbivory by ungulates including livestock, big game and wild horses. Aspen faces a double edge sword: a lack 

of regeneration and the quick dying of overstory stems once shaded due to the extreme shade intolerance of 

aspen. Many conifer species, such as white fir, pinyon pine, Utah and Rocky Mountain juniper, limber pine and 

Engelmann spruce can become dominant over aspen relatively quickly. Stands also often don’t send up new 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 30]
 
aspen shoots without some sort of disturbance to the existing root system. Historically, this was done by 

periodic fire stimulating hormonal responses in the aspen sending up a sea of new aspen stems. Fire would 

also kill the encroaching conifers that are much less fire resilient than aspen. 

One of the tools used to make the assessment of the watershed’s condition is Fire Regime Condition Class 

(FRCC), which is an interagency, standardized tool based on scientific and peer reviewed literature for 

determining the degree of departure from a reference vegetation condition within a given biophysical setting. 

FRCC describes the departure from natural fire regimes, which is one indicator of the naturalness of the 

wilderness. For each wilderness, the FRCC rating has been calculated (see the Vegetation section in the EA, 

Page 88) which indicates the degree of departure from the reference condition (i.e. vegetation pre-European 

settlement). For more information on FRCC see Appendix D. 

Preference would be given to allowing natural ignition fires to burn within the wilderness. Vegetation 

treatments may be considered to in order to establish conditions where naturally ignited fires could play a 

natural role with in the ecosystem. 

If approved, prescribed fire would occur with little or no suppression or control efforts, unless fire escapes its 

treatment conditions and threaten other values. Vegetation communities that are in a condition where 

prescribed or natural fire would occur at intensity and severity levels beyond the historical fire regime may 

require pre-treatment to prevent the loss of key ecosystem components due to wildfire or prescribed fire. 

Temporary structures, such as exclosure fences, may be permitted when their presence would contribute to 

the long-term enhancement of wilderness character. When considering these structures, preference would 

be given to the least disturbing, least visible and shortest duration methods available. 

An analysis using the MRDG must be made in non-urgent situations to determine whether or not any 

restoration action within a wilderness is warranted. The MRDG must also be used to determine the most 

appropriate method to use in order to minimize impacts to wilderness qualities. As Minimum Requirements 

Analysis is completed for potential vegetation treatments the following factors, among others, may be 

considered: 

 Review success of comparable treatments in nearby or similar areas. 

 Consider potential loss of key ecosystem components should disturbance occur outside of the 

historical disturbance regime. 

 Potential risks of conducting the treatment. 

Site-Specific Action 

Vegetation treatments within wilderness would be analyzed in an MRDG with additional site-specific NEPA. 

For all wildernesses, naturally ignited fires would be allowed to burn where fuels and climate conditions 

support achieving resource management objectives in compliance with current EYDO BLM fire management 

policies. The overall goal would be to allow the wilderness to return to a condition that allows naturallyignited fires to play a natural role within wilderness. 

Mount Grafton Wilderness is approved for restoration activities which are covered within the South Steptoe 

Valley Watershed Restoration Plan (DOI-BLM-NV-L020-2011-0013) and the Cave Valley and Lake Valley 

Watershed Restoration Plan (DOI-BLM-NV-L020-2011-0021). Highland Ridge wilderness would be evaluated 

for vegetative restoration treatments within the Hamblin and South Spring Valley Watershed Restoration Plan. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 31]
 
 

Management of Wildlife 

Over the life of this Plan, it may be necessary to implement wildlife management activities within the four 

wilderness areas to: 

1) mitigate loss of natural water sources, 

2) mitigate for wildlife habitat loss or fragmentation, 

3) reduce competition among wildlife, livestock, and wild horses, or 

4) reduce competition among wildlife species. 

Wildlife management activities would be conducted in conformance with the current (2012) BLM-NDOW 

Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) (BLM-MOU-6300-NV-930-0402), as amended, regarding wildlife 

management in Wilderness Areas and guided by both the WPCCRDA (2006) and LCCRDA (2004), which 

may include, on a case-by-case basis, the occasional and temporary use of motorized vehicles or tools. Also 

the forthcoming Nevada and Northern California Greater Sage – Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and EIS 

guidance would be adopted. 

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

stipulations: 

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

brood rearing seasons. 

 Migratory birds – during the migratory bird nesting season from May 1 – July 15. If disturbance occurs 

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

 Raptors – April 15 – July 15 within a half-mile of active raptor nests, unless the nest has been 

determined to be inactive for at least 5 years. 

 Big Game – within big game calving/fawning/kidding grounds and crucial summer range from April 15 –

June 30. 

 Big Game – crucial winter range November 1 – March 31. 

 Desert Bighorn Sheep – March 1 – May 31 and July 1 – August 31. 

Wildlife Water Developments 

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

lost as a result of human influence. Restoration of existing natural water sources is preferred and will be 

analyzed for wildlife benefit prior to considering artificial water developments. Any new facilities should be 

considered outside of wilderness first. LCCRDA (2004) and WPCCRDA (2006) permit existing and future 

structures and facilities, including inspections and maintenance, for wildlife water development projects in 

wilderness when considered essential to preserve, enhance, or prevent degradation of wilderness character. 

Wildlife water developments may be authorized if the structures and facilities will enhance wilderness values 

by promoting healthy, viable, and more naturally distributed wildlife populations and the visual impacts meet 

VRM Class I criteria. Proposals will be considered for construction of new developments, which may allow 

motorized and/or mechanized equipment during construction, if deemed necessary by the public notification, 

MRDG analysis and site-specific NEPA assessment. 

Removal, Replacement, Modification and New Water Developments 

Should removal, replacement, or modification be required for any existing wildlife water developments, or if 

new water developments are proposed, the Ely District Manager will follow the requirements for processing, 

analyzing and evaluating such proposals including motorized access in the current BLM-NDOW MOU. The Ely 

District Manager will issue a public notification, prepare a MRDG, NEPA analysis, and appropriate decision 

documents as prescribed by BLM policy and procedure. Modifications to existing water developments may be 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 32]
 
made as long as the designed capacity and/or dimensions of the existing development are not exceeded 

replacement of existing water developments and meet VRM Class I criteria. 

Wildlife Relocation 

According to the BLM-NDOW MOU (2012), transplants (i.e., removal or reintroduction of terrestrial wildlife 

species in Nevada BLM Wilderness Areas) may be permitted if necessary: (1) to perpetuate or recover a 

threatened or endangered species; or (2) to restore the population of indigenous species eliminated or 

reduced by human influence. Sites and locations outside wilderness will be used first. If sites and locations 

outside wilderness are not available, transplants shall be made in a manner compatible with the wilderness 

character of the area. Transplant projects, including follow-up monitoring, require advance written approval 

from the BLM, if the action requires ground disturbing activities, motorized methods, and/or temporary 

holding and handling facilities. Also, release of wildlife on public lands will be in conformance with BLM Manual 

1745 (Introduction, Transplant, Augmentation, and Reestablishment of Fish, Wildlife and Plants, 1992) and the 

BLM-NDOW MOU. A MRDG and NEPA analysis would occur for site-specific actions. If motorized or 

mechanized means are authorized, staging would occur outside the wilderness boundary. When feasible, the 

specific project implementation will occur during periods when visitor use is low (for example, weekdays). In 

order to inform visitors of impending activity, relocation dates would be posted on the BLM website two 

weeks in advance. 

Collar Retrieval 

NDOW may submit requests for use of a helicopter in the wilderness areas in order to retrieve data from 

Very High Frequency (VHF)/GPS telemetry collars which have dropped off study animals or from animals 

which have died. In locating remotely situated study animals or dropped collars, opportunities to retrieve 

telemetry collars are usually discovered while performing aerial survey using helicopter where direct line of 

site detection of signals from transmitters are optimal. Once a collar’s location is determined, its retrieval by 

aircraft assistance is usually unnecessary. However, in rare instances, NDOW may need to land a helicopter in 

remote wilderness locations as there is a narrow window of time to retrieve the collar before its location 

signal ceases and significant data stored in the collar is effectively lost. Furthermore, if animal mortality is 

involved, speedy access to the animal to perform a necropsy would provide additional information on the 

species. 

 

NDOW would notify the BLM Wilderness Specialist any time they are requesting a helicopter for collar 

retrieval. The Wilderness Specialist would then evaluate the location, and recommend authorization for the 

use of a helicopter from the District Manager if any of the following criteria apply: 

 Collar retrieval is requested between the months of May-September or the day time high will be 

over 100°F as extreme heat would limit the distance that could be covered on foot safely. 

 Collar is located more than five miles from a vehicle access point or helicopter landing zone outside 

of wilderness. 

 Extreme elevation gain and loss to access the collar location. 

 Collar is located on a cliff and technical rock climbing gear or rappelling is needed to retrieve the 

collar. 

Riparian & Stream Habitat Improvement 

Both Geyser Creek and North Creek (east side) on Mount Grafton Wilderness contain populations of 

rainbow and brook trout, as of the last survey in 1984. Perennial streams in wilderness should be surveyed 

and sampled for fish species, habitat and water quality indicators by NDOW. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 33]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wildlife Damage Management 

To maintain the areas’ natural character, wildlife damage management may be necessary to protect federally 

listed, declining, and reintroduced indigenous wildlife species: to prevent transmission of diseases or parasites 

affecting other wildlife and humans, or to prevent considerable loss of livestock. Wildlife damage management 

is conducted at the request of federal, state, or local agencies, private organizations, and individuals. 

APHIS will provide BLM with data on animal damage control activities (numbers and types of animals taken) 

that occurs within wilderness for the District annual wilderness reports. Activities would use the minimum 

amount of control necessary to resolve wildlife damage problems. Acceptable control measures include lethal 

and non-lethal methods, however, toxicants and M-44 devices (sodium cyanide) are prohibited. Activities 

would be conducted on foot and may include the use of stock. Use of motorized vehicles, motorized 

equipment, and/or mechanical transport must be approved by the BLM on a case-by-case basis. Activities 

occurring in wilderness would be approved by the BLM and conducted in conformance with the BLM-APHIS 

MOU (2012) and BLM Manual 6340 (Management of Designated Wilderness). 

Site - Specific Actions: 

Wildlife Water Developments 

The Pick-Up wildlife water development (aka guzzler), within the Far South Egans Wilderness, would be 

upgraded with a gravity-fed style guzzler. Currently, there is not enough water storage capacity or collection 

area to provide water for wildlife on a consistent basis. The new plan would entail two 1,800 gallon tanks and 

a 1,000 square foot apron in a color that minimizes visual contrast, which would supply approximately 3,100 

gallons annually in dry years (about 5 inches of annual precipitation). A helicopter would be used to transport 

the new materials to the site and remove the old project components. The helicopter would not land in 

wilderness. Worker access would be hiking to the site. Generators would be used to operate power tools for 

construction. 

Also proposed for removal are three defunct developments, Wildcat #1, Wildcat #2 and Robber’s Roost, in 

Mount Grafton Wilderness. Wildcat #1 would be cut into pieces and packed out on foot. Wildcat #2 and 

Robber’s Roost would remain, contingent on BLM or NDOW upgrading or replacing within 3 years of the 

completion of this plan. If no action is taken on Wildcat #2 and Robber’s Roost, they would be removed by 

using vehicles along identified closed routes. The routes would be decommissioned after use to naturalize the 

disturbance. Smaller components would be packed out by BLM employees or volunteers. See Map 9. 

On the South Egan Range Wilderness, the wildlife water development in Sheep Pass Canyon, also nonfunctioning, would be removed to a vehicle on the cherrystem. See Map 11. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 34]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Management of Herd Areas 

The goal within a Herd Management Area (HMA) is to “maintain and manage healthy, self-sustaining wild 

horse herds ... within appropriate management levels ... to ensure a thriving natural ecological balance” 

(RMP, 2008b). Management of wild horses is accomplished by activity plans created by the BLM Wild Horse 

Burro Specialist. None of the wilderness areas overlap with a HMA. 

These four wilderness areas lie in herd areas – areas in which there are wild horse herds not managed within 

a HMA. The management prescription in herd areas is to reduce the numbers to zero. Therefore, all horses 

are targeted for removal. However, some horses may remain or immigrate from HMAs or other areas leading 

to periodic gathers in order to achieve a zero level. For wilderness, if the minimum requirement analysis 

results in motorized means for horse gathers, aircraft, including helicopters, may be used to survey, capture, 

and monitor wild horses. There are no burros in the wilderness areas. 

However, aircraft may not land inside wilderness boundaries except in cases of emergency or by approval 

from the Ely District Manager. In cases where impacts to springs and riparian systems result from wild horses 

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

character. 

Wild horses 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 35]
 
 

Management of Fire Suppression, Fuels and Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation 

Fire management objectives in the wilderness would be structured in accordance with the Ely Fire 

Management Plan (FMP, 2008c) and the Ely District Approved Resource Management Plan (RMP) (2008b). If 

the FMP is updated over the life of this WMP, the new policies would be followed. According to the RMP, the 

overall objectives for fire management are to “manage wildland and prescribed fires as one of the tools in the 

treatment of vegetation communities and watersheds to achieve the desired range of condition for vegetation, 

watersheds, and other resource programs (e.g., livestock, wild horses, soils, etc.)” (RMP 2008b). Further, 

BLM Manual 6340 (Management of Designated Wilderness) states: 

The overall goal of managing fire in wilderness is to allow the frequency and intensity of an ecosystem’s 

natural fire regime to play its inherent role in that ecosystem. This means both allowing fire where 

ecosystems evolved in the presence of fire and preventing unnatural spread of fire in ecosystems that 

evolved without broad-scale fires. 

For details regarding fire management units within wilderness, including maps, see the Fire Management 

section in the EA (Page 73). 

Management actions are developed following the initial report for wildland fires in the planning area and 

include a range of specific actions. Response would be determined according to the RMP and the FMP for each 

wildland fire. Wildland fire use can be determined as a response to the extent practical for resource benefit, 

to improve ecological system function and to allow fire to function as a natural part of the ecological system. 

Wildfire management priorities include maintaining native vegetation diversity by managing fire size to 

minimize the spread and density of noxious or invasive weeds, such as cheat grass. Minimum Impact 

Suppression Tactics (MIST) would be followed in an effort to minimize impacts to wilderness character. Any 

actions deemed necessary by the Incident Commander for public and firefighter safety would be authorized. 

Fire Use Guidelines 

Wildland fire will be used to protect, maintain, and enhance resources and, as nearly as possible, be allowed to 

function in its natural ecological role. Wildland fires that occur in areas identified for wildland fire use will be 

managed, to the extent practical for resource benefit, to improve ecosystem function, and to allow fire to 

function as a natural part of the ecosystem. It is an appropriate response in wilderness. 

Fire Suppression Guidelines 

Minimum cost and consistency with resource objectives will be considered. The following points will guide 

suppression within wilderness: 

 A Wilderness Specialist or Wilderness Resource Advisor would be dispatched to all fires occurring in 

or threatening a wilderness area. 

 Use of any motorized equipment, including heavy machinery such as bulldozers, would be considered 

for approval by the District Manager in cases where the fire is threatening human life or property. 

 Helibases and helispots would be located outside of wilderness boundaries. When this is not feasible, 

the District Manager may approve temporary sites within wilderness that require minimal clearing of 

natural vegetation. Upon final suppression of the fire, the temporary helibase or helispot will be 

rehabilitated as necessary to a natural condition. 

 Staging areas and fire camps requiring motorized access would be located outside of wilderness unless 

authorized by the District Manager. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 36]
 
 

 Staging areas and fire camps that only require non-motorized access may be located in wilderness areas 

if authorized by the District Manager. 

 Sling loading materials into or out of wilderness using a helicopter must be approved by the District 

Manager. 

 Helicopters or other aircraft may be used for aerial reconnaissance work. 

 The Ely District Office Noxious Weed Prevention Schedule, which identifies best management 

practices, would be utilized. Suppression equipment would be inspected and washed to prevent the 

spread of noxious weeds. Wash-down sites would be recorded using a Global Positioning System 

(GPS) unit, if possible, and reported to the Ely District Office Weeds Program. Camps and other 

assembly points would not be located in noxious weed infestation areas. 

 Use of retardant must be approved by the District Manager; if retardant is not approved, water may be 

dropped from retardant aircraft as ordered by the Incident Commander without additional 

authorization. 

 All fire suppression activities in wilderness would use MIST guidelines unless a higher degree or level of 

fire suppression is required. 

 Leave No Trace principles would be used in wilderness areas. All evidence of human activity would be 

removed or rehabilitated to the maximum extent possible during demobilization. 

Suppression Activity Damage 

Repair of fire Suppression Activity Damage (SAD) will generally be planned and implemented as appropriate, 

by the suppression incident organization, prior to demobilization. Repair of SAD may occur with the same 

type of equipment that was used for the suppression activity. If motorized earth-moving equipment was used 

to construct fire lines, then the same type of equipment may be needed for rehabilitation and recontouring. 

Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Activities 

Following site-specific assessments and planning, Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation (ES & R) activities 

may be undertaken in accordance with current Department of Interior policy (620 DM 3 Wildland Fire 

Management Burned Area Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation) and BLM policy (H-1742-1 Burned 

Areas Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Handbook). The 2012 Emergency Stabilization and 

Rehabilitation Projects EA (EA #DOI-BLM-NV-L0000-2012-0004-EA) was implemented in 2013, which aerially 

seeded 2,800 acres of the Egan fire in the South Egan Range Wilderness. 

The following points would guide ES & R within wilderness: 

1.	 Natural recovery by native plant species is preferable to planting or seeding. The potential for recovery 

of existing vegetation and the potential establishment of invasive species should be evaluated prior to 

recommending seeding or planting. Seeding or planting will only be used when objectives cannot be 

accomplished without seeding or planting and there is a threat to wilderness values if no action is 

taken. When seeding or planting is recommended, the use of native material, preferably of local genetic 

stock, will be prioritized. When material of local genetic stock is not available timely or economically, 

or will not accomplish objectives, then other options may be evaluated. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 37]
 
2.	 The use of “assisted succession” or other similar techniques that employ the use of non-native species 

may be approved on a case-by-case basis with site-specific NEPA analysis. The use of non-native seed is 

appropriate only if 1) Suitable native species are not available; 2) the natural biological diversity of the 

proposed management area will not be diminished; 3) exotic and naturalized species can be confined 

within the proposed management area; 4) analysis of ecological site inventory information, if available 

for the site, indicates that a site will not support reestablishment of a species that historically was a 

part of the natural environment; 5) resource management objectives cannot be met with native 

species. (H-1745 Introduction, Transplant, Augmentation, and Reestablishment of Fish, Wildlife, and 

Plants). 

o	 “Assisted succession” is a two-phase approach used to prevent an area from being dominated 

by invasive annual grasses or for manipulating an area that is already dominated by invasive 

annual grasses. In the first phase, a matrix of perennial plants is established. This matrix may be 

established using less desirable perennial species such as non-native species, or native species 

that are not locally adapted. In the second phase, the less desirable perennial plants are 

replaced or augmented with more desirable perennial plants. The second phase may or may not 

require active management to remove the less desirable perennials or to introduce more 

desirable natives. If the less desirable perennials are short-lived, sterile, unable to reproduce 

successfully on the site, or will not compete well with more desirable natives when those plants 

become established, then management intervention may not be necessary to remove the less 

desirable perennials. If native recruitment of more desirable perennials occurs, then secondary 

seeding may not be necessary. In some cases, selectively removal of less desirable species or 

secondary seeding may be necessary. Selective removal projects will follow standards presented 

in the Noxious and Non-Native Invasive Weeds section (Page 17). 

3.	 The following activities could occur in Wilderness and may be approved on a case-by-case basis by the 

District Manager. These activities would follow standards presented in the Fire Suppression Guidelines 

section and must be necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of these two 

areas as wilderness. 

o	 The use of overland motorized equipment. 

o	 The location of helibases and helispots. 

o	 Sling loading materials into or out of wilderness using a helicopter. 

o	 Helicopters or other aircraft for aerial seeding. 

4.	 Temporary structures, such as hydrologic, meteorological, or climatological collection devices, may be 

approved if deemed essential to flood warning, flood control, or water reservoir operation activities. 

Exclosure fences to protect seeding may also be approved. 

5.	 Erosion control techniques such as the installation of anchored logs, bales, or wattles; the application 

of mulch, or the use of other techniques to slow water flow may be approved when their presence 

would contribute to the long term enhancement of wilderness character, or are necessary to meet 

minimum requirements for the administration of these areas as wilderness. 

6.	 Minor developments and facilities (e.g., kiosks, fences, exclosures, small water pipelines, interpretive or 

boundary signs, water control structures, corrals, wildlife water developments, trails, etc.) burned or 

damaged by wildfire could be repaired or replaced to pre-fire specifications when this repair or 

replacement would contribute to the long term enhancement of wilderness character, or is necessary 

to meet minimum requirements for the administration of these areas as wilderness. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 38]
 
 

7.	 Non-motorized and non-mechanized visual inspections for hazardous conditions or materials may be 

conducted. This would not preclude aerial observations, though no landings would be permitted 

without District Manager approval. 

8.	 Burned or seeded areas may be temporarily closed to the public if unacceptable resource damage 

would occur, or if danger to the public is present due to fire damage until safety assessments can be 

completed. 

9.	 Efforts to stabilize and prevent post-fire related degradation to cultural resources including 

archeological sites, cultural landscapes, traditional cultural properties, and historic structures may be 

approved. 

10. Techniques described in the “Management of Small-Scale Surface Disturbances” may be approved for 

use in ES & R (Page 20). 

 

Addition standards regarding ES & R activities which apply to all BLM managed lands can be found in Burned 

Areas Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Handbook (H-1742-1) such as grazing closures, and 

vegetation and soil monitoring. 

Site Specific Proposed Action 

For all wildernesses, naturally ignited fires would be allowed to burn where fuels and climate conditions 

support achieving resource management objectives 

Fire in Mount Grafton Wilderness 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 39]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Protection of Archeological Resources and Historic Properties 

The management and protection of cultural resources is guided by federal laws, the Cultural Resource 

Inventory General Guidelines (as currently published by the Nevada State Office), and the current State 

Protocol Agreement between the BLM and the Nevada State Historic Preservation Office. This includes the 

identification, evaluation and preservation of cultural resources. In some cases, the management of historic 

properties on wilderness lands may enhance the preservation of these resources. Prior to any action in 

wilderness, the potential effects on cultural resources will be evaluated per Section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act of 1966, per Ely District guidelines and the BLM Nevada State Protocol Agreement 

with the State Historic Preservation Office. 

For protection from wildland fire and enhancement of cultural resources, vegetation may be cut back or 

removed up to several feet from a resource or property, such as prehistoric rock art. This would be 

accomplished before fire season with the use of hand tools like pruning shears and Pulaskis. Resource 

protection and enhancement work would be completed after a trained cultural resource specialist’s review. 

Protection of archaeological resources from damage by wilderness visitors may be accomplished with the 

minimum necessary on-the-ground action. Resources would be monitored to determine conditions. If 

monitoring reveals that damage is occurring to cultural resources, the BLM Ely District wilderness planner and 

archaeologist would work together to develop a management strategy for preventing further damage, 

including, but not limited to, education, signage, and natural barriers. 

Every attempt would be made for protection of artifacts and other archaeological remains in place. If these are 

discovered on designated trails, foot-worn hiking paths, or other areas of recreational use, the trail may be rerouted or alternate preservation or protection actions may be taken after consultation with the State Historic 

Preservation Office according to the standard process followed by the Ely District cultural resource specialist. 

Additionally, inventory for cultural resources will be completed at natural springs in proximity to, or within 

wilderness, and along access and cherry stem routes in an effort to inform management of decisions for the 

protection of these resources. No undertakings would occur prior to completion of cultural resource and 

consultation processes. 

Structures with National Register of Historic Places Eligibility or have historical significance, which warrant 

retention as a feature of the wilderness, will receive additional protection of structures through increased 

patrol by rangers and law enforcement. Additionally, they may require active protection as part of wildland fire 

suppression actions, such actions could include the use of protective foil materials, fire retardants, and fuel 

breaks. Within ten (10) years of the Decision Record for the Plan, the BLM would seek to remove from the 

wilderness all structures which do not have historical significance and are not eligible for the National Register 

of Historic Places as required by Bureau policy. 

Summit and cave registers would not be removed. Other structures and installations may be removed if they 

are not the minimum necessary for the administration of the area as wilderness, or if they are not associated 

with a prior use or valid existing right. 

BLM staff and volunteers that monitor wilderness would be given instructions on the identification of human 

effects that would be considered unattended personal property or refuse. Unattended personal property not 

associated with an active camp would be removed by BLM personnel, and held for 30 days at the appropriate 

BLM District or Field Office. If possible, the owner of the personal property would be contacted. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 40]
 
Human effects which may be old enough to be considered cultural artifacts will be evaluated by a qualified 

archaeologist. Cultural resources will be left in place. Removal of cultural resources is a last resort, and will 

not occur without full compliance with federal mitigation and preservation requirements and processes. 

If mine adits or shafts are found in these wilderness areas – and are not eligible for the National Register of 

Historic Places (NRHP) – they may be filled or closed in order to enhance wilderness character and public 

safety using compliant actions such as, but not limited to, hand tools, foam plug, and dynamite. May be filled by 

backfill using native soil, foam filled, if historic content present or bat gate installed, if bats are present. 

Cultural, sensitive plant and biologic surveys will be completed prior to securing. NEPA and MRDG analyses 

would be required for certain actions including, but not limited to, bulldozers and bat gates. If mine adits or 

shafts are proposed for closure, bat surveys would be conducted. 

Pending cultural inventory of the Sheep Creek cabin in Mount Grafton Wilderness, the following options may 

be considered: 

 If rights can be identified for permitted use for support of sheep grazing activities, the cabin would be 

allowed to remain. The Wilderness Act and the Congressional Grazing Guidelines allow for continued 

use and maintenance of supporting facilities that were in place at the time of wilderness designation. 

 If no rights are identified for permittee use and it is deemed historic, it may remain. Maintenance levels 

and methods would then be determined. 

 If no rights are identified for permittee use, and it is not deemed historic, it will be removed. Methods 

of removal may include: demolition and airlifting pieces out; utilizing a trailer in to haul it out, or a 

combination of these and other methods. An MRDG analysis would be completed for this action. 

Site Specific Action 

The cabin on Murphy’s Wash cherrystem in Highland Ridge Wilderness would be retained. This cabin was 

previously a US Forest Service Ranger cabin and was built in 1958. A separate Historic Preservation 

Treatment Plan will be prepared for the cabin. The State Historic Preservation Office would be consulted at 

that time. The following hierarchy of management options for the Highland Ridge Cabin may be implemented: 

 No reservation system: first come, first served. 

 Outfitter and Guides are not allowed to occupy the cabin or its surrounding area. 

 If warranted, a reservation system and reservation obtained at the BLM office. 

On the southwest side of Mount Grafton Wilderness there is a small shack, remains from a previous mining 

operation. The shack and debris will be removed pending a cultural inventory. The site will be seeded, and 

routes inside the wilderness will be obliterated. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 41]
 
 

Management of Recreation Opportunities 

A variety of primitive and unconfined types of recreational activities are likely to occur in all four wilderness 

areas. Management actions that may be initiated in response to recreational impacts include, but are not 

limited to: 

 Public outreach and education in Leave No Trace principles to encourage minimum impact practices. 

 Provide information to the public on non-wilderness recreational opportunities in the region. 

 Establish protective areas around sensitive resources where recreation activities may be restricted. 

 Closure of areas to recreation activities. Examples may include areas with sensitive plant and animal 

species or water resources. 

 Campsite management to maintain use at existing sites and prevent unmanaged site expansion or new 

site establishment. 

Recreational horseback riding and use of pack stock animals would be allowed both on and off trail. Other 

than incidental browsing, riding and pack stock animals may only be fed with packed-in, certified weed-free 

feed. 

Traditional geocaching and letterboxing would not be allowed, however virtual geocaches are an accepted 

activity within wilderness. Traditional geocaches and letterboxes would be removed when encountered, and 

visitors wishing to participate would be directed to locations outside wilderness. In the instance that a virtual 

geocache identifies a sensitive site, the sponsor will be asked to remove the site from the internet. 

According to BLM Wilderness policy (Manual 6340), “casual collection of small quantities of renewable resources 

(such as wood, fruit, nuts or other vegetation) is permitted for use within the wilderness or for non-commercial, personal 

use.” Any wood cutting in wilderness would be limited to dead and down material collected without 

motorized or mechanized equipment such as for a typical campfire. 

Hunting 

Hunting and trapping are allowed in wilderness, subject to applicable State and Federal laws and regulations. 

The creation or construction of permanent blinds in wilderness areas and wilderness study areas is not 

allowed (43 CFR 6302.20(f)). However, portable or “pop-up” blinds may be temporarily allowed for hunting, 

photography, wildlife observation and similar purposes for a period of fourteen (14) days if they are packed or 

carried in and out and do not require the disturbance or destruction of native soil, rock, or vegetation. 

Portable and “pop-up” blinds must be attended or occupied at least some portion of a ten day period within 

the 14 day period of use. If blinds are not attended or occupied for 10 days, they will be considered 

unattended property and/or permanent structures and will be subject to removal by the BLM (43 CFR 8365.1

2(b)) and subject to disposition under the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as 

amended (40 U.S.C. 484(m)). 

It is suggested that anyone who packs or carries a portable or “pop-up” blind into a wilderness or wilderness 

study area affix to the blind his or her name, address, phone number, the date the blind was placed, and the 

dates the blind will be unattended or unoccupied. This request would be made in any hunter mailings 

regarding wilderness. 

­

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 42]
 
 

Camping 

Camping is allowed on public lands. Occupying a campsite is allowed for up to 14 days. Should a visitor wish to 

camp longer than 14 days, their camp must be relocated a minimum of 25 miles from the previous site 

(Federal Register Notice, Vol. 58, No. 191, October 5, 1993). On occasion an extended stay permit may be 

pursued with the local office if warranted. If monitoring shows that the 14-day stay limit is leading to 

unacceptable resource impacts, site stay limits of less than 14 days could be implemented. 

Campfires will be allowed except during fire hazard restrictions. Leave No Trace camping techniques would 

be encouraged through literature and BLM-sponsored Leave No Trace public workshops. Use of impacted 

sites, usually denoted by the presence of a campfire rock ring is encouraged rather than continually disturbing 

and compacting new vegetation. Some impacted site would be restored to a natural condition to minimize 

additional camping disturbance. Campsites closer than 300 feet to sole water sources would also be removed 

in compliance with state regulations (N.R.S. 50.660). 

Managing to Maintain Solitude 

These wilderness areas currently enjoy outstanding opportunities for solitude and are infrequently visited, 

with the highest use occurring during hunting season. Numeric standards for frequency of visitor encounters 

or group size limits would not initially be established. Large groups (e.g. more than 12) inquiring about 

recreational opportunities would first be directed to locations outside of wilderness, while small groups (e.g. 

12 or less) may be directed to locations within wilderness. If the wilderness character of solitude becomes 

degraded, the following management actions may be initiated: 

 Educate visitors concerning Leave No Trace recreation ethics to reduce conflict with other visitors. 

 Provide information to the public on non-wilderness recreational opportunities in the region. 

 Establish a group size limit. 

 Reduce maintenance levels on access points and boundary roads, and/or provide public information 

about opportunities outside wilderness. 

 Plan revision with additional public input to reassess these standards and/or implement more direct 

controls. 

 Establishing parking areas at trailheads for access issues and delineate parking space. 

Caving and Climbing 

Recreational caving and climbing are acceptable activities in the wilderness and would be allowed to continue 

as long as there are no irreversible impacts to cave resources or wilderness. Caves are protected under the 

Federal Cave Resources Protection Act (FCRPA) of 1988. The purpose of the act is twofold: to “secure, 

protect, and preserve significant caves on Federal lands for the perpetual use, enjoyment and benefit of all 

people” and “to foster increased cooperation and exchange of information between governmental authorities 

and those who utilize caves located on Federal lands for scientific, educational, or recreational purposes.” A 

district wide Cave Management Plan is being planned for and will guide further usage in caves on the Ely 

District. 

All persons engaged in these activities would be responsible for having appropriate equipment and necessary 

technical skills. Any human effects left for the purpose of recreational caving and climbing (i.e. ropes, ladders, 

and temporary devices) would be considered abandoned property and would be removed. Items would be 

retained at the District Office for 30 days. This would assist in resource protection, maintain the undeveloped 

character of wilderness, and provide for public safety. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 43]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The use of natural anchors for rigging ropes would be used when possible. Temporary anchoring devices such 

as nuts, cams, and slings would be allowed. The use of permanent fixed anchors, such as bolts and pitons, 

would be allowed to reduce impacts to vegetation or soils or to improve climbers’ safety. The use of 

permanent bolts and anchors is discouraged, but if used, anchors should be camouflaged with non-reflective 

colors that closely match the rock. Climbers or others may use hand-powered drills to place these fixed 

anchors. Power drills may not be used to place permanent fixed anchors in non-emergency situations. 

Alterations to cave resources such as digging, moving of rocks or enlargement of passages to allow 

explorations will not be allowed, and removal of natural components of the cave is prohibited. Human waste, 

trash, or other debris would be removed. Transport of fuel wood into caves and campfires therein will be 

discouraged and any evidence would be removed. Disturbance to cultural resources, as a result of caving and 

climbing activities is prohibited in accordance with the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) of 

1979. 

There would be no group size restrictions or permits required to enter caves. Recreational use monitoring 

would take place through the use of cave registers located near the entrances of the caves. If monitoring 

determines impacts to cave resources, the BLM may require permits and/or limit the number of persons who 

can enter the cave at any one time. A maximum number of visits per month and/or per year may also be 

established. 

The BLM would encourage Leave No Trace and Minimum Impact Caving principles and techniques to 

minimize impacts. Information, educational materials, and prohibitions regarding cave resources and climbing 

would be provided on information kiosks for the area, in BLM brochures, and on the Ely District Office 

website. Publicity of cave locations would be kept to a minimum, in order to protect them and significant 

caves would not be published in accordance with FCRPA. 

The BLM recognizes the threat of White Nose Syndrome (WNS) expanding into the western U.S. If WNS 

reaches the BLM Ely District, the most current policy regarding WNS will be followed. Adherence to the 

National White-Nose Syndrome Decontamination Protocol - Version 06.25.2012 (and as revised), to prevent 

the spread of the disease by humans is required for all employees and volunteers and is encouraged for public 

entry. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 44]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Site-Specific Action 

No camping is allowed that blocks public access including but not exclusive of: occupying the turnout areas 

preventing vehicles from turning around; occupying the road so as to impede traffic; blocking the roadway, 

turnarounds, trailheads, trail entrances or parking areas excluding people from access. Specifically, camping 

would not be allowed at the four trailheads adjacent to Mount Grafton Wilderness: Robber’s Roost, North 

Creek (west), North Creek (east) and Dupont Creek. Nearby campsites or campsites along the wilderness 

access cherry stem roads may be used within 100 feet of the edge of the road. For three of these trailheads, 

campsites are adjacent to the parking area. The parking areas may be delineated with No Camping or Parking 

Only signs, as needed. 

Two permanent fixed anchors located at the entrance to Whipple Cave in Far South Egans Wilderness would 

remain. The self-register box located within Whipple Cave would be replaced with an aluminum box of similar 

dimensions. 

Descending into Whipple Cave 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 45]
 
Visitor Education, Interpretation and Law Enforcement 

General interpretive information regarding natural and cultural resources, and recreation opportunities in 

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

maps, and at the BLM Ely District Office website. A brochure specific to eastern Nevada wilderness (Lincoln 

and White Pine Counties) has been developed and is distributed across Nevada. Wilderness-specific maps 

would include wilderness area descriptions, designated trails, interpretive information, as well as wilderness 

ethics and Leave No Trace principles. Whenever possible, language would be phrased in a positive light. No 

interpretive trails would be designated. 

When feasible, the BLM would collaborate with other agencies and non-government organizations and 

individuals, including authors of media or guide books, in the presentation of basic information. The BLM will 

continue to coordinate with NDOW to include wilderness information on the maps and regulation in the 

Nevada Hunt Book and on the NDOW website. 

Development of an off-site interpretive exhibit would be constructed outside of the Great Basin Visitor 

Center, near Baker, Nevada. This exhibit would showcase the wilderness areas of eastern Nevada, and 

provide an over-arching wilderness message. Further, a panel would be placed on the three panel kiosk at the 

Patterson Pass Trailhead of the Silver State Off-Highway Vehicle Trail. 

Public outreach for Leave No Trace recreation ethics would be emphasized using classes and workshops 

presented at local schools and in the field. A separate wilderness public education plan has been developed for 

programs related to all designated wilderness in Lincoln County this plan would be adopted for the White 

Pine County wilderness areas. A children’s wilderness booklet has also been developed and is available for 

distribution. 

Further informal education occurs on the ground as BLM personnel and volunteers contact visitors and 

provide on-the-spot education, generally relating to wilderness regulations, Leave No Trace principles and 

dumping on public lands. 

Enforcement of wilderness laws and federal regulations will be performed by uniformed BLM law enforcement 

rangers. BLM staff, contractors, and volunteers may indirectly assist law enforcement rangers by providing 

information regarding wilderness-related violations. Wilderness and law enforcement rangers would conduct 

patrols within wilderness on foot or horseback and along the perimeter using motorized vehicles. Motorized 

equipment, including helicopters may be allowed within wilderness when necessary to meet temporary 

emergencies involving violations of criminal law and/or including the pursuit of fugitives, or operations 

involving search and rescue. 

Site-Specific Action 

During shed antler collection periods and peak hunting times law enforcement and wilderness staff will 

conduct saturation patrols to enforce existing laws. Illegal off route riding will be targeted. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 46]
 
Commercial Use Restrictions 

Pursuant to Section 4(c) of the Wilderness Act, commercial enterprises are prohibited in wilderness, including 

the collection of any resource, including shed antlers, for the purpose of commercial sale. 

Casual collection on foot or horseback (surface only, no digging) of small quantities (<20 lbs.) of renewable 

and mineral resources would be permitted (i.e., wood, pine nuts, vegetation, rock and mineral specimens, 

petrified wood, shed antlers, and common invertebrate and plant fossils). 

Section 4(d) of the Wilderness Act states that commercial services are allowed, “. . . to the extent necessary for 

activities which are proper for realizing the recreational or other wilderness purposes of the areas.” Therefore, 

commercial services that are not wilderness-dependent or do not contribute to wilderness character or public 

education will be prohibited. Commercial guiding would be permitted for: 

 Hunting. 

 Academically-oriented organizations whose primary purpose is wilderness or environmental education. 

 Organizations whose service is primarily for the support of people with disabilities. 

 Wilderness therapy groups. 

Outfitters and Guides are subject to statewide BLM special recreation permit (SRP) stipulations for 

commercial hunting/fishing guides as well as the rules and regulations outlined in their SRPs. Management of 

guides and outfitters will be in conformance with the BLM Ely District Resource Management Plan (2008), the 

Wilderness Act (1964), LCCRDA (2004) and WPCCRDA (2006). Limits on the number of commercial guides 

may be implemented if monitoring identifies excessive impacts to wilderness character or resources. 

Academic and other organizations listed above requesting use of wilderness would be required to obtain a use 

authorization, on a case-by-case basis. Stipulations may include group size limits, camping outside wilderness, 

seasonal restrictions or collection limits. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 47]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Management of Research 

Research proposals investigating indigenous plant communities, wildlife, cultural resources, paleontology and 

the human dimensions of wilderness would be considered. Proposals must contribute to the enhancement of 

wilderness character or the improvement of wilderness management. All proposals would be subject to the 

restrictions and standards of BLM Manual 6340, the Wilderness Act (1964), WPCCRDA (2006), LCCRDA 

(2004) the BLM - NDOW MOU (2012), as well as appropriate standards outlined in this WMP. 

Research proposals that do not contribute to the improved management of the area as wilderness will not be 

permitted if they can be accomplished outside of wilderness and/or cannot be conducted in a manner 

compatible with the preservation of the wilderness environment. 

Research and other studies must be conducted without use of motorized equipment or construction of 

temporary or permanent structures. Exceptions may be approved for projects that are essential to managing 

the specific wilderness areas when no other feasible alternatives exist. Such use must be necessary to meet 

the minimum requirements for administration of the area as wilderness and must not degrade wilderness 

character. A site-specific MRDG and NEPA analysis would have to be prepared for the authorization of 

research proposals. 

Excavation, salvage, or collection of paleontological resources within the wilderness areas would be 

determined on a case-by-case basis (BLM Manual 6340 1.6 C.12.), but should be collected using hand tools to 

preserve their scientific, educational, and interpretive values. Motorized equipment or vehicles may be 

authorized on a case-by-case basis when a separate minimum requirement analysis determines such devices 

are necessary. A site-specific MRDG and NEPA analysis would have to be prepared for the authorization of 

any exceptions. 

Climate, Weather, and Water Monitoring Data Collection Devices 

The installation of collection devices for climate, weather, or water monitoring may be considered in 

wilderness. Devices considered would have to conform to Visual Resource Management Class 1 goals and 

would be subject to a MRDG analysis. Section 121 in the Lincoln County Recreation and Development Act of 

2004 states, 

Subject to such terms and conditions as the Secretary may prescribe, nothing in this title
 

precludes the installation and maintenance of hydrologic, meteorological, or climatological 

collection devices in the wilderness areas designated by this title if the facilities and access to
 

the facilities are essential to flood warning, flood control, and water reservoir operation
 

activities.
 

Similarly, the WPCCRDA states, 

If the Secretary determines that hydrologic, meteorological, or climatological collection devices
 

are appropriate to further the scientific, educational, and conservation purposes of the
 

wilderness areas designated by this subtitle, nothing in this sub title precludes the installation
 

and maintenance of the collection devices within the wilderness areas.
 

The gauging station at Geyser Spring would remain in place. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 48]
 
 

Management of Valid Existing Rights 

A number of existing water rights occur within the four wilderness areas. There are no Federal reserved 

rights as per the terms in the wilderness enabling legislation LCCRDA (2004) and WPCCRDA (2006). The 

BLM may acquire additional State appropriative water rights within these wilderness areas to sustain riparian 

habitat, provide water to wildlife, or support recreation. Existing water rights may be purchased from willing 

sellers or jointly managed with other agencies through cooperative agreements. All water rights actions will be 

in conformance with LCCRDA and WPCCRDA. However, new water resource developments not related to 

wildlife are prohibited by both Acts. In Appendix C, a table lists existing water rights within the boundaries of 

these four wilderness areas. 

All maps represent current, known locations of springs and riparian areas, but may not be a complete 

representation. As new springs and riparian areas are located through monitoring they will be added to the 

database. 

Purchase or Acquisition of Private Land 

If private inholdings (parcels of private land inside the boundary of wilderness) or edge-holdings (private 

parcels which are edged on one or more sides by wilderness) are put up for sale efforts would be made to 

purchase the parcels, whether through an intermediary, such as the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, or 

directly. As stated in both the LCCRDA and WPCCRDA, any land or interest in land within the boundaries of 

a wilderness that is acquired by the BLM shall be added to and administered as part of the wilderness area 

within which the acquired land or interested is located. 

Easements or Access Authorizations 

Public access to these wilderness areas is provided through a variety of primitive roads, routes and trails. The 

majority of these routes are located on non-wilderness lands administered by the BLM. However, segments of 

some routes pass through parcels of private property and in many cases no right-of-way or easement exist to 

ensure continued public access across these private parcels. In most cases, legal public access to the 

wilderness areas can currently be achieved through alternate routes. Securing legal access along existing 

routes would maintain the type and level of access the public currently enjoys. 

Easements across parcels identified in this plan would be actively pursued in the form of rights-of-way, leases, 

access authorizations or fee title from willing sellers. Easements for access across other parcels which would 

maintain additional access to the wilderness areas would only be pursued at the request of willing landowners 

to the extent that acquiring such access would not reduce the potential for meeting the higher priority access 

needs identified in this plan. 

Site-Specific Action 

Valid Existing Rights 

The two diversions (4.3 miles total) on Mount Grafton Wilderness – Sheep and Mill – would remain. The 

water right associated with these irrigation ditches predates 1900. Basic maintenance would be performed on 

foot or horseback, as needed. Large-scale maintenance requiring motorized vehicles or equipment would be 

allowed as needed, with site-specific NEPA and MRDG analysis. 

Legal Public Access 

Priority routes which currently lack legal public access listed in Table 4. These are the routes for which 

easements would be pursued to ensure continued public access to wilderness across private parcels. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 49]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Military Operations 

ilitary training exercises would not occur within the four wilderness areas. Directions for handling military 

perations would distinguish between non-emergency and emergency situations. Non-emergency incidents 

ight include such activities as the release of flares, or the recovery of aircraft parts. Emergency situations 

ay include, but are not limited to, the retrieval of downed aircraft, the rescue of pilots, or the recovery of 

ive ordnance. 

on-emergency military actions may be approved on a case-by-case basis following MRDG analysis, 

nvironmental assessment, and authorization from the Ely BLM District Manager. All evidence of human 

ctivity would be removed to the maximum extent possible. 

mergency military actions involving prohibited uses identified in Section 4(c) of the Wilderness Act (1964) 

e.g. motorized vehicles and mechanized equipment, mechanical transport, landing of aircraft etc.) will be 

llowed within wilderness without prior analysis, assessment, or authorization provided the 99th Airbase Wing 

ommander or his designated representative notifies the Ely BLM District Manager at the onset of the 

mergency or immediately thereafter. 

Interagency Relationship - Great Basin National Park 

ighland Ridge Wilderness lies along the southern border of Great Basin National Park. The BLM would seek 

o establish a Memorandum of Understanding with the Park. Several management objectives would be 

oordinated cooperatively between the two agencies. Cooperatively managing and maintaining the trails which 

ross administrative boundaries (if constructed in the future), designing and maintaining trailheads and jointly 

isseminating information to the public would aid both agencies in better managing the resources. 

Table 4: Locations to Obtain Easements 

Wilderness Area 

Accessed Easement Location Length Township/Range 

Mount Grafton 

Cave Valley 

(Cappy’s Diggins 

cherrystem) 

0.25 miles T 9 N /R 64 E 

Section 6 

South Egan Range Long Canyon 2 miles 

T 9 N / R 63 E 

Sections 5 - 6 

T 10 N / R 63 E 

Section 32 and 28 

M

o

m

m

l

N

e

a

E

(

a

C

e

H

t

c

c

d

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 50]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 51]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 52]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 53]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 54]
 
D. Monitoring Program
 

Monitoring tracks the outcome of proposed activities on the qualities of wilderness character, as previously 

defined (Page 2). BLM Manual 6340 – Appendix C, Monitoring Changes in Wilderness Character and 

Measuring Attributes of Wilderness Character, and the resulting BLM Implementation Guide, direct 

monitoring in wilderness. 

A single activity is likely to affect several qualities of wilderness character. For example, an activity such as 

weed control is intended to restore natural conditions over the long term but may diminish the untrammeled 

condition of the wilderness in the short term. These two separate outcomes, the improvement of 

“naturalness” and decreased “untrammeled nature,” would be monitored separately. 

On the other hand, separate activities undertaken for different purposes may cumulatively diminish the same 

qualities of wilderness character. For example, a trail might be designated to control visitor impacts on 

vegetation. In the same vicinity, a fence or barrier may be in place to protect sensitive resources from 

recreational impacts. Though the two activities are unrelated, both activities have an effect on the 

“undeveloped” quality of wilderness character. Monitoring the effects of single activities to multiple qualities of 

wilderness character will improve understanding of the effects upon wilderness character in combination and 

over time. 

Effects of intentional, incidental, authorized and unauthorized activities will be captured under the monitoring 

system. The monitoring program will provide a greater understanding of the specific condition and trend of 

wilderness character within each wilderness. Information generated in monitoring wilderness conditions will 

indicate: 

1) the current state of wilderness character; 

2) how wilderness character is changing over time; 

3) how stewardship actions are affecting wilderness character; and 

4) what stewardship priorities and decisions would best preserve and sustain wilderness character. 

Monitoring will also provide wilderness managers with more complete information, which will improve the 

evaluation of future proposed activities. However, monitoring will not be used to compare conditions and 

changes within these wilderness areas with other wilderness areas in the National Wilderness Preservation 

System. The following monitoring is associated with specific wilderness characteristics. 

Monitoring of Site-Specific Actions 

 Additional monitoring will occur for the following site-specific actions associated with the attached 

Environmental Assessment in order to ensure that wilderness character is protected and that undue 

impacts to other resources are not occurring as a result of the proposed actions: 

 Success of weed treatments and vegetation restoration projects. 

 Use of administrative access routes and gates. 

 Success of small-scale surface disturbance rehabilitation. 

 Recreational use of designated trails. 

 Effectiveness of sign plan. 

 Wildlife water development functionality and usage. 

 Success of mine site restoration on southwest side of Mount Grafton. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 55]
 
 

E. Plan Evaluation
 

The Plan will be revised when the management actions prescribed no longer meet the wilderness management 

objectives, or when a change in the existing situation warrants revised management. The need for revision will 

be reviewed every five years. If the decision is made to revise this Plan, it will be accomplished with public 

participation. Minor revisions such as typographical or cartographical errors may be made by inserting an 

errata sheet. 

F. Plan Implementation 

The following list shows the priority sequence for accomplishing management activities of this Plan. The actual 

implementation could be altered based on funding and staff availability outside the control of this Plan. 

Ongoing Activities 

 Maintenance of boundary signs. 

 Trail, vehicle access point, and staging area construction and maintenance. 

 Vegetation clearing around archaeological resources. 

 Wilderness monitoring: 

 Visitor use monitoring. 

 Natural resource monitoring. 

 Trail condition monitoring. 

 All other wilderness character monitoring. 

 Visitor information dissemination. 

Future Activities 

The following list of activities must be part of the plan implementation; however, project-specific 

environmental analysis may be required because they are analyzed in the EA associated with this WMP: 

 Non-conforming fire management and suppression actions or ES & R actions. 

 Trail projects including: 

 Trailhead development. 

 New trail construction. 

 Major trail reconstruction or stabilization. 

 New vehicle staging area. 

 Management of social conditions; 

 Visitor use regulations and/or supplemental rules. 

 Group size limits. 

 New sign or kiosk installation. 

 Large weed control projects, such as herbicide use for noxious and invasive plant species control. 

 Riparian area restoration needed to mitigate wild horse and livestock grazing impacts. 

 Vegetation restoration projects. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 56]
 
 

 Wildlife projects. 

 Research on natural or cultural resources. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 57]
 
 

Environmental !ssessment 

Highland Ridge, Mount Grafton, 

South Egan Range & Far South Egan
 

Wilderness Management Plan
 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 58]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Introduction and Background 

The BLM Ely District Office proposes to adopt and implement a Wilderness Management Plan (WMP) for the 

Highland Ridge, Mount Grafton, South Egan Range and Far South Egans Wilderness during fiscal year 2013. 

Mount Grafton, the Far South Egans and the South Egan Range Wilderness areas were former wilderness 

study areas. The Far South Egans Wilderness was designated in the Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation 

and Development Act (LCCRDA, Public Law 108-424, January 20, 2004) and the remaining three areas by the 

White Pine County Conservation, Recreation and Development Act of 2006 (WPCCRDA; Public Law 109­

432, December 7, 2006). 

Wilderness actions described in the first half of this document, the WMP, form the Proposed Action analyzed 

herein. The Proposed Action will be analyzed against a No Action alternative that is considered a continuation 

of current management. Section 4(b) of the Wilderness Act requires administering agencies to preserve 

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

within the designated areas. 

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

were previously managed under FLPMA for multiple use. As such, the No Action Alternative contains the 

minimum land use restrictions deemed necessary to protect and preserve wilderness character and to comply 

with applicable laws and regulations. 

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

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

preserve wilderness character, 2) whether the actions individually or cumulatively involve significant 

environmental effects. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 59]
 
 

Purpose and Need 

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

and protect and enhance wilderness character by identifying conditions and opportunities that will be managed 

for over at least the next ten years, or as changes in wilderness character and/or resource conditions require. 

The Proposed Action is authorized by Section 4(b) of the Wilderness Act, which requires administering 

agencies to preserve wilderness character. In furtherance of this mandate, Section 1.4.C. of BLM Manual 6340 

(Management of Designated Wilderness Areas) requires BLM District and Field Managers, among other things, 

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

Wilderness Act, the establishing legislation, and BLM wilderness policies and guidance. 

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

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

provides heightened management and discretionary opportunities to ensure adequate protection and 

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

and values. 

Insufficient wildness character management in the target area has been identified as the need for the purpose 

of the wilderness management plan. 

The EA will focus on the potential environmental effects of discretionary management actions, as well as their 

effect on wilderness character. Based on their potential effects, the authorized officer will decide whether to 

implement some or all of the proposed discretionary actions. 

Relationship to Planning 

This WMP has been analyzed within the scope of the Ely Resource Management Plan (2008) and has been 

found to be in conformance with the goals, objectives, and decisions of the Decision Summary and Record of 

Decision. 

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

management plans be consistent with officially approved plans of other federal, state, local, and tribal 

governments to the extent those plans are consistent with federal laws and regulations applicable to public 

lands. Although this regulation does not apply to other official plans created after the land use plan is 

implemented, the BLM strives for management decisions to be consistent with other official plans. 

Compliance with Executive Orders, Laws, Regulations, and State Statutes 

Management actions contained in the WMP comply with requirements of the Wilderness Act and the enabling 

WPCCRDA and LCCRDA as well as other applicable laws, regulations, and executive orders. 

Relationship to Manuals, Guidelines and Handbooks 

The proposed action and alternative action are in conformance with the following guidelines and manuals: 

 Congressional Grazing Guidelines (House Report No. 101-405, Appendix A). 

 Congressional Wildlife Management Guidelines (House Report No. 101-405). 

 Management of Designated Wilderness Areas (BLM Manual 6340). 

 Wilderness Management Plans (BLM Manual 8561). 

 Burned Area Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation (BLM Handbook H1742-I). 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 60]
 
 

 Travel and Transportation Planning (BLM Manual 1626). 

Consistency with Existing BLM Land Use Plans 

The Proposed Action conforms to the goals, objectives, and decisions of the Ely District Approved Resource 

Management Plan (2008) and is consistent with the goals, objectives, and decisions in the Master Plan for 

Lincoln County Nevada (2007), the White Pine County Public Land Use Plan (2007) and the Lincoln County 

Public Land Policy Plan (2010). 

Issues 

Issues addressed in this EA were identified through internal and public scoping during the development of the 

Wilderness Management Plan, which is the proposed action. Internal scoping was done via meetings and 

written communications with BLM resource specialists. Public scoping was conducted in the form of public 

workshops, meetings, written letters, email, and by BLM staff. For details, see the Wilderness Issues section on 

Page 8 of the WMP. 

All issues and concerns received through internal and external scoping that relate to wilderness resource 

conditions were considered during the development of the alternatives. Certain issues and concerns were 

judged to be out of the scope of this analysis. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 61]
 
Description of the Proposed Action & the No Action Alternatives 

Proposed Action 

The Wilderness Management Plan (WMP), the first half of this document, is proposed for implementation 

and is the Proposed Action. It consists of the following Wilderness Management Categories, fully described in 

the WMP, that relate to either specific resources or resource programs administered by the Ely BLM District 

Office. These categories are briefly described in the Environmental Assessment with a reference to the 

detailed description contained within the WMP. Certain Wilderness Management Categories contain sitespecific proposed actions. The remaining actions outline general guidelines for each non-wilderness resource 

program operating within wilderness. Although the Plan would not administer these resource programs, 

resource activity plans have been evaluated to ensure conformity with laws, management goals, and 

objectives for these wilderness areas. 

No Action 

The No Action alternative briefly describes differences within each category if a wilderness management plan 

was not adopted. Under this alternative, management of the wilderness would be considered on a case-by

case basis as directed by the Ely Resource Management Plan as well as guidance from 43 CFR 6300 and the 

National BLM Wilderness policy as set forth in BLM Manual 6340 (BLM, 2012). Management would remain 

generally passive, and react only as issues arise. All other programs operating within wilderness would 

operate without consolidated guidance and all new action would be considered in a separate environmental 

analysis, following the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. 

­

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 62]
 
 

Wilderness Management Plan Actions 

Management of Noxious and Non-Native Invasive Weed 

Proposed Action 

Current noxious and invasive weeds near wilderness include, but may not be limited to Spotted knapweed 

(noxious, A), Russian knapweed, Hoary Cress, Salt Cedar, Black hebane, Poison Hemlock, hoary cress and 

areas of cheatgrass. Management emphasis in wilderness would be placed on controlling small infestations 

with the potential to spread and displace native plants. Treatments for large infestations (defined by the BLM 

Ely District Weeds Program) would be considered separately. Site-specific actions would treat known 

infestations of salt cedar. Treatment methods include hand pulling, herbicides, biological control, reseeding, 

and alternatives such as targeted grazing. The detailed description, including treatment methods, is found in 

the WMP starting on Page 17. 

No Action 

There is currently no existing management plan with which to treat invasive grasses such as cheatgrass in 

wilderness. Noxious weeds would be treated on a case-by-case basis as per the District Noxious Weed Plan 

and BLM Manual 6340. The BLM’s noxious weed classification system (which is described in the BLM Manual 

9015 Integrated Pest Management) would be consulted in setting priorities for weed control. 

Management of Livestock Grazing 

Proposed Action 

Grazing would continue under federal regulations to meet the Northeastern Great Basin and Mojave – 

Southern Great Basin Resource Advisory Council Standards for their respective areas. Activities and the 

necessary facilities used to support livestock grazing would be permitted to continue in wilderness. Planning 

related to grazing operations would be guided by the Congressional Grazing Guidelines (House Report 105

405 Appendix A, 1990) and the BLM Manual 6340 (Management of Designated Wilderness Areas). Sitespecific actions are developed by evaluating the administrative access needs on specific grazing allotments. 

Detailed description, including maps and tables, is found in the WMP starting on Page 18. 

No Action 

No difference from the proposed action except all requests would be required to have a site-specific EA for 

each action. 

­

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 63]
 
Management of Small-Scale Surface Disturbances
 

Proposed Action 

Disturbances fall into two categories with common characteristics: small-site disturbances including 

abandoned developments, mining claims, and dispersed campsites; and linear disturbances created by 

motorized vehicle traffic that are largely denuded of vegetation. Linear disturbances will be decommissioned 

and rehabilitated and small-site disturbances will be rehabilitated. Environmental Assessment (EA) NV-040

08-17 (White Pine County Wilderness Ground Disturbance Reclamation Plan), as well as the EA associated 

with this Plan, may be referenced for rehabilitation for decommissioning of former vehicle routes and 

rehabilitating small-site disturbances. Methods include decompaction, scarifying/pitting, recontouring, 

vertical mulching, erosion control, desert varnish colorant, and vegetative restoration. The WMP provides a 

detailed description starting on Page 20 and depiction in Maps 2-5. 

No Action 

Based on routine monitoring, reclamation activities would occur as necessary on a case-by-case basis 

according to methods and standard operating procedures as outlined in the two wilderness disturbance EAs: 

White Pine County Wilderness Ground Disturbance Reclamation Plan (NV-040-08-17) and Wilderness 

Disturbance Reclamation Environmental Assessment (NV-040-05-010). 

Management and Designation of Trails 

Proposed Action 

The proposed action identifies specific designated trails and details how designated and foot-worn hiking 

paths will be managed. The WMP provides a detailed description, including trail standards starting on Page 

22 and depiction in Maps 6 & 7. 

 

No Action 

No trails would be designated, but 6.5 miles in Highland Ridge, 300’ in the Far South Egans and 7.5 miles in 

the South Egan Range Wildernesses– would be treated as foot-worn hiking paths and be rehabilitated 

according to primitive standards and existing BLM policy. Cattle or game trails would also be treated as footworn paths. The game or cattle paths would not be displayed or described on BLM maps or brochures and 

would be monitored according to existing BLM policy. 

­

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 64]
 
 

Management of Vehicle Access Points and Designation of Staging Areas
 

Proposed Action 

The proposed action outlines management actions designed to protect wilderness character near heavily 

used access points into wilderness now and in the future. This section also describes maintenance levels on 

cherry stems. Detailed description, including maps, is found in the WMP starting on Page 26. 

No Action 

Visitors would be able to park their vehicles and access wilderness from any public point outside of the 

wilderness boundary. No vehicle staging areas would be designated or defined to direct recreational use to 

most desired and suitable access points. 

Management of Signs 

Proposed Action 

The proposed action outlines general guidelines for any future sign placement. Current kiosk and 

informational sign placement will be based on details from the document DOI-BLM-NV-L000-2009-003-CX. 

Signs around wilderness include key entrance signs, kiosks, directional signs, and wilderness access signs. 

There would be no further sign development beyond the Wilderness Management Plan. See Page 28 for 

details. 

No Action 

No difference from the Proposed Action. 

Management of Vegetation Restoration 

Proposed Action 

Vegetation restoration project proposals would be considered as described within the proposed action. The 

Mount Grafton Wilderness area treatments have been previously approved with the South Steptoe Valley 

Watershed Restoration Plan (DOI-BLM-NV-L020-2011-0013) and the Cave Valley and Lake Valley Watershed 

Restoration Plan (DOI-BLM-L020-2011-0021). These treatments are included within the proposed action for 

the WMP and incorporated by reference from Chapter Two of the previously mentioned environmental 

analyses. See Page 30 for details. 

No Action 

There are no treatments proposed in the WMP. It could be anticipated that the current trajectory of 

vegetation to move away from the reference condition would continue. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 65]
 
 

Management of Wildlife 

Proposed Action 

Management of wildlife is the responsibility of the Nevada Department of Wildlife. Management of wildlife 

habitat is the responsibility of the BLM. Over the life of this plan it may be necessary to implement wildlife 

management activities to prevent degradation or enhance wilderness characteristics by promoting healthy, 

viable, and more naturally distributed wildlife populations and/or their habitats. Detailed guidelines are found 

in the WMP starting on Page 32. Categories related to wildlife management are as follows: 

 Wildlife Water Developments 

 Wildlife Relocation Activities 

 Wildlife Damage Management 

 Collar retrieval 

 Riparian & Stream Improvement 

No Action 

A comprehensive wilderness management plan would not guide wildlife related management categories. 

Activities within these wilderness areas would be conducted in conformance with the current (2012) and 

subsequent BLM-NDOW Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and guided by White Pine County 

Conservation, Recreation and Development Act (WPCCRDA) (2006), as well as BLM-APHIS MOU (2012) 

and BLM Manual 6340 (Management of Designated Wilderness). 

Management of Herd Areas 

Proposed Action 

The BLM Ely District Office Wild Horse Program’s activity plans guide the management of wild horses. 

Gathers may occur within wilderness to remove wild horses. See Page 35 in the WMP for more wild horse 

management guidelines. 

No Action 

No difference from the proposed action. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 66]
 
 

Management of Fire Suppression, Fuels and Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation 

Proposed Action 

Fire management objectives in these wilderness areas would be structured in accordance with the 2008 Ely 

District Fire Management Plan (FMP). If this FMP is updated over the life of this Plan, the new policies would 

be followed. Following fire, Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation (ES & R) activities may be undertaken 

in accordance with current Department of Interior policy (620 DM 3 Wildland Fire Management Burned Area 

Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation) and Bureau of Land Management policy (H-1742-1 Burned Areas 

Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Handbook). BLM Manual 6340 provides detailed categories 

related to fire management are as follows: 

 Fire Use Guidelines 

 Fire Suppression Guidelines 

 Suppression Activity Damage 

 Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Activities 

Detailed maps are found in the WMP starting on Page 36. 

No Action 

Fire management activities would occur without the guidance of a comprehensive wilderness management 

plan. 

Protection of Archeological Resources and Historic Properties 

Proposed Action 

In addition to federal laws, protection of cultural resources for all BLM Ely District Office resource programs is 

further guided by the Cultural Resource Inventory General Guidelines (as currently published by the Nevada 

State Office) and the State Protocol Agreement between the BLM and the Nevada State Historic 

Preservation Office. Protection of cultural resources includes the identification, evaluation, and preservation 

of archaeological sites, and involves both monitoring and inventory. The proposed management plan will not 

alter the current management of archeological resources and historic properties, and will be incompliance 

with all applicable federal laws, including Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Guidelines for 

the protection of cultural resources are found in the WMP starting on Page 40. Site-specific actions would 

occur under this alternative. 

No Action 

With or without adoption of this plan, management of archeological resources and historic properties would 

not change. All laws regarding the protection of these resources, such as the Archaeological Resources 

Protection Act of 1979 and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, would apply. The proposed sitespecific actions would not occur. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 67]
 
Management of Recreation Opportunities
 

Proposed Action 

Recreation activities include hunting, trapping, shed antler collection, horseback riding, caving, climbing, 

hiking, and backpacking. BLM staff and volunteers monitoring wilderness would be given instructions on the 

identification of human effects that would be considered unattended personal property or refuse. 

Unattended personal property not associated with an active camp, including traditional geocaches, would be 

removed by BLM personnel, and temporarily held at the appropriate BLM District or Field Office. Detailed 

guidelines for current and potential future management related to these activities are found in the WMP 

starting on Page 42. 

No Action 

Current laws, policies, and guidelines would be followed without the guidance of a comprehensive wilderness 

management plan. 

Visitor Education, Interpretation & Law Enforcement 

Proposed Action 

On- and off-site interpretive information regarding natural and cultural resources and recreation 

opportunities in wilderness would be located on informational signs outside of wilderness, in brochures, on 

BLM recreation maps, and at the BLM Ely District Office website. Enforcement of wilderness laws, federal 

regulations, and resource protection services would be performed by uniformed BLM Law Enforcement 

Rangers on foot or horseback and along the perimeter using motorized vehicles. Detailed guidelines are 

found in the WMP starting on Page 46. 

No Action 

The BLM has developed a wilderness public education plan for programs related to all designated wilderness 

in Lincoln County. This plan would be adopted for White Pine County and implemented without the guidance 

of a comprehensive wilderness management plan. Current laws, policies, and guidelines would be followed 

without the guidance of a comprehensive wilderness management plan. 

Commercial Use Restrictions 

Proposed Action 

Section 4(c) of the Wilderness Act (1964) prohibits commercial enterprises within wilderness, with the 

exception of those commercial services listed in Section 4(d) of the Wilderness Act. Details on commercial 

uses allowed in wilderness, including guide services, are found in the WMP starting on Page 47. 

No Action 

There would be no difference from the proposed action. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 68]
 
Management of Research 

Proposed Action 

Research proposals investigating indigenous plant communities, wildlife, cultural resources, and the human 

dimensions of wilderness would be considered. Additional guidelines for the types of research proposals and 

subsequent approval within wilderness are found in the WMP starting on Page 48. 

No Action 

Scientific research proposals would be considered that adhere to current laws, policies, and guidelines, but 

would be implemented without the guidance of a comprehensive wilderness management plan. 

Management of Valid Rights 

Proposed Action 

The BLM would adhere to Nevada state water law and could seek to acquire water rights to sustain riparian 

habitat, provide water to wildlife, or support recreation. Any inholdings or edge holdings whether acquired by 

purchase or gift would be preserved as wilderness. For details see the WMP starting on Page 49. 

No Action 

No difference from the proposed action. 

Military Operations 

Proposed Action 

Military training exercises would not be located within wilderness. Guidelines for handling military operations 

would distinguish between emergency and non-emergency situations. Non-emergency incidents include 

release of low-level flares, recovery of aircraft parts or retrieval of non-operational ordinances. Emergency 

situations include downed aircraft or pilot and some classes of live ordinance. Details for potential military 

operations are found in the WMP starting on Page 50. 

No Action 

Current laws, policies, and guidelines would be followed without the guidance of a comprehensive wilderness 

management plan. 

Interagency Relationship - Great Basin National Park 

Proposed Action 

The relationship between the BLM and the National Park Service would be guided by a proposed MOU. No 

MOU is in place. See details on Page 50. 

No Action 

Current laws, policies, and guidelines would be followed without the guidance of a comprehensive wilderness 

management plan. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 69]
 
 

No other action alternatives were needed to address unresolved conflicts concerning uses of available 

resources. 

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Introduction 

The scope of this EA comprises the Highland Ridge, Mount Grafton, South Egan Range and Far South Egans 

Wilderness areas located in White Pine, Lincoln and Nye Counties in the Central Basin and Range ecoregion. 

The BLM’s NEPA Handbook (H-1790-1) requires that all EAs address specific resources or concerns of the 

human environment. The list of elements contained in the handbook has been expanded by BLM Instruction 

Memoranda and Executive Orders. These mandatory items along with the rationale for including or not 

including them in this analysis are listed in Table 5 below. Resources not adversely affected will not be 

considered further in this document. 

Resources/Concerns Considered for Analysis 

The following items have been evaluated for the potential for impacts to occur, either directly, indirectly or 

cumulatively, due to implementation of the proposed action. Consideration of some of these items is to 

ensure compliance with laws, statutes, or Executive Orders that impose certain requirements upon all Federal 

actions. Other items are relevant to the management of public lands in general, and to the Ely BLM in 

particular. Following the table, each analyzed item is organized into two parts: Affected Environment and 

Environmental Consequences. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 70]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 5. Resources/Concerns Considered including Supplemental Authorities. 

Issue(s) Rationale for Dismissal from Analysis or Resource/Concern Analyzed? Issue(s) Requiring Detailed Analysis (Y/N) 

Air Quality N Proposed Action would not increase air pollutant concentrations. 

All ground disturbing activities will be subject to National Historic 

Preservation Act (1966) Section 106 review and, if needed, SHPO Cultural Resources N consultation as per BLM Nevada’s implementation of the Protocol for 

cultural resources. 

No minority or low-income groups would be affected by Environmental Justice N disproportionately high and adverse health or environmental effects. 

Fire Management Y Impacts assessed in the EA. 

Federally Threated and N No federally listed plants or animals in wilderness. Endangered Species 

Fish and Wildlife Y Impacts assessed in the EA. 

Floodplains N Resource present but not affected. 

Forest and Rangeland N Project does not meet HFRA criteria. (HFRA only) 

Grazing Uses Y Impacts assessed in EA. 

Invasive Non-native Plant 

Species (includes noxious Y Impacts assessed in the EA. 

weeds) 

Designation of wilderness, not this wilderness management plan, affects Land Uses N land uses. 

Following the BLM interim management guidance for the Migratory Bird Migratory Birds N Treaty Act would prevent impacts. 

Mineral Resources N No open mine claims existed at the time of wilderness designation. 

Native American Religious N No concerns presented at this time. Concerns 

Paleontological Resources N No known sites of high scientific value are known. 

Recreation Uses Y Impacts assessed in the EA. 

Special Designations other N None present. than Designated Wilderness 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 71]
 
 

 

Resource/Concern 

Issue(s) 

Analyzed? 

(Y/N) 

Rationale for Dismissal from Analysis or 

Issue(s) Requiring Detailed Analysis 

Special Status Animal 

Species Y Impacts are assessed in the EA. 

Special Status Plant 

Species Y Proposed action may impact undiscovered individual plants. 

Vegetation/Soils/Watershed Y 

Constructing staging areas and route decommissioning would affect 

small areas of vegetation. Soils would not be destroyed or removed and 

watershed function would not be affected. 

Vegetative Resources 

(Forest or Seed Products) N The Wilderness Act does not allow forest or seed products to be sold. 

VRM N 

The proposed action is consistent with Visual Resource Management 

(VRM) Class I objectives for wilderness. The proposed action (except 

route decommissioning) would not be visible from any road and the level 

of change to the landscape is low. 

Wastes, Hazardous or Solid N No wastes are anticipated. 

Water Quality, 

Drinking/Ground N No action to affect. 

Water Resources (Water 

Rights) N BLM is subject to State of Nevada water rights laws. 

Wetlands/Riparian Zones N Resource is not present. 

Wild Horses N Resource is not present. 

Wilderness Y Proposed actions seek to maintain, restore, or enhance wilderness 

character. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 72]
 
 

Effects Analysis 

Fire Management 

Affected Environment 

The BLM’s objective regarding fire management is to manage wildland and prescribed fires as one of the 

tools in the treatment of vegetation communities and watersheds to achieve the desired future condition for 

vegetation, watersheds, and other resource programs (BLM 2008). The overall emphasis of managing fire in 

wilderness is to allow the frequency and intensity of an ecosystems natural fire regime to play its inherent role 

in that system. 

The fire management units (FMUs) that overlap these wilderness areas are displayed in Map 12 and described 

in Table 6 below. The primary goals of these FMUs are to employ wildland and prescribed fire, as well as nonfire treatments, in an effort to improve watershed cover conditions and to hinder the spread of non-native 

invasive annual grasses. 

All wilderness areas are characterized as Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) 2 which is described as being at 

a moderate risk of losing key ecosystem components. See Appendix D for a summary of the FRCC ratings and 

vegetation communities within each of the wilderness areas. 

While there has not been fire history studies conducted in all of the wilderness areas, there have been several 

done within the great basin and the region of these wilderness areas. In general the studies have determined 

the fire return intervals have lengthened following the European settlement of the great basin. These 

changes to the fire return interval are commonly attributed to past grazing practices and fire suppression 

(Gruell 1994, Gruell 1999, Kitchen 2012). 

Environmental Consequences 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

Impacts from fire management activities include visual impact from retardant, but the use of retardant 

potentially reduces surface disturbance from line construction as well as limits fire size. Localized impacts to 

vegetation may occur if motorized access is granted for a specific fire. However, Minimum Impact 

Suppression Tactics (MIST) would be followed in an effort to minimize impacts to wilderness character. 

Actions deemed necessary by the Incident Commander for public and firefighter safety could cause shortterm impacts to resources such as vegetation, wildlife, and weeds. 

Post-fire Emergency Stabilization and/or Rehabilitation seeding or planting treatments, if successful, would 

benefit wilderness by restoring natural vegetation communities or establishing a less fire-prone community if 

non-native species are approved. Fire management planning may be altered in order to protect cultural 

resources, which could hinder fire management objectives. 

The re-introduction of fire to the landscape through the use of prescribed fire and allowing naturally ignited 

fires to burn would further enhance the naturalness of the wilderness. The implementation of prescribed fires 

would minimize the risk of negative impacts resulting from wildfire as well as increase the rate at which the 

desired future condition would be achieved. As the departure of the wilderness areas decrease wildfire would 

be allowed to play a more natural role within the system and decrease the amount of human suppression of 

wildland fires within wilderness area. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 73]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Impacts of No Action 

Impacts would be the similar to the Proposed Action because fire management is guided by its own prog

activity plans that are currently in compliance with all applicable wilderness policies. 

Table 6. Fire Management Units (FMUs) within the four wilderness areas. 

ram 

Wilderness Area FMU Name FMU Type* FMU Acres Within 

Wilderness by Percent 

Highland Ridge 

Northern Benches High Habitat Value 2% 

Kern/Snake/Cherry 

Creek/Park Mtn High Habitat Value 83.5% 

Southern Benches – High 

Habitat Value High Habitat Value 12% 

Northern Valleys Vegetation 2.5% 

Mount Grafton 

Bullwhack High Habitat Value 50% 

Highlands & South Egan 

Range High Habitat Value 27% 

Northern Benches High Habitat Value 23% 

South Egan Range 

Highlands & South Egan 

Range High Habitat Value 73% 

Ely/Lund Watershed & 

WUI High Habitat Value 12% 

Bullwhack High Habitat Value 8% 

Southern Benches Vegetation 7% 

Far South Egans 

Highlands & South Egan 

Range High Value Habitat 75% 

Bullwhack High Value Habitat 23% 

Southern Benches Vegetation 2% 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 74]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 75]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE -WMP & EA 76]
 
Fish and Wildlife
 

Affected Environment 

Wildlife species characteristic of the Great Basin are supported by the diverse habitat types found in 

wilderness. Key habitats, as defined in the Nevada Wildlife Action Plan (2006), can be used to infer likely 

occurrences of wildlife species assemblages when survey data is lacking, as is the case for many species in 

these wilderness areas. Key Habitats include primarily lower montane woodlands and sagebrush and Inter

mountain conifer forests and woodlands (Nevada Wildlife Plan Action Team 2006). 

The Highland Ridge Wilderness has 7 springs within or adjacent and no perennial streams. Mount Grafton 

contains 3 perennial streams and 16 springs. As of 1984 fish surveys, both in Geyser Creek and North Creek in 

the Mount Grafton Wilderness contain populations of rainbow and brook trout. The South Egan Range 

contains no perennial streams and 7 springs. The Far South Egans Wilderness contains no perennial streams, 

and no developed or undeveloped springs. Perennial streams, springs and riparian areas provide very 

important water sources, forage and habitat for all wildlife. 

Small game and furbearers in the project area include black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), gray fox 

(Urocyon cinereoargenteus), bobcat (Lynx rufus baileyi), mountain lion (Puma concolor) and coyote (Canis 

latrans). Other animals that can be found in these regions include golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), prairie 

falcon (Falco mexicanus), northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis), red-tailed hawk, short-eared owl (Asio 

flammeus) and sagebrush Lizard. Nongame species of mammals, reptiles, and birds are diverse and provide 

the prey base for the predators of the area. 

Big Game 

The big game species that occupy these areas are Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus elaphus), mule deer (Odocoileus 

hemionus), Pronghorn antelope (Antelocapra americana) and Rocky Mountain and desert bighorn sheep (Ovis 

canadensis canadensis or canadensis nelsoni). Table 7 below displays the acreage of big game habitat in each 

wilderness. 

­

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 77]
 
Big Game Wilderness Year Round Crucial Crucial 

(acres) Summer Winter 

(acres) (acres) 

Rocky Mountain Elk Mount Grafton 78,722 35,723 0 

Highland Range 48,446 5,206 0 

South Egans 67,222 0 0 

Far South Egans 36,299 0 0 

Mule Deer Mount Grafton 32,695 46,027 0 

Highland Range 47,241 298 2,108 

South Egans 6,438 60,785 0 

Far South Egans 10,366 25,933 0 

Pronghorn Mount Grafton 19,291 0 0 

Highland Range 5,540 0 0 

South Egans 4,303 0 0 

Far South Egans 5,345 0 0 

Rocky Mountain Mount Grafton 0 0 0 

Bighorn Sheep Highland Range 35,957 0 0 

South Egans 0 0 0 

Far South Egans 0 0 0 

Desert Bighorn Sheep Mount Grafton 32,294 0 0 

Highland Range 0 0 0 

South Egans 17,567 0 0 

Far South Egans 21,862 0 0 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 7. Acreages of big game habitat in each wilderness. 

Rocky Mountain Elk – Elk eat grasses and forbs during the spring and summer and supplement their 

diet with tree bark and shrubs in the winter. Elk breed in the fall when the bulls gather cows and 

calves into small groups or harems. 

Mule Deer – Deer generally browse on forbs, grasses, and shrubs depending on the time of year. For 

instance, forbs and grasses are most important in spring and summer while shrubs are most utilized 

during winter and the dry summer months. 

Pronghorn Antelope – The lower slopes of the three wilderness areas provides the low shrub habitat 

preferred by pronghorn. They eat a wide range of plants including sagebrush, rabbitbrush, cheatgrass 

and Indian rice grass. 

Rocky Mountain and Desert Bighorn Sheep – The steep, rocky terrain of the Highland Ridge Wilderness 

provides habitat the sheep desire to help avoid predators such as coyote, eagle and mountain lions. 

Their diet depends upon grasses and shrubs. The male’s distinctive horns can weigh up to 30 pounds. 

The Highland Ridge Wilderness contains 35,957 acres of occupied Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep 

habitat. 

Desert Big Horn Bighorn Sheep – Bighorn sheep preferred habitat is steep slopes on, or near 

mountains, with a clear view of the surrounding area, therefore the mountains and cliffs of several 

wilderness areas are ideal. Their diet depends upon grasses and shrubs. The male’s distinctive horns 

can weigh up to 30 pounds. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 78]
 
Upland Game
 

Upland game species primarily consist of blue grouse (Dendragapus obscurus) and chukar (Alectoris chukar). 

Blue Grouse – In the warm months blue grouse eat seeds, berries and insects whereas during the 

colder months they will eat conifer needles. During mating season the male blue grouse will call out 

with a booming hoot that can be heard for miles while displaying his neck sac and fanning out his tail. 

Chukar – This species from the pheasant family was originally introduced from Pakistan as an upland 

game bird. It can be found on rocky hillsides or open and flat desert with sparse grassy vegetation. 

They primarily eat seeds but will forage on some insects (Christensen 1996). 

Migratory and Resident Birds 

Common migrant bird species occurring in the project area include:
 

black throated grey warbler (Dendroica negrescens), sage sparrow (Amphispiza belli), sage thrasher
 

(Oreoscoptes montanus), vesper sparrow (Pooecetes gramineus), Cassin’s finch (Carpodacus cassinii), green
 

tailed towhee (Pipilo chlorurus).
 

Common resident bird species include:
 

juniper titmouse (Baeolophus ridgwayi), Clark’s nutcracker (Nucifraga columbiana), red-breasted nuthatch
 

(Sitta Canadensis) and Brewer’s sparrow (Spizella breweri).
 

Environmental Consequences 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

Authorized livestock activities and ground-disturbing methods relating to fire management activities, 

vegetation treatments, noxious and invasive weed treatments, emergency stabilization and rehabilitation, 

route decommissioning, construction of trails and staging areas and water development removal or 

maintenance could have localized, short term impacts on behavior and movement of individuals. Wildlife 

would be displaced, however once these actions have concluded, wildlife would return to the area. 

In the long-term, vegetation treatments, noxious and invasive weed treatments, and emergency stabilization 

and rehabilitation would improve habitat for all wildlife by increasing native plant composition for forage and 

cover, as well as increasing habitat diversity. Treatments that remove encroaching trees from riparian areas, 

sagebrush communities, and aspen stands will improve habitat for all wildlife. Route decommissioning and 

restoration will reduce habitat fragmentation in the wilderness for all wildlife species. Repairing or upgrading 

Pickup, Wildcat #2, and Robber’s Roost water developments would better distribute big game throughout 

the wilderness areas and relieve pressure on riparian vegetation and soils at natural water sources. 

Big game and migratory bird timing stipulations outlined in the Proposed Action of the WMP will lessen 

impacts to both. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 79]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Impacts of No Action 

In general, the impacts of fire management and emergency stabilization and rehabilitation would be the 

same as the Proposed Action because they are guided by their own resource programs and may still occur in 

wilderness. Sagebrush communities and aspen stands, would benefit from vegetation treatments by 

continuing to reduce tree encroachment for wildlife that depend on them. Not treating noxious and invasive 

weeds may replace native grasses and forbs over time decreasing forage and habitat, as well as increase fire 

intensity and frequency, potentially resulting in long-term loss of wildlife habitat. Not repairing wildlife water 

developments will concentrate big game in smaller areas and increase use on natural water sources which 

may create impacts to riparian plants and soils. 

Clark's Nutcracker, South Egan Range Wilderness 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 80]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total 

Wilderness Area Allotment Wilderness Season of Use Total AUMs*

Acres 

Sheep 12/1-7/30 Baker Creek 1,182 4,313 Cattle 11/1-6/10 

Sheep 

South Spring 5/1-6/15 and 9/1-9/30 3,889 6,329 Valley Cattle 

2/1-6/15 

North 399 10/15-5/15 770 Chokecherry Highland Ridge 

Murphy Wash 43,935 6/5 – 9/10 728 

Lexington 11,239 Closed (FS) 

Hamblin 6,675 11/1-5/31 8,177 Valley 

Chokecherry 9,570 Closed (FS) 

Cattle 

Camp/Cave 25,664 5/15-11/30 6,878 

Valley 

Mount Grafton Cave Valley 21,773 5/1-10/31 2,402 Ranch 

Geyser 31,312 3/1-2/28 12,308 Ranch 

Grazing Uses
 

Affected Environment 

Livestock grazing allotments in the Highland Ridge, Mount Grafton, South Egan Range and Far South Egans 

Wilderness areas are managed entirely by the Ely District Office. Most of the eighteen allotments are 

managed through the Schell Field Office, though Hardy Spring & Shingle Pass allotments are managed 

through the Egan Field office (See Table 8 and Maps 2-5). Animal Unit Months (AUMs) not included in Table 8 

that may be associated with the allotments include historic suspended, as well as mandatory and voluntary 

non-use AUMs, for conservation and protection purposes. Livestock numbers may vary based on rotational 

grazing systems and the terms and conditions of the individual term grazing permits. 

Range developments currently exist in support of rangeland health and the management of livestock grazing. 

Existing range developments identified through administrative records and field reconnaissance within the 

wilderness areas are depicted in Maps 2 – 5. 

The grazing permittee is responsible for maintenance of all livestock grazing facilities in the wilderness areas 

by cooperative agreements. 

Table 8. Grazing Allotments overlapping Wilderness. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 81]
 
 

 

 

 

 

Total 

Wilderness Area Allotment Wilderness Season of Use Total AUMs*

Acres 

Brown Knoll 2,542 4/1-5/15 161 

Chimney 10,289 5/1-11/1 684 Rock 

Hardy Spring 15,069 10/15-5/15 3,478 

Rock Canyon 425 11/1-2/28 and 3/15-5/15 432 

South Egan Range 

Sheep Pass 13,514 4/1-12/31 1,095 

Shingle Pass 24,814 5/15-10/30 2,724 

Six Mile 157 4/1-4/30 and 9/15-2/28 162 Ranch 

Sunnyside 406 6/1-3/31 5,402 

Shingle Pass 11,839 5/15 - 10/30 2,724 

Far South Egans 

Sunnyside 24,460 6/1 to 3/31 5,402 

Environmental Consequences 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

The Proposed Action for management of livestock grazing provides specific guidance for the maintenance of 

facilities and activities in support of a livestock grazing program in contrast to the No Action. Administrative 

access routes would be clearly defined and regular maintenance of structures in support of livestock grazing 

would be distinguished from emergency operations. This may enhance the ability of the BLM to manage 

livestock grazing activities within wilderness and eliminate time delays in approval for access to maintain 

range developments and respond to emergency situations. The installation of gates would allow for 

permittee access to the range developments while preventing illegal vehicle incursions and reducing 

vandalism to range developments. Maintenance and removal techniques and activity is being analyzed within 

site-specific EA(s). 

The proposed action may create temporary localized impacts to other resources. The proposed action may 

affect the “undeveloped” character of the wilderness resource, recreationists seeking a wilderness 

experience, individual wildlife species in the vicinity, and has the potential to increase the spread of invasive, 

non-native plant species. Wildlife may benefit from the maintenance of rangeland water developments as 

they provide additional sources of water. 

Impacts of No Action 

Administrative access and maintenance needs for livestock grazing operations would occur on a case-by-case 

basis. No administrative access routes would be designated and access gates would not be installed. Impacts 

to and from other resources would not differ from the proposed action. 

*AUMs are for the entire allotment (wilderness and non-wilderness). 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 82]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Invasive Non-native Plant Species (includes noxious weeds)
 

Affected Environment 

Noxious and non-native invasive weeds are frequent obstacles to managing wilderness character in the 

Central Basin Ecoregion. Non-native invasive species are defined by Executive Order 13112 as “an alien 

species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human 

health.” Alien refers to a species that did not evolve in the environment in which it is found. Noxious weeds 

are any plant designated by a Federal, State, or County government as injurious to public health, agriculture, 

recreation, wildlife, or property (Sheley, Petroff, and Borman 1999). 

Noxious weeds in Nevada are classified by the Nevada Department of Agriculture and the Plant Protection 

Act (2000) administered by the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service (APHIS). Category A weeds are weeds that are generally not found or that are limited in 

distribution throughout the State. Such weeds are subject to active exclusion from the State, active 

eradication wherever found, and active eradication from the premises of a dealer of nursery stock. Category B 

weeds are weeds that are generally established in scattered populations in some counties of the State. Such 

weeds are subject to active exclusion where possible and active eradication from the premises of a dealer of 

nursery stock. Category C weeds are weeds that are generally established and generally widespread in many 

counties of the State. Such weeds are subject to active eradication from the premises of a dealer of nursery 

stock. 

Highland Ridge Wilderness has one documented location of spotted knapweed on the John’s Wash 

cherrystem. Within the immediate vicinity of Mount Grafton Wilderness are Black henbane, white top/hoary 

cress, Spotted Knapweed and Salt Cedar. Nearby the South Egan Range are locations of Black Henbane, and 

Russian Knapweed. 

Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) is currently found in a few areas at low density throughout both wilderness 

areas. This invasive annual grass displaces native perennial shrub, grass, and forb species because of its ability 

to germinate quicker and earlier than native species, thus outcompeting natives for water and nutrients. 

Cheatgrass is also adapted to recurring fires that are perpetuated in part by the fine dead fuels that it leaves 

behind. In general, native plants have a difficult time thriving in these altered fire regimes. 

A risk assessment for noxious weeds was conducted for these wilderness areas. For this project, the risk 

factor is low. A risk rating of moderate requires the development of preventative management measures for 

the proposed project to reduce the risk of introduction or spread of noxious weeds into the area. 

Environmental Consequences 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

In general, the management actions outlined in this plan apply best management practices and standard 

operating procedures that are focused on preventing the spread of weeds by vectors such as vehicles or 

equipment. The ability to detect noxious and invasive weeds would be enhanced over the No Action 

alternative through a greater emphasis on regular wilderness monitoring. Weed treatment procedures within 

these areas would be clearly defined and compatible with limiting or eliminating noxious and invasive weeds. 

High-use staging areas and designated trails could be infested by weeds through vehicle or human vectors. 

The continued presence and anticipated increase of recreational activities, including hunting, camping, 

hiking, and horse packing, may contribute to the spread of noxious and invasive species as a result of 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 83]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

trampling of native species and the possibility of spreading noxious and invasive seeds into wilderness. Pack 

stock animals used for recreational horseback riding and routine livestock maintenance would be fed with 

packed-in, certified weed-free feed, decreasing their contribution to weed infestation problems and the 

impact of incidental recreational horse browsing on vegetation. 

Rehabilitation of small-scale disturbances would include methods such as decompaction, scarifying, and 

pitting soil that may stimulate the growth of noxious and invasive weeds. Future approved vegetation 

restoration projects may cause small, local disturbances that could increase local noxious and invasive weed 

populations. Allowable motorized access could occur through emergency stabilization and rehabilitation, 

wildlife management, livestock permittee administrative access, or fire-management; such access may cause 

disturbances that encourage weed establishment, or may introduce additional weeds into the wilderness. 

Livestock grazing management seeks to achieve or maintain desired rangeland health and healthy 

rangelands are less vulnerable to weed infestations. However, livestock can carry seeds and plant parts of 

noxious and invasive weed species. Monitoring of high risk areas should minimize possible infestations. Cattle 

would generally be excluded from areas of new revegetation until deemed successful to prevent livestock 

from trampling and grazing young plants (BLM 2008b). 

Impacts of No Action 

Weed introduction from individuals hiking and from vehicles along cherry-stemmed routes and wilderness 

boundary roads may occur. Weed monitoring would occur approximately every 5 years along roads, cherrystemmed routes, and around springs reasonably accessible from roads. Compared to the proposed action, 

weed treatment would be sporadic and would not occur in a timely manner. Additionally, when weeds are 

found, site-specific NEPA analysis would not be guided by the treatment options and priorities outlined in the 

proposed action, further slowing down the ability to treat weeds in a timely manner. 

Recreation Uses 

Affected Environment 

The four wilderness areas lie in remote central Nevada, about a 4 hour drive from Las Vegas. Although the 

precise amount of annual visitation is unknown, it is presumed to be low. Recreational activities include 

hiking, camping, climbing, enjoying scenery, nature study and hunting. The wilderness areas range in 

elevation from 5,000 feet to the 10,991 foot summit of Mount Grafton. The rugged peaks, cliffs, and remote 

canyons offer destinations for hikers and climbers. There is a summit register atop Mount Grafton. There are 

no known geocaches, or letterboxes in any of the wilderness areas. 

Less difficult hiking opportunities can be found on the wilderness areas’ outer edges. An unknown number of 

trails exist which were created by wildlife and livestock. Hunting occurs for Rocky Mountain elk, mule deer, 

and upland game birds including blue grouse. Availability of firewood for campfires is good; pinyon pine and 

juniper are prevalent across the four wilderness areas. 

No permits are required to visit, and there are no group size limits or camping restrictions. 

The majority of the wilderness areas provide the opportunity to experience a sense of remoteness and 

isolation. There are numerous draws, ravines, rocky outcrops, ridges, and canyons that create secluded 

locales. The wilderness areas’ large area and low visitation combine to provide outstanding opportunities for 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 84]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

solitude. However, the lower open slopes of the mountains, and periodic sights and sounds of vehicles in 

adjacent lands and aircraft flying overhead, may decrease experiences of solitude. On the western portion of 

Far South Egans and the South Egan Range Wilderness areas opportunities for solitude are diminished due to 

the sights and sounds of State Route 318. Similarly, the eastern side of Mount Grafton is within sight and 

sound of Highway 93. 

An unmaintained foot-worn hiking path of approximately 300 feet provides easy access to Whipple Cave from 

a nearby parking area outside of wilderness. Reaching the cave floor involves a 75-foot rappel from the roof of 

the cave, aided in part by two permanent fixed anchors near the ledge; the last 20-feet of the rappel is an 

overhang. A visitor self-register is located on the cave floor. Visitation to the cave is moderate due to the 

relative ease of access; however the technical climbing equipment and skills required may limit use within the 

cave itself. 

Environmental Consequences 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

In the Highland Ridge Wilderness, 6.5 miles of trails will be designated, 2 vehicle staging areas and two signs 

will be installed. The short section of trail leading to Whipple Cave would be designated in the Far South 

Egans Wilderness. 

With the redesign of the wildlife water developments, opportunities for wildlife viewing and hunting would be 

improved on the Far South Egans and Mount Grafton Wilderness areas. 

The proposed action would provide hiking opportunities and protection of resources by concentrating 

impacts in those areas over No Action. Recreational use may create temporary localized impacts to wildlife 

through displacement of individual animals; however, the recreational experience may also be improved 

through increased opportunities to observe wildlife. Increased pedestrian, equestrian and vehicle traffic at 

trailheads has the potential to introduce invasive non-native plants, including noxious weeds. Creation of 

vehicle staging areas and sign installations would create small localized disturbances to vegetation and soils. 

The wilderness resource would be enhanced by the Proposed Action as the majority of the four wilderness 

areas would not be accessed by designated trails. Off-trail travel would not be impacted. The experience of 

visitors seeking a more primitive and unconfined form of recreation would be enhanced, and opportunities for 

solitude would remain extensive. Signs/kiosks may increase protection of the wilderness resource and 

enhance visitors’ experiences by providing recreationists with information and education, and creating 

staging areas may reduce instances of vehicle incursions. A monitoring system would be established to 

prevent or respond to degradation of trails, campsites, solitude, additional foot-worn hiking paths, and 

recreational impacts to other resources. 

Recreational activities may be impacted by temporary closures of areas as a result of fire suppression 

activities, emergency stabilization and rehabilitation, and herbicide treatments of invasive non-native and 

noxious weed treatments. 

Impacts of No Action 

The No Action option would generally have similar impacts compared to the Proposed Action, however, 

impacts to recreation and wilderness resources may be more severe. Impacts of recreational use to wildlife 

resources, non-native invasive plants, including weeds, would be identical to the Proposed Action. No trails 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 85]
 
would be designated; however, 211 miles of former vehicle routes would be available for hiking and 

equestrian use. The lack of designated trails may increase opportunities for recreationists seeking a primitive 

and unconfined type of recreation and increased opportunities for solitude. However, the absence of 

designated trails may result in numerous foot-worn hiking paths, which may increase disturbance to 

vegetation and soils. 

There would be no vehicle staging area or barrier construction in the No Action, thereby eliminating short 

term localized impacts to vegetation and soils. The absence of these facilities may, however, result in 

widespread impacts to these resources from vehicles creating their own staging areas, and potentially driving 

into wilderness. The consequences of visitor impacts may detract from the wilderness setting if there is no 

monitoring system and strategy in place to deal with those impacts. 

Impacts of other resources, including fire suppression activities, emergency stabilization and rehabilitation, 

and herbicide treatments of invasive non-native and noxious weed treatments would be the same as the 

Proposed Action. 

Special Status Animal Species 

Affected Environment 

According to BLM Manual 6840, Special Status Species Management Manual, special status species are 

defined as 1) species listed or proposed for listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and 2) species 

requiring special management consideration to promote their conservation and reduce the likelihood and 

need for listing under the ESA, which are designated as Bureau sensitive by the State Director. Additionally, 

all federal candidate, proposed, and delisted species in the five years following delisting will be conserved as 

Bureau sensitive species (BLM 2008d). 

Information on the occurrence and abundance of Nevada BLM special status species within the management 

area is currently lacking because no extensive surveys within wilderness have been conducted, however, 

populations may be discovered in the future. Table 9 lists the Nevada BLM special status wildlife species that 

may occur in the project area, along with its key habitat (BLM 2011). 

Environmental Consequences 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

In general, impacts to special status animal species would generally be the same as described for fish and 

wildlife on Page 77. Vegetation treatments that remove encroaching trees in sagebrush communities, riparian 

areas, and aspen stands would benefit greater sage-grouse, northern goshawk, as well as other special status 

bird and bat species that rely on these communities. Nest and roost sites for birds and bats would be lost due 

to potential vegetation treatments; however there is sufficient habitat throughout the wilderness. 

Implementing the proposed action would not harm special status species populations nor cause them to 

become federally listed under the ESA. 

Greater sage-grouse and migratory bird timing stipulations outlined in the Proposed Action of the WMP will 

lessen impacts to these species. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 86]
 
Table 9. Nevada BLM Special Status Fish & Wildlife Species with Potential to Occur in the Project Area (BLM 

2011).
 

BLM Special Status Animal 

Species Scientific Name Key Habitat 

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Lower Montane Woodland 

Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis Sagebrush & Intermountain Conifer Forests & Woodlands 

Golden Eagle Aquila chysaetos Sagebrush & Lower Montane Woodlands 

Ferruginous Hawk Buteo regalis Sagebrush & Lower Montane Woodlands 

Western Burrowing Owl Athene cunicularia Sagebrush 

Greater Sage-Grouse Centrocercus 

urophasianus Sagebrush 

Loggerhead Shrike Lanius ludovicianus Sagebrush 

Black Rosy-Finch Leucosticte atrata Lower & Upper Montane Woodlands 

Pinyon Jay Gymnorhinus 

cyanocephalus Lower Montane Woodlands 

Lewis’s Woodpecker Melanerpes lewis Intermountain Conifer Forests and Woodlands 

Dark Kangaroo Mouse Microdipodops 

megacephalus Sagebrush 

Pygmy Rabbit Brachylagus idahoensis Sagebrush 

Long-eared Myotis Myotis evotis Lower Montane Woodlands & Intermountain Conifer Forests 

and Woodlands 

Western Small-footed Myotis Myotis ciliolabrum Lower Montane Woodlands 

Fringed Myotis Myotis thysanodes Lower Montane Woodlands 

Townsend’s Big-eared Bat Plecotus townsendii Lower Montane Woodlands 

Spotted Bat Euderma maculatum Lower Montane Woodlands 

Brazilian Free-tailed Bat Nyctinomops macrotis Lower Montane Woodlands 

Hoary Bat Lasiurus cinereus Intermountain Conifer Forests and Woodlands 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 87]
 
Impacts of No Action 

In general, the impacts of the no action alternative to special status animal species are the same as described 

for fish and wildlife on Page 77. Implementing the no action alternative would not cause these species to 

become listed under the ESA. 

Special Status Plant Species 

Affected Environment 

BLM special status plant species are defined according to BLM Manual 6840 (BLM 2008). 

Information on the occurrence and abundance of Nevada BLM special status plant species within the project 

area is currently lacking because no extensive surveys within wilderness have been conducted, however, 

populations may be discovered in the future. Two populations of waxflower (Jamesia tetrapetala) have been 

documented in the Highland Ridge Wilderness. This plant inhabits alpine, subalpine limestone cliff, talus, and 

canyon areas. It is unknown if these populations are decreasing, increasing, or stable due to insufficient 

surveys and lack of information. 

Nevada willowhead (Epilobium nevadense) has potential to occur in the project area. 

Environmental Consequences 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

Destruction of known or undiscovered special status plant species could occur from wildland fire. Areas where 

known populations of waxflower or newly discovered special status plant species would be avoided by ground 

disturbing activities. 

Impacts of No Action 

Impacts from wildland fire would be the same as the proposed action. The existing waxflower populations 

and any undiscovered special status plant species would remain unchanged. 

Vegetation 

Affected Environment 

All four wilderness areas lie entirely within the Central Basin and Range Ecoregion (Great Basin). (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 2007). 

Biophysical setting (BPS) models have been developed for most major vegetation types. These models 

describe the vegetation, geography, biophysical characteristics, succession stages, disturbance regimes, and 

assumptions for each vegetation type (Havlina et al, 2010). Each biophysical setting model establishes a 

reference condition that is described as the potential vegetative community for a given site prior to European 

influence reflecting a range of natural disturbances. These reference conditions specify a range, in 

percentages, of several classes that describe the vegetation progression post-disturbance. The Ely District 

Resource Management Plan (RMP) utilized the BPS data in delineating the vegetative goals for the district. 

The percentages within the RMP vary slightly from the BPS models for certain vegetation types. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 88]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mount Grafton Wilderness FRCC rating has been calculated at 50% departed or at the upper end of FRCC 2 

(34-67%). This is described as representing a moderate risk of losing key ecosystem components. Highland 

Ridge Wilderness FRCC rating has been calculated at 51% departed or in the middle of FRCC 2 (34-67%). This 

is described as representing a moderate risk of losing key ecosystem components. Past studies within the 

South Snake Range have documented historical fire return intervals that are similar or are shorter than those 

utilized within the BPS models. Following European settlement the fire return intervals have increased 

dramatically. The change in the disturbance regime has been attributed to past grazing practices, fire 

suppression and the removal of the Native American ignition source (Gruell 1994, Gruell 1999, Kitchen 2012). 

South Egan Range Wilderness FRCC rating has been calculated at 50% departed or in the middle of FRCC 2 

(34-67%). This is described as representing a moderate risk of losing key ecosystem components. Far South 

Egans Wilderness FRCC rating has been calculated at 47% departed or in the middle of FRCC 2 (34-67%). This 

is described as representing a moderate risk of losing key ecosystem components. While there has not been 

any fire history studies identified, there have been several done within the Great Basin and the region of 

these wilderness areas. In general the studies have determined the fire return intervals have lengthened 

following the European settlement of the great basin. These changes to the fire return interval are commonly 

attributed to past grazing practices and fire suppression. 

Appendix D lists the major BPS models within the wilderness areas as summarized by the FRCC rating. 

Environmental Consequences 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

These actions are proposed on relatively disturbed sites, thus there would be nominal impacts to vegetation 

communities. Also, vehicle barriers would be constructed outside of wilderness to prevent vehicles from 

unauthorized travel inside wilderness, thus further limiting impacts to vegetation. 

Very small amounts of vegetation may be temporarily impacted along cherry-stemmed or administrative 

access routes from authorized motorized access that may occur through future emergency stabilization and 

rehabilitation, wildlife management, grazing permittee administrative access, or fire management actions. 

Approximately 207 miles (approximately 207 acres) of former vehicle routes will be decommissioned. 

Rehabilitating decommissioned routes will reduce or eliminate further unauthorized incursions and new plant 

growth will enhance the vegetation communities in proximity to these former routes. 

Small areas of vegetation could be disturbed or destroyed if vegetation is cut back or removed to protect 

sensitive archaeological and historic resources, such as prehistoric rock art, from wildland fire. 

Approved research on native plant communities, vegetation restoration projects, wildland fire for resource 

benefit and monitoring could improve and restore vegetation communities within wilderness. As departure is 

reduced fire frequency and severity would have a higher probability of occurring within the historic fire 

regime thereby creating a natural arrangement of vegetative communities and seral classes. These 

restoration activities would move vegetation closer to the reference condition thereby increasing the 

naturalness of the wilderness area. 

The prohibition of geocaching would prevent disturbance to vegetation that could occur through object burial 

and the development of social trails relating to geocaching. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 89]
 
Impacts of No Action 

Without the guidance of a management plan and subsequent monitoring, altered vegetation communities 

may persist or further degrade impacting wildlife habitat and increasing fire frequency and severity. 

Unmonitored recreational use of the wilderness areas could result in impacts to vegetation on foot-worn 

paths and at campsites. Not designating administrative access routes, staging areas, or pullouts, could lead to 

degradation of vegetative communities through an increase in motorized trespass and poor wilderness ethics 

from recreational users. 

Wilderness 

Affected Environment 

A Wilderness is an area designated by Congress and defined by the Wilderness Act of 1964 as a place that “(1) 

generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man’s work 

substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type 

of recreation; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable its 

preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geological, or other 

features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value.” 

The Wilderness Management Plan addresses management of the 68,622 acre Highland Ridge, 78,743 acre 

Mount Grafton 67,214 acre South Egan Range and 51,480 Far South Egans Wilderness. Wilderness 

characteristics are described under four categories: untrammeled, natural, undeveloped, and having 

outstanding opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation. Table 10, below, provides a 

summary of the affected environment for the wilderness areas for which data was available. 

Untrammeled 

Trammels are modern human controls or manipulations which hinder and restrict components or processes 

of wilderness. The few trammeling activities that exist include various measures in the management of 

wildland fire, weeds, and removal of vegetation due to livestock grazing. Additional obstructions are present 

in the form of authorized allotment fences, pipelines, water troughs, and wildlife water developments. 

Natural 

These areas appear be substantially free from the effects of modern civilization, having been primarily 

affected by the forces of nature, and their primeval character is mostly preserved. Non-native chukar 

partridge may be present in all four areas. Any weed infestations alter the natural component of wilderness. 

Undeveloped 

The wilderness areas have few permanent improvements or other evidence of modern human presence or 

occupation. Structures which occur include range developments such as fence lines, pipelines, water troughs 

and reservoirs, corrals, as well as wildlife water developments, abandoned mining claims, and former vehicle 

routes. Three wildlife water developments are located within Far South Egans. Few metal pieces and 

roadbeds are what remain of a shingle mill operation, once located in what is now Far South Egans 

Wilderness. A railroad bed with ties, metal boiler, unconfirmed stack of processed logs, and human effects 

such as boots, cans, and glass are left from a historic sawmill operation within Far South Egans. Other historic 

mine sites exist within the Mount Grafton Wilderness. A self-register box is located on the floor of Whipple 

Cave. Additionally, two permanent fixed anchors are located on the rock ledge at the Whipple Cave entrance. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 90]
 
Outstanding Opportunities for Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation 

The wilderness areas provide outstanding opportunities for people to experience solitude and primitive, 

unconfined recreation, including the values of inspiration and physical and mental challenge. Jagged peaks 

and ridges, and forested slopes and drainages in these areas provide excellent opportunities for solitude. The 

rugged terrain, broad canyons provide for primitive recreation opportunities such as hiking, camping, 

climbing, hunting, horseback riding, and nature study. Only the 14-day stay limit for camping in all four areas 

confines recreation opportunities. 

Environmental Consequences 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

All activities that authorize the use of motorized and mechanized vehicles and equipment would result in 

temporary and localized short-term effects to all wilderness characteristics. 

Untrammeled 

Under this alternative, trammeling activities would continue in the wilderness areas to the same extent as 

under the No Action. These trammeling activities include control of fire, emergency stabilization and 

rehabilitation after a fire, vegetation restoration and control of non-native invasive plants. Trammeling 

developments include existing or upgraded wildlife water developments, and range developments. Although 

trammeling, these activities or developments are expected to enhance the natural character of the wilderness 

areas. 

Natural 

The natural and primeval character of the wilderness would be maintained or enhanced under the Proposed 

Action, and would be improved as compared to the No Action. The proposed action would provide definite 

direction for the control of noxious weeds, and would direct fire management actions, and emergency 

stabilization and rehabilitation to reduce the potential for conversion and dominance of introduced annual 

grasses. Designation of trails would be expected to better direct visitors in ways that would prevent 

degradation of natural resources and prevent widespread impacts to vegetation and soils. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 91]
 
 

Undeveloped 

The proposed action would designate approximately 15 miles of trails. This is the optimal amount to 

simultaneously provide for recreational opportunities while protecting natural resources by directing the 

majority of visitors away from sensitive locations and preventing more widespread impacts. 

Decommissioning of former vehicle routes followed by vegetative restoration of those areas and the removal 

of non-functioning wildlife water developments would improve the undeveloped qualities of the wilderness. 

Administrative access routes would remain and would impact wilderness character. Removal of the mining 

shack and debris on the southwest side of Mount Grafton Wilderness would improve the undeveloped quality. 

Outstanding Opportunities for Solitude and Primitive, Unconfined Recreation 

Outstanding opportunities for solitude would be largely unaffected by the Proposed Action. By designating 

trails, visitation may increase in those areas, causing the ability to find solitude to diminish; however the 

locations of the designated trails are historic trail locations and/or known areas of scenic and recreational 

opportunities and over time use increases would be expected in those areas without trail designations. 

Solitude may remain impacted by military aircraft operations in airspace. Opportunities for primitive and 

unconfined recreation will remain outstanding throughout the wilderness. Trails may enhance the ability of 

some to enjoy primitive recreational opportunities. The Proposed Action allows for additional restrictions on 

recreation if monitoring indicates new damage to natural resources is occurring. 

Impacts of No Action 

Untrammeled 

Impacts occurring to the untrammeled quality of wilderness would continue to the same extent as under the 

Proposed Action. These trammeling actions include suppression of fires, emergency stabilization and 

rehabilitation of vegetation after fires, and control on non-native invasive plants including noxious weeds. 

New activities that could create trammels would be considered on a case-by-case basis. 

Aspen leaves in the Highland Ridge Wilderness 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 92]
 
Natural 

The naturalness and primeval character of wilderness would remain mostly unchanged under the No Action 

alternative. Invasive non-native plants including noxious weeds would remain and may spread in portions of 

the wilderness areas. Limited actions may be taken in fire management and emergency stabilization and 

rehabilitation to prevent further conversion of native to non-native vegetation communities compared to the 

Proposed Action. Lack of designated trails may cause impacts to new areas and resources such as vegetation 

and soils. 

Undeveloped 

No trails would be designated under the No Action; however former vehicle routes would be available for use 

by hikers and equestrians. The historic trails may continue to receive use, without the benefit of maintenance. 

Personal property, unauthorized structures, or installations would be removed as encountered as long as they 

are not culturally noteworthy. Removal of these items would maintain or improve the undeveloped character. 

Outstanding Opportunities for Solitude or Primitive, Unconfined Recreation 

Under the No Action, impacts to solitude, such as from military over flights would largely be the same as in 

the Proposed Action. Opportunities for primitive and unconfined recreation would remain outstanding 

throughout the wilderness areas. There would be no trail designation which may increase opportunities for 

solitude and primitive and unconfined recreation. No additional regulations would be implemented to confine 

or restrict recreational activities. 

Table 10. Summary of Developments in Wilderness 

Wilderness Area Fence lines 

(miles) Pipelines (miles) Mines Water Troughs and Reservoirs 

Wildlife 

Water Developments 

Vehicle Routes 

(miles) 

Highland Ridge 1.2 0.05 - 21 - 58.9 

Mount Grafton 13 0 3 11 3 105.6 

South Egan Range 5.1 - 1 11 2 39.8 

Far South Egans 0.19 - - - 3 2.9 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 93]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cumulative Impacts 

The purpose of the cumulative impacts analysis for the proposed action is to evaluate the combined, 

incremental effects of human activity within the scope of the project. The Ely RMP states that resource 

analysis will occur by watershed. The project area overlaps with seven hydro-geographic basins, which are 

within the Colorado River Basin region; therefore the scope of the cumulative analysis will be restricted to 

actions within these basins. See Map 1 for an overview of the area. 

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations define scope and state that connected actions, 

cumulative actions, and similar actions should be included in the effects analysis (40 CFR 1508.25). With the 

exception of wildfire suppression, noxious weed and invasive species management, and emergency 

stabilization and rehabilitation, the scope of the cumulative effects analysis will be restricted to an area that 

includes a one-mile buffer around each of the wilderness areas. The one-mile distance equates to the 

proximity of human activities that may affect wilderness character. This distance was chosen to represent the 

visual and sound intrusion that could be carried to and from edges due to topography, as well as the 

heightened risk of wildfire, weed invasion, and non-native seeding that is in close proximity to the wilderness. 

Actions related to wildfire suppression, noxious weed and invasive species management, and emergency 

stabilization and rehabilitation will include a scope that encompasses lands within the region that pose a 

threat to wilderness character. 

The 1997 CEQ Handbook Guidelines for Assessing and Documenting Cumulative Impacts states that the 

cumulative effects analysis can be focused on issues and resource values identified during scoping that are of 

major importance. Relevant issues identified for this project include the following: 

Past actions (includes activities that have occurred since designation): 

 Large wildfires that threaten wilderness and non-wilderness 

 Fire Suppression and ES&R actions 

 Fence repair and construction 

 Livestock grazing operations 

 Wild Horse presence 

 Sign installation 

 Stream monitoring device 

Current and ongoing activities: 

 Livestock grazing operations 

 Monitoring 

 Wild Horse presence 

 Commercial outfitting and guiding 

 Recreation: camping, hunting and fishing 

 Vegetation restoration activities planned in the South Steptoe and Cave Valley and Lake Valley 

Watershed plans 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 94]
 
Future actions (includes those that are reasonably foreseeable within the project area): 

 Large wildfires that threaten wilderness and non-wilderness values 

 Inholding acquisitions 

 Water development 

 Development of staging areas 

 Fuel treatments and fire breaks 

 Travel Management Planning 

 Maintenance and repair of access routes 

 Vegetation restoration activities currently proposed within the South Spring and Hamblin Watershed 

Restoration Plan. 

There are few activities in the Proposed Action that, when combined with other activities, result in a 

cumulative impact. These include: 

1. Actions that may include motorized use. 

2. Actions that may disturb soils, vegetation, or other natural or cultural resources. 

3. Actions pertaining to land acquisition, and private and state land access and development. 

Unauthorized motorized incursions into wilderness cause direct and indirect effects usually associated with 

noise and/or visitor experience and may affect untrammeled, undeveloped, solitude, and primitive wilderness 

character. Such operations pertain to grazing, emergency access situations, wildfire suppression, emergency 

stabilization and rehabilitation, treatment of large weed infestations, or vegetation manipulation. An 

example of the direct effect would be an authorized permittee entering a pasture to repair fence damage or 

for a large salt delivery. An estimated average of 20 incursions per year would occur within the wilderness 

areas, and the impact would be localized or limited in scope to the affected pasture(s) and area adjacent to 

the pasture (effects would not be realized outside of an estimated one-mile radius from the motorized 

activity, and no more than one mile from the wilderness boundary). 

Cumulative impacts may result from activities that occur simultaneously even when separated by space (up 

to one mile). However, there is a low probability for this cumulative impact to occur due to the low frequency 

of motorized incursions into the wilderness. The impact is considered negligible and is related mostly to 

authorized livestock operations. An example of the cumulative impact would be a hunter traveling within a 

mile from the permittee at the same time and just outside the wilderness. The combined actions would result 

in an annual cumulative effect within a localized portion of wilderness (pasture). 

Authorized actions in wilderness may involve disturbance to soils, vegetation, or other natural or cultural 

resources. Actions considered for their contribution to cumulative impacts to natural resources include 

wildfire suppression, emergency stabilization and rehabilitation, weed treatments, and livestock 

concentration areas. 

A cumulative impact would only occur when two activities overlap in both time and space. There is a low 

probability for that to occur because such actions occurring within wilderness must be authorized by BLM. In 

addition, livestock grazing operations must adhere to Rangeland Health Standards designed to prevent 

effects to vegetation community and ecosystem health. The cumulative effect could be described through an 

example in which a livestock concentration area is located within the same seeding project area. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 95]
 
Other actions within wilderness that may have a direct effect include land acquisition, and private land access 

and development. BLM’s acquisition of this property reduces or eliminates the likelihood of subsequent 

development that would reduce solitude. 

Climate forecasts predict increasing heat and drought for the southwest United States may lead to the need 

for installation of additional wildlife water developments, which may increase trammeling and reduce the 

undeveloped character of wilderness, but will enhance the natural character by allowing some native wildlife 

to expand into suitable but water-limited habitat. 

In conclusion, cumulative impacts associated with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions within the 

analysis area would have an estimated negligible, but positive effect. When added to other foreseeable 

actions in the analysis area, management actions included in the Proposed Action Alternative would 

preclude, minimize, or mitigate natural and human-caused impacts to natural resources and wilderness 

character. 

Monitoring Program 

Monitoring of wilderness is a component of the Ely District Wilderness Program. Monitoring tracks the 

outcome of proposed activities on all wilderness characteristics, not just the one specific character that the 

activity was primarily intended to address. The Wilderness Management Plan contains a detailed monitoring 

section on starting on Page 55. 

Public Involvement 

The Ely District Office mailed a Consultation, Cooperation, and Coordination Letter to individuals and 

organizations that have expressed an interest in recreation/wilderness related actions. Those receiving the 

Consultation, Cooperation, and Coordination Letter have had the opportunity to request from the Ely District 

Office more information regarding specific actions. 

A Notice of Intent was sent in November, 2009. 

Public meetings were hosted by the BLM from the winter of 2009 to the summer of 2011 to inform the public 

of the policies and regulations associated with Wilderness management. Input was solicited during these 

meetings and for several weeks afterward concerning wilderness-related issues and concerns, as well as the 

development of alternatives and management actions proposed in the WMP. 

The Proposed Wilderness Management Plan was presented at a Tribal Coordination Meeting on September 

2009; no comments or concerns were raised. 

Meetings specifically for livestock grazing concerns were held in February 2010. A letter was also sent to 

appropriate grazing permittees asking for input on the BLM’s assessment of access needs for range 

improvements. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 96]
 
Consultation and Coordination
 

Nevada Department of Wildlife 

Great Basin National Park 

Southern Nevada Water Authority 

Lincoln County 

White Pine County 

Wingfield Nevada Group 

Wild Sheep Foundation 

Nevada Outfitter & Guide Association 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 97]
 
List of Preparers & Reviewers
 

BLM personnel 

Emily Simpson, Wilderness Planner 

S. Gus Malon, Wilderness Planner 

Dave Jacobson, Wilderness Planner 

Solomon Odom, Planning and Environmental Coordinator 

Matt Rajala, Fire Planner 

Mark D’Aversa, Hydrologist 

Andrea J Cox, Rangeland Management Specialist 

Ken Vicencio, Rangeland Management Specialist 

Jake Ferguson, Rangeland Management Specialist 

Benjamin Noyes, Wild Horse/Burro Specialist 

Nancy Herms, Wildlife Biologist 

John Miller, Park Ranger 

Renee Barlow, Archeologist 

Dave Davis, Geologist 

Cynthia Longinetti, Reality Specialist 

Alicia Hankins, Land Law Examiner 

Melanie Peterson, Environmental Protection Specialist 

Elvis Wall, Native American Coordinator 

Erica Husse, Rehabilitation Manager 

Christopher McVicars, Natural Resource Specialist 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 98]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References
 

Barker, J. P. 1990. Cultural Resources Inventory General Guidelines. Bureau of Land Management, Nevada 

State Office, Reno. Fourth edition (revised). 

BLM 2012. Manual 6340 - Management of BLM Wilderness. July 13, 2012. 

BLM 2011. Updated Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Sensitive Species List for Nevada. Instruction 

Memorandum NV-2011-059. June 27, 2011. 

BLM 2009. Wilderness Signs & Information Kiosks Categorical Exclusion. U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Land Management, Ely District Office, Ely, Nevada. 

BLM 2008. White Pine County Wilderness Ground Disturbance Reclamation Plan. U.S. Department of the 

Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Ely District Office, Ely, Nevada. April 2008. 

BLM 2008b. Ely District Approved Resource Management Plan. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of 

Land Management, Ely District Office, Ely, Nevada. November 2008. 

BLM, 2008c. Ely Fire Management Plan U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Ely 

District Office, Ely, Nevada. 

BLM 2008d. Manual 6840 – Special Status Species Management. December, 12, 2008. 

BLM 2007. Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Ely District. 

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Ely District Office, Ely, Nevada. November 

2007. 

BLM 2004. Ely District Fire Management Plan. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management, Ely District Office, Ely, Nevada. 

Christensen, G.C. 1996. Chukar (Alectoris chukar). In The Birds of North America, No. 258 (A. Poole and F. Gill, 

eds.). The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA, and The American Ornithologists Union, 

Washington, D.C. 

Congressional Grazing Guidelines (House Report 105-405 Appendix A, 1990). 

Gruell, G.E., L. E. Eddleman and R. Jaindl. 1994. Fire History of the Pinyon-juniper Woodlands of Great Basin 

National Park. Technical Reprot NPS/PNROSU/NRTR-94/01. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park 

Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 27 pp 

Gruell, G. E. 1999. Historical and modern roles of fire in pinyon-juniper. Pages 24-28 in: S.B. Monsen and R. 

Stevens, complilers. Proceedings: ecology and management of pinyon –juniper communtieis within the 

Interior West: Sustaining and restoring a diverse ecosystem; 1997 September 15-18 Provo, UT. Proceedings 

RMRS-P-9. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 99]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Kitchen, Stanley G. 2011. Historical fire regime and forest variability on two eastern Great Basin 

fire-sheds (USA). Forest Ecology and Management 285 (2012) 53–66. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station, Provo, UT. 

Sheley, R.,J. Petroff, M.. Borman, 1999. Introduction to Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland 

Weeds, Corvallis, OR. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. Western Ecology Division. Ecoregions of North America. 

Accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/level_iii.htm. Accessed on: November 12, 2009. 

USGS National Gap Analysis Program. 2005. Southwest Regional GAP Analysis Project—Land Cover 

Descriptions. RS/GIS Laboratory, College of Natural Resources, Utah State University. Accessed at: 

http://earth.gis.usu.edu/swgap/data/atool/files/swgap_legend_desc.pdf 

Wildlife Action Plan Team. 2006. Nevada Wildlife Action Plan. Nevada Department of Wildlife, Reno NV. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 100]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Range Allotment Type Details Development T/R/S 

b/t Cattle 

HGO Fence (S. of Camp/Cave Fence 4.3 miles Wildcat Canyon) Valley and Cave 

Valley Ranch 

Cattle Camp Cattle Management Fence Camp/Cave 1.1 miles Fence (North of Valley Molly's Nipples) 

Cattle Camp Cattle Management Fence Camp/Cave 3.9 miles Fence (South of Valley Molly's Nipples) 

North Creek 

Riparian Fence Fence Geyser Ranch 1.0 miles (Off North Creek 

Road) 

Darrel Fence 

(South of Geyser Fence Geyser Ranch 2.8 miles 

Spring) 

H & CC Cattle 

Protection Camp/Cave Fence 1.4 miles Fence (East of Valley (into 

Robber's Roost) Geyser Ranch) 

Cave Valley Trough Ranch Sagehen Trough & (non-functioning) T10N R64E Sec. pipeline 23 

Cattle Camp/ 

Off Cave Valley Cave Valley Trough (non-functioning) Road - trough T10N R63E Sec. 

12 

Cave Valley 

Trough, Ranch Robison Spring (non-functioning) pipeline T9N R64E Sec. 

25 

trough, Geyser Ranch Deer Track (pipeline, trough pipeline, T10N R64E Sec. Spring non-functional) pond 12 

pipeline & Pipeline, Geyser Ranch reservoir in Campbell Spring trough, T10N R65E Sec. wilderness; trough reservoir 18 in cherrystem 

Geyser Ranch 

Reservoi T10N R65E Sec. Reservoir (non- Reservoir (N) r 15 functioning) 

APPENDICES 

APPENDIX A 

IDENTIFIED RANGE DEVELOPMENTS 

Mount Grafton Wilderness 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 101]
 
 

 

 

Range Allotment Type Details Development T/R/S 

Geyser Ranch 

T10N R65E Sec. Reservoir (non- Reservoir (NE) reservoir 23 functioning) 

Geyser Ranch Reservoir (non- Reservoir (SW) reservoir T10N R65E Sec. functioning) 22 

T10N R64E Sec. Trough Trough 23 

Cave Valley Cabin Spring Trough Ranch trough & & T11N R64E Sec. pipeline pipeline 11 

Cave Valley Wall Spring Trough Ranch Pipeline & & T10N R64E Sec. Trough pipeline 1 

Sheep Creek & Cave Valley ? Sheep Spring Ranch 

Range Development Type Allotment T/R/S Details 

Fence Sunnyside Hardy Spring Extension (off Shingle 0.2 T08N R62E Sec. Pass Rd) miles 25 

Far South Egans 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 102]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Allotment Range Development Type Details T/R/S 

Chimney Tony Allotment Rock Fence & Extension Fence 0.8 miles T11N R63E (Schoolhouse fence) Sec. 31 

Sheep Pass 

T10N R62 2.0 miles (+ 1 Sheep Pass Canyon Fence Sec. 12 and mile in Fence T10N R63 cherrystem) 

Sec. 7 

Sheep Pass Canyon Sheep Pass 

Fence (@ Beginning Fence T10N R62E 0.5 miles 

of cherrystem) Sec. 14 

Sheep Pass 1.3 (+ 0.4 “Haggerty Spring T09N R63E Fence miles along fence” Sec. 3, 4, boundary) 10 

b/t Shingle 

Pass & WGF Fence (N. of Fence Sheep Pass 0.3 miles Long Canyon) T10N R63E 

Sec. 28 

Whipple Seeding Sheep Pass 

Fence (beginning of Fence T10N R62E 0.2 miles 

Ninemile) Sec. 22 

Shingle 

Pass 1.1 (+ 0.8 in Nine Mile Fence Fence T10N R62E cherrystem) Sec. 25, 26, 

36 

NonShingle functioning 

Trough at Parker Trough, Pass trough (~60’ 

Spring pipeline T10N R62E of pipeline; 

Sec. 36 nonfunctioning) 

48’ in

Shingle Wilderness; Cottonwood Spring Pass remainder in (in Long Cyn Pipeline T09N R62E cherrystem cherrystem) Sec. 13 (trough in 

cherrystem) 

70’ pipeline in Shingle wilderness Big Travis Spring Pass T09N Pipeline (pond, trough Pipeline R63E Sec. in 17 cherrystem) 

Pipeline (beg. Of Shingle On edge of 

Long canyon Pipeline Pass T09N private - 15’ 

cherrystem) R63E Sec. 6 on BLM 

South Egan Range Wilderness 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 103]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Range Development Type Allotment Details 

T/R/S 

0.52 miles Shoshone Hamblin Fence T10N R69E fence (Primitive – (W) Sec. 20 native & wire) 

Shoshone Hamblin Fence T10N R69E 0.37 miles Non- fence (E) Sec.27 primitive 

T10N R70E 0.39 miles (Non- Choke Cherry Drift Fence fence Sec. 4-5 primitive) 

0.08 miles in 

Murphy Wash wilderness; Big Spring Wash Corral or Fence T11N R69E mostly in Exclosure? Sec. 28 cherrystem 

Primitive 

Spring box, Murphy Wash Stock pipeline, trough Cedar Cabin Spring T11N R69E trough (in cherrystem: Sec. 27 trough)z 

Murphy Wash In cherrystem: Stock head of John’s Wash T11N R68E Exclosure fence, trough Sec. 25 head box, tank 

Murphy Wash (trough in Murphy Wash spring box T11N R68E cherrystem) Sec. 35 

Murphy Wash Stock trough & spring box Trough & T11N R68E non-functioning (John’s Wash N) box Sec. 36 

Murphy Wash Stock trough & spring box Trough & T10N R68E non-functioning (John’s Wash S) box Sec. 1 

Murphy Wash Stock trough (west side of trough T11N R68E non-functioning Murphy’s Wash) Sec. 26 

T10N R68E Corral Corral Historic? Sec. 36 

IN CHERRYSTEM 

Exclosure, pipeline & Murphy Wash Entirely within trough at Spring at head of T11N R68E Cherrystem Murphy’s Wash Sec. 25 

Murphy’s Wash Pipeline, Murphy Wash stock tank at cabin & Entirely within T10N R68E pond, tank & fence at Cherrystem Sec. 2 beginning of cherrystem 

Spring Box & stock trough Stock Murphy Wash Non-functioning 

at cherrystem junction trough & T10N R69E Entirely within 

(b/t Decathon & Big Wash) spring box Sec. 4 Cherrystem 

Highland Ridge 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 104]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX B 

DESCRIPTIONS OF PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS PRESENT WITHIN WILDERNESS 

Great Basin Pinyon-Juniper Woodland 

This pattern typically occurs on the dry mountain ranges of the Central Basin and Range ecoregion and the eastern 

foothills of the Sierra Nevada, typically at lower elevations ranging from 5200 ─ 8500 feet. These woodlands tend to be 

dominated by a mix of singleleaf pinyon (Pinus monophylla) and Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma). Shrubs include 

multiple species of sagebrush (Artemesia spp.), mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus spp.), and grasses, such as bluebunch 

wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), and needle-and-thread grass (Hesperostipa 

comata). 

Inter-Mountain Basins Montane Sagebrush Steppe 

This ecological system includes sagebrush communities occurring at montane and subalpine elevations from 

3280─9840 feet and is primarily composed of mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridnetata ssp. vaseyana) and related 

plants, as well as antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata). Other common shrubs include snowberry (Symphoricarpos 

spp.), serviceberry (Amelanchier spp.), rubber rabbitbtush (Ericameria nauseosa), wild crab apple (Peraphyllum 

ramosissimum), wax currant (Ribes cereum), and yellow rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus). The herbaceous layer 

is abundant in most stands (over 25% cover), but also includes mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. 

vaseyana) shrublands. Common grasses include Idahoe fescue (Festuca idahoensis), needle-and-thread grass 

(Hesperostipa comata), muttongrass (Poa fendleriana), slender wheatgrass (Elymus trachycaulus), Sandberg bluegrass 

(Poa secunda), and spike fescue (Leucopoa kingii). 

Inter-Mountain Basins Big Sagebrush Shrubland 

This vegetation type typically occurs in broad basins between mountain ranges, plains, and foothills in soils which are 

typically deep, well-drained, and non-saline. These shrublands are dominated by big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata 

spp.), however scattered Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma), greasewood (Sarcobatus vermiculatus), and saltbush 

(Atriplex ssp.) may be present in some stands. Yellow rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus) and mountain 

mahogany (Cercocarpus spp.) may be codominate species in disturbed areas. Several grass species such as Indian 

ricegrass (Achnatherum hymenoides) or wild rye (Leymus cinereus) may be common. 

Inter-Mountain Basins Mountain Mahogany Woodland and Shrubland 

This vegetation type generally occurs from 1,970 feet to over 8,700 feet in elevation on rocky outcrops or escarpments 

and forms small- to large-patch stands in forested areas. This system includes both woodlands and shrublands 

dominated by mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius), mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. 

Vaseyana), antelope bitter brush (Purshia tridentate), with species of bearberry or manzanita (Arctostaphylos), currant 

(Ribes spp.), or snowberry (Symphoricarpos) are often present. 

Great Basin Xeric Mixed Sagebrush Shrubland 

This ecological system occurs in the Great Basin on dry flats and plains, alluvial fans, rolling hills, rocky hillslopes, 

saddles and ridges at elevations between 3,200 and 8,500 feet. Sites are dry, often exposed to desiccating winds, with 

typically shallow, rocky, non-saline soils. Shrublands are dominated by black sagebrush (Artemisia nova), little 

sagebrush (Artemisia arbuscula) and may be codominated by Wyoming big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. 

Wyomingensis) or rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus). 

Inter-Mountain Basins Subalpine Limber-Bristlecone Pine 

These open woodlands are typically found on high-elevation ridges and rocky slopes above subalpine forests and 

woodlands (8300-12,000 feet). Sites are harsh, exposed to desiccating winds with rocky substrates and a short growing 

season that limit plant growth. Stands are strongly dominated by limber pine (Pinus flexilis) and/or bristlecone pine 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 105]
 
(Pinus longaeva). Single-leaf pinyon (Pinus monophylla) may be present in lower-elevation stands. Associated species 

may also include rosy pussytoes (Antennaria rosea), mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus intricatus), cushion buckwheat 

(Eriogonum ovalifolium), alpine fescue (Festuca brachyphylla), or wax currant (Ribes cereum). 

Rocky Mountain Mesic Montane Mixed Conifer Forest and Woodland 

These are mixed-conifer forests of the Rocky Mountains west into the ranges of the Great Basin, occurring 

predominantly in cool ravines and on north-facing slopes. Elevations range from 4,000 to 10,800 feet. Douglas fir 

(Pseudotsuga menziesii) and white fir (Abies concolor) are most common canopy dominants, but Engelman spruce 

(Picea engelmannii), or ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) may be present. This system includes mixed conifer/aspen 

(Populus tremuloides) stands. 

(USGS National Gap Analysis Program, 2005) 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 106]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX C 

SUMMARY OF EXISTING WATER RIGHTS WITHIN WILDERNESS. 

The information contained in this table was obtained through the State of Nevada Department of 

Conservation and Natural Resources Division of Water Resources Water Rights Database. This list may not be 

complete or legally accurate but is presented as a general overview. Points on map may not be exact. 

Water Right Status and 

Permit Number Use Source Township and Range* 

Certificate 

Application Number – 1710 

Certificate Number - 203 

Irrigation 

Lexington Canyon 

Highland Ridge 

Wilderness 

NW 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 06 

T11N R70E 

Certificate 

Application Number – 2567B 

Certificate Number – 9294 

Irrigation 

Lincoln Creek 

Highland Ridge 

Wilderness 

SE 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 27 

T12N R68E 

Certificate 

Application Number – 48724 

Certificate Number – 12339 

Stock 

Watering 

Unnamed Spring 

Highland Ridge 

Wilderness 

NW 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 15 

T10N R68E 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V02915 

Stock 

Watering 

Unnamed Spring 

Highland Ridge 

Wilderness 

NW 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 15 

T10N R68E 

Certificate 

Application Number – 6167 

Certificate Number – 1772 

Irrigation 

Lexington Creek 

Highland Ridge 

Wilderness 

NE 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 05 

T11N R70E 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01147 

Stock 

Watering 

Choke Cherry Spring #1 

Highland Ridge 

Wilderness 

SW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 24 

T11N R69E 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01148 

Stock 

Watering 

Chokecherry Spring 

Highland Ridge 

Wilderness 

SW 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 25 

T11N R69E 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V02836 

Stock 

Watering 

Swallow Creek 

Highland Ridge 

Wilderness 

SW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 03 

T11N R68E 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01675 

Stock 

Watering 

Brush Spring 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

SE 1⁄4 SW 1⁄4 Sec. 27 

T10N R64E 

Certificate 

Application Number – 9720 

Certificate Number – 2269 

Stock 

Watering 

Cabbin Spring (sic) 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

NW 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 14 

T09N R64E 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01698 

Stock 

Watering 

Cabbin Spring (sic) 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

NW 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 14 

T09N R64E 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 107]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Water Right Status and 

Permit Number Use 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01697 

Vested Right
 

Application Number – V09526
 

Vested Right
 

Application Number – V01498
 

Vested Right
 

Application Number – V01699
 

Vested Right
 

Application Number – V09527
 

Certificate
 

Application Number – 9001
 

Vested Right
 

Application Number – V01807
 

Township and Source Range* 

Stock 

Watering 

Stock
 

Watering
 

Stock
 

Watering
 

Stock
 

Watering
 

Stock
 

Watering
 

Domestic 

Irrigation 

Mahogany Spring
 NW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 11 Mount Grafton T09N R64E Wilderness
 

Cabin Spring
 SW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 11
 Mount Grafton T09N R64E
 Wilderness
 

NE 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec 18
 

T10N R65E
 

NE 1⁄4 SW 1⁄4 Sec. 14
 

T09N R64E
 

SE 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 13 T09N 

R64E
 

SW 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 16
 

T09N R64E
 

NW 1⁄4 SW 1⁄4 Sec. 31 

T10N R64E
 

Campbell Spring
 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness
 

Canyon Spring
 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness
 

Canyon Spring
 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness
 

Cave Spring
 

Mount Grafton 

Cave Valley or Sheep 

Creek
 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness
 

Deer Track Spring
 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness
 

Graham Spring
 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness
 

Ledge Creek
 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness
 

Permit 

Application Number – 73168 

Stock 

Watering 

Cave Valley Well #2 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

SW1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 27 

T09N R64E 

Certificate 

Certificate Number – 4209 Wilderness 

Certificate 

Application Number – 4881 

Certificate Number – 1060 

Irrigation 

Cave Spring 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

SW 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 16 

T09N R64E 

Stock
 SW 1⁄4 SW 1⁄4 Sec. 12
 Application Number – 4993 Watering
 T10N R64E
 

Stock
 SW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 05 Application Number – 7496 Watering
 T09N R65E
 

Stock
 SW 1⁄4 SW 1⁄4 Sec. 29
 Application Number – 7495 Watering
 T09N R65E
 Certificate Number – 2230 

Certificate Number – 905 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01029 Irrigation 

Dupont Spring 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

SE 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec.16 T09N 

R65E 

Certificate 

Certificate Number – 2231 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V75779 

QuasiMunicipal 

Homestead Well 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

SE 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 05 

T09N R64E 

Certificate 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 108]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Certificate 

Application Number – 5997 

Certificate Number – 1907 

Mining and 

Milling 

Mill Stream 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

NE 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 05 

T09N R65E 

Certificate Mill Creek 

Water Right Status and Township and Use Source Permit Number Range* 

Stock
 NW 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 05
 Application Number – 7499 Mount Grafton Watering
 T09N R65E
 Wilderness
 

North Creek
 Vested Right Stock
 NE 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 26
 Mount Grafton Application Number – V01681 Watering
 T10N R64E
 Wilderness
 

Patterson Spring
 Stock
 SE 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 30
 Application Number – 3193 Mount Grafton Watering
 T09N R65E
 Wilderness
 

Quaker Spring
 Stock
 SW 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 07
 Application Number – 7484 Mount Grafton Watering
 T09N R65E
 Wilderness
 

Quartzite Spring #2
 Vested Right Stock
 NW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 22
 Mount Grafton Application Number – V01660 Watering
 T10N R64E
 Wilderness
 

Robber’s Roost Spring Stock
 NE 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 33
 Application Number – 13102 Mount Grafton Watering
 T11N R64E
 Wilderness
 

S. Branch Sheep Creek
 Vested Right Stock
 NW 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 02
 Mount Grafton Application Number – V09523 Watering
 T09N R64E
 Wilderness
 

Certificate Number – 2232 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01678 

Stock 

Watering 

No. Branch Sheep Creek 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

NE 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 34 

T10N R64E 

Certificate 

Application Number – 21744 

Certificate Number – 7703 

Irrigation 

North/Sheep Creek 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

NE 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 28 

T10N R65E 

Certificate 

Certificate Number – 389 

Certificate 

Application Number – 7482 

Certificate Number – 2227 

Stock 

Watering 

Sheep Creek 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

SE 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 30 

T09N R65E 

Certificate 

Certificate Number – 2229 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01659 

Stock 

Watering 

Quartzite Spring No. 1 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

SE 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 22 

T10N R64E 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V09525 

Stock 

Watering 

Quartzite Spring #2 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

NW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 22 

T10N R64E 

Certificate 

Certificate Number – 4059 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01679 

Stock 

Watering 

So. Branch Sheep Creek 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

NW 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 02 

T09N R64E 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 109]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01658 

Stock 

Watering 

Sage Hen Spring 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

SW 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 23 

T10N R64E 

Water Right Status and Township and Use Source Permit Number Range* 

SageHen Spring
 Vested Right Stock
 NW 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 23
 Mount Grafton Application Number – V09524 Watering
 T10N R64E
 Wilderness
 

Schwartz Tunnel Spring
 Stock
 NE 1⁄4 SW 1⁄4 Sec. 19
 Application Number – 7481 Mount Grafton Watering
 T09N R65E
 Wilderness
 

Wall Spring
 Stock
 SW 1⁄4 SW 1⁄4 Sec. 02
 Application Number – 9721 Mount Grafton Watering
 T09N R64E
 Wilderness
 

Wall Spring
 Vested Right Stock
 SW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 02
 Mount Grafton Application Number – V09522 Watering
 T09N R64E
 Wilderness
 

Wild Cat Spring
 Vested Right Stock
 NW 1⁄4 SW 1⁄4 Sec. 10
 Mount Grafton Application Number – V01559 Watering
 T10N R64E
 Wilderness
 

Big Canyon Spring
 Vested Right Stock
 NW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 12
 South Egan Range
 Application Number – V09232 Watering
 T09N R62E
 Wilderness
 

Blue Spring
 Permit Stock
 NE 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 24
 South Egan Range
 Application Number – 46426 Watering
 T10N R62E
 Wilderness
 

Certificate 

Application Number – 7480 

Certificate Number – 2225 

Stock 

Watering 

Schwartz Spring 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

SW 1⁄4 SW 1⁄4 Sec. 20 

T09N R65E 

Certificate 

Certificate Number – 2226 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01680 

Stock 

Watering 

Sheep Creek 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

NW 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 04 

T09N R64E 

Certificate 

Certificate Number – 2270 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01696 

Stock 

Watering 

Wall Spring 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

SW 1⁄4 SW 1⁄4 Sec. 02 

T09N R64E 

Certificate 

Application Number – 7483 

Certificate Number – 2228 

Stock 

Watering 

White Rock Spring 

Mount Grafton 

Wilderness 

SW 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 18 

T09N R65E 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01415 

Stock 

Watering 

Barrel Springs 

South Egan Range 

Wilderness 

NW 1⁄4 SW 1⁄4 Sec. 17 

T11N R63E 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V09234 

Stock 

Watering 

Big Spring 

South Egan Range 

Wilderness 

NE 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 32 

T09N R63E 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 110]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Water Right Status and 

Permit Number Use Source Township and Range* 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01333 

Stock 

Watering 

Camp Spring 

South Egan Range 

Wilderness 

SE 1⁄4 SW 1⁄4 Sec. 16 

T12N R63E 

Vested Right Cottonwood Spring Stock SE 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 13 South Egan Range Application Number – V09236 Watering T09N R62E Wilderness 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01486 

Stock 

Watering 

Currant Springs 

South Egan Range 

Wilderness 

NE 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 20 

T11N R63E 

Vested Right 

Unnamed (Hendrix) 

Stock Spring NW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 28 

Application Number – V01332 Watering South Egan Range T12N R63E 

Wilderness 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01792 

Stock 

Watering 

First Sawmill Spring 

South Egan Range 

Wilderness 

NW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 28 

T12N R63E 

Certificate 

Application Number – 3119 

Hole in the Bank Spring Stock NE 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4 Sec. 04 South Egan Range Watering T11N R63E Certificate Number – 1979 Wilderness 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V02100 

Stock 

Watering 

Parker Spring 

South Egan Range 

Wilderness 

NW 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 13 

T09N R62E 

Certificate 

Application Number – 3141 

Reid Spring Stock SE 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 17 South Egan Range Watering T11N R63E Certificate Number – 2333 Wilderness 

Certificate 

Application Number – 5747 

Certificate Number – 707 

Stock 

Watering 

School House Spring 

South Egan Range 

Wilderness 

SW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 30 

T11N R63E 

Vested Right Summit Spring Stock NE 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 30 South Egan Range Application Number – V01416 Watering T11N R63E Wilderness 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V01791 

Stock 

Watering 

Third Saw Mill Spring 

South Egan Range 

Wilderness 

SW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 16 

T12N R63E 

Permit Unnamed Spring Stock NE 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 23 South Egan Range Application Number -- 46427 Watering T10N R62E Wilderness 

Vested Right 

Application Number – V02087 

Stock 

Watering 

West Parker Range 

Spring 

South Egan Range 

Wilderness 

NW 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4 Sec. 03 

T09N R62E 

Certificate 

Application Number – 15453 

White Knoll Spring Stock SW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 30 South Egan Range Watering T12N R63E Certificate Number – 4587 Wilderness 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 111]
 
 

 

Water Right Status and 

Permit Number Use Source Township and Range* 

Certificate 

Application Number – 66123 

Certificate Number – 16617 

Stock 

Watering 

Cave Valley Well 

Far South Egans 

Wilderness 

NW 1⁄4 SE 1⁄4 Sec. 15 

T07N R63E 

Certificate 

Application Number – 66125 

Sawmill Well Stock SE 1⁄4 SW 1⁄4 Sec. 30 Far South Egans Watering T08N R64E Certificate Number – 16619 Wilderness 

*This list may include water right that are not actually within wilderness and may not include points that do 

lie in wilderness. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 112]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 113]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 114]
 
[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 115]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX D 

WILDERNESS CONDITION CLASSES. 

Within wilderness, the FRCC rating is one indicator that may be used to determine if 

vegetation treatments are needed to restore naturalness. Assessing FRCC can help guide 

management objectives and set priorities for treatments. The classification is based on a 

relative measure describing the degree of departure from the historical natural disturbance 

regime (reference condition) for a given biophysical setting (BPS). This departure is described 

as changes to one or more of the following ecological components: vegetation characteristics 

(species composition, structural stages, stand age, canopy closure and mosaic pattern); fuel 

composition; fire frequency, severity and pattern; and other associated disturbances (e.g. 

insects and disease mortality, grazing and drought). 

Biophysical setting models have been developed for most major vegetation types. These 

models describe the vegetation, geography, biophysical characteristics, succession stages, 

disturbance regimes, and assumptions for each vegetation type (Havlina et al, 2010). Each 

biophysical setting model establishes a reference condition that is described as the potential 

vegetative community for a given site prior to European influence reflecting a range of natural 

disturbances. These reference conditions specify a range, in percentages, of several classes 

that describe the vegetation progression post-disturbance. The Ely District Resource 

Management Plan utilized the BPS data in delineating the vegetative goals for the district. The 

percentages within the RMP vary slightly from the BPS models for certain vegetation types. 

There are three FRCC classes used to describe the departure from reference BPS conditions. 

The three classes are based on low (0-33% departure; FRCC1), moderate (34-66% departure; 

FRCC2) and high (67-100% departure; FRCC3) departure from central tendency of the natural 

(historical) regime. Low departure is considered to be within the natural (historical) range of 

variability, while moderate and high departures are outside the range of variability. The FRCC 

rating is accompanied by indicators of the potential risks that may result. FRCC 1 is desired for 

each BPS and for the Ely District. 

The FRCC rating will be refined over time as better information is collected or the rating is 

improved through natural or planned disturbances occur within the wilderness area. Prior to 

utilization of the FRCC rating for vegetation treatment identification, the BPS data for the 

wilderness area would be refined by field checking the vegetative conditions present within the 

wilderness areas. The FRCC calculation would be corrected based upon the new data. The 

FRCC would then be used to determine the current departure. The current departure may 

indicate the need to consider treatments in order to return the vegetation to the historical 

range of variability both for the wilderness as a whole and by vegetation model. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 116]
 
 

 

 

 

LANDSCAPE FRCC STRATA FRCC STAND FRCC 

FRCC FRCC FRCC 

Departure Rating Departure Rating Departure Rating 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

ROCKY SERAL CLASS B 53% 2 

MOUNTAIN 

ASPEN 46% 2 SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

FOREST AND 

SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 WOODLAND 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

GREAT BASIN 

SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 PINYON 50% 2 JUNIPER SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

WOODLAND 

SERAL CLASS E 50% 2 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 62% 2 

ROCKY SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 MOUNTAIN 

MESIC SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

MONTANE 69% 3 

MIXED SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

CONIFER SERAL CLASS E 85% 3 

FOREST 

ss

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

nerlde

SERAL CLASS A 1% 1 

iW

INTERn 

56% 2 SERAL CLASS B 51% 2 o

MOUNTAIN 

taf

BASINS SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

 Grt

ASPEN-MIXED 48% 2 

M

SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 CONIFER 

FOREST AND SERAL CLASS E 0% 1 

WOODLAND 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

INTERMOUNTIAN SERAL CLASS B 17% 1 

BASINS 

SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 MOUNTAIN 36% 2 MAHOGANY SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

WOODLAND 

AND SERAL CLASS E 17% 1 

SHRUBLAND 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

GREAT BASIN SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

XERIC MIXED 61% 2 SERAL CLASS C 29% 2 SAGEBRUSH 

SHRUBLAND SERAL CLASS D 79% 3 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 3 

INTER- SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

MOUNTAIN 52% 2 SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 BASIN BIG 

SAGEBRUSH SERAL CLASS C 36% 2 

Wilderness Condition classes 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 117]
 
SHRUBLAND SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS E 0% 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 

1 

3 

SERAL CLASS A 58% 2 

ROCKY 

MOUNTAIN SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

LOWER 77% SERAL CLASS C 0% MONTANEFOOTHILL SERAL CLASS D 76% 

SHRUBLAND 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 

INTER- SERAL CLASS B 0% 

MOUNTAIN 

SERAL CLASS C 12% BASINS 57% MONTANE SERAL CLASS D 0% 

SAGEBRUSH 

STEPPE SERAL CLASS E 0% 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 

3 1 

2 

3 

3 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

3 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 118]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LANDSCAPE FRCC STRATA FRCC STAND FRCC 

FRCC Rating Departure FRCC Rating Departure FRCC Rating Departure 

SERAL CLASS A 26% 2 

ROCKY SERAL CLASS B 48% 2 

MOUNTAIN 

ASPEN 41% 2 SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

FOREST AND 

SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 WOODLAND 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

GREAT BASIN 

SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 PINYON 37% 2 JUNIPER SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

WOODLAND 

SERAL CLASS E 36% 2 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 41% 2 

ROCKY SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 MOUNTAIN 

MESIC SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

MONTANE 58% 2 

MIXED SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

CONIFER SERAL CLASS E 84% 3 

FOREST 

sse

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

nrde

SERAL CLASS A 7% 2 

liW

INTERe 

SERAL CLASS B 51% 2 MOUNTAIN 

dg

53% 2 

and Ri

BASINS SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

ASPEN-MIXED 43% 2 

SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 CONIFER 

hlgi

FOREST AND H

SERAL CLASS E 0% 1 

WOODLAND 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

INTERMOUNTIAN SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

BASINS 

SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 MOUNTAIN 47% 2 MAHOGANY SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

WOODLAND 

AND SERAL CLASS E 40% 2 

SHRUBLAND 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 0 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

GREAT BASIN SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

XERIC MIXED 61% 2 SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 SAGEBRUSH 

SHRUBLAND SERAL CLASS D 80% 2 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 3 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 INTERMOUNTAIN SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

BASIN BIG 52% 2 

SAGEBRUSH SERAL CLASS C 44% 2 

SHRUBLAND SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 119]
 
 

 

 

 

 

SERAL CLASS E 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 3 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

INTER- SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

MOUNTAIN 

SERAL CLASS C 38% 2 BASINS 61% 2 MONTANE SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

SAGEBRUSH 

STEPPE SERAL CLASS E 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 3 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 120]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LANDSCAPE FRCC STRATA FRCC STAND FRCC 

FRCC Rating 

Departure FRCC Rating Departure FRCC Rating Departure 

SERAL CLASS A 62% 2 

SERAL CLASS B 37% 2 

ROCKY MOUNTAIN ASPEN 42% 2 SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

FOREST AND WOODLAND 

SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 GREAT BASIN PINYON JUNIPER 43% 2 WOODLAND SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS E 49% 2 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 57% 2 

SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

ROCKY MOUNTAIN MESIC SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

MONTANE MIXED CONIFER 49% 2 

SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 FOREST 

ss

SERAL CLASS E 70% 2 

nerlde

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

iWan 

50% 2 SERAL CLASS A 13% 2 

gh E

SERAL CLASS B 52% 2 

out

INTER-MOUNTAIN BASINS S

SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

ASPEN-MIXED CONIFER 49% 2 

SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 FOREST AND WOODLAND 

SERAL CLASS E 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS B 33% 2 

INTER-MOUNTIAN BASINS SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

MOUNTAIN MAHOGANY 40% 2 

WOODLAND AND SHRUBLAND SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS E 21% 2 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

GREAT BASIN XERIC MIXED 70% 3 SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 SAGEBRUSH SHRUBLAND 

SERAL CLASS D 82% 3 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 3 

INTER-MOUNTAIN BASIN BIG 51% 2 SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 121]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SAGEBRUSH SHRUBLAND 

ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOWER 

MONTANE-FOOTHILL 72% 

SHRUBLAND 

INTER-MOUNTAIN BASINS 

MONTANE SAGEBRUSH 58% 

STEPPE 

SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS C 4% 

SERAL CLASS D 0% 

SERAL CLASS E 0% 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 

SERAL CLASS B 0% 

SERAL CLASS C 0% 

SERAL CLASS D 0% 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 

SERAL CLASS B 0% 

1 

1 

1 

3 

1 

1 

3 1 

2 

1 

3 

1 

1 

SERAL CLASS C 32% 2 

SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS E 0% 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 

1 

3 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 122]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LANDSCAPE FRCC STRATA FRCC STAND FRCC 

FRCC Rating Departure FRCC Rating Departure FRCC Rating Departure 

SERAL CLASS A 61% 2 

SERAL CLASS B 25% 2 

ROCKY MOUNTAIN ASPEN 35% 2 SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

FOREST AND WOODLAND 

SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 GREAT BASIN PINYON JUNIPER 32% 2 WOODLAND SERAL CLASS D 3% 1 

SERAL CLASS E 22% 2 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 55% 2 

SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

ROCKY MOUNTAIN MESIC SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

MONTANE MIXED CONIFER 53% 2 

SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 FOREST 

SERAL CLASS E 76% 2 

ss

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

ner

RA

lde

SE L CLASS A 59% 2 

iW

SERAL CLASS B 37% 2 

an 

47% 2 

h Eg

INTER-MOUNTAIN BASINS SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

ASPEN-MIXED CONIFER 37% 2 

uto

SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 FOREST AND WOODLAND 

ar SF

SERAL CLASS E 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS B 62% 2 

INTER-MOUNTIAN BASINS SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

MOUNTAIN MAHOGANY 42% 2 

WOODLAND AND SHRUBLAND SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS E 4% 1 

SERAL CLASS U 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 

GREAT BASIN XERIC MIXED 64% 2 SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 SAGEBRUSH SHRUBLAND 

SERAL CLASS D 83% 3 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 3 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS B 0% 1 INTER-MOUNTAIN BASIN BIG 54% 2 SAGEBRUSH SHRUBLAND SERAL CLASS C 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS D 0% 1 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 123]
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SERAL CLASS E 0% 1 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 

SERAL CLASS A 0% 

SERAL CLASS B 0% 

INTER-MOUNTAIN BASINS SERAL CLASS C 0% 

MONTANE SAGEBRUSH 59% 2 

SERAL CLASS D 0% STEPPE 

SERAL CLASS E 0% 

SERAL CLASS U 100% 

3 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

3 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 124]
 
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
 

For the 

Highland Ridge, Mount Grafton, South Egan Range and Far South Egans
 

Wilderness Management Plan
 

Bureau of Land Management
 

Environmental Assessment # DOI-BLM-NV-L000-2009-0012-EA
 

Finding of No Significant Impact: 

I have reviewed Environmental Assessment (EA), dated August 13, 2013. After consideration of the 

environmental impacts as described in the EA, which is incorporated herein, I have determined that the 

proposed action (wilderness management plan) as described in the EA will not significantly affect the 

quality of the human environment and that an environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required. 

This finding and conclusion is based on my consideration of the Council on Environmental Quality’s

(CEQ) criteria for significance (40 Code of Federal Regulations 1508.27), both with regard to the context 

and the intensity of impacts described in the EA. 

Context: 

The Highland Ridge, Mount Grafton, South Egan Range and Far South Egans Wilderness Areas are part of 

the National Wilderness Preservation System. These areas are of most interest to residents in Nevada, 

California and Utah. 

Intensity: 

1) Impacts that may be both beneficial and adverse. 

The environmental assessment has considered both beneficial and adverse impacts of 

the wilderness management plan. On the whole, the plan will result in enhancements 

to the wilderness characteristics of naturalness, opportunities for primitive recreation, 

and various special features including cultural resources. Preserving a more natural 

system is considered improving the quality of the human environment through 

proactive management, and is not considered a significant effect both in the short or 

long term. 

2) The degree to which the proposed action affects public health or safety. 

Implementation components of the proposed wilderness management plan will not 

result in potentially substantial or adverse impacts to public health and safety. 

3) Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity to historic or cultural resources, 

park lands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas. 

The action areas are within and adjacent to designated wilderness. These four areas 

were designated for their unique characteristics including high scenic qualities, diverse 

cultural resources, important wildlife habitat, and opportunities for solitude and 

primitive recreational pursuits. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 125]
 
4)	 The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment are likely to be highly 

controversial. 

The effects of implementing decisions of the wilderness management plan are well 

known and documented and not highly controversial in that wilderness management 

plans are essential to maintaining the natural condition of wilderness as required by the 

Wilderness Act. The methods chosen to complete implementation actions are accepted 

methods to meet resource and management objectives and are not considered highly 

controversial. 

5)	 The degree to which the possible effects on the human environment are highly uncertain or 

involve unique or unknown risks. 

There are no effects of the proposed action identified in the EA which are considered 

uncertain or involve unknown risks. All actions proposed to be employed are accepted 

standard practices. 

6)	 The degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future actions with significant 

effects or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration. 

The proposed action does not establish a precedent for future actions with significant 

effects and does not represent a decision in principle about a future consideration. 

7) Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively 

significant impacts. 

No significant cumulative impacts have been identified in the EA. 

8)	 The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures, or 

objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or may cause loss 

or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical resources. 

The proposed action will not cause the loss or destruction of significant scientific, 

cultural or historical resources. 

9) The degree to which the action may adversely affect an endangered or threatened species or its 

habitat that has been determined to be critical under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. 

There are no known federally listed species in these four wildernesses. 

10) Whether the action threatens a violation of Federal, State, or local law or requirement imposed 

for the protection of the environment. 

The proposed action will not violate or threaten to violate any Federal, State, or local 

law or requirement imposed for the protection of the environment. 

Approved by: __/s/ Rosemary Thomas_________________ __8/14/13_________ 

Rosemary Thomas Date 

District Manager 

Ely District Office 

 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 126]
 
DECISION RECORD
 

For the 

Highland Ridge, Mount Grafton, South Egan Range and Far South Egans
 

Wilderness Management Plan
 

Bureau of Land Management
 

Environmental Assessment # DOI-BLM-NV-L000-2009-0012-EA
 

Decision: 

It is my decision to approve and implement the wilderness management plan for the Highland Ridge, 

Mount Grafton, South Egan Range and Far South Egans Wildernesses (which is the proposed action and 

contains all identified mitigation measures). The proposed action is in conformance with the Ely 

Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement (2008). 

Legal Compliance: 

 The Wilderness Act of 1964 (16 U.S.C. §§ 1131-1136, September 3, 1964, as amended 1978). 

 The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. §§ 1701-1782, October 21, 

1976, as amended 1978, 1984, 1986, 1988, 1990-1992, 1994 and 1996). 

 The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4347, January 1, 1970, as 

amended 1975 and 1994). 

 The Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation and Development Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-

424). 

 The White Pine County Conservation, Recreation and Development Act of 2006 (public Law 109-

432). 

 The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544, December 28, 1973, as amended 

1976-1982, 1984, and 1988). 

 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 668-668d, June 8, 1940, as amended 1959, 

1962, 1972, and 1978). 

 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 703-712, July 3, 1918, as amended 1936, 1960, 1968, 

1969, 1974, 1978, 1986 and 1989). 

 Executive Order 13186─Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds (2001). 

 Management of Designated Wilderness Areas (43 CFR Part 6300). 

 Recreation Management Restrictions: Occupancy Stay Limitation (43 CFR 8365.1-2(a) and 

Federal Register Notice NV-930-4333-02). 

 Unlawful Manner of Camping Near Water Hole (Nevada Revised Statute 503.660). 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 127]
 
Public Involvement: 

A Notice of Proposed Action was mailed to known interested parties on October 2, 2009. Public scoping 

workshops were held in Lund, NV., Ely, NV. and Caliente, NV. on November 3, 4 and 5th, 2009. A meeting 

specifically for livestock grazing permittees was held on February 18, 2010. A 45-day public comment 

period for the final Plan and EA was initiated on May 14, 2013 which generated 37 formal written 

comments. 

Public Comment: 

All comments received during the management plan process comment period were given serious 

consideration. Some comments related to associated programs were not incorporated as they are 

beyond the scope of this plan. Changes were made to the plan based on significant public comments 

including but not limited to: 

	 Commercial enterprises in wilderness degrading wilderness values. 

	 Trail construction and access at trailheads and cherry stems. 

	 Natural water addressed or improved before artificial development. 

	 Private water rights and inholding access. 

	 Natural fire for resource benefit. 

	 Livestock grazing monitoring. 

	 Wildlife water development maintenance. 

Rationale For Decision: 

The purpose of creating a Wilderness Management Plan is to preserve the areas’ wilderness

characteristics by identifying the conditions and opportunities that will be managed for within the 

wilderness areas over a ten-year span. Wilderness Management Plans must be prepared for all 

wilderness areas on public lands. Management direction must be based on the pertinent objectives of 

the BLM wilderness management policy as identified in BLM manual-6340. 

The need for the plan stems from the Wilderness Act of 1964, which defines wilderness and mandates 

that the primary management direction is to preserve wilderness character. The plan creates specific 

management guidance addressing resources and activities in these wilderness areas. Wilderness 

character is a complex idea and is not explicitly defined in the Wilderness Act; Wilderness characteristics 

are commonly described as: 

 Untrammeled ─ area is unhindered and free from modern human control or manipulation. 

 Natural ─ area appears to have been primarily affected by the forces of nature. 

 Undeveloped ─ area is essentially without permanent improvements or
 

human occupation and retains its primeval character.
 

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

recreation ─ area provides outstanding opportunities for people to experience 

solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation, including the values associated with physical 

and mental inspiration and challenge. 

 Supplemental values ─ complementary features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historic 

values. 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 128]
 
The proposed action (wilderness management plan) was selected over the alternative because it met 

the need and objectives outlined in the plan. The proposed action has been analyzed and determined 

that there is no significant impact as referenced in the (FONSI) attached to the EA. The proposed plan 

will guide management so that the preservation objectives of the Wilderness Act can be met. The 

decision is also based on the fact that there was a finding of no significant impact. 

Appeal Opportunities: 

All parties involved in the process will be notified by certified mail and will have 30 days after receiving 

notification to appeal the decision. 

Approved by: __/s/ Rosemary Thomas_________________ __8/14/13_________ 

Rosemary Thomas Date 

District Manager 

Ely District Office 

[HR/MG/SER/FSE – WMP &EA 129]