Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan TOC-i

May 2007

Contents

Record of Decision/ 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision..........................................................................................................1

Introduction................................................................................................1

Results of Protest Review..........................................................................1

Decision.....................................................................................................3

What the Decision/Approved RMP Provides .......................................3

What the Decision/Approved RMP Does Not Provide .........................5

Implementation Decisions....................................................................6

Modifications........................................................................................6

Clarifications ........................................................................................7

Overview of the Alternatives ......................................................................8

Alternative 1 (No Action Alternative)....................................................8

Alternative 2.........................................................................................9

Alternative 3.........................................................................................9

Alternative 4.........................................................................................9

Proposed Plan, Alternative 5 ...............................................................9

Management Considerations in Selecting the Approved RMP................10

Mitigation Measures.................................................................................12

Plan Monitoring........................................................................................12

Implementation Monitoring.................................................................12

Effectiveness Monitoring....................................................................13

Validation Monitoring .........................................................................13

Public Involvement...................................................................................13

Availability of the Plan..............................................................................14

Field Manager Recommendation.............................................................15

Approved Resource Management Plan.........................................................................1

Introduction................................................................................................1

Purpose and Need...............................................................................1

Planning Area and Map .......................................................................2

Scoping Issues.....................................................................................4

Issues Addressed ................................................................................4

Issues Considered but not Further Analyzed.......................................5

Planning Criteria ..................................................................................5

Planning Process.................................................................................6

Other Stakeholder Relationships .......................................................10

Related Plans.....................................................................................12

Policy .................................................................................................13
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan TOC-ii

May 2007

Vision .................................................................................................13

Management Decisions ...........................................................................13

Biological Resources Management ...................................................15

Cultural Resource Management ........................................................26

Fire Management...............................................................................30

Lands and Realty Program ................................................................34

Mineral Resources.............................................................................41

Paleontological Resource Management ............................................44

Rangeland Management/Grazing......................................................45

Recreation Management....................................................................47

Special Designations .......................................................................104

Travel Management.........................................................................111

Visual Resource Management.........................................................118

Wild Burro Management ..................................................................119

Wilderness Characteristics ..............................................................123

Public Involvement.................................................................................126

Management Plan Implementation ........................................................126

Immediate Decisions........................................................................126

One-Time Decisions ........................................................................126

Long-Term Guidance/Life of Plan Direction.....................................127

General Implementation Schedule of “One-Time” Actions ..............127

Implementation Updates..................................................................127

Maintaining the Plan ........................................................................127

Changing the Plan ...........................................................................128

Plan Evaluation and Adaptive Management..........................................129

Plan Evaluation................................................................................129

Adaptive Management.....................................................................129

Glossary.......................................................................................................................131

References Cited.........................................................................................................163

Index .............................................................................................................................167

Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................................181 

List of Preparers..........................................................................................................185 

List of Tables in the Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1. Surface Management within the Lake Havasu Planning Area............................3 

Table 2. Categories for Cultural Resource Allocation.....................................................26 

Table 3. Desired Future Conditions and Land Use Allocations for 

Vegetation Communities ..................................................................................31 

Table 4. ROW Corridors Designations Summary...........................................................40 

Table 5. Communication Sites: Designated, Renamed, and Undesignated..................41 

Table 6. Paleontological Resource Classifications.........................................................45 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan TOC-iii

May 2007

Table 7a. Colorado River Nature Center SRMA .............................................................48 

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA........................................................................................51 

Table 7c. Parker Strip SRMA..........................................................................................68 

Table 7d. Swansea SRMA ..............................................................................................74 

Table 7e. Gibraltar SRMA...............................................................................................76 

Table 7f. Havasu Urban SRMA......................................................................................85 

Table 7g. Plomosa SRMA...............................................................................................91 

Table 7h. Extensive Recreation Management Area (ERMA)..........................................96 

Table 8. OHV Area Designations................................................................................113 

Table 9. Acreages within Herd Management Areas....................................................122 

List of Figures in the Approved Resource Management Plan follows page 

Figure 1. Monitoring Model Flow Diagram ...................................................................130 

Appendices

Appendix A. Applicable Laws, Regulations, Policy, and Planning Criteria 

Appendix B. Administrative Actions and Standard Operating Procedures 

Appendix C. Biological Resources 

Appendix D. Water Resources: Springs/Wells/Reservoirs/Water Catchments 

Appendix E. Cultural Resources 

Appendix F. Vegetation Treatments (Including Fire) 

Appendix G. Legal Descriptions of Lands Identified for Disposal 

Appendix H. Grazing 

Appendix I. Recreation 

Appendix J. Parker Dam 

Appendix K. Special Designations 

Appendix L. Travel Management 

Appendix M. Little Harquahala Herd Area Manageability Analysis 

Appendix N. Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities 

Appendix O. Plan Maintenance Roster 

Appendix P. Plan Monitoring Roster 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan TOC-iv

May 2007

List of Maps in the Approved Resource Management Plan follows page 

Map 1. Planning Area with Surface Management ..........................................................2 

Map 2. Previous RMP and MFP Boundaries..................................................................2 

Map 3. Bureau of Reclamation Withdrawn and Acquired Lands....................................8 

Map 4. Lake Havasu/Colorado River Regional Management Area..............................10 

Map 5. General Vegetation...........................................................................................16 

Map 6. Wildlife Habitat Areas .......................................................................................16 

Map 7. Riparian Zones Colorado River ........................................................................16 

Map 8. Riparian Zones Bill Williams River....................................................................16 

Map 9. Wildlife Movement Corridors ............................................................................18 

Map 10. Bighorn Sheep Habitat .....................................................................................18 

Map 11. Desert Tortoise Habitats...................................................................................22 

Map 12. Special Cultural Resource Management Areas................................................28 

Map 13. Vegetation Communities for Fire Management................................................32 

Map 14. Disposal Lands.................................................................................................38 

Map 15. Utility/Transportation Corridors and Communication Sites...............................38 

Map 16. Saleable Minerals.............................................................................................44 

Map 17. Leasable Minerals ............................................................................................44 

Map 18. Locatable Minerals ...........................................................................................44 

Map 19. Grazing Management.......................................................................................46 

Map 20. Prescribed Recreation Settings........................................................................48 

Map 21. Lake Havasu Field Office Recreational Management Areas............................48 

Map 22. Lake Havasu - Special Recreation Management Area.....................................52 

Map 23. Gibraltar - Special Recreation Management Area............................................76 

Map 24. Havasu Urban - Special Recreation Management Area...................................86 

Map 25. Plomosa - Special Recreation Management Area............................................92 

Map 26. Allocated Competitive Use Routes.................................................................100 

Map 27. Existing Developed Recreation Sites and Potential Fishing Dock 

Locations ........................................................................................................102 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan TOC-v

May 2007

Map 28. Special Designations - ACECs and Back Country Byways ............................106 

Map 29. Wilderness Areas, Wilderness Study Area, and Determined Suitable 

Wild & Scenic River Segments.......................................................................106 

Map 30. Travel Management Areas and Route Inventory Index..................................112 

Map 31. Off-Highway Vehicle Area Designations.........................................................114 

Map 32. Existing Routes...............................................................................................114 

Map 33. Visual Resource Management .......................................................................118 

Map 34. Wild Horse and Burro Herd Areas..................................................................120 

Map 35. Wild Burro Herd Management Areas..............................................................120 

Map 36. Lands with Wilderness Characteristics...........................................................124 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 1

May 2007

Record of Decision 

Introduction

This Record of Decision (ROD) approves the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM’s) 

proposal to manage the BLM-administered public lands within the Lake Havasu Field 

Office as presented in the attached Approved Resource Management Plan (Approved 

RMP). This Approved RMP was described as Alternative 5 in the September 2006 

Proposed Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental 

Impact Statement (PRMP/FEIS) (USDI-BLM 2006). The ROD provides the background 

on development of the plan and rationale for approving the proposed decisions contained 

in Alternative 5, and describes the clarifications made to resolve the protest received. 

Results of Protest Review 

The BLM received one protest letter during the 30-day protest period provided for the 

proposed land use plan decisions contained in the PRMP/FEIS in accordance with 

43 CFR Part 1610.5-2. Protesting parties included in the one protest letter were: Arizona 

Wilderness Coalition, Natural Trails & Waters Coalition, Sierra Club – Grand Canyon 

Chapter, and Center for Biological Diversity. 

Main protest points pertained to: 

Issue 1. The Proposed Plan does not manage sufficient acreage for wilderness 

characteristics.

Issue 2. The Proposed Plan appears to overestimate the potential negative consequences 

to other resources or uses while failing to give sufficient weight to the likely benefits 

from managing these lands to protect wilderness character. 

Issue 3. The Proposed Plan does not include management prescriptions that sufficiently 

protect wilderness characteristics and, therefore, does not comport with BLM’s guidance 

in Instruction Memorandum (IM) No. 2003-275, Change 1. 

Issue 4. The FEIS contains prescriptions that are likely to damage and degrade the 

qualities of solitude, unconfined recreation, and naturalness and do not comport with the 

BLM’s guidance. 
Bureau of Land Management Record of Decision

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 2

May 2007

Issue 5. The Proposed Plan does not manage off-road vehicles or address travel 

management in accordance with the BLM’s legal obligations. 

Issue 6. The BLM failed to disclose the environmental consequences resulting from 

implementation of its Proposed Plan. 

Issue 7. The BLM’s Proposed Plan designates Standard Wash as an Open OHV (offhighway vehicle) Area for unrestricted ORV (OHV) use despite lack of a comprehensive 

survey for vegetation and wildlife. 

Issue 8. The Proposed Plan for the Lake Havasu Field Office fails to take into account 

both ongoing and foreseeable impacts from ORV (OHV) use, thereby underestimating 

the cumulative impacts of the Preferred Alternative. 

Issue 9. The BLM has failed to account for the cumulative impacts by ignoring the 

potentially significant impacts of the major public highways and county roads that have 

yet to be constructed but are proposed to cross through the planning area. 

Issue 10. Contrary to the National Environmental Policy Act’s (NEPA’s) requirement, 

the Proposed Plan implements management strategies that are not adequately supported 

by scientific data or sufficient information. In addition, the Proposed Plan violates NEPA 

by failing to adequately disclose the extent to which “it is proceeding in the face of 

[substantial] scientific uncertainty” concerning the baseline conditions of numerous 

adversely impacted resources. 

Issue 11. The BLM should develop and analyze a true range of management alternatives, 

specifically including more environmentally protective alternatives that comply with its 

obligations regarding management of ORVs (OHVs). 

Issue 12. The mitigation measures for damage from ORVs (OHVs)in the Proposed Plan 

are not sufficiently detailed or analyzed to be relied upon by the BLM. The BLM is also 

required to consider mitigation measures that could avoid or lessen these environmental 

impacts. 

Issue 13. The Proposed Plan also fails to acknowledge and describe future actions (e.g., 

monitoring, law enforcement, etc.) on which user compliance of a designated route 

system would be contingent. 

Issue 14. The Proposed Plan’s “restoration actions,” as described in Chapter 2, are not 

enough to ensure the mitigation of impacts from superfluous vehicle routes. BLM should 

use more of the area designation of “limited to authorized users,” in areas allocated to 

protect wildlife such as WHA (Wildlife Habitat Area). 

Issue 15. The BLM has not adequately responded to comments on the DEIS. 

Issue 16. The current 2004 route inventory must be revised to eliminate those routes that 

cannot be verified as existing prior to adoption of the current RMPs and only those routes 

that were previously authorized should be carried over for analysis and potential 

designation for use in the forthcoming TMP (Travel Management Plan). 
Bureau of Land Management Record of Decision

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 3

May 2007

The BLM Director resolved the protest without making significant changes to the 

Proposed Resource Management Plan, though minor modifications and clarifications 

were made and have been explained in the Modifications and Clarifications sections 

below.

Decision

The decision is hereby made to approve the attached plan as the Approved Resource 

Management Plan (Approved RMP) for BLM-administered public lands located in 

California and Arizona that are administered by the Lake Havasu Field Office (see Map 1 

in the Approved RMP). The Approved RMP replaces relevant decisions in the Yuma

District Resource Management Plan (YRMP) (1987) as amended; Kingman Resource 

Area Resource Management Plan (KRMP) (1995); Lower Gila South Resource 

Management Plan (LGSRMP) (1988); Lower Gila North Management Framework Plan

(LGNMFP) (1983); and the Approved Amendment to the Lower Gila North Management 

Framework Plan and the Lower Gila South Resource Management Plan and Decision 

Record (LGNSA) (2005). 

The plan was prepared under the regulations of 43 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

Part 1600, which implements the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 

1976. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was prepared for this Approved RMP 

in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. The plan is 

nearly identical to the one presented in the PRMP/FEIS published in September 2006. 

Management decisions and guidance for public lands under the jurisdiction of the Lake 

Havasu Field Office are presented in the Approved RMP attached to this ROD in the 

section titled Management Decisions.

All decisions covered by the ROD are land use planning decisions that were protestable 

under the land use planning regulations (43 CFR Part 1610). 

What the Decision/Approved RMP Provides 

Many land use plan decisions are implemented or become effective upon approval of the 

Approved RMP and may include Desired Future Conditions, Land Use Allocation or 

Designation decisions, and Special Designations. Management Actions that require 

additional site-specific project planning as funding becomes available will require further 

environmental analysis. Administrative Actions are not land use planning decisions, but 

are a key component of the overall Plan. The BLM will continue to involve and 

collaborate with the public during implementation of this plan. Brief descriptions of 

these decisions follow: 

Desired Future Conditions 

Land use plans express Desired Future Conditions or desired outcomes in terms of 

specific goals, standards, and objectives for resources and/or uses. They direct the BLM 

actions in most effectively meeting legal mandates; numerous regulatory responsibilities; 

national policy; state director (BLM) guidance; and other resource or social needs. The 
Bureau of Land Management Record of Decision

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 4

May 2007

Land Use Allocations, Special Designations, or Management Actions are the decisions 

that allow the BLM to work toward achieving the Desired Future Conditions. 

Land Use Allocations (Allowable Uses) 

Land use allocations specify locations within the planning area that are available or not 

for certain uses. These include decisions such as what lands are available for livestock 

grazing, mineral material use and locatable mineral development, disposal, and what 

lands are open, closed, or limited to motorized travel. It is common for specific resource 

or use allocations to overlap with other resource or use allocations. 

Special Designations 

Special designations include those that are designated by Congress for special protection, 

such as wilderness areas or national historic or scenic trails. Such designations are not 

land use plan decisions. However, recommendations for designation can be made to 

Congress at the land use plan level. Congress may then act on these recommendations at 

a later time. 

Administrative designations made by the BLM (e.g., designating Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern (ACECs) or watchable wildlife viewing sites) are also 

considered special designations and can be made in the land use plan. 

Management Actions 

Management actions include those provisions that help in meeting the established goals 

and objectives and include measures that will be applied to guide day-to-day activities on 

public lands, including but not limited to stipulations, guidelines, best management 

practices, and design features. 

Administrative Actions 

Administrative actions are day-to-day activities conducted by the BLM, often required by 

FLPMA. BLM administrative actions do not require NEPA analysis or a written decision 

by a responsible official to be accomplished. Examples of administrative actions include 

mapping, surveying, inventorying, monitoring, and collecting information needed such as 

research and studies. See Appendix B in the Approved RMP. 

Key Decisions 

Listed below are the key management decisions in the Approved RMP. 

 Designate OHV management areas (see Map 31). Define existing roads and trails for 

limited use areas per inventory (see Map 32). 

 Designate Standard Wash and Osborne Wash “Open” areas only after compliance 

with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and Section 7 of the 

Endangered Species Act. 

 Nominate two new Back Country Byways once partnerships are established. 
Bureau of Land Management Record of Decision

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 5

May 2007

 Allocate six areas as Special Cultural Resource Management Areas. 

 Allocate 15 wildlife movement corridors. 

 Prohibit collection of dead and down wood except for wood collected within the 

vicinity (100 feet) of a dispersed campsite for campsite use only. 

 Make 50,616 acres of land available for sale, exchange, R&PP leasing, and disposal. 

 Designate a total of 15 utility corridors. This total includes three new corridors. One 

existing corridor was dropped. 

 Exclude the area north of Lake Havasu City (west of State Route 95 and east of the 

Colorado River) from the Havasu Herd Management Area (HMA). 

 Adjust the eastern boundary of the Alamo HMA in coordination with Arizona Game 

and Fish Department (AGFD). 

 Make 1.1 million acres of the field office available for grazing. 

 Designate five ACECs. 

 Allocate seven Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs). 

 Identify 41,590 acres for management to maintain wilderness characteristics. 

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

the Approved RMP and is effective on the date it is signed. No further administrative 

remedies are available for these land use plan decisions. 

What the Decision/Approved RMP Does Not Provide 

The Approved RMP does not contain decisions for actions outside the jurisdiction of the 

BLM. Comments asking for decisions that were beyond the scope of this plan were 

forwarded to the appropriate agency. Additionally, to facilitate resolution of concerns 

that were received concerning activities on Lake Havasu, BLM identified the need for a 

multi-agency, multi-year coordinated effort. While the Lake Havasu/Lower Colorado 

River Regional Management Area is not a land use allocation or a management action, 

the identification encourages a multi-agency, multi-year coordinated effort. The mission 

would be to define the issues, responsibilities, and actions required to maintain a quality 

lake recreation experience, properly functioning habitat (both terrestrial and aquatic), and 

common management relationships and goals among the jurisdictions. 

In addition, many decisions are not appropriate at this level of planning and are not 

included in the ROD. Examples of these types of decisions include: 

Statutory requirements. The decision will not change the BLM’s responsibility to 

comply with applicable laws and regulations. 

National policy. The decision will not change the BLM’s obligation to conform with 

current or future national policy. 

Funding levels and budget allocations. These are determined annually at the national 

level and are beyond the control of the field office. 
Bureau of Land Management Record of Decision

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 6

May 2007

Monitoring strategies to determine the effectiveness of these decisions in achieving plan 

goals and objectives. These will be addressed in specific activity-based plans that will be 

completed to implement the Approved RMP, with the exception of the Lake Havasu 

Fisheries Partnership program that has monitored and will continue to monitor fish and 

habitat productivity and dynamics. 

Implementation Decisions 

The Approved RMP does not contain Implementation Decisions. Future activity-level 

plans will address the implementation of the Approved RMP. 

Modifications

 In response to Protest Issue 4, the BLM added text to a prescription for lands 

managed to maintain wilderness characteristics. The clarifying text is in italics. The 

decision coded WC-3 will read: 

WC-3 Use of motor vehicles and mechanical transport, and the construction of 

temporary roads, structures, and installations will be allowed for emergency 

purposes. Any emergency actions will be conducted in a manner that creates the 

least disturbance and will be reclaimed as soon as possible after the situation has 

ended.

 Also in response to Protest Issue 4, the BLM added text to an additional prescription 

for lands managed to maintain wilderness characteristics. The clarifying text is in 

italics. The decision coded WC-5 will read: 

WC-5: The administrative use of motorized/mechanized equipment for natural and 

cultural resource management would be allowed. Administrative activities include,

but are not limited to, water supplementation, collar retrieval, and capture/release of 

wildlife, maintenance/repair and reconstruction or construction of wildlife waters. 

Cross-country travel for administrative purposes will be permitted only with prior 

approval by the authorized officer. Any administrative actions will be conducted in a 

manner that creates the least disturbance and reclaimed as soon as possible after the 

administrative need has ended.

 In response to Protest Issue 6, the BLM edited a Travel Management Action. The 

clarifying text is in italics. The decision coded TM-27 will read: 

TM-27: Approximately 5,023 acres identified as protection sites in previous plans 

would be designated as “limited" and the specific concerns for these areas will be 

identified as evaluation criteria and addressed though the route evaluation and 

designation process. 

 In response to Protest Issue 7, the BLM added text to a Travel Management Action. 

The clarifying text is in italics. The decision coded TM-24 will read: 

TM-24: Standard Wash and Shea Road/Osborne Wash RMZs [Recreation 

Management Zones] will be allocated “Open” following compliance with NHPA 

[National Historic Preservation Act], the ESA [Endangered Species Act] and the

successful resolution of adverse effects to historic properties and threatened and 
Bureau of Land Management Record of Decision

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 7

May 2007

endangered species. Until these consultations are completed in these two RMZs, 

travel will remain restricted to existing roads and trails.

 In response to Protest Issue 12, the BLM added examples of mitigation measures to 

Appendix L, Travel Management, in the Approved RMP.

Clarifications

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

the PRMP/FEIS and the Approved RMP. 

 To facilitate locating a resource, the BLM restructured the resource sections; the 

resources now appear in alphabetical order. 

 Some decisions presented in the PRMP/FEIS were placed in the incorrect decision 

category. These decisions were moved to their correct category. (This includes some 

Management Actions that were actually Administrative Actions. Administrative 

Actions were moved to Appendix B in the Approved RMP.) 

 SRMA acres were corrected and updated to only include BLM acres. 

 Mineral acres were corrected for surface occupancy. 

 Some decisions were clarified with additional text. 

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

the Approved RMP, these decisions are coded only once. The code reflects the 

program that is most affected. 

 Additional text was added to Appendix K, Special Designations, from Arizona

Statewide Wild and Scenic Rivers Legislative Environmental Impact Statement, 

December 1994.

Minor grammatical or editorial edits were not part of this discussion. 

Also, some PRMP/FEIS appendices were not included in the Approved RMP. 

 Appendix A, Summary of Scoping, was deleted since this addressed the process prior 

to the DRMP/DEIS and the PRMP/FEIS. 

 Appendix C, Planning Process Overview, was deleted because it was a general 

planning overview intended to aid the reader to participate in the DRMP/DEIS and 

PRMP/FEIS process. 

 Appendix D, Existing Land Use Planning Decisions, was deleted. This appendix 

contained the decisions that constituted Alternative 1. 

 Appendix O, Environmental Justice, Appendix P, Socioeconomic Conditions, and 

Appendix R, Minerals, were not included because they were not referenced in the 

Approved RMP. 

 Numerous resource appendices also have been revised to delete reference to 

alternatives other than the Approved RMP. 
Bureau of Land Management Record of Decision

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 8

May 2007

Several new appendices were added to the Approved RMP: 

 Appendix B, Administrative Actions and Standard Operating Procedures. This 

appendix also includes Administrative Actions (by program area) from the 

PRMP/FEIS. Administrative Actions are not land use plan decisions. However, 

these are day-to-day, non-ground-disturbing activities and are an important 

component when considering program activities. 

 Appendix N, Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities. 

 Appendix O, Plan Maintenance Roster.

 Appendix P, Plan Monitoring Roster.

Overview of the Alternatives 

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

RMP/EIS and PRMP/FEIS (USDI-BLM 2006). The alternatives were developed to 

address major planning issues identified through the scoping process and to provide 

direction for resource programs influencing land management. 

Each alternative is composed of a set of components (decisions) that can be identified as 

a general theme. Each theme represents a distinct concept for management using a 

variety of land use planning decision types (including Desired Future Conditions, Special 

Designations, Land Use Allocations, and Management Actions). These decisions provide 

management direction at a broad scale and guide future actions to govern management of 

BLM-administered public lands. 

Alternative 1 (No Action Alternative) 

Alternative 1 described the current management of BLM-administered lands in the Lake 

Havasu Field Office planning area. The current management identifies the management 

decisions contained within existing management plans that would have continued to 

occur if new decisions had not been made to alter them. Alternative 1 served as a 

baseline and an opportunity to compare the current management with the various 

strategies that were proposed for future management (Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5). 

Supplemental Rules are another category of decisions that affect the way the BLM 

manages the Lake Havasu Shoreline Program, the Parker Strip Recreation Area, and 

Craggy Wash. The Supplemental Rules are part of the implementation of ongoing 

management. These rules are revised periodically to reduce conflicts among a highly 

diverse group of resource users and notices have been published in the Federal Register.

Current Supplementary Rules are listed in Appendix A. At the time of publication of the 

Approved RMP, the revised Supplementary Rules covering the decisions in the Approved 

RMP have not been finalized. When the rules become final, they will replace those listed 

in Appendix A. 

Because their decisions affect the way the BLM manages public land today, decisions 

from implementation or activity-level plans written since the previous RMPs were 

completed were also included in Alternative 1. For example: OHV area designations 
Bureau of Land Management Record of Decision

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 9

May 2007

were changed from Limited to Existing Roads and Trails, to Limited to Designated Roads 

and Trails [italics added for emphasis] in Gibraltar Mountain Interdisciplinary 

Management Plan and Environmental Assessment (Bureau of Land Management 2001). 

Alternative 2 

Alternative 2 emphasized resource protection through a focus on natural processes and 

other discrete methods for resource management, minimal human use and influence, and 

enhanced protection of remoteness and primitive recreation. For example, more areas 

were restricted from mineral development; recreation management focused on more 

primitive and semi-primitive recreation activities within SRMAs; and there was 

designation of more public lands as ACECs than under any of the other alternatives. 

Alternative 3 

Alternative 3 placed an emphasis on maximum resource use and a more permissive 

resource management approach. For example, there were very few restrictions on 

mineral development. There was a higher level of motorized recreation and the fewest 

number of ACECs would have been designated than under any of the other alternatives. 

Alternative 4 

Alternative 4 sought to preserve the unique values of lands within the Lake Havasu Field 

Office planning area while accommodating reasonable levels of use. The “middle-of-theroad” approach to resource management proposed in Alternative 4 would have provided a 

moderate amount of mineral development. Recreation would have included a mix of 

motorized and primitive recreation opportunities, and a median number of ACECs would 

have been designated. 

Alternative 5 (Approved RMP) 

Alternative 5 was the BLM’s Proposed Plan in the PRMP/FEIS. Using the Preferred 

Alternative in the DRMP/DEIS, the BLM revised the alternative to incorporate comments 

received during the 90-day public comment period. The resultant alternative (updated in 

response to the protest) is the Approved RMP attached to this ROD. In the most 

comprehensive manner, the Proposed Plan is designed to respond to each of the issues 

and management concerns recognized during the planning process. The BLM has 

determined that the decisions presented under Alternative 5 will provide an optimal 

balance between authorized resource use and the protection and long-term sustainability 

of sensitive resources within the planning area. As with Alternatives 1 through 4, 

Alternative 5 is the summation of its Desired Future Conditions, Land Use Allocations, 

and Management Actions, as well as the information in Administrative Actions and 

Standard Operating Procedures (see Appendix B in the Approved RMP). 

Alternative 5, Proposed Plan (in the PRMP/FEIS) is considered the preferable alternative 

when taking into consideration the human (social and economic) environment as well as 

the natural environment. The U.S. Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has defined 

the preferable alternative as the alternative that will promote the national environmental 
Bureau of Land Management Record of Decision

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 10

May 2007

policy as expressed in Section 101 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. 

This section lists six broad policy goals for all federal plans, programs, and policies: 

1. Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for 

succeeding generations;

2. Assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally 

pleasing surroundings; 

3. Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, 

risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences; 

4. Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage, and 

maintain, wherever possible, an environment that supports diversity and variety of 

individual choice; 

5. Achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high 

standards of living and a wide sharing of life’s amenities; and 

6. Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable 

recycling of depletable resources. 

Based on these criteria, identification of the preferable alternative involved balancing 

current and potential resource uses with the need to protect resources, as well as 

consideration of the human environment. Alternative 3 could be viewed the least 

environmentally preferable alternative, as it offered the most intensive, active 

management for use of the area, which may have impacted other resource values the most 

or limited the rate of ecosystem recovery. However, this alternative could have provided 

the most economic benefit to the region in the short term. Alternative 4 would have been 

less environmentally preferable than Alternative 2, but more preferable than 

Alternatives 1 or 3. This alternative would have provided a balance between sustainable 

economic benefits and resource protection. Alternative 2 would have been more 

protective of natural and biological values than Alternatives 1, 3, or 4, but would have 

provided for fewer uses with more restrictions on those uses. The Proposed Plan 

provides a balanced approach with protection for the environment while also providing 

economic and recreational activities.

Management Considerations in Selecting the 

Approved RMP 

The BLM is tasked with the job of multiple use management and the sustained yield of 

renewable resources. These tasks are mandated under the FLPMA and numerous other 

laws and regulations that govern the management of public lands for various purposes 

and values. Key laws and regulations are summarized in a listing in Appendix A. 

Due to the diversity of community needs and stakeholders affected by management of 

BLM-administered lands, there has been both support and opposition to certain 

components of the Proposed Plan (as presented in the PRMP/FEIS). The BLM’s 

objective in choosing Alternative 5 as the Proposed Plan was to address these diverse 

needs and concerns in a fair manner and provide a practical and workable framework for 

management of BLM-administered public lands. The BLM is ultimately responsible for 
Bureau of Land Management Record of Decision

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 11

May 2007

preparing a plan consistent with its legal mandates that reflects its collective professional 

judgment, incorporating the best from competing viewpoints and ideas. The Approved 

RMP (Alternative 5 as modified in consideration of public and agency comments and 

internal review) provides a balance between those reasonable measures necessary to 

protect the existing resource values and the continued public need for use of the BLMadministered public lands within the planning area. 

The Approved RMP proposes management that will improve and sustain properly 

functioning resource conditions while considering needs and demands for existing or 

potential resource commodities and values. In the end, resource use is managed by 

integrating ecological, economic, and social principles in a manner that safeguards the 

long-term sustainability, diversity, and productivity of the land. Additional key concerns 

are addressed below. 

The Approved RMP responds to issues related to managing for healthy rangelands and 

riparian and upland vegetation while still providing for livestock grazing and fish and 

wildlife habitat. The Approved RMP achieves this end by making most of the planning 

area available for livestock grazing, as long as Standards for Rangeland Health continue 

to be met, and by restricting grazing where it is incompatible with resource values. 

The Approved RMP specifies conditions for permitted activities such as communication 

uses, and other commercial uses as appropriate at the land use plan level to resolve 

concerns regarding impacts of commercial uses. Impacts on uses as a result of protective 

management were disclosed in the PRMP/FEIS, and considered in conjunction with 

impacts to resource values. The Approved RMP provides the best balance in allowing 

for uses to occur while providing for protection of resource values and public health and 

safety. The Approved RMP responds to issues regarding noxious weeds and invasive 

species by maintaining the BLM’s integrated management approach as well as 

emphasizing the reestablishment and restoration of native plants during project activities 

and as a part of the watershed assessment process. 

Concerns about specific resource values are addressed throughout the Approved RMP. 

Since standard management contained in the Approved RMP protects many of the 

relevant and important values in the planning area, only five areas were designated as 

ACECs where additional special management is necessary. 

The Approved RMP responds to increasing demands for recreation on BLM-administered 

public lands while adhering to the FLPMA’s mandate for multiple use management and 

the sustained yield of renewable resources. 

The Approved RMP responds to travel management and access issues by providing a 

mechanism for route designation under the Travel Management Plan, to be completed in 

5 years. Pending completion of route designation, travel is restricted to existing routes of 

travel with a network of transportation routes that tie into roads administered by the 

counties, the States of Arizona and California, and federal agencies. Users who value 

non-motorized areas for hunting, hiking, solitude, etc., are accommodated by areas that 

are closed to motorized or mechanized travel, as in designated Wilderness. 

Consistency of the Approved RMP with other local, state, Tribal, and federal plans and 

policies (which sometimes conflict among themselves) was also considered as a factor in 

alternative selection. The Approved RMP is consistent with plans and policies of the 
Bureau of Land Management Record of Decision

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 12

May 2007

Department of the Interior and Bureau of Land Management, other federal agencies, state 

government, and local governments to the extent that the guidance and local plans are 

also consistent with the purposes, policies, and programs of federal law and regulation 

applicable to public lands. 

Neither the Arizona nor the California Governor’s Office identified any inconsistencies 

between the PRMP/FEIS and state or local plans, policies, and programs following the 

60-day Governor's Consistency Review of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS (initiated 

August 23, 2006, in accordance with planning regulations at 43 CFR Part 1610.3- 2(e)). 

Mitigation Measures 

Measures to avoid or minimize environmental harm were built into the Approved RMP 

where practicable and appropriate. Many of the standard management provisions will 

minimize impacts when applied to activities proposed in the planning area. The Arizona 

Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing Administration (Standards 

and Guidelines) will be used as the base standards to assess the health of BLM lands in 

the planning area. Standards and Guidelines will be applied as appropriate. Best 

management practices will be used (when applicable) for a number of uses including 

livestock grazing, mineral development, recreation management, and realty actions. 

Additional measures to mitigate environmental impacts may also be developed during 

subsequent NEPA analysis at the activity-level planning and project stages, or through 

legally mandated consultations covering those same proposed actions. 

Plan Monitoring 

Monitoring is the repeated measurement of activities and conditions over time with the 

implied purpose to use this information to adjust management if need be, to achieve or 

maintain resource objectives. The BLM planning regulations (43 CFR Part 1610.4-9) 

call for monitoring resource management plans on a continual basis and establishing 

intervals and standards based on the sensitivity of the resource to the decisions involved. 

CEQ regulations implementing NEPA state that agencies may provide for monitoring to 

assure that their decisions are carried out and should do so in important cases (40 CFR 

Part 1505.2(c)). 

There are three types of monitoring. These include implementation, effectiveness, and 

validation monitoring, described below.

Implementation Monitoring 

Implementation monitoring is the most basic type of monitoring and simply determines 

whether planned activities have been implemented in the manner prescribed by the plan. 

Some agencies call this compliance monitoring. This monitoring documents the BLM’s 

progress toward full implementation of the land use plan decision. There are no specific 

thresholds or indicators required for this type of monitoring, but progress towards plan 

compliance will be evaluated and reported at a 5-year interval from the date of plan 
Bureau of Land Management Record of Decision

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 13

May 2007

approval. Aspects of the following two monitoring types may also be addressed in this 

report.

Effectiveness Monitoring 

Effectiveness monitoring is aimed at determining if the implementation of activities has 

achieved the Desired Future Conditions (or goals and objectives). Effectiveness 

monitoring asks the question: Was the specified activity successful in achieving the 

objective? This requires knowledge of the objectives established in the Approved RMP 

as well as indicators that can be measured. Indicators are established by technical 

specialists in order to address specific questions, and thus avoid collection of unnecessary 

data. Success is measured against the benchmark of achieving the objectives (Desired 

Future Conditions) established by the plan, which may include regulated standards for 

resources such as endangered species, air, and water. The interval between these efforts 

will vary by subject and expected rate of change, but effectiveness monitoring progress 

will generally be reported to the Field Office Manager on an annual basis with trends and 

conclusions when appropriate and also incorporated in 5-year evaluation reports. 

Validation Monitoring 

Validation monitoring is intended to ascertain whether a cause-and-effect relationship 

exists among management activities or resources being managed. It confirms whether 

the predicted results occurred and if assumptions and models used to develop the plan are 

correct. This type of monitoring can also be done by partner, contract with other 

agencies, academic institutions, or other entities. 

Since land use plan monitoring is the process of (1) tracking the implementation of land 

use planning decisions and (2) collecting and assessing data/information necessary to 

evaluate the effectiveness of land use planning decisions, monitoring related to the 

Approved RMP will consist of implementation and effectiveness monitoring. 

The BLM will monitor the Approved RMP to determine whether the objectives set forth 

in this document are being met and if applying the land use plan direction is effective. 

(see Appendix P in the Approved RMP for a Plan Monitoring Roster). Monitoring for 

each program area is outlined in the Management Decision section of the Approved 

RMP. If monitoring shows land use plan actions or best management practices are not 

effective, the BLM may modify or adjust management without amending or revising the 

plan as long as assumptions and impacts disclosed in the analysis remain valid and broadscale goals and objectives are not changed (see the discussion entitled Maintaining the 

Plan in the Approved RMP). Where the BLM considers taking or approving actions that 

will alter or not conform to overall direction of the plan, the BLM will prepare a plan 

amendment or revision and environmental analysis of appropriate scope (see the 

discussion entitled Changing the Plan in the Approved RMP).

Public Involvement 

One of the BLM’s primary objectives during development of the Lake Havasu Approved 

RMP was to understand the views of various publics by providing opportunities for 
Bureau of Land Management Record of Decision

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 14

May 2007

meaningful participation in the resource management planning process. The BLM 

interdisciplinary planning team used the scoping process to identify issues relevant to the 

Lake Havasu Field Office planning area. Through communication media such as 

meetings, newsletters, and news releases, the public was provided opportunities to 

identify issues that needed to be addressed in the PRMP/FEIS. The goal was for this 

process to result in an increased sense of the planning process, the decisions that result 

from it, and the importance of collaborative stewardship as a strategy for implementation. 

Additionally, CEQ regulations mandate that federal agencies responsible for preparing 

NEPA analysis and documentation do so “in cooperation with state and local 

governments” and other agencies with jurisdiction by law or special expertise. In support 

of this mandate, the BLM invited a broad range of local, state, Tribal, and federal 

agencies to establish cooperating agency status with the BLM. Cooperating agency 

status offers the opportunity to assume additional roles and responsibilities beyond the 

collaborative planning processes of attending public meetings and reviewing and 

commenting on plan documents. Four agencies requested Cooperating Agency status for 

the Lake Havasu Field Office Approved RMP: the Arizona Department of 

Transportation (ADOT), AGFD, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), and the 

Federal Highway Administration. 

Specifically, the process began when the BLM published the Notice of Intent to prepare 

an RMP with EIS in the Federal Register on August 3, 2001. The Notice of Availability 

of the DRMP/DEIS was published on September 30, 2005. The BLM facilitated public 

involvement through a series of open houses in 2001 and 2003, and another series of 

meetings was held to announce and discuss the DEIS in 2005. The Notice of Availability 

of the PRMP/FEIS was published on September 22, 2006. 

Neither the Arizona nor the California Governor’s Office identified any inconsistencies 

between the PRMP/FEIS and state or local plans, policies, and programs following the 

60-day Governor's Consistency Review of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS (initiated 

August 23, 2006, in accordance with planning regulations at 43 CFR Part 1610.3-2(e)). 

Lake Havasu Field Office also maintained a national mailing list of approximately 

1,500 individuals, agencies, interest groups, and Tribes who expressed interest in the 

planning process. The BLM mailed planning bulletins to those on the mailing list to keep 

them informed of project status. Additionally, public meetings were announced at least 

15 days prior to the event in local news media. The BLM also participated in numerous 

meetings with cooperating agencies, other federal agencies, American Indian Tribes, and 

state and local governments. Additional details concerning the coordination process are 

included in the Approved RMP in the section entitled Planning Process, and in the 

PRMP/FEIS.

Availability of the Plan 

Copies of the Record of Decision and the Lake Havasu Field Office Resource 

Management Plan are available by request from the following locations: The BLM Lake 

Havasu Field Office, 2610 Sweetwater Avenue, Lake Havasu City, Arizona 86406 

(928) 505-1200, and on the Lake Havasu Field Office website at www.blm.gov/az. 

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 1

May 2007

Approved

Resource Management Plan 

Introduction

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Lake Havasu Field Office has prepared the 

Approved Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan (Approved RMP) to 

provide comprehensive current and future management of the more than 1.3 million acres 

of BLM-administered public land located within the Lake Havasu Field Office planning 

area. The planning area is comprised of portions of Mohave, La Paz, Yavapai, and 

Maricopa Counties in Arizona and San Bernardino County in California (Map 1). This 

plan represents years of ongoing, coordinated efforts on the part of BLM Lake Havasu 

Field Office staff, BLM Arizona State Office staff, representatives of communities 

located within the planning area, cooperating and collaborating government agencies, 

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

outlined in this document will enable the BLM to manage the resources and uses of 

BLM-administered public lands located within the Lake Havasu Field Office planning 

area as a comprehensive unit. 

Purpose and Need 

The current planning area was formerly known as the Havasu Resource Area of the 

Yuma District. The BLM restructured management responsibility for public lands a few 

times starting on December 15, 1991. As a result, portions of four other planning areas 

within Arizona were transferred into the Havasu Resource Area. The Havasu Resource 

Area became the Lake Havasu Field Office in 1997. In June 2004, the Colorado River 

District was established. The District is composed of the Lake Havasu, Yuma, and 

Kingman Field Offices. 

Lake Havasu Field Office managed resources under five different land use plans: the 

Yuma District Resource Management Plan (YRMP) (1987) as amended, Kingman 

Resource Area Resource Management Plan (KRMP) (1995), Lower Gila South Resource 

Management Plan (LGSRMP) (1988a), Lower Gila North Management Framework Plan

(LGNMFP) (1983), and the Approved Amendment to the Lower Gila North Management 

Framework Plan and the Lower Gila South Resource Management Plan and Decision 

Record (LGNSA) (2005). The Approved RMP combines the relevant portions of those 

documents and updates the plan with issues and concerns identified during the scoping 

process (Map 2). 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 2

May 2007

Sections 102 and 202 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) require 

the Secretary of the Interior to develop land use plans for all public lands. This Approved 

RMP conforms to FLPMA and BLM planning regulations as set forth in Title 43 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 1600. 

The FLPMA directs the BLM to manage the public lands and their various resource 

values for multiple use and sustained yield to ensure they are utilized in a manner that 

will best meet the present and future needs of the public. As required by these Acts of 

Congress and current BLM policy, the BLM prepared this Approved RMP to establish 

management directions for the balanced use of such renewable and non-renewable 

resources as rangeland, wildlife, wilderness, recreation, cultural resources, and other 

natural, scenic, scientific, and historical values within the planning area. 

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on major federal actions. Since the Approved 

RMP is a major federal action, the BLM distributed the Draft Resource Management 

Plan/Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DRMP/DEIS) in September 2005 and the 

Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement 

(PRMP/FEIS) in September 2006. The FEIS documented the potential environmental 

impacts of implementing the Preferred Alternative from the DRMP/DEIS as well as other 

alternatives and conforms to U.S. Council on Environmental Quality regulations for 

implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1500). 

Planning Area and Map 

The planning area boundary includes the Colorado River from Davis Dam in the north, 

(bordering Nevada/Arizona) to south of Parker Dam. On the California side, the 

planning area varies in width from less than one-quarter mile to approximately 6 miles 

west of the Colorado River. The planning area also trends east to Alamo Dam and the 

Harcuvar Mountains, which are located near the community of Wenden, Arizona. The 

planning area includes two incorporated cities (Lake Havasu City and Bullhead City), 

and the town of Parker, Arizona, along with more than a dozen smaller communities, and 

encompasses more than 1.3 million acres of BLM-administered public land, resources, 

and uses (Map 1). 

Located within the planning area are the Havasu National Wildlife Refuge, Bill Williams 

River National Wildlife Refuge, five designated BLM wilderness areas, and other critical 

fisheries, migratory waterfowl, and desert plant and wildlife habitats. Seven Native 

American Indian tribes (Chemehuevi Indian Tribe, Fort Mojave Indian Tribe, Hopi Tribe, 

Hualapai Tribe, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, Yavapai-Prescott Tribe, 

and Colorado River Indian Tribes) either currently reside within boundaries of the 

planning area or have recognized cultural ties to these lands. 

The area is widely known as a recreation destination. Seasonal population changes 

significantly influence water and land-dependant outdoor recreation use within the 

planning area. The Lake Havasu Convention and Visitor Center estimates that 

recreational visitation during both the winter and summer tourist seasons increases the 

area’s base population of approximately 55,000 people by another 15,000 to 

20,000 persons (Cunning pers. comm.). Visitation thus plays a substantial role in the 
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

Calif

ornia

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

Y

a

v

apai

Count

y

Maricopa

C

ounty

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La

P

a

z

Count

y

M

oha

v

e Count

y

Parker

Dam

Davis

Dam

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big

Sandy

River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

PHOENIX

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

May 2007

T17N

T16.5

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R17WR18WR19WR20WR21W R16W R14WR15W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 1 Planning Area with Surface Management

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

Township and Range for

San Bernardino Merdian

Township and Range fo

Gila & Salt River Merdia

Bureau of Land Management

Bureau of Reclamation

Corps of Engineers

Indian Lands

National Park Service

Private

State

City, County, & State Park

State Wildlife Area

US Fish & Wildlife Service

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Ariz

o

n

a

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave

County

La Paz

County

Yavapai County Maricopa

County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

Bill Williams River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R14WR15WR16WR17WR18WR19WR20WR21WR22W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 2 Previous RMP and MFP Boundaries

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Previous RMP/MFP Areas

Kingman Resource Area RMP

Lower Gila North MFP

Lower Gila South Resource Area RMP

Yuma District Office RMP

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 3

May 2007

regional economy, in land uses within the planning area, and potentially in natural 

resource conditions. 

Decisions in the Approved RMP apply to more than 1.3 million acres of BLMadministered public land within the 2.1-million-acre planning area (Table 1, Map 1). 

This area includes approximately 70,992 acres of U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 

(Reclamation) acquired and withdrawn land. 

Table 1. Surface Management within the Lake 

Havasu Planning Area

Land Status Acreage Percentage 

Federal 

 Bureau of Land Management 1,359,103 64.82 

 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 45,835 2.18 

 National Park Service 1,626 0.08 

 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 11,932 0.57 

 Bureau of Reclamation 216 0.01 

 Subtotal 1,418,712 67.66 

Tribal Lands 177,356 8.46 

 Subtotal 177,356 8.46 

State 

 Arizona Game and Fish Department 464 0.02 

 State Trust Lands 245,812 11.72 

 Arizona State Parks 3,545 0.17 

 Subtotal 249,821 11.91 

Private 

 County and City Parks 614 0.03 

 Private 250,355 11.94 

 Subtotal 250,969 11.97 

 Total 2,096,858 100.00 

Generally, public lands within the planning area consist of large, contiguous blocks 

containing scattered state and private land holdings, known as “inholdings.” In a few 

locations, public lands are isolated or “checkerboarded” between state and private lands. 

Most of the state and private lands are located in populated areas associated with the 

Colorado River and along the highways that transect the area. While the planning area 

encompasses more than BLM-administered public lands, all actions and decisions created 

by the Approved RMP will be limited to public lands administered by the BLM. 

However, it is important to recognize that population growth could impact public land 

natural resources, in which case coordinated monitoring efforts would guide management 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 4

May 2007

direction. Federal agencies, Tribes, private landowners, and state and local municipal 

entities within the planning area have been and will continue to be consulted throughout 

the Approved RMP’s implementation. 

Development of this Approved RMP was formally initiated with publication of a Notice 

of Intent in the Federal Register on August 3, 2001. Over the next 5 years, the BLM 

conducted extensive public outreach, and initiated a number of collaborative efforts 

involving diverse interests as part of plan development. (These opportunities are 

summarized in the Public Involvement section below and fully described on pages 1-4 

through 1-10 of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS). The BLM also provided standard public 

comment periods and an opportunity to protest the proposed decisions to the Director of 

the Bureau of Land Management prior to approval of this ROD as required by the BLM 

planning regulations. 

Scoping Issues 

Resource Management Plans are prepared to resolve significant issues and management 

concerns associated with the management of the public lands in the planning area. The 

issues drive the RMP in that the Approved Plan is primarily designed to resolve the 

identified planning issues. 

The BLM interdisciplinary planning team used the scoping process to identify issues 

relevant to the Lake Havasu Field Office planning area. Through communication media 

such as meetings, newsletters, and news releases, the public was provided opportunities 

to identify issues that needed to be addressed in the Approved RMP. The planning team 

then analyzed the public’s comments and identified the major planning issues to be 

resolved. The specific criteria by which changes in current resource management 

practices were considered are: 

 Management of one resource significantly constrains or curtails use of another 

resource.

 Existing land use allocations conflict with agency resource management policies or 

guidance.

 Existing resource management practices conflict with management plans, policies, 

and guidance of another federal or state surface management agency. 

 Documented public controversy regarding management of a specific resource value 

indicates a management issue. 

Issues Addressed 

In August 2002, the BLM published the Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management 

Plan Scoping Report. This document summarized the procedures, issues, and 

management concerns that were identified over 2 years as the result of public meetings, 

comments received through the mail, and via email. Following the publication of the 

scoping report, the BLM continued to solicit input from the public, agencies, and staff 

members. Those additional comments all fell within the issues identified in the scoping 

report (Bureau of Land Management 2002a). 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 5

May 2007

After the publication of the DRMP/DEIS in September 2005, the BLM received more 

than 200 comment letters during the public comment period. These letters contained 

more than 800 comments. Of these comments, 23% concerned recreation issues; 19% 

concerned the alternatives (i.e., readers voicing a preference); 11% concerned travel 

management issues; 8% concerned fish and wildlife issues; 8% concerned Special 

Designation; 8% concerned administrative issues; and 6% concerned disposal or retention 

of public lands. The remaining comments were divided between other resources. Most 

(73%) of the comments were from Arizona residents; 6% were from California residents; 

and 21% of the comments were from residents of miscellaneous other states. The issues 

remained consistent with those outlined in the scoping report. 

Issues Considered but not Further Analyzed 

During the planning process, the BLM received comments concerning issues that were 

beyond the scope of this plan (e.g., safety issues on Lake Havasu). When applicable, the 

BLM forwarded comments received to agencies that have authority over the issues that 

were beyond the scope of this plan. Other issues that were not included could be 

addressed through administrative or policy action (e.g., use of an area for educational 

purpose).

Planning Criteria 

Planning criteria are the constraints or ground rules that guide and direct the development 

of the plan. Criteria are taken from laws and regulations, BLM guidance, and input from 

state, county, and federal agencies, Indian tribes, and the public. These criteria were 

developed by the BLM to assure that the planning process and decision-making are 

focused on the pertinent issues, and to ensure that the BLM avoids unnecessary data 

collection and analyses. The criteria were used at four stages of the planning process 

(resource inventory, assessment of the current situation [which includes a description of 

current BLM guidance, discussion of existing problems, and opportunities to resolve 

them], formulation of alternatives, and selection of the Preferred Alternative). 

The basic planning criteria are identified in Section 202 of the FLPMA: 

 Follow the principles of multiple use and sustained yield. 

 Use a systematic interdisciplinary approach, fully considering physical, biological, 

economic, and social aspects of public land management. 

 Identify, designate, protect, and specially manage Areas of Critical Environmental 

Concern (ACECs). 

 Consider the relative significance of public land products, services, and use to local 

economies. 

 Rely on the inventory of public lands, their resources, and other values to the extent 

such information is available. 

 Consider present and potential uses of public lands. 

 Consider the impact of federally approved actions on adjacent or nearby non-federal 

lands and on private land surface over federally owned subsurface minerals. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 6

May 2007

 Consider the relative scarcity of the values involved and alternative means and sites 

for realization of those values. 

 Weigh the long-term benefits and consequences of proposed actions against shortterm benefits and consequences. 

 Comply with applicable pollution control laws, including state and federal air, water, 

noise, and other pollution standards and plans. 

 Coordinate, to the extent consistent with public laws, resource planning and 

management programs of other federal departments and agencies, states, local 

governments, and Indian tribes. 

 Provide the public with early notices and frequent opportunities to participate in the 

preparation of plans. 

 Manage the public lands to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the lands. 

Planning Process 

Collaboration/Partnership Relationship 

The BLM’s Lake Havasu Field Office conducts many activities that require coordination 

with tribes, state, other federal agencies, and interested public. Coordination has been 

ongoing throughout this planning effort. Coordination is accomplished as a matter of 

course when implementing land use plan decisions through project development and sitespecific activities. Key coordination efforts include those described below. 

Intergovernmental, Inter-Agency, and Tribal Relationships 

In developing this plan, the BLM coordinated with Reclamation; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (USFWS); Federal Highway Administration; Arizona Game and Fish 

Department (AGFD); Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT); Arizona State 

Parks; California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), the cities of Lake Havasu City, 

Bullhead City, and Needles; Mohave County; La Paz County; San Bernardino County; 

the town of Parker; and with Lake Havasu Fisheries Improvement Program partners, 

including the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) and Anglers 

United.

The BLM initiated consultation with American Indian Tribes who have oral traditions or 

cultural concerns relating to the planning area, or who are documented as having 

occupied or used portions of the planning area during prehistoric or historic times. These 

tribes include the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe, Chemehuevi Indian Tribe, Colorado River 

Indian Tribes, Hopi Tribe, Hualapai Tribe, Yavapai-Prescott Tribe and Salt River PimaMaricopa Indian Community. Four tribes (the Chemehuevi, Fort Mojave, Hopi, and 

Colorado River Indian Tribes) requested follow-up meetings. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 7

May 2007

Cooperating Agencies 

In the first sentence of NEPA, Congress declares that, 

It is the continuing policy of the Federal Government, in cooperation with State and local 

governments, and other concerned public and private organizations...to create and 

maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony, and 

fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations of 

Americans. (Sec. 101(a)) 

Additionally, U.S. Council on Environmental Quality regulations, contained in 

40 CFR 1501.6 and 1508.5, mandate that federal agencies responsible for preparing 

NEPA analysis and documentation do so “in cooperation with state and local 

governments” and other agencies with jurisdiction by law or special expertise (42 United 

States Code [USC] 4331(a), 4332(2)). 

In support of this mandate, the BLM invited a broad range of local, state, tribal, and 

federal agencies to attend a series of meetings with the aim of developing Memorandum 

of Understanding (MOU) that would establish cooperating agency status with the BLM. 

Cooperating agency status offers the opportunity for interested agencies to assume 

additional roles and responsibilities beyond the collaborative planning processes of 

attending public meetings and reviewing and commenting on plan documents. MOUs are 

time-limited documents that describe the roles and responsibilities of the BLM and the 

cooperating agency during the planning process for a particular RMP. 

Four agencies requested Cooperating Agency Status for the Lake Havasu Field Office 

Approved RMP: ADOT, AGFD, Reclamation, and the Federal Highway Administration. 

Reclamation is considered a Cooperating Agency because a valid MOU, dated July 15, 

1991, exists between the BLM and Reclamation, in which Reclamation agreed to be “a 

cooperating agency on land use plans, including amendments, affecting resources on 

project lands administered by the BLM.” 

Transportation Agencies 

Both ADOT and the Federal Highway Administration requested cooperating agency 

status on the plan. In addition to working with cooperating agencies, BLM coordinated 

with city and county transportation departments. When these agencies plan and develop 

roadways that cross public lands, the BLM is involved in their design and contributes to 

environmental impact analysis. In that process, the BLM would coordinate with the 

responsible agency to develop design features that minimize the fragmenting effect of the 

planned roadway. The BLM would work with the responsible agency to evaluate and 

incorporate safe and effective wildlife crossings to ensure long-term species viability and 

maintaining habitat connectivity. Where planned roadways potentially fragment other 

resources, such as (but not limited to) recreation routes or trails, grazing allotments, or 

mining operations, the BLM would work with the responsible agency to provide 

continued connectivity for those purposes as well. The BLM would also work with the 

agency to provide continued safe access to public lands from any developed roadway for 

recreation and other public land users.
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 8

May 2007

Arizona Game and Fish Department and California Department 

of Fish and Game 

AGFD, CDFG, and the BLM work cooperatively to manage resources within the Lake 

Havasu Field Office planning area. The BLM is responsible for management of wildlife 

habitats on BLM-administered lands, while AGFD and CDFG are responsible for 

managing fish and wildlife. Continued efforts will be made to coordinate with AGFD 

and CDFG for opportunities to enhance fish and wildlife habitat, species diversity, and 

riparian health.

In 2003, the BLM and AGFD signed a MOU giving AGFD cooperating agency status on 

the BLM planning efforts in Arizona. Throughout the planning process for this plan, the 

close, cooperative nature of the relationship is cited. At the writing of this document, 

AGFD and the BLM are revising the current Master MOU. The MOU establishes 

protocols that direct the cooperative working relationship between the agencies. The 

MOU will provide context to better enable both agencies to work in partnership and to 

make decisions in a consistent manner across the state. The guidelines established in the 

MOU apply to implementation of this Approved RMP. 

Bureau of Reclamation 

Bureau of Reclamation Project Lands

Several hundred thousand acres of Reclamation land, both acquired and withdrawn, 

accommodate the Boulder Canyon and related projects from Davis Dam to Mexico, 

including lands within the planning area. Under a unique provision of the Department of 

the Interior Departmental Manual (DM) (613 DM 1.1), the Secretary assigned 

management responsibilities for certain resources on these withdrawn lands to the BLM, 

in coordination with Reclamation (Map 3). 

These lands constitute a corridor along the Lower Colorado River in Arizona and 

California, and are managed by the BLM for multiple uses. However, they remain 

Reclamation lands, and their use is dedicated primarily to support various Reclamation 

projects. 613 DM 1.1 was added in 1972, following completion of the Lower Colorado 

River Land Use Plan in 1964 by the Office of the Secretary of Interior. 

The BLM and Reclamation work and coordinate closely on the management of these 

lands. The BLM exercises primary day-to-day management for non-Reclamation project 

uses. However, Reclamation retains certain management responsibilities to maintain the 

projects.

Management of Bureau of Reclamation Project Lands

The BLM has a unique responsibility for management of Reclamation project lands 

pursuant to the Departmental Manual at 613 DM 1. About 71,000 acres of land within 

the planning area are Reclamation lands that have been withdrawn from the public lands 

or acquired from non-federal owners to accommodate Reclamation projects along the 

Lower Colorado River. The Secretary of the Interior, acting through Reclamation, retains 

the role of Watermaster for the Lower Colorado River, and for operation of the various 

dams, river works, and irrigation project facilities authorized by Congress. 
#

#

#

#

!"e

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

California Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

San Bernardino County

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

CAP

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Colorado

River

Colora

do River

!

!"a

!"e

AREA OF

INTEREST

LAKE

HAVASU

CITY

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

R22W R20WR21W R19W R17WR18W R15WR16W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E R26E R27E

Map 3 Bureau of Reclamation

Withdrawn and Acquired Lands

Lake Havasu

Field Office

0 10 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management May 2007

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

± 0 10 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Bureau of Reclamation Lands Managed by the Bureau of Land Management

Bureau of Reclamation Withdrawn Lands

Bureau of Reclamation Acquired Lands

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 9

May 2007

To maximize opportunities for multiple-use management, the BLM has the responsibility 

of managing these lands, in coordination with Reclamation. Reclamation relies on the 

BLM to take the lead role in non-Reclamation project management of the Reclamation 

lands along the Lower Colorado River. The BLM may not dispose of any of these lands 

without written approval of Reclamation. 

It is important for the reader to understand that on these lands, Reclamation retains the 

responsibility for Reclamation project operation and maintenance, and certain 

environmental mitigation and enhancement activities associated with its mission. Every 

effort has been made by the BLM and Reclamation to ensure that this plan does not 

conflict with existing and planned Reclamation project activities. In addition, 

Reclamation will make every effort to assist the BLM in implementation of this plan. 

However, on Reclamation lands included in this plan, project operational situations may 

arise that would preclude full implementation of certain prescriptions, or may cause 

curtailment, modification, or delay of portions of certain decisions affecting Reclamation 

lands. DM 613 and the above mentioned MOU provides guidance to cover this issue. 

Reclamation has the final authority over DM 613 lands. 

Bureau of Reclamation Non-Project Lands

Reclamation also has a right-of-way (ROW) for the Central Arizona Project (CAP), 

which delivers Colorado River water to central Arizona. A portion of the ROW occurs 

within the boundaries of the Lake Havasu Field Office, which coordinates with 

Reclamation to ensure that other projects adjacent to their ROW do not adversely affect 

the CAP. Reclamation has established a national CAP recreation trail in other areas 

outside of the Lake Havasu Field Office. However, Reclamation has not proposed any 

recreation routes with the field office boundaries.

The BLM and Reclamation work and coordinate closely on the management of these 

lands. While the BLM exercises primary day-to-day management for non- Reclamation 

project uses, Reclamation retains certain management responsibilities to maintain the 

projects.

Lower Colorado River Multiple-Species Conservation Plan 

Reclamation and other cooperators completed the Lower Colorado River Multiple 

Species Conservation Program (LCRMSCP) that was signed by the Secretary of Interior 

in 2005. This program represents a 50-year-long comprehensive native species 

conservation approach to both federal actions and nonfederal activities on the Lower 

Colorado River management. All participating Department of Interior officials are 

directed to cooperate and implement such agreements to achieve the important species 

conservation actions identified within the plan.

As a partner to the LCRMSCP, the BLM coordinates with Reclamation (the 

implementing agency) to achieve LCRMSCP goals and objectives. In the LCRMSCP 

ROD published in April 2005, the Secretary of the Interior directed that “all participating 

agencies within the Department of the Interior [will] utilize their authorities in 

furtherance of this conservation program to the fullest extent allowed by law.” 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 10

May 2007

Compliance

Consultation with the Arizona and California SHPOs and all potentially affected Tribes is 

also conducted, in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act 

(NHPA). BLM actions will also comply with existing programmatic environmental 

analyses, land use plans, and other federal environmental legislation, such as the Clear 

Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Safe Drinking Water Act, and with state and local 

government regulations (applicable laws, regulations, policies, and planning can be seen 

in Appendix A). 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

As a part of this planning effort and in implementing on-the-ground activities, the BLM 

executed Endangered Species Act (ESA), Section 7 consultation with the USFWS. In 

2001, the BLM and USFWS finalized a consultation agreement to establish an effective 

and cooperative ESA, Section 7 consultation process. A biological assessment (BA) was 

prepared and submitted to determine the effect of the Proposed Plan on all relevant listed, 

proposed, and candidate species, and associated critical habitat. All anticipated 

environmental effects, conservation actions, mitigation, and monitoring were disclosed in 

the BA, including analysis of all direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the Proposed 

Plan/FEIS. The USFWS provided the BLM with a Biological Opinion of proposed 

actions on June 15, 2006 (USFWS 2006). As this plan’s decisions are implemented, 

actions determined through environmental analysis to potentially affect species listed or 

candidate species for listing under ESA would trigger additional site-specific consultation 

on those actions. 

Sikes Act 

The Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670 et seq.) authorizes the Department of the Interior, in 

cooperation with state agencies responsible for administering fish and game laws, to plan, 

develop, maintain, and coordinate programs for conserving and rehabilitating wildlife, 

fish, and game on public lands within its jurisdiction. The plans must conform to overall 

land use and management plans for the lands involved. The plans could include habitat 

improvement projects and related activities and adequate protection for species of fish, 

wildlife, and plants considered endangered or threatened. The BLM must also coordinate 

with suitable state agencies in managing state-listed plant and animal species when the 

state has formally made such designations. 

Other Stakeholder Relationships 

Lake Havasu/Colorado River Regional Management Area 

Because of the multi-jurisdictional nature of the issues and the complexity of 

management on Lake Havasu, the BLM recognized the need for collaboration. However, 

many issues are beyond the scope of this plan. To facilitate regional collaboration, BLM 

identified the Lake Havasu/Colorado River Regional Management Area (see Map 4). 

Identification could give rise to efforts focused on such over-arching issues as public 

safety, recreation opportunities, conservation of natural resources, and regional economic 

development. 
#

#

#

!"e

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

Mohave

County

California

Arizona

San Bernardino County

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE

HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Lake

Mohave

B

Colorado River

Bill Williams River

0 5 10 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

May 2007

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

± 0 5 10 Kilometers

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

!

!"a

!"e LAKE HAVASU/

COLORADO RIVER

REGIONAL

MANAGEMENT

AREA

LAKE

HAVASU

CITY

Map 4 Lake Havasu/Colorado River

Regional Management Area

T21N

T18N

T15N

T11N

T20N

T19N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T14N

T13N

T12N

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E R26E R27E R18W R17W R16W

T10N

T11N

T09N

T05N

T02N

T03N

T04N

T06N

T07N

T08N

R20E R21E R22W R21W R20W R19W

Lake Havasu

Field Office

Land Status

Lake Havasu/Colorado River Regional Managementt Area

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

Township Grid

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Bureau of Land Management

Indian Lands

Private

State

City, County, & State Park

US Fish & Wildlife Service

Concession Lease

National Park Service

State Wildlife Area

Bureau of Reclamation

Interstate Highways
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 11

May 2007

A coordinated Lake Management Plan should be completed for the Lake 

Havasu/Colorado River Regional Management Area that would engage all of the 

involved jurisdictions and stakeholders on a voluntary basis. This plan would be a multiyear, multi-agency coordinated effort with the mission of defining the issues, 

responsibilities, and action items required to maintain a quality lake recreation 

experience, properly functioning habitat (both terrestrial and aquatic), and common 

management relationships and goals among the jurisdictions. 

While BLM has limited authority on the lake surface, BLM could participate as a 

cooperating agency and provide data and information. A steering committee for the Lake 

Havasu/Colorado River Regional Management Area is warranted to better focus all of the 

involved jurisdictions on common issues and opportunities that assure multiple uses and 

sustained yields for future generations. Because identification is not a land use plan 

decision, the management area is described in Appendix B. 

Lake Havasu Fisheries Improvement Partnership 

The Lake Havasu Fisheries Partnership has been a successful and accomplished BLM-led 

cooperative since 1992. Official partners include AGFD, CFGD, Reclamation, USFWS, 

the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and Anglers United, but many others have helped, 

from local governments and the military, to private parties and business interests. To 

date accomplishments include: 

 Building and installation of 875 acres of fish habitat improvements in 42 coves. 

 Rearing and release of two endangered fish species totaling over 30,000 individuals 

of each species. 

 Construction of five independent, barrier-free, public shoreline fishing facilities. 

Results of this achievement have rippled through the regional community with multiple 

economic, social, and environmental benefits too numerous to mention in this text. In 

2006, these same partners signed a new MOU charting a future course of action that 

includes:

 Development of at least one more shoreline fishing facility. 

 Coordinated monitoring of endangered fish survival and preferred habitat. 

 Long-term fish habitat results in terms of longevity, and fish use. 

 Coordinated maintenance of all fish habitat installations and recreational fishing 

areas.

 Collaboration through leverage of partner authorities to assure the long term health 

and vitality of the Lake Havasu Fishery renewable resources. 

Bill Williams River Corridor Steering Committee 

A direct tributary to Lake Havasu is the Bill Williams River that forms at the confluence 

of the Big Sandy and the Santa Maria Rivers just above Alamo Lake. This remotely 

rugged desert watershed of 5,000 square miles is home to very few people, several BLM 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 12

May 2007

wilderness areas, and a unique assemblage of natural resource managers known as the 

Bill Williams River Corridor Steering Committee. This group has been active since the 

late 1980s and is composed of AGFD, Arizona State Parks Department, the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers (Corps), the Nature Conservancy, USFWS, Reclamation, and the 

BLM. The committee recently authorized an MOU to cooperate toward the study and 

management of the watershed. The group’s objective is to optimize environmental 

vitality within this river system. An initial effort toward this objective has been 

cooperative river flow releases from Alamo Dam. Approximately 21 miles of the 

40 river miles between Alamo Dam and Lake Havasu is administered by the BLM. 

Water Quality 

The BLM works cooperatively through separate MOUs under the Clean Water Act 

authorities of both Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and the California 

State Water Resources Control Board to manage public lands in a way that minimizes 

non-point source pollution. 

The objective of this cooperation within this plan is to restore and maintain the chemical, 

physical, and biological integrity of the Colorado River and tributaries for all users, with 

emphasis on non-consumptive water uses of productive fish and wildlife habitat, and safe 

water recreation. 

Related Plans 

Title II, Section 202 of the FLPMA provides guidance for the land use planning process 

of the BLM to coordinate planning efforts with Native American Indian tribes, other 

federal departments, and agencies of state and local governments. To accomplish this 

directive, the BLM is instructed to keep informed of state, local, and tribal plans; assure 

that consideration is given to such plans; and to assist in resolving inconsistencies 

between such plans and federal planning. The section goes on to state in Subsection 

(c)(9) that “Land use plans of the Secretary [of the Interior] under this section shall be 

consistent with state and local plans to the maximum extent he finds consistent with 

Federal law and the purposes of this Act.” The provisions of this section of the FLPMA 

are echoed in Section 1610.3 of BLM Resource Management Planning regulations. 

In keeping with the provision of this section, state, local, and tribal officials were made 

aware of the planning process through the previously described mailings and meetings. 

The following is a list of plans reviewed during the Lake Havasu Field Office Approved 

RMP planning effort: 

 Mohave County General Plan (1995)

 La Paz County Comprehensive Plan (March 2005 Revised Draft) 

 San Bernardino County Plan (2001) 

 Lake Havasu City General Plan (2001) 

 Bullhead City General Plan (2002) 

 Town of Parker General Plan (June 1996) 

 Lower Colorado River Multiple Species Conservation Program (April 2005) 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 13

May 2007

 Lake Havasu Coordinated Fisheries Management Plan (January 2005)

 California Desert Conservation Area Plan of 1980, as amended 

Policy

This plan is consistent with and incorporates requirements identified in various laws, 

regulation and policy. These include Executive Orders, legislative designations, and 

court settlements/rulings. The policies and decisions that existed prior to this plan being 

written are outside the scope of the plan but have influenced the decisions, constrained 

the alternatives, and are needed to understand management of the area. 

Refer to Appendix A for a summary of laws, regulations, policy, and planning criteria. 

Vision 

The BLM’s mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the public lands 

for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. In keeping with its mandate 

for developing multiple-use plans, the BLM developed a vision to provide overall 

direction for the public lands administered by the BLM’s Lake Havasu Field Office to 

support a rich variety of public experiences while simultaneously providing for long-term 

protection of the area’s natural resources. The vision states: 

Within the capability of the resources: 

 Provide opportunities for environmentally responsible recreation and commercial 

activities and address community expansion needs along the Colorado River. 

 Manage resources wisely, while promoting citizen-based partnerships through public 

awareness and education. 

Management Decisions 

This section of the Approved RMP presents the Desired Future Conditions, Land Use 

Allocations, and Management Actions established for public lands managed by the 

BLM’s Lake Havasu Field Office. Most of the Desired Future Conditions are long-range 

in nature and will not be achieved immediately, but rather are assumed to require a period 

of time to achieve. These management decisions are presented by program area. Not all 

types of decisions were identified for each program. 

Implementation or activity level decisions are decisions that take action to implement 

land use plan decisions. These types of decisions require appropriate site-specific 

planning and NEPA analysis. Implementation decisions generally constitute BLM’s final 

approval allowing on-the-ground actions to proceed and are generally appealable to the 

Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) under 43 CFR 4.410. This Approved RMP does 

not identify Implementation Decisions. However, some decisions listed within this 

section (e.g., WF-12 and TE-23) will be incorporated into future implementation 

(activity- or project-level) plans. These implementation plans will provide the required 

additional site-specific planning and NEPA analysis. At that time, the decisions will 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 14

May 2007

become appealable. The appeal process will be listed in the future individual 

implementation (activity- or project-level) plans. 

A monitoring section is also included for each program to describe how the program 

decisions will be tracked to ensure implementation. Through Adaptive Management, a 

monitoring plan ensures that Land Use Allocations and Management Actions achieve 

Desired Future Conditions. The content of the decisions remains as contained in the 

Proposed RMP, except as described in the Modifications and Clarifications sections of 

the ROD. 

Data used in development of the Approved RMP are dynamic. The data and maps used 

throughout the Approved RMP are for land use planning purposes and will be refined as 

site-specific planning and on-the-ground implementation occur. Updating data is 

considered plan maintenance that will occur over time as the Approved RMP is 

implemented (see Plan Implementation). Please note that all acreages presented in the 

Approved RMP are estimations, even when presented to the nearest acre. 

Complete consideration of the Approved RMP also includes Administrative Actions and 

Standard Operating Procedures (which are presented in Appendix B). These actions and 

procedures outline the objectives, basic management policy, and program direction. 

Administrative Actions are not land use plan decisions. However, these are day-to-day 

non-ground-disturbing activities and are an important component when considering 

program activities. 

This section is organized alphabetically by program area. The decisions for each 

program are coded to reflect the primary resource that is affected. The codes are 

presented below. Because the discussion for the Lake Havasu/Colorado River Regional 

Management Area does not contain land use planning decisions, the section was moved 

to Appendix B. 

 Biological Resources Management 

 Riparian (RP) 

 Soil, Water, Air (Watershed) (WS) 

 Special Status Species (TE) 

 Vegetation (VM) 

 Wildlife and Fisheries (WF) 

 Cultural Resource Management (CL) 

 Fire Management (FM) 

 Lands and Realty Program (LR) 

 Mineral Resources (MI) 

 Paleontological Resource Management (GL) 

 Rangeland Management/Grazing (GM) 

 Recreation Management (RR) 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 15

May 2007

 Special Designations 

 Area of Critical Environmental Concern (AC) 

 Back County Byway (BB) 

 Wilderness (WM) 

 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WR) 

 Travel Management (TM) 

 Visual Resource Management (VR) 

 Wild Burro Management (HB) 

 Wilderness Characteristics (WC) 

Biological Resources Management 

The areas of consideration are: vegetation and riparian management, fish and wildlife 

habitat management, special status species management, invasive or noxious species 

management, and watershed management. 

Conservation measures applicable to the Lake Havasu Field Office planning area were 

derived from all applicable Recovery Plans, Conservation Plans, and Management Plans 

available for species with in the LHFO planning area. 

Vegetation and Riparian Management 

Desired Future Conditions 

VM-1. Native plant communities (Appendix C, Table C-1) will be maintained 

appropriate to climate and landform to: 

 Provide watershed stability. 

 Provide adequate forage for native wildlife species. 

 Improve or restore riparian-wetland functions. 

 Enhance groundwater recharge. 

 Satisfy state water quality standards. 

VM-2. Establishment of invasive and noxious species will diminish throughout the 

planning area and many will begin to decline in aerial extent, density, and cover. 

RP-1. Riparian areas will be maintained in sufficient quality and quantity to provide 

roosting and potential nesting trees and adequate prey base for riparian obligate 

species such as bald eagle, willow flycatcher, western yellow-billed cuckoo, etc. 

Land Use Allocations 

For additional Land Use Allocations, refer to the Mineral Resources section and to the 

Land Health Standards in Appendix A. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 16

May 2007

See the Special Designations section for proposed Wild and Scenic Rivers. See the 

Lands and Realty Program section for Management Actions related to utility corridors 

and telecommunication sites. 

RP-2. New facilities and campgrounds will be located away from riparian wetland areas 

if they are incompatible with achieving or maintaining riparian wetland function. 

VM-3. Lake Havasu Field Office will protect all woodlands, including mesquite 

bosques, by limiting wood collection to authorized users (see Map 5). 

Management Actions 

The following Management Actions were designed to incorporate the needs expressed by 

related plans including: 

 Migratory Bird Executive Order 13186, Executive Order 12962 of June 7, 1995, 

Arizona Partners in Flight Bird Conservation Plan (Latta, Beardmore, and Corman 

1999), Partners in Flight Desert and Riparian Conservation Plan (California 

Partners in Flight 2006), USFWS North American Waterfowl Management Plan

(USFWS et al. 1998), other bird Conservation Plans (Riparian Habitat Joint Venture 

2004) and LCRMSCP (Reclamation, USFWS, and MWD 2004). 

 Conservation measures found in the Sonoran Desert Tortoise Habitat Management 

on the Public Lands: A Rangewide Plan (November 1988) and subsequent plans. 

 Conservation tasks for the Western yellow-billed cuckoo. 

 Recovery tasks found in the Recovery Plans and subsequent plans for: Mojave 

Desert Tortoise, Bonytail Chub, Razorback Sucker, Yuma Clapper Rail (YCR), 

Southwestern Willow Flycatcher, and Southwestern Bald Eagle. When recovery 

plans are revised and updated, new conservation measures applicable to the Lake 

Havasu Field Office will be incorporated into the Lake Havasu Field Office 

Approved RMP. 

RP-3. The BLM will manage for proper functioning condition within riparian areas and 

springs, but where hydrological modifications and soil conditions prohibit proper 

functioning condition, a desired plant community will be defined and managed 

appropriately (see Maps 6, 7, and 8). 

RP-4. No-wake zones will be recommended as needed, to protect the shore from 

erosion, prevent damage to riparian growth, and reduce noise to nesting wildlife 

and fish habitat. 

RP-5. Monkey Head, the Needles Revegetation Site, Beale Slough, Standard Wash, and 

the Colorado River Nature Center Riparian Areas will continue to be restored to 

proper functioning condition (see Map 7). 

VM-4. The BLM will require the use of certified weed-free forage for all stock in 

Wilderness Areas (WAs), Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs), lands managed for 

wilderness characteristics, and WHAs. Domestic-sheep-free forage will be 

required for any permitted activity within or adjacent to bighorn sheep habitat. 
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

?¿

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

Yavapai

County

Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 5 General Vegetation

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

(No Vegetation Data)

Vegetation Communities within LHFO

Vegetation Communities only outside of LHFO

Lower Sonoran Desert Scrub

Upland Sonoran Desert Scrub

Mohave Desert Scrub

Great Basin Pinyon-Juniper Woodland

Interior Chaparral

Riparian

Mesquite/Ephemeral Wash Woodland

Agriculture

Urban

Semidesert Grassland

Plains and Great Basin Grassland

Great Basin Desert Scrub

Montane Conifer Forest

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan
#

#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a$

!"a$

!"e$

!"e$

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

?u

Mohave County

La Paz County

Yavapai County Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big

Sandy River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 6 Wildlife Habitat Areas

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Wildlife Habitat Areas

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes
#

#

#

#

#

#

#

!"e

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

San Bernardino County

California Arizona

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

CAP

r

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Colorado

River

Colora

do River

Three Mile

Lake Needles

Revegetation

Site

Monkey Head

(Arizona side)

Colorado River

Nature Center

Beale Slough

Partners

Point

Standard

Wash

!

!"a

!"e Area of

Interest

LAKE

HAVASU

CITY

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

R22W R20WR21W R19W R17WR18W R15WR16W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E R26ER27E

Map 7 Riparian Zones - Colorado River

Lake Havasu

Field Office

0 10 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management May 2007

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

± 0 10 5 Kilometers

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Land Status

Riparian Vegetation

Riparian Revegetation Sites

# Riparian Revegetation Sites - Small (<50 acres)

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Bureau of Land Management

Bureau of Reclamation

Indian Lands

National Park Service

Private

State

City, County, & State Park

State Wildlife Area

US Fish & Wildlife Service
?Ù

?À

Mohave County

La Paz County

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Bill Williams River

Big Sandy River

!

!"a

!"e

Area of

Interest LAKE

HAVASU

CITY

T13N

T14N

T09N

T12N

T11N

T10N

R18W R17W R16W R15W

Map 8 Riparian Zones - Bill Williams River

Lake

Havasu

Field

Office

0 10 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management May 2007

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

± 0 10 5 Kilometers

R14W R13W R12W

T08N

T07N

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Riparian Vegetation Land Status

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Bureau of Land Management

Corps of Engineers

Private

State

City, County, & State Park

US Fish & Wildlife Service
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 17

May 2007

VM-5. Only native vegetation will be utilized in all landscaping designs that will 

incorporate a Desired Plant Community (DPC) concept. Exceptions to this 

requirement could be made in high-traffic public recreation areas or soil 

stabilization/reclamation efforts where native species will have a poor likelihood 

of success due to existing site characteristics. Acceptable non-native plants used 

for this purpose will consist of genetic variations of natives that will not become 

invasive and or noxious species (e.g., Chilean mesquite trees). 

VM-6. BLM vegetation/seed collection permits will be required for all collection (expect 

for cultural resources privileges as stipulated in Cultural Resources). Areas for 

collection will be identified on each individual permit. 

VM-7. Protection will be provided for the scaly sandplant (Pholisma arenarium) and 

fringe-toed lizard (Uma scoparia), which exists on sandy soil and edges of 

washes within the low dunes (325 to 820 feet) southeast of Parker, Arizona, by 

requiring all vehicles to remain on existing roads and trails within the range of 

this rare plant. 

Monitoring

Upland

Land Health Assessments will determine upland conditions and trend as a part of all 

grazing allotment assessments and Travel Management Plans (TMPs). These will serve 

as a baseline measure for any further monitoring required to measure management 

success in that area. This will include route restoration efforts to assure achievement of 

desired plant communities, and revegetation prescriptions associated with utility and 

transportation corridor work. 

Riparian

Proper Functioning Condition Assessments will be performed in combination with plan 

implementation on at least a 10-year revolving schedule, with all riparian resources 

receiving an initial assessment by 2012. More detailed measures will occur in 

cooperation with partners and in association with restoration projects. A desired plant 

community will be prescribed and monitored for implementation success in all waterside 

recreation or concession leases with condition reports to the Field Office Manager 

included with all 5-year implementation plan reports. 

Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management 

Desired Future Conditions 

WF-1. Wildlife movement corridors will be maintained for biotic diversity, to 

minimize fragmentation of habitat and to minimize barriers to movement. 

WF-2. The BLM will manage all wildlife habitats with the objective to conserve 

native species for sustainable public benefits. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 18

May 2007

WF-3. Integrity of roost sites, lek sites and maternity sites within caves and 

abandoned mine lands for bat species will be maintained. Food and water 

sources will be conserved and protected. 

WF-4. Ensure that important habitats for migratory birds are managed, maintained, 

increased and improved to attain the vegetation structure plant species diversity 

and density to provide diverse habitat of quality and quantity (see Maps 6, 7, 

and 8). 

WF-5. Recognize the importance of the tortoise as a keystone species, which via its 

burrowing systems provides habitats for many other species. 

Land Use Allocations 

WF-6. Within WHAs, the route designation process will determine route closures 

and/or limitation to meet habitat objectives (see Travel Management).

WF-7. A total of 15 wildlife movement corridors will be allocated as identified on 

Map 9. Corridors overlap the draft Arizona’s Wildlife Linkages workgroup 

map.

WF-8. Previous lambing grounds are now identified as sensitive sheep habitat 

(Map 10) and existing seasonal closures (43 CFR 8365.1-6 Part II) will remain 

for wildlife habitat and scenic values and Recreation Opportunity Spectrum 

(ROS) recreation settings until evaluation by TMP. The TMP may change this 

limitation by individual routes; limitation may also change as a result of 

scientific studies. 

WF-9. Domestic or feral sheep or goats will not be allowed on public lands within 

9 miles of desert bighorn habitat. 

WF-10. 791,885 acres in the Lake Havasu Field Office planning area will be 

cooperatively managed as WHAs with state and federal wildlife agencies. See 

Map 6. This land is comprised of (some of these areas overlap leading to the 

smaller total acreage); 

 Riparian Habitat, Springs and Seeps (6,126 acres) 

 Bighorn Sheep Habitat (562,022 acres) 

 Mojave and Sonoran Desert Tortoise Habitat (I,II) (440,599 acres) 

 Wildlife Corridors (288,206 acres) 

 Threatened and Endangered (T&E) Species Habitat 

WF-11. New developments on WHAs will be compatible with wildlife habitat to the 

extent possible to preserve, maintain, and/or enhance plant and wildlife 

diversity.
!"a$

!"a$

!"e$

!"e$

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

Calif

ornia

Arizo

n

a

Nevada

I¡

I¡

?u

Mohave County

La Paz County

Y

a

v

apai

Count

y

Maricopa

C

ounty

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

I¡

I¡

I¡

La

P

a

z

Count

y

M

oha

v

e Count

y

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big

Sandy

River

BLACK

MOUNTAINS

HARCUVAR MOUNTAINS

LITTLE

HARQUAHALA

MTNS

BUCK

MOUNTAINS

GRANITE WASH

MOUNTAINS

RAWHIDE

MOUNTAINS

HARQUAHALA

MOUNTAINS

BILL WILLIAMS

MTNS

CHEMEHUEVI

MOUNTAINS

WHIPPLE

MOUNTAINS

MOHAVE

MOUNTAINS

BUCKSKIN MOUNTAINS

1

6

15

12

13 14

4

7

11

8

3

5

10 9

2

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T17N

T16.5

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R17WR18WR19WR20WR21W R16W R14WR15W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 9 Wildlife Movement Corridors

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W Township and Range 

Gila & Salt River Merd

Township and Range forSan Bernardino Merdian

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

0 10 20 5 Miles ± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Wildlife Corridor - numbers are only for reference

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Land Status

Bureau of Land Management

Bureau of Reclamation

Corps of Engineers

Indian Lands

National Park Service

Private

State

City, County, & State Park

State Wildlife Area

US Fish & Wildlife Service
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

Yavapai County Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

AUBREY

HILLS

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big

Sandy River

HARCUVAR MOUNTAINS

MOHAVE MOUNTAINS

BUCKSKIN MOUNTAINS WHIPPLE

MOUNTAINS

LITTLE

HARQUAHALA

MTNS

BILL WILLIAMS

MTNS

HARQUAHALA

MOUNTAINS

GRANITE WASH

MOUNTAINS

RAWHIDE

MOUNTAINS

PLOMOSA MOUNTAINS

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 10 Bighorn Sheep Habitat

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

Bighorn Sheep Habitat

General Yearlong Habitat

Sensitive Bighorn Sheep Habitat

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 19

May 2007

WF-12. An area of 7 acres of Lake Havasu bottom will receive organic brush 

maintenance each year to replace woody habitat improvements that have 

decomposed over the previous 10-year period. This process will occur only in 

areas that already contain fish habitat improvements. 

Management Actions 

WF-13. Conduct research to identify important migratory bird habitat and 

restore/enhance that identified habitat. 

WF-14. To the extent practicable, avoid, minimize impacts and/or take of migratory 

birds and their habitat. 

WF-15. During construction and tree pruning associated with plan implementation, 

identify and avoid all migratory bird nests. 

WF-16. Recognize that Category III habitats may serve as important buffer and 

dispersal zones and provide genetic linkage to core population areas.

Incorporate these areas into long-term and ecosystem management and 

planning.

WF-17. Wildlife habitat improvement projects will be implemented where necessary to 

stabilize or improve degraded or declining wildlife habitat conditions. 

WF-18. Reintroductions, transplants, release of rehabilitated native species, and 

supplemental stockings of wildlife populations will be carried out in 

collaboration with federal and state wildlife agencies within suitable habitat to: 

1) restore, enhance, maintain current populations, distributions, and/or genetic 

diversity; 2) conserve or recover species that are in danger of becoming listed; 

and/or 3) restore or enhance native wildlife diversity and distribution and 

4) release rehabilitated wildlife. Species that could be reintroduced, 

transplanted, or augmented include, but are not limited to rehabilitated wildlife, 

threatened and endangered species (see Table 3-3 in the PRMP/FEIS), special 

status species (see Table 3-4 in the PRMP/FEIS) pronghorn, desert bighorn 

sheep, mountain lions, burrowing owls, other raptors, reptiles, mule deer, other 

game species, fish, and frogs. 

WF-19. All new and existing range improvements on public lands will allow for 

wildlife passage or escape, in compliance with the BLM standards. Wildlife 

escape devices will be installed on all new and existing water tanks and/or 

troughs.

WF-20. Construction sites for wind turbines, power lines, telecommunication, towers, 

solar power sites, and any other new technology, etc., will conform with 

guidelines developed by USFWS to minimize impacts to wildlife species, 

particularly migratory birds and bats. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 20

May 2007

WF-21. Abandoned mines will be examined to determine species utilization prior to 

deciding on the method of mine closure. Bat-friendly mine closures will be an 

intermediate measure for protecting bat maternity roosts, lek sites, and yearround use by bat colonies. Management and protection of the quantity and 

quality of foraging habitat surrounding important bat colonies will be achieved 

to the fullest extent possible. 

WF-22. The natural existing quality and quantity of vegetation will be maintained 

within a wash to the extent possible where there is an established bat species 

colony. 

 The Bat Cave north of Lake Havasu City will be protected and managed to 

minimize disturbance within the cave to the extent possible. 

WF-23. Distribution/density of wildlife waters throughout the planning area will be 

maintained, improved, and/or increased to sustain and enhance wildlife 

populations across their range. All existing wildlife waters will be maintained 

or improved as necessary to maintain the presence of perennial water for 

wildlife. New wildlife waters, including in new locations, may be constructed 

if necessary to replace old wildlife waters, restore, or enhance native wildlife 

populations and for improving wildlife distributions. All wildlife water 

projects will be evaluated through the NEPA analysis to determine necessity 

and effects. 

WF-24. Water developments for purposes other than wildlife will include design 

features that ensure safe and continued access to water by wildlife on yearround basis. If it is not feasible to provide water on a year-round basis, a 

determination will be made whether to design the feature for wildlife access. 

WF-25. Within wildlife corridors construction of overpasses, underpasses, culverts, and 

all fences on public lands will be built to allow for wildlife passage, unless the 

fence is specifically constructed for directing or excluding wildlife from 

locations for the protection of the wildlife (e.g., desert tortoise fence along a 

highway, directing wildlife to a corridor for safe highway crossing, etc.). Any 

existing fences not specifically constructed for directing wildlife that obstructs 

wildlife movements should be brought into compliance with the BLM fence 

standards.

WF-26. Identified wildlife corridors will be used to help the BLM make decisions on 

land tenure (retention, acquisition, disposal), land use authorizations, or permits 

to address and avoid habitat fragmentation. 

WF-27. Fish habitat improvements in Lake Havasu will be maintained to sustain fish 

productivity by providing permanent escape cover and rearing habitat for 

young. Damaged artificial reef structures will be repaired if needed and 

replaced in the original location. This work will be accomplished 

cooperatively by the Lake Havasu Fisheries Partnership program. 

WF-28. Approximately 875 acres in 42 separate locations in Lake Havasu will be 

designated as Fish Habitat Areas (FHAs). 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 21

May 2007

WF-29. Vehicular access within the Lake Havasu Aubrey Hills to retrieve game will 

not be allowed. 

WF-30. The BLM will coordinate with appropriate interests, the Multi-Species 

Conservation Program (MSCP), and jurisdictions to create backwaters along 

the Colorado River and tributaries to increase native aquatic species habitat 

availability and diversity. 

 The BLM will coordinate with Parker Strip interests and other agencies to 

enhance the sport fishery below Parker Dam through the development of 

both aquatic and bank habitat improvements. 

Monitoring

Fish Habitat

Artificial reef installations in Lake Havasu will be monitored for longevity and 

performance in cooperation with program partners according to procedures established by 

the partnership. AGFD protocols will be used when appropriate. Results and trends will 

be reported to partner organization executives on an annual basis. 

Wildlife Management

Lake Havasu Field Office will support and assist AGFD and CDFG in monitoring 

wildlife habitat and population goals through Arizona’s Comprehensive Wildlife 

Conservation Strategy and the California Fish and Game Code. Changes in habitat 

distribution, canopy, composition, and condition will be assessed on a landscape and 

watershed basis during the development of the TMP. 

Lake Havasu Field Office will also participate in Sonoran Joint Venture and Arizona Bird 

Conservation Initiative and will continue to support and participate in achieving the 

conservation goals identified within the MSCP, the Comprehensive Conservation Plans 

of National Wildlife Refuges, Conservation Goals and Objectives for the Lower Colorado 

River Watershed, and ecoregional plans of the Nature Conservancy. 

A long-term monitoring program appropriate for the habitat and species identified within 

each activity level plan (ACECs, Special Recreation Management Areas [SRMAs]) will 

be developed. 

This information will be included in the annual planning update, along with a summary 

of areas monitored for changes in species composition and structure, and the number/type 

of baseline inventories completed. 

Special Status Species Management 

Desired Future Conditions 

TE-1. Conserve and protect Migratory Bird species (see Appendix C Table C-7) and 

their habitats, Lake Havasu Field Office will follow the guidance provided 

within the Migratory Bird Executive Order 13186, Arizona Partners in Flight 

Bird Conservation Plan (Latta, Beardmore, and Corman 1999), Partners in 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 22

May 2007

Flight Desert and Riparian Bird Conservation Plan (California Partners in 

Flight 2006), USFWS North American Waterfowl Management Plan (USFWS

et al. 1998), and LCRMSCP (Reclamation, USFWS, and MWD 2004). 

TE-2. No net loss of quantity or quality of priority species and/or priority habitats 

will occur on the Lake Havasu Field Office. (See Table 3-4 in the 

PRMP/FEIS.)

TE-3. Conserve habitat and work toward the recovery of T&E species, as well as 

reduce the likelihood of additional species listings under the ESA and 

California ESA. 

TE-4. Sustainable populations of native species currently absent from the area, and 

those species whose genetic pools require augmentation, will be achieved. 

TE-5. Wildlife habitat projects will be designed to maintain, restore, and improve 

species biodiversity. 

TE-6. Ecosystems will be restored and supported in conjunction with vegetation, 

aquatic, and terrestrial wildlife habitat requirements. 

TE-7. Management will seek instream flows suitable to sustain aquatic and terrestrial 

T&E species habitat on public lands in the Bill Williams River. 

Land Use Allocations 

TE-8. Approximately 1,017,759 acres of public lands will be allocated for 

management as Category I, II, or III Sonoran Desert tortoise and Mojave 

Desert tortoise habitat. See Map 11. 

 Category I - 108,499 acres 

 Category II - 286,388 acres 

 Category III - 573,767 acres 

 Mojave - 49,105 acres 

TE-9. In Category I and II Sonoran Desert tortoise habitat, only range improvements 

that will not conflict with tortoise populations will be allowed. 

TE-10 Within Wildlife Habitat Areas (WHAs), uses that are in conflict with 

restoration and/or maintenance of T&E habitats will be restricted as determined 

by NEPA process (see Map 6). 

TE-11. The BLM, in cooperation with other authorities, will allocate 75 acres at the 

Colorado River Nature Center, Three Mile Lake, and Beale Slough to be used 

for spawning and rearing habitat for special status fish species (see Map 7). 

TE-12. Spawning, nesting, brood rearing, or larval fish rearing habitat used by special 

status species will be identified as FHAs. Incompatible uses or development, 

modification, and/or negative impacts where practicable will not be allowed. 
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

?¿

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

Yavapai County Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 11 Desert Tortoise Habitats

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

Desert Tortoise Habitats

Sonoran Desert Tortoise Habitat Categories

Mojave Desert Tortoise Habitat

Category 1

Category 2

Category 3

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Category 3

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 23

May 2007

Management Actions 

TE-13. Complete and maintain a continuing inventory and monitoring program for 

tortoise populations and habitats to assist in making management decisions, 

including habitat categorization. 

TE-14. Include monitoring provisions specific to decisions affecting the desert tortoise. 

Maintain a log of Environmental Assessments containing stipulations 

pertaining to the desert tortoise, for express purpose of tracking compliance 

and effectiveness of the stipulations. The monitoring of these stipulations and 

recommendations for improvement will be documented in the log. 

TE-15. Develop and maintain a monitoring program specifically for land-use activities 

that adversely affect tortoise habitats for use in analyzing and responding to the 

cumulative impacts of land-use decisions on tortoise habitats. 

TE-16. Quantify suitable habitat on BLM lands within Lake Havasu Field Office 

planning area for all T&E species. 

TE-17. Carry out a program of public conservation, education, and planning directed 

towards preservation of Southwestern willow flycatcher habitat. 

TE-18. Riparian areas that could physically support Southwestern willow flycatcher 

habitats will be managed, maintained, increased, and improved to attain the 

vegetation structure plant species diversity, density, and canopy cover to 

constitute suitable habitat (see Maps 7 and 8 in the Approved RMP for habitat). 

TE-19. Increase enforcement of access into restricted areas occupied by T&E species. 

TE-20. Establish areas near existing occupied Western yellow-billed cuckoo habitat for 

restoration, before focusing on areas further away. 

TE-21 The BLM will participate in a coordinated effort to develop a scientific based 

inventory and evaluation process to periodically identify species density and to 

possibly reevaluate desert tortoise categories following the criteria as set forth 

in Management Plan for the Sonoran Desert Population of the Desert Tortoise 

in Arizona 1996 or future updates. 

TE-22 Areas classified as Category I, II, or III tortoise habitat will be reevaluated 

periodically by extensive scientific survey and the category could be updated 

by RMP amendment based on changes in species density. 

TE-23. Develop roosting habitat (artificial structures) in managed backwaters to 

facilitate foraging habitat for wintering bald eagle along the Lower Colorado 

River.

TE-24. At a minimum, the BLM will follow the management guidelines in the Bald 

Eagle Conservation Assessment Strategy. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 24

May 2007

The following restriction in three buffer zones around all known nests 

will protect breeding attempts from adverse impacts: 

Buffer Zone 1: 500 foot radius around the nest. 

During breeding season – December 1 to June 30: No activity 

occurs around all known nests.

During non-breeding season – July 1 to November 30: No activity 

will be permitted that will permanently change the landscape. 

Buffer Zone 2: 500- to 1,000 foot radius around the nest. 

During breeding season – December 1 to June 30: Limited human 

activity. 

During non-breeding season – July 1 to November 30: No activity 

should permanently change the landscape. 

Buffer Zone 3: 1,000- to 2,500 foot radius around the nest. 

During breeding season – December 1 to June 30: No activity 

should permanently change the landscape. 

During non-breeding season – July 1 to November 30: Maintenance 

activities such as upkeep of existing buildings and roads can occur, 

but no activity should permanently change the landscape. 

TE-25. Collection of federally listed T&E species will not be authorized. 

Monitoring

TE-26. Participate with other agencies in the recovery, conservation, research, 

management, and monitoring activities for bonytail chub and razorback 

suckers.

TE-27. Sample every 5 years all known regions where YCR populations are found 

using standardized techniques and develop and implement a plan of local 

population surveys every year. 

TE-28. Continue to survey, monitor, and conduct research to improve the recovery of 

the Southwestern willow flycatcher. 

Fish

The BLM will coordinate the Lake Havasu Fisheries Partnership and cooperate with 

MSCP authorities to monitor critical habitat for, and survival of, two endangered fish in 

the Colorado River. Monitoring Standards and protocol will be consistent with state 

requirements and maintain BLM compliance with terms of the Biological Opinion for 

this Approved RMP that calls for monitoring all T&E fish habitat. Information gathered 

will support future BLM river decisions and aid completion of Section 7 Consultation on 

any future BLM projects or actions involving the Colorado River. The BLM will support 

interagency monitoring efforts on Lake Havasu as a priority, and other river reaches and 

tributaries as resources permit. Reports and recommendations will be submitted annually 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 25

May 2007

to the seven-member Lake Havasu Fisheries Executive Committee as well as MSCP 

officials.

Wildlife

The BLM will continue to monitor known populations of special status species in 

conjunction with federal, state, and private agencies or organizations (Southwestern 

willow flycatcher, desert tortoise, marsh birds and bald eagle). Monitoring may use 

intensive research projects or periodic population/habitat inventories to determine habitat 

extent or population status. This monitoring may be accomplished through contracts 

and/or with the aid of partnership funding sources in support of individual species 

conservation strategies. 

Watershed Management 

Desired Future Conditions 

WS-1. Management objectives will seek to meet land health standards for soil 

resources on all BLM lands. 

WS-2. Water resources and natural communities associated with springs, wetlands, 

seeps, and streams will be conserved, enhanced, and restored, with water 

supplies protected by state law (see Appendix D). 

Land Use Allocations 

WS-3. Domestic and commercial collection or sales of fuel wood for home heating 

purposes will not be authorized.

WS-4. For the protection of habitat and other natural values, no motorized vehicles 

will be allowed within the Lake Havasu Aubrey Hills Area. This restriction 

does not include authorized vehicles for administrative purposes, authorized 

ROWs, lands under Recreation and Public Purposes Act (R&PP) lease/patent, 

and ownership access to private land. 

Invasive or Noxious Species Management 

Monitoring

Monitoring of noxious weeds and invasive species will focus on two tasks: prevention 

and control. Identifying and protecting land that is not presently infested is the single 

most important management goal. Examples of monitoring for prevention include 

compliance monitoring to insure that weeds, forages, and bilge contents are not being 

introduced on to public lands and waters. 

When a noxious weed or invasive species is detected in association with public lands, the 

BLM will coordinate stakeholders to produce an Integrated Pest Management plan 

incorporating the best-suited mechanical, cultural, biological, and/or chemical strategies 

presenting the greatest likelihood of environmental success. The acres of public land 

infestation will be reported in the annual planning update to track plan implementation. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 26

May 2007

The update will include acreage inventoried, acreage evaluated to determine treatment 

effectiveness, and acreage treated. 

Cultural Resource Management 

Cultural resources can be allocated to one or more of the categories listed in Table 2 

below.

Table 2. Categories for Cultural Resource Allocation 

Land Use Allocationa Desired Future Condition Management Actions 

a. Scientific Use Preserved until research potential 

is realized 

Permit appropriate research, 

including data recovery 

b. Conservation for Future Use Preserved until conditions for use 

are met 

Propose protective measures or 

designations

c. Traditional Use Long-term preservation Consult with tribes; determine 

limitationsb

d. Public Use Long-term preservation, on-site 

interpretation

Determine limitations, permitted 

uses2

e. Experimental Use Protected until used Determine nature of experiment 

f. Discharged from Management No use after recordation; not 

preserved 

Remove protective measures 

Notes:

a These categories are defined in Appendix E. The majority of the cultural properties in a given geographic area will 

fall into categories “a” and “f.” The less common properties in categories “b” through “e” are likely to be associated 

with particular settings that can be delineated geographically in the planning process. Properties in categories “b” 

through “d” will require the most attention to balance their proactive uses with other land and resource uses.

b Safeguards against incompatible land and resource uses may be imposed through withdrawals, stipulations on land 

use authorizations, such as leases, permits, and ROWs, design requirements, and similar measures that are developed 

and recommended by an appropriately staffed interdisciplinary team.

Desired Future Conditions 

CL-1. Preserve and protect significant cultural resources and ensure that they are 

available for appropriate uses by present and future generations. 

CL-2. The BLM will identify sacred sites in consultation with Indian tribes, 

accommodate tribal access to sacred sites, and prevent physical damage or 

intrusions that might impede their use by religious practitioners. The locations 

of sacred sites and other places of traditional or religious importance to Indian 

tribes will be kept confidential to the extent allowed by law. 

Land Use Allocations 

CL-3. Conservation for Future Use—Some sites currently managed under 

Conservation for Future Use will be allocated to the Traditional Use category. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 27

May 2007

Additional sites may be shifted to Traditional Use category if Indian tribes 

identify them in the future. 

Traditional Use – Sites allocated to Traditional Use will be limited to those 

identified by Indian tribes as important for maintaining their cultural identity, 

heritage, or wellbeing. 

Significant sites (or features) will be stabilized, fenced, or otherwise managed 

to protect the values ascribed to these sites by Indian tribes. 

Public Use – Sites allocated to Public Use will be limited to those considered 

suitable as an interpretive exhibit-in-place, a subject of supervised participation 

in scientific or historical study, or related educational and recreational uses by 

members of the general public. 

Scientific Use – Sites allocated to Scientific Use are those with the potential to 

yield important information where current archaeological and historical 

investigative techniques can adequately extract that information. These sites 

will be preserved in place until their scientific values are recovered. 

Experimental Use – Sites allocated to Experimental Use will generally be 

drawn from properties that are not eligible for the National Register of Historic 

Places (NRHP) but may include eligible properties if the experimental uses will 

not adversely affect the characteristics that make them eligible. 

Discharged from Management – Only sites determined ineligible for 

inclusion on the NRHP will be placed in the Discharged from Management 

category. 

CL-4. The BLM will allocate 28 sites to Conservation for Future Use, seven sites to 

Traditional Use, and eight sites to Public Use. 

CL-5. Public Use - Swansea is managed as a Public Use site. A 1995 Federal

Register Notice, 60 FR 53194-53195, details specific allocations and 

management prescriptions for Swansea, effectively changing Swansea from 

Conservation for Future Use to Public Use. 

CL-6. Manage Schwanbeck’s Store as a Public Use site and maintain existing 

interpretive panels. 

CL-7. Allocate the following sites to Conservation for Future Use – 

Three intaglios/intaglio complexes, 10 petroglyph/pictograph sites, 

13 habitation/site complex areas, and two historic mining areas will be 

allocated to the Conservation for Future Use category and preserved in place. 

Sites are listed in the cultural resource appendix (Appendix E). 

CL-8. Allocate the following sites to Traditional Use – Five intaglios, one petroglyph 

site, and one site complex (trail, intaglio and rock art) will be allocated to the 

Traditional Use category. Sites are listed in the cultural resource appendix 

(Appendix E).
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 28

May 2007

CL-9. Allocate the following sites to Public Use – Manage Atlantic & Pacific (A&P) 

Railroad, Culling’s Well and Hardy Toll Road, McGuffie Cabin, Camp Bouse, 

Swansea, Schwanbeck’s and Hargus Cabin for public visitation and preserve 

them for future generations. 

CL-10. Under Special Designations, Crossman Peak will be managed as an ACEC, in 

part due to associated Native American values. 

CL-11. Allocate the following areas as Special Cultural Resource Management Areas 

(SCRMAs):

Bullhead Bajada, 4,387 acres (Conservation for Future Use and Traditional 

Use); Harcuvar Mountain East, 17,048 acres (Conservation for Future Use); 

Harcuvar Mountain West, 10,249 acres (Conservation for Future Use and 

Public Use); Topock-Needles, 1,127 acres (Conservation for Future Use and 

Traditional Use); Black Peak, 768 acres (Traditional Use); Swansea, 

6,839 acres (Conservation for Future Use and Public Use) (see Map 12).

Management Actions 

CL-12. The following apply to sites managed for Conservation for Future Use, 

Traditional Use, and Public Use: 

Motorized use on cultural resource sites and site complexes managed for 

Conservation for Future Use, Traditional Use, and Public Use will be restricted 

to designated open roads and trails. Prior to completion of the Transportation 

Management Plan, motorized use will be restricted to existing roads and trails 

except for the Swansea Townsite and Plomosa Mountains where route 

designation has already occurred (see TM-20). 

Allowable uses on the cultural resource sites and site complexes managed for 

Conservation for Future Use, Traditional Use, and Public Use include activities 

that are compatible with the objective of preserving these resources for future 

use.

Improvements on cultural resource sites and site complexes managed for 

Conservation for Future Use, Traditional Use, and Public Use will be restricted 

to those that are compatible with the cultural resources or those required for 

mining. Some of the cultural resource sites and areas are under Reclamation 

withdrawal and are therefore segregated from mineral entry and development. 

The BLM will pursue a mineral withdrawal for Swansea Townsite, a portion of 

the Bullhead Bajada Natural and Cultural ACEC, and the Incline Railway. 

Mining activity on the remaining sites and areas will be managed to avoid 

disruption or, where avoidance is not possible, to minimize damage to cultural 

values using regulatory standards contained in 43 CFR 3800. 

Surface occupancy for oil and gas leases, mineral material disposals, and 

ROWs will not be authorized on the cultural resource sites and site complexes 

managed for Conservation for Future Use, Traditional Use, and Public Use (see 

MI-2, MI-12, LR-7). 
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

Yavapai County Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big

Sandy River

Burro Creek

Harcuvar

Mountain

West

Harcuvar

Mountain

East

Swansea

Bullhead

Bajada

TopockNeedles

Black

Peak

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 12 Special Cultural Resource Management Areas

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Special Cultural Resource Management Areas

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 29

May 2007

Management for sites allocated to Public Use may include but is not limited to 

signs, educational displays, picnic tables, ramadas, parking areas, and 

protective fencing. 

LR-36. All communication facilities on Black Peak will be phased out and relocated at 

a suitable site through negotiation with the Colorado River Indian Tribes and 

the site lessees. 

CL-13. Management prescriptions for SCRMAs will reflect and support the primary 

values for which the areas are allocated. Management prescriptions in 

SCRMAs allocated primarily to conserve sites for the future will protect 

selected sites within the SCRMA that are scarce, that are of singular 

importance, and that should not be subjected to invasive studies or other uses 

that will threaten their present condition. Management prescriptions for 

SCRMAs allocated primarily for Traditional Use will seek to accommodate the 

traditional cultural practices of Indian tribes or other cultural groups that 

ascribe religious or other heritage values to specific places within the SCRMA. 

Management prescriptions for SCRMAs allocated primarily for public use will 

focus on developing and interpreting selected sites for public visitation, 

including heritage tourism. 

CL-14. Acquire properties from owners who are willing to sell or exchange or donate 

adjacent to public lands that contain significant cultural resources including, 

but not limited to, those properties eligible for inclusion on NRHP. Priority 

acquisitions will be for lands that contain portions of eligible sites also located 

on public lands. 

CL-15. The BLM will work and coordinate with Native Americans to select harvesting 

areas and noncommercial (personal or tribal use) collection of medicinal or 

ceremonial herbs and necessary vegetation with specific annual authorization 

as appropriate. 

CL-16. The BLM will work and coordinate with Native Americans to select harvesting 

areas and allow noncommercial (personal use) collection of minerals (e.g., 

quartz, clay) for traditional or ceremonial use without specific authorization or 

sale as appropriate. 

TE-25. Collection of federally listed T&E species will not be authorized. 

CL-17. The BLM will review requests for vehicular access to sacred areas not 

normally open to vehicles and consider authorizing such use on a case-by-case 

basis if Indian tribes identify such areas. 

Monitoring

All previously recorded cultural resource properties that are listed on the NRHP or 

determined eligible for listing, and allocated to the Conservation for Future Use, 

Traditional Use, or Public Use categories will be monitored on an annual basis at a 

minimum. Analysis and documentation of the monitoring will include updating of the 

site form to current professional standards, if necessary, and assessment of the current 

condition and trend of significant resource values. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 30

May 2007

Visitation of the previously recorded cultural properties or designated ACECs will be 

made by the cultural resource specialist or designated representative. The purpose of the 

visits will be to monitor the condition of the site(s) and document any disturbance or 

deterioration. 

A long-term monitoring program will be established for the designated ACECs 

containing cultural resource values. The program will also include the visitation of a 

representative sample of cultural resource values within each of the designated ACECs to 

establish baseline information on the current condition of cultural resources values. Once 

the baseline condition assessment information has been compiled, ACECs will be 

monitored on an annual basis to identify any potential adverse impacts. 

A periodic review of the cultural resource program will be conducted to ensure that the 

program is meeting established parameters for proactive cultural resources inventory 

under Section 110 of the NHPA. 

The number of acres inventoried by the BLM under Section 110 will be reported annually 

in the Annual Planning Update Report and Summary to the Field Office Manager. 

Fire Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office coordinates with other agencies to manage fire in accordance 

with the nationwide BLM fire policy. In 2003, the BLM Arizona State Office prepared 

the Arizona Statewide Land Use Plan Amendment for Fire, Fuels and Air Quality 

Management (AZLUP), which incorporates new management direction coming from the 

National Fire Plan and the 2001 Federal Fire Policy. Fire and fuels management are 

integrated with other management activities to benefit both natural resources and multiple 

uses on lands administered by BLM within Arizona and the portion of California that 

falls within Lake Havasu Field Office and Yuma Field Office boundaries. The Approved 

RMP carries forward the decisions in the AZLUP. 

Desired Future Conditions 

FM-1. Fire is recognized as a natural process in fire-adapted ecosystems and is used to 

achieve objectives for other resources. 

FM-2. Fuels in Wildland-Urban Interface areas are maintained at non-hazardous 

levels to provide for public and firefighter safety. 

FM-3. Prescribed fire activities comply with federal and state air quality regulations. 

FM-4. Each vegetation community is maintained within its natural range of variation 

in plant composition, structure, and function. Fuel loads are maintained below 

levels that are considered to be hazardous. Desired future conditions for 

vegetation communities are listed in Table 3. 

Land Use Allocations 

As authorized in the AZLUP, BLM-administered public lands will be assigned to one of 

two Land Use Allocations for fire management. Within the Lake Havasu Field Office 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 31

May 2007

area, the Harcuvar and Mohave mountain ranges fall into Allocation 1. The remainder of 

the Lake Havasu Field Office falls within Allocation 2. Table 3 below details these 

allocations.

Table 3. Desired Future Conditions and Land Use Allocations for Vegetation 

Communities (see Map 13)

Fire Specific 

Vegetation 

Community 

Type 

Approximate 

Acreage 

Desired Future Conditions Land Use 

Allocation

Category 

Desertscrub 

3,500-4,500-ft 

elevation

4,603 Adequate cover and a mix of natural plant 

species that have good vigor. In terms of fire 

management and fire ecology, the desired future 

conditions are for fire to control or reduce exotic 

annual weeds such as red brome and to limit 

woody vegetation to non-hazardous levels. 

2

Desertscrub 

below 3,500 ft 

elevation

1,264,562 Adequate cover and a mix of natural plant 

species that have good vigor. In terms of fire 

management and fire ecology, the desired future 

conditions are for fire to control or reduce exotic 

annual weeds such as red brome and to limit 

woody vegetation to non-hazardous levels. 

2

Interior Chaparral 35,424 Fire naturally maintains shrub cover while 

reducing annual grass cover, the invasion of 

woody plants such as juniper and piñon pine are 

controlled, and the average age of chaparral 

stands is reduced through controlled fire or 

mechanical treatment. 

1

Riparian/

Mesquite

41,963 Adequate cover and a mix of natural plant 

species that have good vigor. In terms of fire 

management and fire ecology, the desired future 

conditions are for fire to control or reduce exotic 

annual weeds such as red brome and to limit 

woody vegetation to non-hazardous levels. 

2

Management Actions 

FM-5. The following decision was derived from the 1987 YRMP and will be 

applicable to the entire planning area: Fires on or threatening public lands will 

be suppressed and fuels will be managed in accordance with BLM fire policy, 

agreements with other government agencies, approved modified fire 

suppression plans, relevant resource management plans, and the AZLUP. The 

structure of the fire management organization and fire management 

implementation guidance can be found in the Yuma-Lake Havasu Zone Fire 

Management Plan (Bureau of Land Management 2004). 

FM-6. In areas suitable for fire where fuel loading is high and current conditions 

constrain fire use, the BLM will emphasize prevention and mitigation programs 

to reduce unwanted fire ignitions, and use mechanical, biological, or chemical 

treatments to mitigate the fuel loadings and meet resource objectives. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 32

May 2007

FM-7. In areas suitable for fire and where conditions allow, the BLM will allow 

naturally ignited wildland fire, use prescribed fire, and employ a combination 

of biological, mechanical, and chemical treatments to maintain non-hazardous 

levels of fuels, reduce the hazardous effects of unplanned wildland fires, and 

meet resource objectives. 

FM-8. In areas suitable for fire, the BLM will monitor existing air quality levels and 

weather conditions to determine which prescribed fires can be ignited and 

which, if any, must be delayed to ensure that air quality meets federal and state 

standards. If air quality approaches unhealthy levels, the BLM will delay 

igniting prescribed fires. 

FM-9. The BLM will implement conservation measures during fire suppression and 

all fire management activities as required, to minimize or eliminate adverse 

effects to federally threatened, endangered, proposed, and candidate federally 

protected species and habitats, unless firefighter, public safety, protection of 

property, improvements or natural resources render them infeasible during a 

particular operation (Bureau of Land Management 2004). Conservation 

measures noted as recommended in Appendix F are not mandatory for 

implementation to help minimize effects to federally protected species and to 

provided consistency. Procedures within the Interagency Standards for Fire 

and Fire Aviation Operations 2002, including future updates, relevant to fire 

operations that may affect federally protected species or their habitat are 

incorporated here by reference. 

FM-10. The BLM will undertake education, enforcement and administrative fire 

prevention mitigation measures to reduce human-caused fires. Education 

measures will include various media information including a signing program, 

information as to the natural role of fire within local ecosystems, participation 

in fairs, parades, and public contacts. Enforcement will be accomplished by 

providing training opportunities for employees interested in fire cause 

determination. Administration includes expanded prevention and education 

programs with other cooperating agencies. 

FM-11. Firefighter and public safety is the first priority in every fire management 

activity. Setting priorities among protecting human communities and 

community infrastructure, other property and improvements, and natural and 

cultural resources must be based on the values to be protected, human health 

and safety, and costs of protection (National Interagency Fire Center 2001). 

FM-12. During fire suppression actions, resource advisors may be designated to 

coordinate concerns regarding federally protected species, and to serve as a 

liaison between the field office manager and the incident commander/incident 

management team. They will also serve as a field contact representative 

responsible for coordination with USFWS. The resource advisors will have the 

necessary information on federally protected species and habitats in the area 

and the available conservation measures for the species. They will be briefed 

on the intended suppression actions for the fire, and will provide input on 

which conservation measures are appropriate, within the standard constraints of 

safety and operational procedures. The incident commander has the final 
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

?¿

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

Yavapai

County

Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big

Sandy River

Burro Creek

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 13 Vegetation Communities for Fire Management

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

(No Vegetation Data)

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Desertscrub 3,500-4,500 ft elevation

Desertscrub below 3,500 ft elevation

Interior Chaparral

Riparian/Mesquite

Agriculture

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 33

May 2007

decision-making authority on implementation of conservation measures during 

fire suppression operations. 

FM-13. Because of the number of species located within the action area for the 

Approved RMP, combined with a variety of fire suppression and proposed fire 

management activities, conflicts may occur in attempting to implement all 

conservation measures for every species potentially affected by a particular 

activity. Implementing these conservation measures effectively will depend on 

the number of federally protected species and their individual life history or 

habitat requirements within a particular location that is being affected by either 

fire suppression or a proposed fire management activity. This will be 

particularly true for timing restrictions on fuels treatment activities if the ranges 

of several species with differing restrictions overlap, making effective 

implementation of the activity unachievable. Resource advisors (in 

coordination with USFWS), fire management officers or incident commanders, 

and other resource specialists will need to coordinate to determine which 

conservation measures will be implemented during a particular activity. If 

conservation measures for a species cannot be implemented, the BLM will be 

required to initiate Section 7 consultation with USFWS for that particular 

activity. 

FM-14. In WAs, WSAs, and areas with wilderness characteristics according to 

wilderness plans or the Approved RMP, when suppression actions are required, 

minimum impact suppression tactics (Interagency Standards for Fire and 

Aviation Operations 2003) will be applied and coordinated with WA 

management objectives and guidelines. In all cases, determining appropriate 

attack strategies and tactics, including the use of Minimum Impact Suppression 

Tactics (MIST), must be based on appropriate management response while 

providing for fire fighter and public safety, land and resource management 

objectives, values at risk, weather, fuel conditions, threats and values to be 

protected, and available resources 

FM-15. Fire management activities along National Historic Trails will be conducted to 

assure no adverse effects occur to those resources and values identified in the 

legislation designating the trail. 

FM-16. ACEC and Back Country Byways are established in the Approved RMP. The 

Desired Future Conditions and management prescriptions for these special 

areas will be considered in implementing fire management activities. 

Fire Suppression Actions 

FM-17. Suppression tactics will be utilized that limit damage or disturbance to the 

habitat and landscape. No heavy equipment will be used (such as dozers) 

unless approved by the field office manager. 

FM-18. Use of fire retardants or chemicals adjacent to waterways will be accomplished 

in accordance to the Environmental Guidelines for Delivery of Retardant or 

Foam near Waterways (Interagency Standards for Fire and Aviation Operations 

pages 8–13). 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 34

May 2007

FM-19. All known cultural resources will be protected from disturbance. 

FM-20. In WAs, WSAs, and lands with wilderness characteristics according to land use 

plans, when suppression actions are required, minimum impact suppression 

tactics (Interagency Standards for Fire and Aviation Operations 2003) will be 

utilized and coordinated with WA management objectives and guidelines. 

FM-21. The general and species-specific conservation measures listed in Appendix D 

of the AZLUP (USDI-BLM 2004) will be implemented to the extent possible 

to minimize adverse effects to federally listed, proposed, or candidate species 

occurring within the planning area. 

FM-22. For fire suppression activities, a protocol for consultation has been developed 

as a part of the Biological Opinion for the AZLUP (USDI-BLM 2004). This 

programmatic consultation contains conservation measures and prescriptions 

for use in fire suppression activities. Emergency consultation should only be 

needed in the future if suppression actions fall outside of these 

prescriptions/measures. The Biological Opinion will outline coordination 

needs for emergency response actions that may affect a listed/proposed species 

and/or critical habitat. 

FM-23. The BLM will contact the appropriate USFWS biologist as soon as practical 

once a wildfire starts and a determination is made that a federally protected 

species and/or its habitat could be affected by the fire and/or fire suppression 

activities. USFWS will work with the BLM during the emergency response to 

apply the appropriate conservation measures. If conservation measures cannot 

be applied during the suppression activities, the BLM will need to consult after 

the fact on any suppression actions that may have affected the federally 

protected species or its habitat. If conservation measures are adhered to, then 

the BLM will report on the actions taken and effects to the species and its 

habitat following the fire, but no further consultation on that incident will be 

required.

Monitoring

Monitoring will determine whether fire management strategies, practices, and activities 

are meeting resource management objectives and concerns. Fire management plans and 

policies will be updated as needed to keep current with national and state fire 

management direction. Scheduled program reviews (post-season fire review) will be 

conducted to evaluate fire management effectiveness in meeting goals and to reassess 

program direction. In the case of wildfire rehabilitation, monitoring will be specific to 

resource objectives. Monitoring information and conclusions of this type will be 

included in the Annual Planning Update Report and Summary.

Lands and Realty Program 

The Lands and Realty program consists generally of two distinct segments: Land tenure 

and use authorization. The following shows the current policy for the Lands and Realty 

program. The decisions for the Lands and Realty program follow the policy section and 

are noted by the symbol LR. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 35

May 2007

Land Tenure 

The land tenure segment of the Lands and Realty program specifies that the Lake Havasu 

Field Office will 

1. retain all public lands or interests in land that enhance multiple-use management, 

2. acquire lands or interests in land that complement important resource values and 

further management objectives, and 

3. dispose of lands or interests in lands that are difficult or uneconomical to manage or 

are no longer needed for federal purposes. 

Land Management

Split estate is property for which the surface estate is owned by one entity and the mineral 

estate is owned by another entity. For purposes of the Lands and Realty program, split 

estate refers to federal government ownership of the surface estate and ownership of the 

mineral estate by another entity. In this situation, the BLM may attempt to acquire the 

mineral estate from the owner(s). 

Land Acquisition

Lake Havasu Field Office may acquire lands or interests in lands by purchase using Land 

and Water Conservation Fund funds or through other funding. The BLM may also 

acquire lands from donations or exchanges. 

Acquisition of non-federal lands would be prioritized based on the potential to enhance 

the conservation and management of threatened or endangered species habitat, riparian 

habitat, desert tortoise habitat, key big game habitat, or to improve the overall 

manageability of wildlife habitat. 

Land Disposal

The BLM may dispose of lands or interests through sales, exchanges, conveyance of 

mineral interests, R&PP patents. Legal descriptions of parcels that have been identified 

(and the approved method of disposal) are listed in Appendix G. 

The BLM may also use withdrawals in which jurisdiction of the land or interests in lands 

are transferred to another federal agency. If Lake Havasu Field Office discovers an area 

that needs the protection of a withdrawal, the withdrawal will be processed. If other 

agencies’ withdrawals are revoked, the BLM will manage the land consistently with the 

current land use plan. 

 Public lands may have potential for disposal when they are isolated and/or difficult to 

manage. Disposal actions are usually in response to public request or application that 

results in a title transfer, wherein the lands leave the public domain. All public lands 

would be retained unless specifically identified for disposal. The criteria for land 

disposals are listed below. 

 Public lands classified, withdrawn, reserved, or otherwise designated as not available 

or subject to sale are unavailable. A land use plan amendment would be required to 

dispose of lands not identified for disposal in the current land use plan. All disposal 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 36

May 2007

actions are coordinated with adjoining landowners, local governments, and current 

land users. 

 There are two distinct sets of criteria in the FLPMA for evaluating whether disposal 

will serve the national interest. One set is for disposal by sale and the other is for 

disposal by exchange: 

a) Land disposal by public sale is addressed in Section 203(a) of the FLPMA. This 

section contains three criteria to apply in identifying public lands suitable for 

disposal by public sale. The criteria, as paraphrased, are that a) the tract of public 

land is difficult and uneconomical to manage as part of the public lands and is 

not suitable for management by another federal department or agency, b) the land 

is no longer required for a specific purpose, or c) disposal will serve important 

public objectives. 

b) The criteria for determining which public lands or land interests are available for 

disposal by exchange are covered in Section 206(a) of the FLPMA. These 

criteria require the BLM to consider the public interest by giving full 

consideration to better federal land management and the needs of state and local 

people. These include the need of lands for the economy, community expansion, 

recreation areas, food, fiber, minerals, and fish and wildlife. The criteria also 

require that the public objectives to be served must be greater on the lands to be 

acquired than on the lands to be conveyed. 

The Recreation and Public Purposes (R&PP) Act of 1954, as amended, authorizes the 

lease and/or conveyance of BLM-administered lands for recreational or public purposes 

to state and local governments and to qualified nonprofit organizations under specified 

conditions at less than the fair market value. 

The Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982 provides for the conveyance of BLMadministered lands to public agencies for use as airports and airways. Disposal criteria 

with respect to Endangered Species Act listed, proposed, or candidate species and critical 

habitat are as follows: 

 The BLM will not transfer out of federal ownership designated or proposed critical 

habitat for a listed or proposed threatened or endangered species. 

 The BLM will not transfer out of federal ownership lands supporting listed or 

proposed threatened or endangered species if such transfer would be inconsistent 

with recovery needs and objectives or would likely affect the recovery of the listed or 

proposed species. 

 The BLM will not transfer out of federal ownership lands supporting federal 

candidate species if such action would contribute to the need to list the species as 

threatened or endangered. 

Exceptions to the three previous criteria could occur if the recipient of the lands would 

protect the species or critical habitat equally well under the Endangered Species Act, such 

as disposal to a nonfederal governmental agency or private organization if conservation 

purposes for the species would still be achieved and ensured. 

In addition, the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act of 2000, commonly referred to 

as the Baca Bill, allows the BLM to retain receipts from land sales to cover 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 37

May 2007

administrative costs and acquire properties. Section 205 of the Act requires that the 

public land be identified for disposal in an approved land use plan as of July 25, 2000. 

Those Baca lands identified for disposal in the Approved RMP are identified in 

Appendix G. Lands identified for disposal that are large enough to show on a map are 

displayed on Map 14. 

Use Authorization 

Lake Havasu Field Office may allow the use of the public lands or interests in lands 

through issuance of ROWs, leases, and permits. The types of uses that would be 

authorized by a ROW issued pursuant to Title 5 FLPMA would include access roads, 

power lines, telephone lines, fiber optic systems, communications facilities, and so forth. 

Examples of uses authorized pursuant to the Mineral Leasing Act include crude oil 

pipelines and oil and gas pipelines. Typical uses authorized by permits would include 

filming and establishing and maintaining apiary sites. 

To minimize adverse environmental impacts and the proliferation of separate ROWs, the 

utilization of shared ROWs would be required to the extent practical. Any existing 

transportation and utility corridors may be designated as transportation and utility 

corridors pursuant to FLPMA Section 503 [43 USC 1763] without further review. 

Map 15 displays the locations of the corridors. 

Public lands may also be designated for use as a communications site or a 

communications facility. A communications facility is a building and/or tower or other 

physical improvement that is built, installed, or established to house and support 

authorized communications uses. Lake Havasu Field Office communications sites 

accommodate the wireless systems referred to in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 as 

well as many other uses, including AM/FM broadcast facilities, commercial mobile 

radios, private mobile radios, and microwaves on designated communications sites 

located on mountaintops. Map 15 also displays the location of the communication sites. 

Land Use Allocations 

Acquisitions 

LR-1. Acquisition of lands, or interests in lands, including non-federal minerals, will 

be considered if the three following conditions exist: 

(a) The lands are free and clear of any hazardous materials, or legal 

encumbrances. 

(b) The owners are willing to sell or exchange or donate. 

(c) One or more of following criteria apply: 

 Inholdings and easements encompassed within the boundaries of 

special designated areas (ACECs, WAs, WSAs, National Trails, 

proposed Wild and Scenic River, and so forth) as designated in the 

Approved RMP. 

 Properties adjacent to public lands that contain significant cultural 

resources including, but not limited to, those properties eligible for 

inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. Priority 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 38

May 2007

acquisitions will be for lands that contain portions of eligible sites also 

located on public lands. 

 Lands made available by willing non-federal landowners that are 

within Category 1 and II desert tortoise habitat and/or will improve the 

status of desert tortoise by protecting areas large enough to support 

viable populations of desert tortoise. 

 Properties within wildlife habitat management areas as allocated in the 

Approved RMP. 

 Properties adjacent to wildlife habitat management areas where the 

species are jeopardized by future proposed activities. 

 Properties with important wildlife corridors or properties that provide 

for continuity of important wildlife corridors where links between 

fragmented habitats will be made available for movement of species. 

 Properties within or adjacent to SRMAs or Recreation Management 

Zones (RMZs), or that enhance recreational opportunities available on 

adjacent public lands. 

 Lands that provide connectivity for trails or routes. 

 Properties within areas with high wilderness characteristics as 

described in the Approved RMP. 

 Properties that will consolidate public ownership for the benefit of a 

resource program. 

LR-2. Lake Havasu Field Office could acquire conservation easements to protect 

resources within the Special Designations, WHAs, cultural resource sites, and 

SRMAs.

Disposals

LR-3. Approximately 50,616 acres (see Appendix G) will be available for potential 

disposal by land tenure category as follows: 

2,934 acres as current leases for disposal under R&PP Act 

47,682 acres as available for sale, exchange, and R&PP leasing and disposal 

LR-4. The BLM will dispose of federal minerals underlying state and private land and 

acquire nonfederal minerals underlying public lands to eliminate split estate 

property. Any lands acquired by the BLM will include both the surface and the 

mineral estate whenever possible. 

Use Authorizations 

Lake Havasu Field Office may allow the use of the public lands or interests in lands 

through issuance of ROWs, leases, and permits. The types of uses that will be authorized 

by a ROW issued pursuant to Title 5 FLPMA will include access roads, power lines, 

telephone lines, fiber optic systems, communications facilities, and so forth. Examples of 

uses authorized pursuant to the Mineral Leasing Act include crude oil pipelines and oil 
"J

"J"J"J

"J

"J

"J

"J"J

"J

"J

"J

"J

"J

"J"J

"J

"J "J

"J

"J

"J

"J

"J

"J

#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

Calif

ornia

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

Y

a

v

apai

Count

y

Maricopa

C

ounty

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La

P

a

z

Count

y

M

oha

v

e Count

y

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big

Sandy

River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

PHOENIX

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

May 2007

T17N

T16.5

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R17WR18WR19WR20WR21W R16W R14WR15W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 14 Disposal Lands

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Land Ownership Adjustments

Land Status

Baca Disposal Land

Approved Disposals

Existing R&PP Leases (available for disposal)

"J Existing R&PP Leases (available for disposal) - too small to show

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Bureau of Land Management

Bureau of Reclamation

Corps of Engineers

Indian Lands

National Park Service

Private

State

City, County, & State Park

State Wildlife Area

US Fish & Wildlife Service
##

>

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

Yavapai

County Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big

Sandy

River

Burro Creek

CS-1

CS-4

CS-6

LGN-11

UC-5

UC-3

LGN-1

UC-6B

LGN-2

UC-4

LGN-4

UC-2A

LGN-3

UC-2A

LGN-5

UC-6B

UC-7

UC-8

UC-5

WUG-1

WUG-2

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 15 Utility/Transportation Corridors

and Communication Sites

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

Corridors administered

primarily by

Kingman Field Office

Corridors administered

primarily by

Needles Field Office

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Utility Corridor Additions and Revisions

Existing Utility Corridors

Communication Sites

Utility Corridors - 1 Mile Wide

Utility Corridors - 2 Miles Wide

Western Utility Group Corridors - 1 Mile Wide

Utility Corridors - 1 Mile Wide

Utility Corridors - 2 Miles Wide

# Existing Communication Sites

> New Communication Sites

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Utility/Transportation Corridor Additions and Revisions

Utility/Transportation Corridors - 1 Mile Wide

Utility/Transportation Corridors - 2 Miles Wide

Existing Utility/Transportation Corridors

Utility/Transportation Corridors - 1 Mile Wide
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 39

May 2007

and gas pipelines. Typical uses authorized by permits will include filming and 

establishing and maintaining apiary sites. 

LR-5. When lands currently managed under agricultural lease no longer are 

authorized for agricultural use they will revert to uses that will benefit other 

programs carried out by the BLM or return to natural condition for use as 

wildlife habitat in accordance with the LCRMSCP. 

LR-6. The BLM will continue to lease recreation areas for concessions, state parks, 

county parks, and city parks in accordance with the prescribed recreation 

settings (see Map 20). 

LR-7. Within the boundaries of Special Designations (such as but not limited to: 

ACEC, WSA, proposed Wild and Scenic Rivers, etc.) as identified in this 

Approved RMP, no new utility and roads ROWs will be authorized, with the 

exception of utilities and access roads that provide service to nonfederal land 

within these areas. One additional ROW will be issued in the proposed 

Crossman Peak Scenic ACEC to authorize an existing building and two towers 

on public land in T. 14 N., R. 19 W. section 13, lot 1. The Lake Havasu Field 

Office may issue ROWs to ADOT for the construction and associated activities 

of the realignment of State Route (SR) 95 through the Bullhead Bajada Natural 

and Cultural ACEC. 

TM-4. Public access easements will be acquired across private or state lands where 

public access to federal lands and waterways is not available. 

LR-8. Locating facilities outside of designated corridors and communications sites 

will be avoided in WHAs if practicable. 

LR-9. The BLM will not permit placement of memorial monuments on the BLM. 

However, the BLM will cooperate with other parties to place memorials (e.g., 

tree or park bench) to enhance a recreation site or wildlife habitat. 

LR-10. If ADOT realigns SR 95 through the Bullhead Bajada Natural and Cultural 

ACEC, the BLM will issue a ROW for the realigned SR 95 and ROWs for the 

associated work including but not limited to drainage, temporary work areas, 

etc.

LR-11. New utility facilities will be located in designated corridors unless an 

evaluation of the project shows that location outside of a designated area is the 

only practicable alternative. 

LR-12. Locating utility facilities outside of designated corridors and communications 

sites will be prohibited in Special Designations. 

LR-13. Locating utility facilities outside of designated corridors and communications 

sites will be avoided in Wildlife Habitat Areas. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 40

May 2007

LR-14. In utility corridors, uses including but not limited to transportation, pipelines, 

and electrical transmission lines will be allowed when the uses are compatible. 

These designated corridors apply only to BLM-administered lands. 

Table 4 is a summary of existing and new ROW corridors and the adjustments made in 

the Approved RMP. Table 5 shows a summary of communications sites as designated, 

renamed, and undesignated. See Map 2-11 in the PRMP/FEIS for the original locations 

of the dropped and revised corridors and sites. 

Table 4. ROW Corridors Designations Summary (See Map 15)

Decision

Code ROW Corridor/Location 

Width

in

Miles

Designation in 

Approved RMP 

LR-15. California Desert Conservation 

Area “F” (CA) (UC-1) 

1 Dropped 

LR-16. Western Utility Group (WUG 1) 

(new) 

1 Designated 

LR-17. Interstate 40 (UC-3) 1–2 Rerouted and 

designated

LR-18. Davis-Parker “A” (UC-2A) 1 Rerouted and 

designated

LR-19. Parker-Blaisdell “B”-(UC-6B) 1 Rerouted and 

designated

LR-20. Parker-Liberty (UC-5) 1–2 Rerouted and 

designated

LR-21. Central Arizona Project (CAP) 

(LGN-2) 

1 Route returned to 

original location 

LR-22. Bouse-Salome [Adjust] (LGN-1) 1 Rerouted, adjusted 

and designated 

LR-23. El Paso Natural Gas (LGN-11) 2 Rerouted and 

designated

LR-24. San Juan Crossover (UC-4) 1 Designated 

LR-25. Interstate 10 (UC-7) 1 Designated 

LR-26. Bouse-Harcuvar (LGN-3) 1 Designated 

LR-27. Little Harquahala (LGN-4) 1 Designated 

LR-28. Wenden-Wickenburg (LGN-5) 1 Designated 

LR-29. State Route 60 (UC-8) (new) 1 Designated 

LR-30. Western Utility Group (WUG 2) 

(new) 

1 Designated 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 41

May 2007

Table 5. Communication Sites: Designated, Renamed, and 

Undesignated

Decision

Code Communication Site Approved RMP 

LR-31. Smith Peak Communication 

Site (CS)-4 

Designated

LR-32. Citizens Utilities/Mohave 

Mountain (CS-1) 

Designated/renamed 

LR-33. Black Peak (CS-3) Undesignated (no new uses) 

LR-34. American Cable TV (CS-2) Undesignated (no new uses) 

LR-35. Alamo Dam (CS-6) Designated (new site) 

LR-36. All communication facilities 

on Black Peak 

All communication facilities on Black 

Peak will be phased out and relocated at a 

suitable site through negotiation with the 

Colorado River Indian Tribes and the site 

lessees.

LR-37. Facilities located outside of 

designated corridors and 

communication sites 

Locating communication facilities outside 

of designated corridors and 

communication sites will be prohibited in 

ACEC, WAs, WSAs, and cultural sites 

eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. 

LR-38. New utility and 

communication facilities 

New communication facilities will be 

located in designated communication 

sites or corridors unless an evaluation of 

the project shows that location outside of 

a designated area is the only practicable 

alternative.

Monitoring

All lands and realty actions implemented in this plan will be specifically addressed in 

separate NEPA documents that will generate mitigations, management objectives, and 

monitoring designs. 

A compilation of new monitoring obligations for lands actions will be assembled for 

reporting in the Annual Planning Update Report and Summary. Opportunities to 

combine redundant efforts may be presented over time and will be addressed in the 

5-year plan evaluation report. 

Mineral Resources 

The minerals program consists of three categories: Saleable, Leasable, and Locatable. 

Saleable minerals (also referred to as mineral materials) include sand, gravel, and 

common varieties of stone and clay. These materials are sold to the public, on request, at 

fair market value or are provided to federal, state, and local government agencies through 

free use permits. Leasable minerals include, but are not limited to, oil, gas, coal, sodium, 

potassium, and geothermal resources. Locatable minerals are those minerals that are 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 42

May 2007

appropriated by the public under the General Mining Law of 1872, as amended. 

Locatable minerals include, but are not limited to, metals such as gold, silver, zinc, 

manganese, copper, and uncommon varieties of stone. 

Subject to valid existing rights at the time of designation, all wilderness areas are 

withdrawn from all forms of appropriation under the mining laws and closed mineral 

leasing and mineral material disposal. The designated wilderness areas cover a total of 

120,599 acres. 

Reasonable Foreseeable Development 

Saleable Minerals 

The reasonable foreseeable development (RFD) scenario for saleable minerals will be 40 

new mineral material sites distributed throughout the planning area over the life of the 

plan, disturbing a maximum of 1,000 acres. The disturbed areas will be reclaimed when 

they are no longer needed or the permit expires. 

Leasable Minerals 

The RFD for oil, gas, and geothermal resources for the life of the plan will be a 

maximum of 10 holes drilled. The BLM does not anticipate that any of these wells will 

be capable of production. The 10 holes will be dispersed throughout the planning area, 

with each drill hole disturbing an area of 5 to 7 acres, including the access road. The 

pads and associated access roads will subsequently be reclaimed. 

There are no known coal resources within the planning area. It is not expected that a coal 

lease will be issued or a coal mine developed. 

The RFD for other solid leasable minerals for the life of the plan will be a maximum of 

three exploration permits issued, resulting in a maximum of six exploration holes drilled, 

with minerals found but not in sufficient a quantity or quality to anticipate development. 

Each exploratory drilling will disturb 5 to 7 acres, including any access roads. Maximum 

area of disturbance will be 42 acres for roads and pads, which will be reclaimed. 

Locatable Minerals 

The RFD for locatable minerals will be three to five new exploration level notices 

submitted per year for 20 years that will disturb a maximum of 5 acres per notice. There 

will be 5 to 10 new small locatable mineral operations developed over the life of the plan, 

which will disturb approximately 20 acres at each operation. There may be one large 

mine that may disturb 200 to 300 acres. The total estimated disturbance related to new 

mining exploration and operations over the life of the plan is 1,000 acres. 

Land Use Allocations 

Saleable Mineral Resources 

MI-1. Community pits will be authorized on a case-by case basis. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 43

May 2007

MI-2. No new or expansion of existing mineral material disposal sites will be 

authorized in the Swansea Townsite, cultural sites and areas, and site 

complexes managed for Conservation for Future Use, Traditional Use, and 

Public Use. 

MI-3. No new or expansion of existing mineral material disposal sites will be 

authorized in the Aubrey Hills and the Cactus Plain WSA. 

MI-4. No new or expansion of existing mineral material disposal sites will be 

authorized in riparian areas. 

MI-5. No new or expansion of existing mineral material disposal sites will be 

authorized in desert tortoise Category I habitat. 

MI-6. No new or expansion of existing mineral material disposal sites will be 

authorized in the Bullhead Bajada Natural and Cultural ACEC and the Beale 

Slough Riparian and Cultural ACEC. 

MI-7. No new or expansion of existing mineral material disposal sites will be 

authorized in Open off-highway vehicle (OHV) Areas. 

MI-8. Mineral material development will only be authorized on lands managed to 

maintain wilderness characteristics when there will be no lasting impacts to 

solitude, unconfined recreation, and naturalness. 

MI-9. The total area open to mineral material disposal is 1,044,027 acres, and 

299,297 acres are restricted from mineral development as shown in Map 16. 

Leasable Mineral Resources 

MI-10. The entire planning area, outside of wilderness areas, will be open to mineral 

leasing for exploration and development. Conditions of approval and special 

stipulations will be developed and incorporated as part of any operational 

permit after site-specific environmental analyses are completed and 

documented per NEPA. Stipulations will mitigate impacts to special status 

species, cultural areas, and other resources affected by leasing-related 

activities.

MI-11. Surface occupancy for mineral leases will not be permitted on the Cactus Plain 

WSA.

MI-12. Surface occupancy for mineral leases will not be authorized on the cultural 

resource sites and site complexes managed for Conservation for Future Use, 

Traditional Use, and Public Use. 

MI-13. Surface occupancy for mineral leases will be prohibited within 0.25 mile of the 

Bill Williams and Colorado Rivers and within the riparian zone of the Three 

Rivers Riparian ACEC. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 44

May 2007

MI-14. Surface occupancy for mineral leases will be permitted on lands managed to 

maintain wilderness characteristics when there will be no lasting impacts to 

solitude, unconfined recreation, and naturalness. 

MI-15. 69,123 acres are restricted with a no surface occupancy stipulation as shown in 

Map 17. 

Locatable Mineral Resources 

MI-16. Approximately 200 acres of the Swansea Townsite will be recommended for 

withdrawal.

MI-17. The riparian area of the Three Rivers Riparian ACEC will be recommended for 

withdrawal, which covers 238 acres. 

MI-18. Recommend for withdrawal approximately 185 acres within the Bullhead 

Bajada Natural and Cultural ACEC. 

MI-19. Recommend for withdrawal approximately 10 acres to protect the Incline 

Railway in the Harcuvar Mountains. 

See Map 18 for areas recommended for withdrawal. 

Monitoring

Monitoring minerals activities consists of periodic field inspections that ensure 

compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and site-specific authorizations. Findings 

for each inspection are documented and placed in the case file. The number of sites 

inspected and the number of sites in compliance will be reported in the Annual Planning 

Update Report and Summary.

Paleontological Resource Management 

Desired Future Conditions 

GL-1. Paleontological resources will be managed for their scientific, educational, and 

recreational values, and adverse impacts to these resources will be mitigated. 

GL-2. The BLM will preserve and protect significant vertebrate paleontological 

resources for present and future generations. Scientifically significant 

invertebrates (to be determined by a qualified paleontologist) will also be 

protected.

Land Use Allocations 

GL-3. The Golden Shores mammoth site and the Chemehuevi Formation localities 

will be managed for their scientific values. 
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave

County

La Paz

County

Yavapai County Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE

HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big

Sandy River

Bill Williams River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 16 Saleable Minerals

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

Swansea Townsite

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Public Lands Open to Saleable Minerals - 1,044,027 BLM acres,

excluding the following areas (299,297 BLM acres):

Wilderness

Wilderness Study Area

Desert Tortoise Category 1 Habitat

Riparian Areas

Beale Slough ACEC

Bullhead Bajada ACEC

Swansea Townsite - 200 BLM acres

OHV Open Areas

Aubrey Hills

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave

County

La Paz

County

Yavapai County Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big

Sandy River

Bill Williams

River

DUTCH FLAT

MC MULLEN VALLEY

DATE CREEK BASIN

RANEGRAS PLAIN

PARKER VALLEY

MOHAVE VALLEY

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 17 Leasable Minerals

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

Three Rivers Riparian ACEC

riparian areas

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Swansea Townsite

Public Lands Open to Leasable Minerals - 1,222,841 BLM acres,

excluding the following areas:

No Surface Occupancy - 69,323 BLM acres

Wilderness

Wilderness Study Area

1/4 mile from the Colorado and Bill Williams Rivers

Three Rivers Riparian ACEC - riparian areas only

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Swansea Townsite - 200 BLM acres
^

^

#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave

County

La Paz

County

Yavapai County Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big

Sandy River

Bill Williams

River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 18 Locatable Minerals

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

Three Rivers Riparian ACEC

riparian areas

Swansea Townsite

Inclined Railway

Bullhead Bajada

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Areas Withdrawn - 188,662 BLM acres

Areas Recommended for Withdrawal -

Wilderness

Bureau of Reclamation Withdrawn Lands

Bureau of Reclamation Acquired Lands

Swansea Townsite - 200 BLM acres

Three Rivers Riparian ACEC - riparian areas only

- 238 BLM acres

Bullhead Bajada - 185 BLM acres

^ Inclined Railway - 10 BLM acres

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

^
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 45

May 2007

GL-4. Areas will be classified according to their potential to contain vertebrate fossils 

or noteworthy occurrences of invertebrate or plant fossils. These 

classifications will be based on future inventory of geological units and will be 

accomplished through adaptive management and plan maintenance. There are 

four such classifications ranging from Class 1 (low sensitivity) to Class 4 (high 

sensitivity), shown in Table 6 below.

Table 6. Paleontological Resource Classifications 

Classification Definition 

Class 1 (Low sensitivity) Igneous and metamorphic geologic units and sedimentary 

geologic units where vertebrate fossils or uncommon nonvertebrate fossils are unlikely to occur. 

Class 2 (Moderate sensitivity) Sedimentary geologic units that are known to contain or 

have unknown potential to contain fossils that vary in 

significance, abundance, and predictable occurrence. 

Class 3 (Moderate sensitivity) Areas where geologic units are known to contain fossils but 

have little or no risk of human-caused adverse impacts 

and/or low risk of natural degradation. 

Class 4 (High sensitivity) Areas where geologic units regularly and predictably contain 

vertebrate fossils and/or uncommon non-vertebrate fossils, 

and are at risk of natural degradation and/or human-caused 

adverse impacts. 

GL-5. Fossil localities will be identified and managed in accordance with their 

scientific, educational, and recreational values through the life of the plan. All 

vertebrate fossils and noteworthy invertebrate and plant fossils will be 

managed for their scientific values. Common invertebrate and plant fossils 

will be available for recreational collecting. 

Management Actions 

No Management Actions were identified. 

Monitoring

A long-term monitoring program will consist of the annual visitation to Golden Shores 

Mammoth site to identify adverse impacts, if any. The same approach would apply to 

other significant localities identified in the future. 

Rangeland Management/Grazing 

See Appendix H. 

Desired Future Conditions 

GM-1. Provide forage on a sustained yield basis for livestock consistent with meeting 

Land Health Standards and multiple use objectives. Healthy, sustainable 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 46

May 2007

rangeland ecosystems will be maintained or improved to meet Land Health 

Standards (Arizona’s Standards for Rangeland Health [1997a]); and produce a 

wide range of public values such as wildlife habitat, livestock forage, 

recreation opportunities, clean water, and functional watersheds. 

GM-2. Livestock use and associated management practices will be conducted in a 

manner consistent with other multiple use needs and objectives to ensure that 

the health of rangeland resources is preserved or improved so that they are 

productive for all rangeland values. Where needed, public rangeland 

ecosystems will be improved to meet objectives. 

Land Use Allocations 

GM-3. A total of 1,359,765 acres will be allocated for livestock grazing use as 

follows:

1,121,701 acres as Available 

238,064 acres as Unavailable 

 Note that acreage is included in allotments managed by neighboring Field 

Offices (Kingman and Yuma). See Map 19.

Management Actions 

GM-4. Guidelines for grazing administration apply to all livestock grazing activities 

on BLM-administered-lands. 

Monitoring

A majority of the perennial/ephemeral allotments have monitoring studies established at 

key areas. Monitoring data collected includes climatic information, actual use, 

utilization, and trend in condition. These studies will continue to be collected 

periodically, as necessary to ensure that current grazing management continues to meet or 

is making progress towards existing goals and objectives. 

All grazing allotments within the Approved RMP area will be assessed in accordance 

with the Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health prior to October 1, 2009. If the 

assessment finds that an allotment does not meet or is not making significant progress to 

meet the Land Health Standards, management actions to correct the deficiency will be 

implemented in accordance with the grazing regulations at 43 CFR 4100. During 

assessments, each allotment will be analyzed in relation to the criteria for classifying 

allotments as ephemeral, as enumerated in the Approved RMP. 

Progress towards this commitment will be reported annually in the Annual Planning 

Update Report and Summary to the Field Office Manager. 
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave

County

La Paz

County

Yavapai County Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big

Sandy River

Bill Williams

River

03067

03093

00025

03069

03040

03034

03038

03050

03051

03006

00045

03070

03048

00001

03061

03073

03059

03022 03000

03047

03096 03012

00068

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 19 Grazing Management

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Available for Grazing - Allotments administered by LHFO RMP *

Allotments administered by other field office plans

Allotments and Other Areas Unavailable for Grazing

Unallocated BLM-administered Lands

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

* The allotment numbers shown are referenced in Appendix L.
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 47

May 2007

Recreation Management 

The plan addresses the BLM’s local, regional, and national goals (see Appendix I) for 

providing a wide range of opportunities for environmentally responsible recreation. 

Outdoor Recreation on public lands will be managed through a societal benefits-based 

management approach to achieve specific targeted outcomes, with the goal to maintain a 

freedom of recreational choice with a minimum of regulatory constraints. Where the 

nature of the resource attracts concentrated or intensive recreational use, public lands 

may be managed as a SRMA. These are areas where the BLM focuses specific 

management, funding, and planning to provide for the best possible recreation experience 

while protecting, sustaining, and enhancing the environmental resources of these areas. 

A framework for each SRMA’s activity plan can be found in Appendix B under 

Administrative Actions. 

Specific management direction in a SRMA is devised to provide public enjoyment, 

resource protection, and public health and safety. Within SRMAs, RMZs have been 

identified to provide better site-specific planning and management. Although identified 

in this document, the RMZs are subject to minor adjustment during future 

implementation-level planning to account for the environmental and visitor use flux that 

occurs. In addition, new or adjusted management/administrative actions may be 

developed in specific SRMA activity plans. The BLM also manages recreation in the 

area outside of SRMAs; this area is known as the Extensive Recreation Management 

Area (ERMA). There are no RMZs in ERMAs because these are by definition areas that 

do not receive focused, specific recreation program management. 

Prescribed recreation settings or recreation management objectives are best summarized 

by six recreation settings or classes: Primitive, Semi-Primitive, Rural Natural, Rural 

Developed, Suburban, and Urban (see Appendix I). Each class prescribes an experience, 

setting, and potential activities as well as desired societal outcomes. Lake Havasu Field 

Office will manage public lands to maintain or meet these prescribed recreation settings 

(see Map 20). 

Tables 7a through 7g describe the desired future conditions by the SRMA and RMZ. The 

description of desired future conditions under the Approved Plan includes: 

 Primary market strategy. 

 Market composition. 

 The niche specific to the RMZ. 

 Detailed description of specific management objectives for the RMZ. 

 The type of primary activities the public could expect to find within the RMZ. 

 A list of experiences, benefits, and settings for which the RMZ will be managed. 

 Potential outcomes for which the RMZ will be managed. 

Desired future conditions for the ERMA appear in Table 7h. 
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 48

Desired Future Conditions 

Table 7a. Colorado River Nature Center SRMA (See Map 2

RR-1 Desired Future Conditions for Colorado River Nature Center Special Recreation ManaPrimary Market Strategy: CommunityMarket Residents of the Bullhead City urban development and surrounding rural areasRR-2 Desired Future Conditions for Colorado River Nature Center RMZ 1 – Southern Bluff 

“Rural Natural” providing the following:

Niche Provide needed natural open space, accessible only by foot, close to a population center fo

cultural and biological resources.

Management Objective Manage this zone to provide opportunities for community residents to engage in sustainab

protecting critical resources located in the area. This area serves as open space for the resi

Partnerships will be sought to help improve this RMZ so that within the life of this plan ma greater appreciation for their public lands and the natural and cultural resources found th

Primary Activities  Wildlife watching 

 Hiking Cultural/historical sightseeing

Experiences  Enjoying easy access to natural landscapes

 Feeling good about the way shared cultural heritage is being protected Contemplating humanity’s relationship with the land Knowing that things are not going to change

Benefits Personal:

 Greater spiritual growth  Increased appreciation of the area’s cultural history
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Ariz

o

n

a

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

Yavapai County Maricopa

County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

Bill Williams

River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R14WR15WR16WR17WR18WR19WR20WR21WR22W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 20 Prescribed Recreation Settings

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Prescribed Recreation Settings

County Roads

Primitive

Semi-Primitive

Rural Natural

Rural Developed

Suburban

Urban

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Paved

Maintained Unpaved

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

(applies to BLM-administered lands)
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave

County

La Paz

County

Yavapai County Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

Bill Williams

River

Burro Creek

Plomosa

SRMA

Gibraltar

SRMA

Havasu

Urban

SRMA

Lake

Havasu

SRMA

Parker

Strip

SRMA

Swansea

SRMA

Colorado

River

Nature

Center

SRMA

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 21 Lake Havasu Field Office

Recreational Management Areas

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Special Recreational Management Areas

Extensive Recreational Management Areas

County Roads

Extensive Recreational Management Areas

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Paved

Maintained Unpaved

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

(Different shades are used to separate adjoining

SRMAs.)
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 49

Table 7a. Colorado River Nature Center SRMA (See Map 2

Benefits Community/Social:

 Greater community valuation of its ethnic diversity

Environmental:

 Greater protection of the area’s historic and archaeological sites Greater community ownership and stewardship of park, recreation, and natural resour

Economic:

 Increased property value

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adm

Remoteness: Rural Natural Naturalness: Semi-Primitive

Facilities: Semi-Primitive

Contacts: Semi-Primitive

Group Size: Semi-Primitive

Evidence of Use: Semi-Primitive

Mech

ManaPrimVisit

Potential Outcomes  Opportunities for partnerships with local agencies to realize the full potential of this a

cultural resource appreciation.

RR-3 Desired Future Conditions for Colorado River Nature Center RMZ 2 – River Side will 

Developed” providing the following:

Niche Quick, easy access from Bullhead City to sustainable day-use adventure, enjoyment of Co

appreciation of wildlife viewing opportunities. 

Management Objective Manage this zone to provide opportunities for community residents to engage in sustainab

discovery, while protecting critical resources located in the area. This RMZ is most impor

access to the Colorado River for the residents of Bullhead City. Partnerships will be sough

that within the life of this plan most responsible visitors will attain a greater appreciation f

natural and cultural resources found therein.

Primary Activities  Wildlife watching 

 Fitness activity (routine walking/running) Picnicking River/beach access
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 50

Table 7a. Colorado River Nature Center SRMA (See Map 2

Experiences  Enjoying easy access to natural landscapes

 Enjoying access to hands-on environmental learning Enjoying needed physical exercise Enjoying access to outdoor amenities close to home

Benefits Personal:

 Improved opportunity to view wildlife close up Better-informed and more responsible visitor  Enhanced awareness and understanding of nature

Community/Social:

 Citizenry better informed about where to go for different kinds of recreation experienc

Environmental:

 Reduced wildlife harassment by users of recreational facilities  Increased awareness and protection of natural landscapes Reduced negative human impacts such as litter, trampling of vegetation, and unplanne

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Admin

Remoteness: Rural Developed

Naturalness: Rural Developed

Facilities: Rural Developed

Contacts: SuburbanGroup Size: Suburban

Evidence of Use: Rural Developed

Mechan

Manage

Visitor 

Potential Outcomes  Opportunities for partnerships with local agencies to realize the full potential of this a

resource appreciation

 Foot access to the Colorado River
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 51

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

RR-4 Desired Future Conditions for Lake Havasu Special Recreation Management Area are Primary Market Strategy: DestinationMarket Residents of and visitors to the Lake Havasu RegionSRMA Desired Future Condition

Manage high-volume recreation on the lake and shoreline to sustain natural resource value

RR-5 Desired Future Conditions for Lake Havasu RMZ 1 – Whipple Mountains will be gener

Primitive” providing the following:

Niche Primitive trekking and OHV touring in rugged scenic natural settings for visitors seeking a Management Objective Manage this RMZ to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in a remote isolated recre

RMZ to provide opportunities for community residents and regional visitors who use the a

sustainable, primarily primitive day-use opportunities and gain appreciation of the natural 

corridor though self-discovery and exploration. This area provides a back county experien

area. Because of the undeveloped, primitive opportunities available in this RMZ, this area 

level of management actions to achieve the desired outcomes for the majority of visitors d

RMP.

Primary Activities  Hiking

 OHV touring Backpacking Wilderness access Rockhounding

Experiences  Developing skills and abilities 

 Testing personal endurance Enjoying risk-taking adventure Savoring the total sensory experience of a natural landscape Escaping everyday responsibilities for awhile 
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 52

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

Benefits Personal:

 Greater self-reliance Improved skills for outdoor enjoyment Closer relationship with the natural world 

Community/Social:

 Enhanced lifestyle  Increasing independence/autonomy

Environmental:

 Reduced negative human impacts Increase awareness and protection of natural landscapes 

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adm

Remoteness: Semi-Primitive

Naturalness: Semi-Primitive

Facilities: Primitive

Contacts: Primitive

Group Size: Primitive Evidence of Use: Semi-Primitive

MechManPrimVisit

Potential Outcomes  Moderate improvements to achieve targeted benefits, increased effort to manage unau

realize potential for solitude, unconfined primitive activities. 

 Outfitting and guiding operations may be considered. However, other commercial act

case-by-case basis for consistency with targeted benefits and prescribed recreation set

RR-6 Desired Future Conditions for Lake Havasu RMZ 2 - North Aubrey will be generally m

provide the following:

Niche Hiking, birding, scenic enjoyment, and equestrian activities in close proximity to a popula

of the local community. 
!

!"a

!"eSPECIAL

RECREATION

MANAGEMENT

AREA

LAKE

HAVASU

CITY

Map 22 Lake Havasu

Special Recreation Management Area

Lake Havasu

Field Office

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management May 2007

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles ± 0 1 2 3 4 5 Kilometers

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

R18W

T04.5N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

R24E R25E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E R26E R27E

#

?Ù

North

Lake Havasu

RMZ 7

Aubrey Hills

RMZ 3

Whipple Mountains

RMZ 1

North Aubrey

RMZ 2

South

CA Shoreline Lake Havasu

RMZ 6

AZ Shoreline - RMZ 4

Havasu

Springs

RMZ 5

Aubrey

Hills - RMZ 3

AZ Shoreline

RMZ 4

LAKE HAVASU CITY

Lake Havasu Special Recreation Management Area

Land Status

Lake Havasu SRMA

Recreation Management Zones

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

Township Grid

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Bureau of Land Management

Indian Lands

Private

State

City, County, & State Park

US Fish & Wildlife Service

Concession Lease

R26E R27E

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 53

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

Management Objective Manage this zone to provide opportunities for regional visitors and community residents to 

in a short time frame (i.e., after work or during a single day); for primarily day-use and to 

wildlife of the Colorado River corridor though self-discovery. Motorized access restrictio

retained to support and encourage most forms of non-motorized use and to protect the sens

resources contained herein. Minimal developments and considerable protection measures 

the stated outcomes in this semi-primitive setting, by the majority of visitors targeted. 

Primary Activities  Hiking

 Wildlife viewing Pet exercise Equestrian Fitness activity  Hunting

Experiences  Testing personal endurance

 Enjoying easy access to natural landscapes Enjoying unguided exploration Savoring the total sensory experience of a natural landscape

Benefits Personal:

 Sense of wellness Greater self-reliance Improved physical fitness and health maintenance
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 54

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

Benefits Community/Social:

 Heightened sense of satisfaction with the community  Feeling that this community is a special place to live 

Environmental:

 Greater community ownership and stewardship of park, recreation, and natural resour Greater retention of distinctive natural landscape features

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire Enhanced ability for visitors to find areas providing wanted recreation experiences an

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adm

Remoteness: Suburban

Naturalness: Rural DevelopedFacilities: Primitive

Contacts: Rural Natural 

Group Size: Rural Natural

Evidence of Use: Rural Natural

MechManPrimVisit

Potential Outcomes  Opportunities for urban residents of Lake Havasu to experience a wildland setting in c

wide of range environmentally sound, non-motorized, dispersed recreation activities – 

 Greater potential for interpretive developments and signing. A scenic trail will further optimize the realization of the targeted benefits.
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 55

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

RR-7 Desired Future Conditions for Lake Havasu RMZ 3 – Aubrey Hills will be generally ma

provide the following:

Niche Hiking, birding, scenic enjoyment, and equestrian activities in close proximity to populatio

of the local community. 

Management Objective Manage this zone to provide opportunities for regional visitors and community residents to 

in a short time frame (i.e., after work or during a single day); for primarily day-use and to 

wildlife of the Colorado River corridor though self-discovery. Motorized access restrictio

retained to support and encourage most forms of non-motorized use and to protect the sens

resources contained herein. Minimal developments and considerable protection measures 

the stated outcomes in this semi-primitive setting, by the majority of visitors targeted. 

Primary Activities  Hiking

 Wildlife viewing Equestrian Fitness activity  Hunting

Experiences  Testing personal endurance

 Enjoying easy access to natural landscapes Enjoying unguided exploration Savoring the total sensory experience of a natural landscape

Benefits Personal:

 Sense of wellness Greater self-reliance Improved physical fitness and health maintenance

Community/Social:

 Heightened sense of satisfaction with the community  Feeling that this community is a special place to live 
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 56

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

Environmental: Greater community ownership and stewardship of park, recreation, and natural resour Greater retention of distinctive natural landscape features

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire Enhanced ability for visitors to find areas providing wanted recreation experiences an

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adm

Remoteness: Rural DevelopedNaturalness: Rural Natural Facilities: Primitive 

Contacts: Semi-Primitive

Group Size: Semi-PrimitiveEvidence of Use: Semi-Primitive

Mech

Man

PrimVisit

Potential Outcomes  Opportunities for urban residents of Lake Havasu to experience a wildland setting in c

wide range of environmentally sound, non-motorized, dispersed recreation activities – 

 Partnerships will be developed with landowners, agencies, and stakeholders. A scenic trail will further optimize the realization of the targeted benefits.

RR-8 Desired Future Conditions for Lake Havasu RMZ 4 – AZ Shoreline will be generally ma

provide the following:

Niche Fishing, boat-in-only campsites, day-use sites for personal enjoyment, watercraft motor sp

wildlife observation, remote rugged setting, social appreciation, an escape for urban visito
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 57

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

Management Objective The BLM will provide opportunities for visitors to this extremely high-demand, water-bas

engage in fishing, watercraft motor sports activities, camping, and day-use activities and re

BLM will intensely manage public lands in this RMZ to provide opportunities for regional 

and Arizona who use the area seasonally to engage in sustainable recreational activities in desert water-based opportunity. Targeted use is primarily day-use and overnight camping 

all manner of motorized boating activities and fishing in a natural environment. The BLM 

campsite development, law enforcement patrols, visitor services patrols, and fee collection 

anticipates continued leadership of the Lake Havasu Fisheries Partnership to sustain a heal

participating with more than 25 separate jurisdictions on and adjacent to the lake to develo

Management Plan (interagency and stakeholders). From this future planning process will 

based outcomes for the public lands in this SRMA. The BLM will continue with current l

increase the BLM’s presence of both staff members and facilities. Visitor demand and pre

BLM’s capacity to manage with current resources. Surveys will be conducted of visitor de

planning with the other jurisdictions will be initiated as soon as possible to better target or 

currently understood by the BLM. This water-based recreation resource is unique and dem

such an exponential rate that further study may reveal the scope of demand of national sign

“park-like” management approach will be required to achieve future outcomes. Funding f

sought from many sources.

Primary Activities  Special Recreational Permits (SRPs)

 Recreation use permits Personal watercraft (PWC) use Waterskiing and wakeboarding Shoreline fishing Boat fishing Competitive fishing Meat fishing  Camping Boating motor sports Poker run, aquatic Swimming Scuba/snorkel
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 58

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

 Hiking Wildlife watching  Sunbathing/relaxing

Experiences  Developing skills and abilities 

 Enjoying the esteem of others Testing personal endurance Telling others about the trip Enjoying risk-taking adventure Discussing equipment with others Escaping everyday responsibilities for awhile  Experiencing a greater sense of independence Enjoying unguided exploration Being in control of things that happen Enjoying the closeness of friends and family Relishing group affiliation and togetherness Enjoying meeting new people with similar interests  Enjoying participating in group outdoor events Savoring the total sensory experience (sight, sound, and smell) of a natural landscape  Enjoying easy access to natural landscapes
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 59

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

Benefits Personal:

 Restored mind from unwanted stress  Greater self-reliance More balanced competitive spirit  Stronger ties with family and friends

Community/Social:

 Greater family bonding Improved group cooperation Lifestyle improvement or maintenance Enhanced lifestyle 

Environmental:

 Maintenance of distinctive recreation setting character  Improved maintenance of physical facilities Reduced negative human impacts

Economic:

 Improved local economic stability  More positive contributions to local and regional economies Increased local tax revenue Increased local job opportunities  Greater value-added local services/industry Increased desirability as a place to live or retire Maintenance of community’s distinctive recreation-tourism market niche or character Increased property values
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 60

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adm

Remoteness: Suburban

Naturalness: Rural DevelopedFacilities: Rural Developed

Contacts: SuburbanGroup Size: Suburban

Evidence of Use: Suburban

Mech

Man

DeveVisit

Potential Outcomes  Opportunities for extreme world-class power boating, fishing, and water-based motor 

setting.

 Partnerships with many agencies and jurisdictions will be sought to develop a coordin

lake-based recreation and resource protection. 

 As demand increases, further environmentally sound recreation developments may be  The personal delivery of on-the-ground visitor services and interpretation must be exp Appropriate vending may be considered on a site-specific basis and with a multi-juris A more sophisticated/automated means for the collection of fees will be considered. A non-motorized scenic trail and additional shoreline fishing sites may enhance the re

RR-9 Desired Future Conditions for Lake Havasu RMZ 5 – Havasu Springs will be generally 

the following:

Niche Boat launch, boating activities, shoreline fishing facilities, and commercial amenities in a 

personal enjoyment. Winter visitors seeking the region’s mild winter weather.

Management Objective Manage this RMZ to provide visitors with access to a variety of water sports, recreational 

occupancy opportunities. Manage this zone to provide opportunities for regional, national

use the area seasonally to engage in sustainable, easy urban access for primarily day-use/lo

overnight camping to engage in all manner of recreational activities in a natural environme

Williams River National Wildlife Refuge and the Parker Dam Security zone and contains 

known as Havasu Springs Resort, managed for specific outcomes based on economic dem

fishery. Emphasis will be placed on improved facilities, facilities maintenance, fish habita

access/interpretive developments.
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 61

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

Primary Activities  Wildlife viewing

 Boating access Parker Dam viewing Golf carts  Recreational shoreline fishing

Experiences  Telling others about the trip

 Enjoying unguided exploration Discussing equipment with others Enjoying the closeness of friends and family Relishing group affiliation and togetherness Enjoying meeting new people with similar interests

Benefits Personal:

 Restore mind from unwanted stress Stronger ties with family and friends

Community/Social:

 Greater interaction with visitors from different cultures  Increased independence/autonomy

Environmental:

 Maintenance of distinctive recreation setting character  Maintenance of productively diverse sport and native fishery

Economic:

 Improved local economic stability  More positive contributions to local and regional economies Increased local tax revenue Increased local job opportunities  Greater value-added local services/industry
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 62

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

 Increased desirability as a place to visit Increased property values Clean water to satisfy all designated beneficial uses 

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adm

Remoteness: Suburban

Naturalness: Suburban

Facilities: Urban

Contacts: SuburbanGroup Size: Rural DevelopedEvidence of Use: Suburban

Mech

ManVisit

Potential Outcomes  Continue cooperation and coordination with concession operators to enhance targeted 

 Where long-term impacts from recreation patterns are observed or anticipated in this z

mitigating further environmental impacts.

 The BLM may consider environmental education and interpretation on site with coord

RR-10 Desired Future Conditions for Lake Havasu RMZ 6 – CA Shoreline will be generally m

for the area commonly known as Black Meadow Landing, which will generally be managethe recreation concessions located on the Parker Strip RMZ 1) to provide the following:

Niche Fishing for personal enjoyment, watercraft motor sports activities, scenic appreciation, wil

setting, and social appreciation. Shoreline use minimal due to terrain. 

Management Objective Manage to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing, watercraft motor sports a

realize the targeted benefits. Manage this zone to provide opportunities for regional visito

recreational activities. These activities include access for primarily day use and overnight 

a natural environment. The BLM will continue to coordinate with Black Meadow Landing 

opportunities provided by this development. Beyond Black Meadow Landing, minor deve

regulatory signing may be used minimally. The BLM will continue to monitor and protect 

Primary Activities  Fishing

 Camping Boating/access Boating motor sports PWC use
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 63

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

 Poker run, aquatic Waterskiing/wakeboarding

Experiences  Developing skills and abilities 

 Enjoying the esteem of others Testing personal endurance Telling others about the trip Enjoying risk-taking adventure Discussing equipment with others Escaping everyday responsibilities for awhile  Experiencing a greater sense of independence Enjoying unguided exploration Being in control of things that happen Enjoying the closeness of friends and family Relishing group affiliation and togetherness Enjoying meeting new people with similar interests  Enjoying participating in group outdoor events Savoring the total sensory experience (sight, sound, and smell) of a natural landscape  Enjoying easy access to natural landscapes

Benefits Personal:

 Restored mind from unwanted stress  Greater self-reliance More balanced competitive spirit  Stronger ties with family and friends

Community/Social:

 Greater family bonding Improved group cooperation Lifestyle improvement or maintenance
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 64

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

 Enhanced lifestyle 

Environmental:

 Maintenance of distinctive recreation setting character  Improved maintenance of physical facilities Reduced negative human impacts

Economic:

 Improved local economic stability  More positive contributions to local and regional economies Increased local tax revenue Increased local job opportunities  Greater value-added local services/industry Increased desirability as a place to live or retire Maintenance of community’s distinctive recreation-tourism market niche or character Increased property values

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adm

Remoteness: Rural Natural Naturalness: Semi-Primitive

Facilities: Primitive 

Contacts: Semi-Primitive

Group Size: Rural Natural

Evidence of Use: Primitive Transition 

Mech

Man

Visit

Potential Outcomes  The BLM will maintain the primitive setting of this unique, world-class, water-based 

 The BLM may consider fully self-contained, floating camping pads, to be used as a to

enhancement of public safety. However, development of these facilities will be minim

will occur where evidence of environmental impact and danger to the public exist. 
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 65

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

RR-11 Desired Future Conditions for Lake Havasu RMZ 7 – North Lake Havasu will be gener

Developed to provide the following:

Niche Boating for pleasure in close proximity to the services provided by Lake Havasu City. SR

lake bottom managed by the BLM.

Management Objective Manage this zone to provide opportunities for visitors and residents to engage in a variety 

activities, providing continuity to management though collaborative partnerships with oth

provide environmentally responsible recreation opportunities to include Arizona shoreline 

or protection of important fish habitats from impacts to the lake bottom.

Primary Activities  Boating, motor sports 

 Fishing Public safety  SRPs

Experiences  Enjoying risk-taking adventure

 Enjoying easy access to natural landscapes

Benefits Personal:

 Improved outdoor recreation skills  More balanced competitive spirit  Closer relationship to the natural world

Community/Social:

 Greater family bonding Improved group cooperation Lifestyle improvement or maintenance Enhanced lifestyle 

Environmental:

 Maintenance of distinctive recreation setting character 
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 66

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

 Improved maintenance of physical facilities Reduced negative human impacts

Economic:

 Improved local economic stability  More positive contributions to local and regional economies Increased local tax revenue Increased local job opportunities  Greater value-added local services/industry Increased desirability as a place to live or retire Maintenance of community’s distinctive recreation-tourism market niche or character Increased property values

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adm

Remoteness: Rural Developed

Naturalness: Rural Developed

Facilities: Rural Developed

Contacts: SuburbanGroup Size: SuburbanEvidence of Use: Suburban

Mec

Man

PrimVisi

Potential Outcomes  Partnerships with many agencies and jurisdictions will be sought to develop a coordin

lake-based recreation and resource protection. 

 Increased visitor services patrols and expanded shoreline fishing opportunities may en The BLM will continue to require SRP applications for all events impacting the lake b

RR-12 Desired Future Conditions for Lake Havasu RMZ 8 – South Lake Havasu will be gener

provide the following:

Niche Boating for pleasure in a natural scenic rural area. SRPs related to events that impact lake Management Objective This RMZ is entirely Cattail Cove State Park. The BLM will cooperate with Arizona Stat

management of this zone in whatever manner is consistent with the BLM law, policy, and 

available.
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 67

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

Primary Activities  Boating, motor sports 

 Fishing Public safety  SRPs

Experiences  Enjoying risk-taking adventure

 Enjoying easy access to natural landscapes

Benefits Personal:

 Improved outdoor recreation skills  More balanced competitive spirit  Closer relationship to the natural world

Community/Social:

 Greater family bonding Improved group cooperation Lifestyle improvement or maintenance Enhanced lifestyle 

Environmental:

 Maintenance of distinctive recreation setting character  Improved maintenance of physical facilities Reduced negative human impacts

Economic:

 Improved local economic stability  More positive contributions to local and regional economies Increased local tax revenue Increased local job opportunities  Greater value-added local services/industry Increased desirability as a place to live or retire
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 68

Table 7b. Lake Havasu SRMA (See Map 22) 

 Maintenance of community’s distinctive recreation-tourism market niche or character Increased property values

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adm

Remoteness: Rural Natural 

Naturalness: Rural DevelopedFacilities: Semi-Primitive

Contacts: SuburbanGroup Size: Suburban

Evidence of Use: Suburban

Mec

Man

PrimVisi

Potential Outcomes  The BLM will cooperate with Arizona State Parks, and will partner with many agenc

coordinated management approach to lake-based recreation and resource protection. 

 The BLM will continue to require SRP applications for all events impacting the lake b

Table 7c. Parker Strip SRMA (See Map 21) 

RR-13 Desired Future Conditions for Parker Strip Special Recreation Management Area are aPrimary Market Strategy: DestinationMarket Regional, national, and international visitors to the Lower Colorado River RR-14 Desired Future Conditions for Parker Strip RMZ 1 – Parker Strip Urban will be genera

providing the following:

Niche Vacation use/seasonal occupancy sites and recreation opportunities including boat launchi

Colorado River.

Management Objective Manage to provide visitors with access to a wide variety of recreational opportunities throu

managed facilities. Manage this zone to provide opportunities for regional, national, and i

area seasonally. Enable them easy access to enjoyment of the natural environment through 

recreational activities, including day-use or overnight camping and long-term winter use. 
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 69

Table 7c. Parker Strip SRMA (See Map 21) 

Primary Activities  All-terrain vehicle (ATV) use 

 Wildlife viewing Boating access Cultural/historical sightseeing Golf Camping, staying in resorts

Experiences  Telling others about the trip

 Enjoying unguided exploration Discussing equipment with others Enjoying the closeness of friends and family Relishing group affiliation and togetherness Enjoying meeting new people with similar interests

Benefits Personal:

 Restore mind from unwanted stress Stronger ties with family and friends

Community/Social:

 Greater interaction with visitors from different cultures  Increased independence/autonomy

Environmental:

 Maintenance of distinctive recreation setting character 

Economic:

 Improved local economic stability  More positive contributions to local and regional economies Increased local tax revenue Increased local job opportunities  Greater value-added local services/industry
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 70

Table 7c. Parker Strip SRMA (See Map 21) 

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire Increased property values

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adm

Remoteness: SuburbanNaturalness: Suburban

Facilities: Urban 

Contacts: Suburban

Group Size: Rural Developed

Evidence of Use: Suburban

Mech

Man

Visit

Potential Outcomes  Continue cooperation and coordination with concession operators to enhance targeted 

 Where long-term impacts from recreation patterns are observed or anticipated in this z

mitigating further environmental impacts.

 The BLM may consider environmental education and interpretation on site with coop

enhance targeted benefits.

RR-15 Desired Future Conditions for Parker Strip RMZ 2 – Crossroads and Copper Basin wi

Suburban providing the following:

Niche Unrestricted OHV recreation in an open area setting for personal exploration and challengManagement Objective Manage to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in unrestricted OHV play/recreation 

type of recreation are rare in this region. Manage this zone to provide opportunities for reg

visitors who use the area seasonally to engage in sustainable, easy urban access for unrestr

as day use in a natural environment. Increased signing, development, and interpretive mea

play outside of the open areas.

Primary Activities  4×4 vehicles

 ATV use  OHV Golf carts (modified utility)  Hill climbing Motorcycle use  Permitted motorcycle/ATV Public safety 
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 71

Table 7c. Parker Strip SRMA (See Map 21) 

 Staging area Utility vehicle (UTV) 

Experiences  Developing skills and abilities 

 Enjoying the esteem of others Testing personal endurance Gaining a greater sense of self-confidence Telling others about the trip Enjoying risk-taking adventure Discussing equipment with others Enjoying meeting new people with similar interests

Benefits Personal:

 Improved mental wellbeing  Greater self-reliance Improved skills for outdoor enjoyment

Community/Social:

 Heightened sense of satisfaction with the community  Greater community involvement in recreation and other land use decisions

Environmental:

 Maintenance of distinctive recreation setting character  Improved maintenance of physical facilities

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire Increased property values Increased local tourism revenue
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 72

Table 7c. Parker Strip SRMA (See Map 21) 

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adm

Remoteness: Rural Natural 

Naturalness: Rural DevelopedFacilities: Suburban

Contacts: Rural Natural Group Size: Rural Natural

Evidence of Use: Rural Natural

MechMan

DeveVisit

Potential Outcomes  The BLM will manage this RMZ as an OHV open area, which as such, fully realizes t

 The BLM will cooperate with USFWS, CDFG, the California Off-Highway Vehicle C

Parks, Off-Highway Motorized Vehicle Recreation Division, grants programs, and oth

 The BLM will prioritize the use of methods and mechanisms to contain OHV recreati To realize desired outcomes the BLM will emphasize rider education and environmen

increased developments, signs, and brochures. 

RR-16 Desired Future Conditions for Parker Strip RMZ 3 – Parker Strip Back Country will b

Primitive providing the following:

Niche Primitive trekking and OHV touring on designated routes in rugged scenic natural settings 

primitive experience.

Management Objective Manage to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in a remote isolated recreation expe

provide opportunities for community residents and visitors who use the area seasonally to 

access for primarily primitive day-use opportunities and gain appreciation of the natural se

corridor though self-discovery, and OHV touring on designated routes. Stop OHV play ou

Primary Activities  Hiking

 OHV touring Backpacking Rockhounding
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 73

Table 7c. Parker Strip SRMA (See Map 21) 

Experiences  Developing skills and abilities 

 Testing personal endurance Enjoying risk-taking adventure Savoring the total sensory experience of a natural landscape Escaping everyday responsibilities for awhile 

Benefits Personal:

 Greater self-reliance Improved skills for outdoor enjoyment Closer relationship with the natural world Community/Social: Enhanced lifestyle  Increasing independence/autonomy

Benefits Environmental:

 Reduced negative human impacts Increase awareness and protection of natural landscapes 

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adm

Remoteness: Semi-Primitive

Naturalness: Rural Natural Facilities: Primitive 

Contacts: Primitive

Group Size: Primitive 

Evidence of Use: Semi-Primitive

MechManPrimVisit

Potential Outcomes  Minimal improvements to achieve targeted benefits, realize potential for solitude, unc

increased effort to manage unauthorized motor vehicle use.

 Outfitting/guiding could be considered in certain situations.
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 74

Table 7d. Swansea SRMA (See Map 21) 

RR-17 Desired Future Conditions for Swansea Special Recreation Management Area are as:Primary Market Strategy: Destination/UndevelopedMarket Residents and visitors to western Arizona RR-18 Desired Future Conditions for Swansea RMZ 1 – Swansea will be generally managed for 

following:

Niche Cultural discovery and personal exploration of historic mining.Management Objective Manage this zone to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in personal and guided (in

historical significance of the area. Manage this zone to provide opportunities for commun

national, and international visitors who use the area seasonally to engage in sustainable da

opportunities, opportunities to learn about historical mining, and to gain appreciation of th

Swansea region through self-discovery. 

Primary Activities  Camping

 Cultural/historical sightseeing Rockhounding Picnicking 4-wheel-drive touring  Wilderness access Sightseeing, photography

Experiences  Savoring the total sensory experience of a natural landscape

 Escaping everyday responsibilities for awhile  Feeling good about the way shared cultural heritage is being protected Learning about things here Just knowing this attraction is in or near the community
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 75

Table 7d. Swansea SRMA (See Map 21) 

Benefits Personal:

 Greater respect for shared cultural heritage Closer relationship with the natural world  Enhanced sense of personal freedom

Community/Social:

 Greater understanding of the community’s cultural identity Greater community involvement in recreation and other land use decisions

Environmental:

 Reduced negative human impacts Increase awareness and protection of natural landscapes  Reduced looting of historic and prehistoric sites  Sustainability of community’s cultural heritage

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire Enhanced ability for visitors to find areas providing wanted recreation experiences an

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adminis

Remoteness: Rural DevelopedNaturalness: Rural DevelopedFacilities: Rural Developed

Contacts: Semi-Primitive

Group Size: Semi-Primitive

Evidence of Use: Rural Natural

Mechani

ManagemVisitor S

Potential Outcomes  Minimal improvements to achieve targeted benefits, increased effort to manage unaut

 Public education related to historic mining will be emphasized to realize desired bene The development of interpretive trails will further achieve the targeted benefits and re Camping may be allowed. 
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 76

Table 7e. Gibraltar SRMA (See Map 23) 

RR-19 Desired Future Conditions for Gibraltar Special Recreation Management Area are as:Primary Market Strategy: Destination/UndevelopedMarket Residents of and visitors to La Paz CountyRR-20 Desired Future Conditions for Gibraltar RMZ 1 – Gibraltar Wilderness will be general

providing the following:

Niche Wilderness trekking in a natural scenic environment.Management Objective Manage this zone to provide opportunities for visitors to find solitude, engage in unconfin

personal challenge and reflection. Preserve the primitive opportunities and wilderness cha

Primary Activities  Hiking

 Mountain climbing Backpacking Equestrian activities  Primitive dispersed camping Wildlife watching  Hunting

Experiences  Gaining a greater sense of self-confidence

 Testing personal endurance Savoring the total sensory experience (sight sound, and smell) of a natural landscape Enjoying risk-taking adventure Feeling good about solitude, being isolated and independent Enjoying an escape from crowds of people Nurturing personal spiritual values and growth

Benefits Personal:

 A more holistic sense of wellness A greater sensitivity to awareness of outdoor aesthetics, nature’s art and elegance  Greater self-reliance
!

!"a

!"e

SPECIAL

RECREATION

MANAGEMENT

AREA

LAKE

HAVASU

CITY

Map 23 Gibraltar

Special Recreation Management Area

Lake Havasu

Field Office

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management May 2007

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

0 1 2 3 4 Miles ± 0 1 2 3 4 Kilometers

T10N

T09N

T11N

R17W

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E R26E R27E

?Ù

Shea Hills

RMZ 3

Cienega

RMZ 2

Buckskin Mesa

RMZ 4

Gibraltar Wilderness

RMZ 1

Shea Road/

Osborne Wash

RMZ 5

R19W R18W

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Gibraltar Special Recreation Management Area

Gibraltar SRMA Land Status

Recreation Management Zones

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

US and State Highways

Paved County Road

Unpaved County Road

Routes

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Bureau of Land Management

Indian Lands

Private

State

City, County, & State Park

US Fish & Wildlife Service
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 77

Table 7e. Gibraltar SRMA (See Map 23) 

 A closer relationship with the natural world

Community/Social:

 Enhanced lifestyle  Enlarged sense of community dependence on public lands 

Environmental:

 Greater retention of distinctive landscape features  Improved soil, water, and air quality  Greater protection of fish, wildlife, and plant habitat from growth, development, and p Conservation of entire sustainable ecosystems 

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire Increased property value Enhanced ability for visitors to find areas providing wanted recreation experiences an

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adminis

Remoteness: Primitive

Naturalness: Primitive

Facilities: Primitive 

Contacts: Primitive

Group Size: Primitive 

Evidence of Use: Primitive

MechaniManagem

Visitor S

Potential Outcomes  The BLM will manage this zone to protect wilderness values and provide the targeted 
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 78

Table 7e. Gibraltar SRMA (See Map 23) 

RR-21 Desired Future Conditions for Gibraltar RMZ 2 – Cienega will be generally managed fo

following:

Niche Motorized access to back country trails in natural scenic environment with plentiful oppor

appreciation and interpretation of the historical mining district.

Management Objective Manage this zone to provide opportunities for community residents and regional, national, 

use the area seasonally to engage in sustainable primitive day-use/camping, OHV touring 

crawling. Opportunities will also be provided to learn about historical mining and to gain 

of the greater Gibraltar region though self-discovery. Recreational use and environmental 

enhance a more primitive experience; minor developments and regulatory signing may be 

Primary Activities  OHV touring/ATV

 Technical motorized trails  Dispersed camping Cultural/historic sightseeing  Wildlife watching

Experiences  Developing skills and abilities 

 Testing personal endurance Enjoying risk-taking adventure Savoring the total sensory experience of a natural landscape Escaping everyday responsibilities for awhile  Discussing equipment with others Feeling good about the way shared cultural heritage is being protected Enjoying access to outdoor amenities close to home Having others near by to help

Benefits Personal:

 Greater self-reliance Improved skills for outdoor enjoyment Closer relationship with the natural world 
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 79

Table 7e. Gibraltar SRMA (See Map 23) 

 Improved skills for outdoor enjoyment with others

Community/Social:

 Greater family bonding, improved parenting skills  Greater understanding of the community’s cultural identity Greater community involvement in recreation and other land use decisions

Environmental:

 Reduced negative human impacts Increase awareness and protection of natural landscapes  Reduced looting of historic and prehistoric sites  Sustainability of community’s cultural heritage

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire Enhanced ability for visitors to find areas providing wanted recreation experiences an Maintenance of community’s distinctive recreation-tourism market niche or character

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Admin

Remoteness: Rural DevelopedNaturalness: Rural Developed

Facilities: Rural Developed

Contacts: Rural DevelopedGroup Size: Rural Natural

Evidence of Use: Rural Natural

MechanManage

Visitor 

Potential Outcomes  Moderate improvements to achieve targeted benefits.

 Public education related to historic mining will be conducted to realize desired benefi The development of interpretive trails will further achieve the targeted benefits and re Areas will be identified for camping.
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 80

Table 7e. Gibraltar SRMA (See Map 23) 

RR-22 Desired Future Conditions for Gibraltar RMZ 3 – Shea Hills will be generally managed 

following:

Niche Primitive trekking and OHV touring in rugged scenic natural settings for visitors seeking a Management Objective Manage to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in a remote recreation experience. 

opportunities for community residents and regional visitors who use the area seasonally to 

use/camping, OHV touring opportunities and gain appreciation of the natural setting of the 

self-discovery. Naturalness and unconfined recreation will be prioritized to enhance a modevelopments and regulatory signing may be used very discreetly.

Primary Activities  Hiking

 OHV touring Wilderness access Wildlife viewing Rockhounding Cultural/historical sightseeing Commercial recreation permits Shooting Dispersed camping

Experiences  Developing skills and abilities 

 Testing personal endurance Enjoying risk-taking adventure Enjoying easy access to a natural landscape Escaping everyday responsibilities for awhile
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 81

Table 7e. Gibraltar SRMA (See Map 23) 

Benefits Personal:

 Greater self-reliance Improved skills for outdoor enjoyment Greater freedom from urban living

Community/Social:

 Enhanced lifestyle  Increasing independence/autonomy

Environmental:

 Increased awareness and protection of natural landscapes Maintenance of distinctive recreation setting character  Greater protection of fish, wildlife, and plant habitat from growth, development, and p Reduced negative human impacts

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire Improved economic stability for the local community

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adminis

Remoteness: Rural Natural Naturalness: Rural Natural Facilities: Rural Natural 

Contacts: Semi-Primitive

Group Size: Rural Natural

Evidence of Use: Rural Natural

Mechani

Managem

Visitor S

Potential Outcomes  Moderate improvements to achieve targeted benefits, increased effort to manage unau

realize potential for solitude, unconfined primitive activities. 

 Provide improvements to support OHV touring opportunities. Targeted environmental education, such as Leave-No-Trace, to improve user stewards Developed camping may be considered as a response to resource protection.
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 82

Table 7e. Gibraltar SRMA (See Map 23) 

RR-23 Desired Future Conditions for Gibraltar RMZ 4 – Buckskin Mesa will be generally man

providing the following:

Niche Trekking and OHV trail exploration for self-directed, primitive-mode challenge and recreaManagement Objective Manage this zone to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in personal exploration an

activities. Preserve the semi-primitive opportunities in this zone. Naturalness and unconfi

to enhance a more primitive experience. Minor developments and regulatory signing may 

Primary Activities  Wildlife watching 

 Hunting Hiking OHV touring Mountain biking Vista sightseeing and photography

Experiences  Testing personal endurance

 Developing skills and abilities  Experiencing a greater sense of independence Feeling good about solitude, being isolated and independent Savoring the total sensory experience of a natural landscape

Benefits Personal:

 Improved skills for outdoor enjoyment Enhanced sense of personal freedom Improved opportunity to view wildlife at close range 

Community/Social:

 Enlarged sense of community dependency on public lands 

Environmental:

 Increased awareness and protection of natural landscapes Greater protection of fish, wildlife, and plant habitat from growth, development, and p
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 83

Table 7e. Gibraltar SRMA (See Map 23) 

Economic: Increased desirability as a place to live or retire

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adminis

Remoteness: Semi-PrimitiveNaturalness: Semi-Primitive

Facilities: Semi-Primitive

Contacts: Primitive

Group Size: Semi-PrimitiveEvidence of Use: Semi-Primitive

Mechani

Managem

Visitor S

Potential Outcomes  The BLM will manage this area to maintain the semi-primitive setting. The current d

maintained.

RR-24 Desired Future Conditions for Gibraltar RMZ 5 – Shea Road/Osborne Wash will be ge

Developed providing the following:

Niche Unrestricted OHV use/play and dispersed camping opportunities as a staging area for a wiManagement Objective Manage to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in dispersed camping, unrestricted 

and also will serve as a staging area for long-range OHV touring. Areas for this form of re

Manage this zone to provide opportunities for regional, national, and international visitors engage in sustainable access for unrestricted OHV recreation in a natural environment. Na

recreation will be prioritized; minor developments and regulatory signing will be necessary 

play and to focus riders onto designated routes on leaving the open area.

Primary Activities  4×4 vehicles

 ATV use  OHV Golf carts/UTV (modified utility) Hill climbing Motorcycle use  Permitted motorcycle/ATV Dry or dispersed camping
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 84

Table 7e. Gibraltar SRMA (See Map 23) 

 Staging area

Experiences  Developing skills and abilities 

 Enjoying the esteem of others Testing personal endurance Gaining a greater sense of self-confidence Telling others about the trip Enjoying risk-taking adventure Discussing equipment with others

Benefits Personal:

 Improved mental wellbeing  Greater self-reliance Improved skills for outdoor enjoyment

Community/Social:

 Heightened sense of satisfaction with the community  Greater community involvement in recreation and other land use decisions

Environmental:

 Maintenance of distinctive recreation setting character  Improved maintenance of physical facilities Greater community ownership and stewardship of park, recreation, and natural resour

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire Increased property values
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 85

Table 7e. Gibraltar SRMA (See Map 23) 

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adminis

Remoteness: Rural DevelopedNaturalness: Rural Developed

Facilities: Rural Developed

Contacts: Rural DevelopedGroup Size: Rural Developed

Evidence of Use: Rural Natural

Mechani

ManagemVisitor S

Potential Outcomes  The BLM will manage this RMZ as OHV open area, which as such, will fully realize 

 The BLM will cooperate with USFWS, AGFD, Arizona State Parks OHV grant progr

jurisdictions.

 The BLM will prioritize the use of methods and mechanisms to contain OHV recreati Visitor services and law enforcement patrols will be increased to improve resource pro The identification and development of individual and group campsites will enhance th

Table 7f. Havasu Urban SRMA (See Map 24) 

RR-25 Desired Future Conditions for Havasu Urban Special Recreation Management Area are Primary Market Strategy: CommunityMarket Residents of Lake Havasu City and surrounding communitiesRR-26 Desired Future Conditions for Havasu Urban RMZ 1 – Standard Wash will be generally 

providing the following:

Niche Unrestricted OHV use/play and dispersed camping opportunities as a staging area for a wi
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 86

Table 7f. Havasu Urban SRMA (See Map 24) 

Management Objective Manage to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in dispersed camping, unrestricted 

The zone will also serve as a staging area for long-range OHV touring. Areas for this form 

region. Manage this zone to provide opportunities for regional, national, and international 

seasonally to engage in sustainable access for unrestricted OHV recreation in a natural env

unconfined recreation will be prioritized; minor developments and regulatory signing will 

control OHV play and to focus riders onto designated routes upon leaving the open area.

Primary Activities  44 vehicles

 ATV use  OHV Golf carts/UTV (modified utility) Hill climbing Motorcycle use  Permitted motorcycle/ATV Dry or dispersed camping Staging area

Experiences  Developing skills and abilities 

 Enjoying the esteem of others Testing personal endurance Gaining a greater sense of self-confidence Telling others about the trip Enjoying risk-taking adventure Discussing equipment with others
!

!"a

!"eSPECIAL

RECREATION

MANAGEMENT

LAKE AREA HAVASU

CITY

Map 24 Havasu Urban

Special Recreation Management Area

Lake Havasu

Field Office

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management May 2007

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles ± 0 1 2 3 4 5 Kilometers

T14N

T13N

T12N

T15N

T04N

R25E R26E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E R26E R27E

#

?Ù

Crossman Peak

RMZ 2

Havasu Urban

Interface

RMZ 3

Standard

Wash

RMZ 1

LAKE HAVASU CITY

R20W R19W

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

R18W

Havasu Urban Special Recreation Management Area

Land Status Havasu Urban SRMA

Recreation Management Zones

Township Grid

US and State Highways

Routes

Lakes

Bureau of Land Management

Indian Lands

Private

State

City, County, & State Park
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 87

Table 7f. Havasu Urban SRMA (See Map 24) 

Benefits Personal:

 Improved mental wellbeing  Greater self-reliance Improved skills for outdoor enjoyment

Community/Social:

 Heightened sense of satisfaction with the community  Greater community involvement in recreation and other land use decisions

Environmental:

 Maintenance of distinctive recreation setting character  Improved maintenance of physical facilities Greater community ownership and stewardship of park, recreation, and natural resour

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire Increased property values

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adminis

Remoteness: Rural Developed

Naturalness: Suburban

Facilities: Rural Developed

Contacts: Suburban

Group Size: Rural DevelopedEvidence of Use: Suburban

Mechani

ManagemVisitor S

Potential Outcomes  The BLM will manage this RMZ as OHV open area, which as such, will fully realize 

 The BLM will cooperate with USFWS, AGFD, Arizona State Parks OHV grant progr

jurisdictions.

 The BLM will prioritize the use of methods and mechanisms to contain OHV recreati Visitor services and law enforcement patrols will be increased to improve resource pr The identification and development of individual and group campsites will enhance th
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 88

Table 7f. Havasu Urban SRMA (See Map 24) 

RR-27 Desired Future Conditions for Havasu Urban RMZ 2 – Crossman Peak will be generally 

providing the following:

Niche Scenic hiking and equestrian opportunities and limited OHV trail riding for personal exploManagement Objective Manage this zone to provide visitors and residents with a scenic backdrop to Lake Havasu 

SRMA and provided access to those targeted activities. Further, manage this zone to prov

residents to engage in sustainable personal discovery, while protecting critical resources lo

serves as open space for the residents of Lake Havasu City. Partnerships will be sought to 

within the life of this plan most responsible visitors will attain a greater appreciation for thand cultural resources found therein.

Primary Activities  Hiking

 OHV touring Backpacking Equestrian/Trail riding  Rockhounding

Experiences  Developing skills and abilities 

 Testing personal endurance Enjoying risk-taking adventure Savoring the total sensory experience of a natural landscape Escaping everyday responsibilities for awhile 

Benefits Personal:

 Greater self-reliance Improved skills for outdoor enjoyment Closer relationship with the natural world 

Community/Social:

 Enhanced lifestyle  Increasing independence/autonomy
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 89

Table 7f. Havasu Urban SRMA (See Map 24) 

Environmental: Reduced negative human impacts Increase awareness and protection of natural landscapes 

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adminis

Remoteness: Semi-PrimitiveNaturalness: Semi-Primitive

Facilities: Primitive 

Contacts: PrimitiveGroup Size: Primitive Evidence of Use: Semi-Primitive

Mechani

Managem

Visitor S

Potential Outcomes  Minimal improvements to achieve targeted benefits, increased effort to manage unaut

potential for solitude, unconfined primitive activities. 

 Outfitting/guiding could be considered in certain situations. The BLM will emphasize maintaining the scenic quality of this RMZ due to the fact th

Lake Havasu City. 

 Partnerships will be created and maintained with Lake Havasu City and Mohave Cou

RR-28 Desired Future Conditions for Havasu Urban RMZ 3 – Havasu Urban Interface will be 

Developed providing the following:

Niche Access to public lands with opportunities for hiking, equestrian use, OHV, wildlife and cu

recreational activities.

Management Objective Manage this zone to provide opportunities for visitors and residents quick access to engage 

benefits to persons, community, and environment. Manage this zone to provide opportuni

engage in sustainable personal discovery, while protecting critical resources located in the 

space for the residents of Lake Havasu City. Partnerships will be sought to help improve t

this plan most responsible visitors will attain a greater appreciation for their public lands a

resources found therein.
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 90

Table 7f. Havasu Urban SRMA (See Map 24) 

Primary Activities  Hiking

 OHV touring Backpacking Equestrian/Trail riding  Rockhounding

Experiences  Developing skills and abilities 

 Testing personal endurance Enjoying risk-taking adventure Savoring the total sensory experience of a natural landscape Escaping everyday responsibilities for awhile 

Benefits Personal:

 Greater self-reliance Improved skills for outdoor enjoyment Closer relationship with the natural world 

Community/Social:

 Enhanced lifestyle  Increasing independence/autonomy

Environmental:

 Reduced negative human impacts Increase awareness and protection of natural landscapes 

Economic:

 Increased desirability as a place to live or retire
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 91

Table 7f. Havasu Urban SRMA (See Map 24) 

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adminis

Remoteness: Semi-PrimitiveNaturalness: Semi-Primitive

Facilities: Primitive 

Contacts: Primitive

Group Size: Primitive Evidence of Use: Semi-Primitive

Mechani

Managem

Visitor S

Table 7g. Plomosa SRMA (See Map 25) 

RR-29 Desired Future Conditions for Plomosa Special Recreation Management Area are as:Primary Market Strategy: UndevelopedMarket Visitors to and residents of the local communities in the area RR-30 Desired Future Conditions for Plomosa RMZ 1 – Back Country Byway will be generally 

providing the following:

Niche Driving for pleasure along a scenic byway connecting two communities.Management Objective Manage this zone to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in targeted activities and g

of the byway theme though interpretation. Reduce impacts to natural and cultural resource

opportunities from potentially conflicting uses. Developments and signing will be increas

activities.

Primary Activities  Cultural/historical sightseeing

 Vistas and photography Wildlife watching  Public education  Mountain biking OHV touring
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 92

Table 7g. Plomosa SRMA (See Map 25) 

Experiences  Enjoying closeness of family and friends 

 Learning more about the things that are there Enjoy having easy access to natural landscapes Enjoying access to hands-on environmental learning

Benefits Personal:

 Improved outdoor knowledge and self-confidence Enhanced awareness and understanding of nature

Community/Social:

 Enlarged sense of community dependence on public lands  Increase community involvement, reducing erosion of the community’s small-town, r

Environmental:

 Reduced wildlife harassment by users of recreational facilities  Greater protection of area’s historical structures and archaeological sites  Reduced negative impacts such as litter, trampling of vegetation, and unplanned trails  Increased ecologically friendly tourism operations

Economic:

 Improved stability of the local economy More positive contributions to local and regional economies Increased local tourism revenues

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adminis

Remoteness: Rural DevelopedNaturalness: Rural DevelopedFacilities: Rural Developed

Contacts: SuburbanGroup Size: Rural Natural

Evidence of Use: Rural Developed

Mechani

Managem

Visitor S

Potential Outcomes  Manage this RMZ to realize the targeted benefits.

 The BLM will consider increased interpretive signing, day-use sites, and Watchable W
!

!"a

!"e SPECIAL

RECREATION

MANAGEMENT

AREA LAKE

HAVASU

CITY

Map 25 Plomosa

Special Recreation Management Area

Lake Havasu

Field Office

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management May 2007

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles ± 0 1 2 3 4 5 Kilometers

T05N

T04N

T07N

R17W

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E R26E R27E

#

!"a #

?Ù

?À

Iv

BOUSE

BRENDA

Bouse Plain

RMZ 3

Bouse Plain

RMZ 3

Plomosa Mountains

RMZ 2

Bouse Plain

RMZ 3

Back Country

Byway

RMZ 1

RMZ 2

Plomosa

Mountains

R19W R18W

T08N

T06N

R16W

Plomosa Special Recreation Management Area

Land Status

Plomosa SRMA

Recreation Management Zones

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

State Highway

Paved Road

Routes

Bureau of Land Management

Private

State

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 93

Table 7g. Plomosa SRMA (See Map 25) 

RR-31 Desired Future Conditions for Plomosa RMZ 2 – Plomosa Mountains will be generally m

providing the following:

Niche Trekking and seasonal OHV use for wildlife appreciation and personal challenge.Management Objective Manage this zone to provide visitors and residents with a scenic backdrop and provide acc

Naturalness and unconfined recreation will be prioritized to enhance a more natural public 

developments and regulatory signing may be used very discreetly. Further, manage this zo

community residents and visitors to engage in sustainable personal discovery, while protec

the area. Partnerships will be sought to help improve this RMZ so that within the life of th

will attain a greater appreciation for their public lands and the natural and cultural resource

Primary Activities  Cultural/historical sightseeing

 Vistas and photography Wildlife watching  Public education  Mountain biking OHV touring Hunting Hiking

Experiences  Enjoying closeness of family and friends 

 Learning more about the things that are there Enjoy having easy access to natural landscapes Feeling good about the way shared cultural heritage is being protected

Benefits Personal:

 Improved outdoor knowledge and self-confidence Enhanced awareness and understanding of nature

Community/Social:

 Enlarged sense of community dependence on public lands  Increase community involvement, reducing erosion of the community’s small-town, r
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 94

Table 7g. Plomosa SRMA (See Map 25) 

 Greater sense of place and community identity 

Environmental:

 Reduced wildlife harassment by users of recreational facilities  Greater protection of area’s historical structures and archaeological sites  Reduced negative impacts such as litter, vegetative trampling, and unplanned trails  Increased ecologically friendly tourism operations

Economic:

 Improved local economy stability  More positive contributions to local and regional economies

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adminis

Remoteness: Rural Natural Naturalness: Semi-Primitive

Facilities: Rural Natural 

Contacts: Semi-Primitive

Group Size: Semi-PrimitiveEvidence of Use: Rural Natural

Mechani

Managem

Visitor S

Potential Outcomes  The BLM will manage this area to maintain the semi-primitive setting. 

 Support environmentally responsible OHV touring. Minor improvements may be con

protection and public safety. 

RR-32 Desired Future Conditions for Plomosa RMZ 3 – Bouse Plain will be generally managed 

following:

Niche Dispersed camping and OHV opportunities for pleasure.Management Objective Manage this zone to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in challenging personal di

Allow visitors to appreciate the natural setting while protecting the natural resources of the 

be sought to help improve this RMZ with minimal developments, so that within the life of 

visitors will attain a greater appreciation for their public lands and the natural and cultural 

Primary Activities  Sightseeing

 Wildlife watching 
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 95

Table 7g. Plomosa SRMA (See Map 25) 

 OHV touring Dispersed camping Hunting Hiking Fitness activities  Rockhounding

Experiences  Enjoying closeness of family and friends 

 Learning more about the things that are there Enjoying easy access to natural landscapes Experiencing a greater sense of independence Participating frequently in enjoyable activities in desirable settings  Enjoying solitude in a country setting

Benefits Personal:

 Improved outdoor knowledge and self-confidence Enhanced awareness and understanding of nature Improved mental wellbeing  Stronger ties with families and friends An enhanced sense of personal freedom

Community/Social:

 Enlarged sense of community dependence on public lands  Greater sense of place and community identity  A heightened sense of satisfaction with the community

Environmental:

 Reduced wildlife harassment by uses of recreational facilities Reduced negative impacts such as litter, trampling of vegetation, and unplanned trails 

Economic:

 Improved stability of the local economy
Bureau of Land Management 

Lake Havasu Field Office Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 96

Table 7g. Plomosa SRMA (See Map 25) 

 More positive contributions to local and regional economies

Setting Character Conditions Physical Social Adminis

Remoteness: Rural Natural Naturalness: Rural Natural Facilities: Rural Natural 

Contacts: Semi-Primitive

Group Size: Semi-PrimitiveEvidence of Use: Rural Natural

Mechani

ManagemVisitor S

Potential Outcomes  The BLM will manage this area to maintain the Rural Natural setting. 

 Support environmentally responsible OHV touring. Moderate improvements such as trail signing and naming, interpretive signs, and day-

tools to protect resources and public safety and to enhance the recreation opportunitieavailable in this RMZ. 

Table 7h. Extensive Recreation Management Area (ERMA) (See 

RR-33 Desired Future Conditions for Extensive Recreation Management Area are: The BLM w

custodial manner to ensure quality of experience and enjoyment of natural and cultural resfor enhanced recreation experiences and enjoyment while protecting resources, ensuring presolving user conflicts. The BLM’s approach will include all manner of responsible publrecreation opportunities. These activities and settings may range across the six prescribed location (see Map 21). These lands are all BLM-administered public lands within the planSRMAs, and are subject to less intensive management. However, these lands will be proterecreation settings (see Map 20), as well as natural and cultural resources.

Potential Outcomes The ERMA will be managed in a purely custodial manner across a spectrum of recreation 

all environmentally sound public-lands-dependent recreation opportunity benefits.
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 97

May 2007

Land Use Allocations 

RR-34. 1,097,495 acres will be allocated as the ERMA; the remaining BLM acres will 

be allocated between seven SRMAs as detailed below. 

Colorado River Nature Center SRMA 

RR-35. The Colorado River Nature Center SRMA is 363 acres, an area that includes 

the previous facilities developed in partnership with other agencies (see 

Map 21). 

The SRMA is divided into two RMZs (see Map 21): 

RMZ 1 — Southern Bluff – 100 acres 

RMZ 2 — River Side – 263 acres 

Lake Havasu SRMA 

RR-36. The Lake Havasu SRMA (41,918 acres) will include an area from the south 

edge of the Havasu Wildlife Refuge to the Parker Dam (see Appendix J) 

including both AZ and CA shorelines. The area will also include the Lake 

Havasu Aubrey Hills region west of SR 95 and the Whipple Mountains west of 

the CA shoreline (see Maps 21 and 22). The SRMA will consist of 8 RMZs 

that will have management prescribed to them to achieve the goals, setting, and 

experiences desired for recreational resources in each. 

RMZ 1 – Whipple Mountains – 8,859 acres 

RMZ 2 – North Aubrey – 4,587 acres 

RMZ 3 – Aubrey Hills – 10,251 acres 

RMZ 4 – AZ Shoreline – 1,698 acres 

RMZ 5 – Havasu Springs – 1,339 acres 

RMZ 6 – CA Shoreline – 1,588 acres 

RMZ 7 – North Lake Havasu – 9,752 acres 

RMZ 8 – South Lake Havasu – 3,844 acres 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 98

May 2007

Parker Strip SRMA 

RR36. The Parker Strip SRMA will continue to manage the area outlined in the 

Parker Strip Recreation Area Management Plan (1993) (see Map 21). This 

consists of approximately 12,913 acres of land. Three RMZs will be identified 

within the SRMA. 

RMZ 1 – Parker Strip Urban – 2,890 acres 

RMZ 2 – Crossroads and Copper-basin – 2,602 acres 

RMZ 3 – Parker Strip Back Country – 7,421 acres 

Swansea SRMA 

RR-37. The Swansea SRMA (3,837 acres) will encompass the historical town site and 

outlying areas (see Map 21). This SRMA comprises one RMZ consisting of 

the total acreage of the SRMA. 

Gibraltar SRMA 

RR-38. The Gibraltar SRMA (50,691 acres) will include from the Bill Williams 

wildlife refuge to Osborne Wash, Shea Road, and west to the tribal lands and 

Parker urban interface. Within this area five RMZs are identified (see Maps 21 

and 23). 

RMZ 1 – Gibraltar Wilderness – 18,719 acres 

RMZ 2 – Cienega – 8,876 acres 

RMZ 3 – Shea Hills – 7,234 acres 

RMZ 4 – Buckskin Mesa – 15,118 acres 

RMZ 5 –Shea Road/Osborne Wash – 744 acres 

Havasu Urban SRMA 

RR-39. The Havasu Urban SRMA (49, 470 acres) is identified as the area immediately 

east of Lake Havasu City and to the north and south of the city limits. It 

extends back up towards Crossman Peak. Within this SRMA three RMZs are 

allocated (see Maps 21 and 24). 

RMZ 1 – Standard Wash – 6,291 acres 

RMZ 2 – Crossman Peak – 24,970 acres 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 99

May 2007

RMZ 3 – Havasu Urban Interface – 18,209 acres 

Plomosa SRMA 

RR-40. The Plomosa SRMA (102,053 acres) contains the public lands between Bouse 

and Brenda (see Maps 21 and 25). Three SRZs have been identified. 

RMZ 1 – Back Country Byway – 5,759 acres 

RMZ 2 – Plomosa Mountains – 27,243 acres 

RMZ 3 – Bouse Plain – 69,051 acres 

Management Actions 

Administrative Actions, such as the Framework for SRMAs are listed in Appendix B, 

Administrative Actions and Standard Operating Procedures.

RR-41. Where long-term impacts from recreational use patterns are observed or 

anticipated that exceed acceptable thresholds, control activities through 

specialized management actions such as designated campsites, permits, and 

limitations on number of users, types of use, and duration of use will be 

implemented to maintain the prescribed social settings and targeted benefits.

Recreation management plans will be reviewed to ensure that they are 

maintaining the prescribed social settings. 

RR-42. No new development of any kind will be allowed in the floodplain of desert 

washes except for public health and safety or resource protection. 

RR-43. New concession leases will be allowed in accordance with the desired ROS 

settings of the area and NEPA compliance. 

RR-44. Vending will be allowed except in areas identified as primitive or semiprimitive under prescribed recreation settings (see Map 20), and only if the 

issuance of the permits will be consistent with the criteria outlined in 

Appendix I. 

RR-45. Custodial management within the ERMA will include the development and 

construction of orientation and informational kiosks at scenic views, trail heads 

to support resource protection and public safety, and wildlife viewing areas to 

interpret the cultural, wildlife, and recreational value of the area. 

RR-46. Throughout the lands managed by Lake Havasu Field Office, unless otherwise 

posted or restricted, dispersed camping (in undeveloped areas) is allowed 

without permit for no longer than 14 days within any 28-day period. After the 

14th day, campers must move beyond a 25-mile radius of their previous camp. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 100

May 2007

This decision does not apply to concessions, public agency leases, and LongTerm Visitor Areas (LTVAs). 

RR-47. BLM will coordinate with incorporated towns and cities to create restrictions or 

limitations to dispersed camping on public lands within the boundaries of these 

towns.

RR-48. Collection of dead and down wood within the Lake Havasu Field Office will be 

prohibited except for wood collected within the vicinity (100 feet) of a 

dispersed campsite for campsite use only. Firewood collection for campsites 

may be closed within specific areas identified in activity plans. Education will 

be used to promote use of commercial firewood and camping stoves on public 

lands. (See Biological Resources Management.)

RR-49. Paintball activities will not be allowed in WAs and ACEC. Paintball activities 

will be allowed beyond 0.25 mile of any established facilities or sites, 

campgrounds, residences, trailheads, staging areas, roads, Special 

Designations, and other areas as posted. In addition, paintball activities will be 

restricted in accordance with any applicable local and state laws governing 

recreational shooting. Further stipulations will apply, if SRPs are required, and 

are outlined in Appendix I. 

RR-50. Recreational shooting is governed by state law. These laws apply across the 

field office boundaries for the respective states. The activities may be further 

restricted where public safety and significant resource concerns exist. Shooting 

sports will continue to be allowed in R&PPs and other leases specifically 

designed to manage these activities. 

RR-51. The Parker 400 course will continue as a competitive, commercial-use offhighway race course. The season of use will continue to run from December 1 

through February 28. The race will only be authorized on designated routes. 

The specific course alignment will be determined though a NEPA process. The 

Parker 400 course will be limited to two competitive-use events per year (see 

Map 26). 

RR-52. No additional competitive-use off-highway race courses will be allowed, 

except in designated open areas (see Travel Management).

RR-53. Specialized vehicle recreation (see Glossary for definition) activities will be 

allowed in open areas and on routes/trails designated for this purpose. 

RR-54. The establishment of new camping areas including LTVAs will be based on 

criteria outlined in Appendix I. 
#

#

#

#

#

#

X

X

X

X

X

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Ariz

o

n

a

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave

County

La Paz

County

Yavapai County Maricopa

County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

Bill Williams

River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R14WR15WR16WR17WR18WR19WR20WR21WR22W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 26 Allocated Competitive Use Routes

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

County Roads

Parker 400 Approved Routes

X Parker 400 Pits

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Paved

Maintained Unpaved

Rivers and Canals

Lakes
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 101

May 2007

Lake Havasu SRMA 

RR-55. Development of visitor-oriented facilities will include and will not be limited 

to, interpretive installations, parking and boat ramps, contact stations and both 

hiking and water trails. 

RR-56. Along the AZ/CA shoreline (RMZs 4 and 6) overnight camping will be limited 

to recreation sites allocated to that use, including undeveloped areas signed to 

that effect. 

RR-57. New overnight camping and day use sites will be developed in conjunction 

with environmental mitigation and assessment consistent with the LCRMSCP. 

Any facilities established on the California side (RMZ 6) will provide for a 

more primitive and isolated experience. 

RR-58. Lake Havasu Field Office will continue to charge a day use/camping fees for 

BLM-developed sites within the area. The fee will be appropriate to the 

economics of maintaining the area and provide for fair value in recreation. 

RR-59. A scenic non-motorized trail will be developed in RMZs 2, 3, and 4.

Coordination and partnerships with other landowners, agencies, and user 

groups will be undertaken to achieve this development. 

RR-60. Within the SRMA BLM will require SRPs for organized events and activities 

that impact the public lands comprising the lake bottom and shoreline. 

RR-61. Lake Havasu Field Office and the Lake Havasu Fisheries Program partners and 

other interests will develop no more than three additional free public shoreline 

fishing facilities on the Arizona side of Lake Havasu at either Black Rock 

Cove, Contact Point, or Partners Point (see Map 27) (RMZ 4). 

RR-62. Educational and informational buoys will be installed to alert the public to 

important fish and wildlife habitat areas. 

Parker Strip SRMA 

RR-63. Camping in the Parker Strip SRMA will be limited to concession resorts and 

designated campgrounds (see Map 27), or to at least 0.5 mile from all 

maintained paved roads, unless otherwise posted. 

Swansea SRMA 

RR-64. Camping will be allowed within the SRMA only in the identified campsites for 

a maximum stay of 3 nights. 

RR-65. Interpretive trails will be constructed to protect resources and provided for 

visitor enjoyment and safety. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 102

May 2007

Gibraltar SRMA 

RR-66. Within the SRMA, except for the WA (RMZ 1), BLM will consider developing 

campsites and facilities to protect important natural and cultural resources and 

to provide for growing recreation demand. 

RR-67. Low-impact trails may be developed and interpretive materials provided at 

trailheads.

RR-68. Within Shea Road/Osborne Wash area (RMZ 5) Lake Havasu Field Office will 

develop OHV staging areas, facilities for enhanced use of the area and 

educational kiosks. Sensitive wildlife habitat, cultural resources, and public 

safety issues will be identified and mitigated for in this area. 

Havasu Urban SRMA 

RR-69. Within Standard Wash (RMZ 1) Lake Havasu Field Office will develop OHV 

staging areas, facilities for enhanced use of the area and educational kiosks. 

Sensitive wildlife habitat, cultural resources, and public safety issues will be 

identified and mitigated for in this area. 

RR-70. Standard Wash (RMZ 1) will be closed to recreational shooting activities 

(except legal hunting). 

RR-71. The Craggy Wash area will be maintained as a 14-day camping area. The 

camping area will be identified with signs. This approach will include 

enforcing a 1-mile no-camping limit from the city limits of Lake Havasu City. 

RR-72. The Crossman Peak Natural Scenic Area (26,080 acres) addressed in the 1987 

YRMP is addressed as RMZ 2 within the Havasu Urban SRMA. 

Plomosa SRMA 

RR-73. Recreation activities will be limited to pastimes that are sensitive to cultural 

and natural resources within RMZ 2. These limitations will include seasonal 

restrictions to OHV use to enhance protection of sensitive resources, such as 

wildlife habitat. 

RR-74. BLM will encourage learning and appreciation of the natural world by 

developing interpretive kiosks throughout the SRMA. 

Monitoring

Detailed monitoring for potential recreational impacts to soil, water, and air resources 

along the Colorado River will be addressed through either the Lake Havasu SRMA 

implementation plan and/or the Lake Havasu Regional Management Plan. Monitoring 

activities will be accomplished through partnerships. 
!"e

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

San Bernardino County

California

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

CAP

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Colorado River

Colora

do River

!

!"a

!"e Area of

Interest

LAKE

HAVASU

CITY

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

R22W R20WR21W R19W R17WR18W R15WR16W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E R26E R27E

Map 27 Existing Developed Recreation Sites and

Potential Fishing Dock Locations

Lake Havasu

Field Office

0 10 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management May 2007

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map. ± 0 10 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

FF

F

F +

?Ù

PARTNERS POINT

CONTACT POINT

BLACK ROCK COVE

LAKE HAVASU CITY

FF

F

+

+

0 2 1 Miles

0 1 2Miles

Lake Havasu

Boat-in Campsites

Parker Strip

Developed Recreation Sites

#Kiosk

ï Picnic Area

F Public Fishing Dock

Potential Recreation Sites

F Potential Public Fishing Dock

Campground

Day Use Area

OHV Open Area

Concession Lease

County Roads

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

Colorado River Management Unit Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Paved

Maintained Unpaved

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Boat Ramp

P Boat-in Campsite

+

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 103

May 2007

Public lands within ERMA will be monitored so that the quality of desired experience, 

environmental setting and potential activities which were identified during the planning 

process and prescribed by this Approved RMP (see Prescribed Recreation Settings, 

Map 20) are being maintained. Annually and on a rotating basis, one to three sites/areas 

within the ERMA will be evaluated for the seven elements used to describe recreational 

settings: Access, Remoteness, Naturalness, Site Management, Visitor Management, 

Social Encounters, Visitor Impacts (see Appendix I). 

Other recreation program and natural resource issues will be addressed in the 

development of Special Recreation Management Area Plans. Activity planning 

framework(s), including general monitoring requirements for each SRMA are provided in 

Appendix B under Administrative Actions. These individual activity-oriented plans will 

set monitoring standards and indicators that assess whether recreation benefits/objectives 

are being met and setting prescriptions are being maintained. Land health will also be 

measured in relation to existing standards and/or Desired Future Conditions for natural 

resources. The plans will be developed according to existing priorities, Approved RMP 

implementation schedules, and available future funding levels. 

Until the SRMAs plans are completed, each RMZ will be monitored annually for the 

Setting Character Conditions as described in the Approved RMP (see Desired Future 

Conditions Tables 7a through 7g for each RMZ). The BLM will monitor the seven 

elements as described for the ERMA monitoring, to establish that quality of experiences 

and settings provided in these RMZ continue to be met or will meet the prescribed 

recreation setting. 

Special recreation use permits and vendor permits will be monitored for compliance and 

effectiveness on an as-needed basis through the NEPA process. 

Concession leases will be monitored for compliance and effectiveness on an as-needed 

basis through the existing Concession Review Policy on a quarterly basis and the NEPA 

process, as needed. The results of the quarterly compliance will be compiled annually 

and submitted to the Field Manager. 

Any new development will be monitored for compliance utilizing site-specific 

stipulations developed during the NEPA process. Additionally, the impact of recreation 

concession facilities on recreational, cultural, and natural resources will be monitored as 

needed. Baseline collection of data will be identified during activity plan development. 

The frequency of monitoring will be determined after the collection of baseline data. 

Photo points will be initiated at popular boat-in camp sites, dispersed camping areas, and 

OHV RMZ to document potential impacts, erosion, and existing plant community at a 

minimum of 20 such BLM facilities/sites each year. Photos will be repeated at 5-year 

intervals. Additionally, as many as five aquatic locations adjoining recreational facilities 

will be sampled annually during periods of high use to determine compliance with 

appropriate state standards for primary contact recreation and warm water fish habitat. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 104

May 2007

Remote sensing techniques using satellite and low-level imagery will be used to 

document total boats on the water at one time on a summer holiday weekend, along with 

the shoreline footprint created by this use. This will be repeated at 5-year intervals to 

understand use patterns, measure compliance with prescribed recreation settings, and 

document growth within the watershed. 

Noise throughout public land reaches of Lake Havasu will be monitored during high use 

periods to document cumulative noise extremes relative to prescribed recreation settings, 

state law, and worker safety. 

Annual data collected on recreational activities (e.g., visitation, SRPs, and conditions of 

facilities) will be reported in the BLM Recreation Management Information System 

(RMIS) and Facilities Maintenance Information System (FAMS). 

Completion of these recreation-oriented plans will be tracked and reported on a 5-year 

basis through the plan evaluation schedule. Resource monitoring obligations and 

protocols generated through development of the above plans will be progressively 

included into Field Office monitoring schedules. Resource monitoring findings and 

trends derived from other activities within RMZs will be combined with information 

from recreation activity plans to be reported concisely in the Annual Planning Update 

Report and Summary to the Field Office Manager. 

Special Designations 

The following are recognized land use designations for protection of one or more 

sensitive resources that will be used in this Approved RMP: ACEC, Back Country 

Byway, Wild and Scenic River, Wilderness/WSA. 

Congressional Designations 

Wilderness 

Desired Future Conditions for Wilderness Areas

WM-1. To provide for the long-term protection and preservation of the designated 

area’s wilderness character under the principle of non-degradation. The area’s 

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 historical value present will be managed so 

that they will remain unimpaired. 

WM-2. To manage the WA for the use and enjoyment of visitors in a manner that will 

leave the area unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness. The 

wilderness resources will be dominant in all management decisions where a 

choice must be made between preservation of wilderness and visitor use. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 105

May 2007

WM-3. To manage nonconforming but accepted uses permitted by the Wilderness Act 

and subsequent laws in a manner that will prevent unnecessary or undue 

degradation of the area’s wilderness character. Nonconforming uses are the 

exception rather than rule; therefore, emphasis is placed on maintaining 

wilderness character. 

Management Actions for Wilderness Areas

WM-4. Accommodate the traditional or sacred use that may be identified in the future 

by the tribes that historically used the WAs. 

WM-5. No recreational facilities, including trails, will be constructed within the WAs 

unless needed for public safety or the protection of natural conditions and/or 

any ecological, cultural, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, 

scenic, or historical value. 

Monitoring for Wilderness Areas

Each WA will be monitored annually for preservation of wilderness values (i.e., 

naturalness, opportunities for solitude, and unconfined recreation) and the condition of 

special features found within the area. Baseline conditions for each area will be 

referenced to analyze change, if any. Existing and future Wilderness Management Plans 

have focused/will focus on monitoring and management actions through the development 

of “Limits of Acceptable Change” standards and indicators. 

Wilderness Study Area (WSA) 

In the 1990 Arizona Desert Wilderness Act Congress designated Cactus Plain as a WSA. 

This area will be managed in accordance to BLM’s Interim Management Policy and 

Guidelines for Lands under Wilderness Review H-8550-1, until Congress designates it as 

part of the National Wilderness Preservation System or removes it from its Congressional 

Wilderness Study Status. 

Desired Future Conditions for WSA

WM- 6. Cactus Plain WSA (see Map 29) will be managed in a manner that does not 

impair the suitability of the area for the future designation as wilderness by 

Congress.

Management Actions for WSA (if released by Congress)

WM-7. If Cactus Plain were released from WSA status by Congress, the management 

of the area will not change extensively. To protect the stabilized sand dune 

complex and the associated vegetation within the area, it will be classified 

“Limited to Authorized Users” (see Travel Management in this Approved 

RMP). Mineral material disposals will not be authorized within the area and 

mineral leasing will be subject to no surface occupancy (see also Mineral

Resources). The area will continue to be managed to meet the prescribed 

“Primitive” recreation setting (see Map 20). 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 106

May 2007

Monitoring for WSA

The WSA will be monitored annually to assure that management has met the nonimpairment standard set in BLM’s H-8002-1. 

Administrative Designations 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concerns (ACECs) 

Desired Future Conditions for ACECs

AC-1. Three Rivers Riparian ACEC will be managed to protect and prevent 

irreparable damage to the relevant characteristics or important values (Map 28). 

Relevance

 Riparian resources. 

 Threatened and endangered species habitat. 

 Scenic characteristics. 

Importance

 Protects riparian habitat, a limited resource in the southwestern United 

States.

 Provides for semi-primitive setting around the Bill Williams River while 

allowing for a degree of interaction with the natural environment around 

Lake Alamo. 

AC-2. Swansea Historic District ACEC will be managed to protect and prevent 

irreparable damage to the relevant characteristics or important values (Map 28). 

Relevance

 Historic Swansea Townsite Cultural/historical resources. Includes 

associated shafts, adits, historical features, roads, railroads, and the 

Swansea pump station. 

 Natural and scenic character. 

Importance

 Eligible for inclusion on the NRHP and provides a unique opportunity to 

interpret turn-of-the-century mining. 

 The remote, natural location is irreplaceable and adds to public’s 

understanding of the Swansea story. 

AC-3. Beale Slough Riparian and Cultural ACEC will be managed to protect and 

prevent irreparable damage to the relevant characteristics or important values 

(Map 28). 
#

#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Ariz

o

n

a

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

Yavapai County Maricopa

County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave

County

Beale

Slough

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE

HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

BOUSE

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

Burro Creek

Bullhead

Bajada

Crossman

Peak

Swansea

Historic District

Three Rivers

Riparian

Parker Dam Road

Back Country Byway

Plomosa

Parker-BouseSwansea Loop

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R14WR15WR16WR17WR18WR19WR20WR21WR22W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 28 Special Designations - ACECs and

Back Country Byways

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern

ACEC administered by Kingman Field Office

Existing Back Country Byway

Nominated Back Country Byway

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

US and State Highways

State Highway

Rivers and Canals

Lakes
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a$

!"a$

!"e$

!"e$

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

?u

Mohave County

La Paz County

Yavapai County Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

ARRASTRA

MOUNTAIN

CHEMEHUEVI

MOUNTAINS

WHIPPLE

MOUNTAINS

DEAD

MOUNTAINS

RAWHIDE

MOUNTAINS

HARCUVAR

MOUNTAINS

SWANSEA GIBRALTAR

MOUNTAIN

CACTUS PLAIN

WSA

EAST

CACTUS

PLAIN

1 3 2

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 29 Wilderness Areas, Wilderness Study Area,

and Determined Suitable Wild & Scenic River Segments

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Determined Suitable Wild & Scenic River Segments

Wilderness Area

Wilderness Study Area

Wild (Segments 1 & 3)

Scenic (Segment 2)

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 107

May 2007

Relevance

 Regional rare riparian resources and wildlife habitat. 

 Significant cultural resources, cultural sites within part of a regional 

cultural complex. 

 Place of traditional Native American importance. 

Importance

 The area has regional importance as it was set in reserve to stop the gradual 

decline of aquatic and associated riparian and terrestrial habitat along the 

Colorado River. 

 The area’s fragile and irreplaceable prehistoric sites are eligible for 

inclusion on the NRHP. 

 Assure that the public will continue to have an opportunity to have an 

interaction with the natural environment and cultural values of the area. 

 This area was part of mitigation for the channelization by Reclamation in 

1951 and identified by the LCRMSCP for its fish and wildlife values. 

AC-4. Bullhead Bajada Natural and Cultural ACEC will be managed to protect and 

prevent irreparable damage to the relevant characteristics or important values 

(Map 28). 

Relevance

 Historic Beale’s Wagon Road. 

 Adjacent prehistoric resources. 

 Habitat for Arizona State-listed Sonoran Desert tortoise. 

 Other special status or sensitive species present throughout the area. 

Importance

 The site complex is eligible for the NRHP and is of regional, if not 

national, importance. 

 Protects the complex from expanding urbanization around Bullhead City. 

 Beale built the wagon road in 1857 in the “Great Camel Experiment” along 

the 35th parallel. He followed existing prehistoric trails and associated 

sites.

AC-5. Crossman Peak Scenic ACEC will be managed to protect and prevent 

irreparable damage to the relevant characteristics or important values (Map 28). 

Relevance

 Significant places of traditional cultural importance. 

 Natural scenic backdrop or mountain preserve for Lake Havasu City. 

 Major lambing grounds for bighorn sheep. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 108

May 2007

 Large tract of public land that exhibits high degree of naturalness with little 

human modification of the landscape. 

Importance

 The scenic value of Crossman Peak is irreplaceable to the region. 

 Protects a sacred mountain, sites eligible for inclusion on the NRHP, and 

priority wildlife habitat from impacts of expanding urbanization in the 

Lake Havasu region. 

 Includes large area that provides the region with high opportunity for 

isolation from the sights and sounds of human development. 

Designations (see Map 28)

AC-6 Designate an estimated 2,246 acres of public lands as Three Rivers Riparian 

ACEC.

AC-7 Designate an estimated 5,973 acres of public lands as Swansea Historic District 

ACEC.

AC-8 Designate an estimated 2,395 acres of public lands as Beale Slough Riparian 

and Cultural ACEC. 

AC-9 Designate an estimated 7,090 acres of public lands as Bullhead Bajada Natural 

and Cultural ACEC. 

AC-10 Designate an estimated 48,855 acres of public lands as Crossman Peak Scenic 

ACEC.

Management Actions for ACECs

AC-11. Acquire all non-federal lands and minerals within ACEC boundary from 

willing sellers (Three Rivers Riparian, Swansea Historic District, Bullhead 

Bajada Natural and Cultural, Beale Slough Riparian and Cultural, Crossman 

Peak Scenic). 

AC-12. Develop desired plant community descriptions and design grazing prescriptions 

to achieve the desired plant community objectives (Three Rivers Riparian, 

Swansea Historic District, Crossman Peak Scenic). 

AC-13. In ACECs that contain recreation values, facilities will be limited to projects 

that protect the values that initiated the ACEC designation. The values for 

each ACEC include those settings and experiences that were identified as 

management objectives in recreation management prescriptions (Three Rivers 

Riparian, Swansea Historic District, Bullhead Bajada Natural and Cultural, 

Beale Slough Riparian and Cultural, Crossman Peak Scenic). 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 109

May 2007

AC-14. Camping will be limited to developed or signed sites (town site within Swansea 

Historic District, Bullhead Bajada Natural and Cultural, Beale Slough Riparian 

and Cultural). 

AC-15. Camping may be limited to identified areas. Some parts or whole ACEC will 

be closed to overnight camping. These allocations will be made in activitylevel plans (Three Rivers Riparian, Swansea Historic District, Crossman Peak 

Scenic).

AC-16. Prohibit recreational shooting, except for legal hunting, in identified areas (e.g., 

within town site at Swansea) or posted (Three Rivers Riparian, Swansea 

Historic District, Crossman Peak Scenic). 

AC-17. Prohibit recreational shooting, except for legal hunting, within ACEC 

boundaries (Bullhead Bajada Natural and Cultural, Beale Slough Riparian and 

Cultural).

AC-18. Hiking and non-motorized use will be encouraged by developing a nonmotorized trail network (Swansea Historic District, Bullhead Bajada Natural 

and Cultural, Beale Slough Riparian and Cultural, Crossman Peak Scenic). 

AC-19. Prohibit firewood collection in the Three Rivers Riparian ACEC, Beale Slough 

Riparian and Cultural ACEC, and within town site in Swansea Historic District 

ACEC.

AC-20. Prohibit driving except on designated open and signed routes in Swansea 

Townsite (Swansea Historic District). 

Monitoring for ACECs

ACECs designated through this Approved RMP will be monitored for potential damage 

to the relevant characteristics or important values. This monitoring will be accomplished 

primarily under guidance provided from the cultural and biological sections of this 

document. ACEC management plans will be developed in the future with associated 

monitoring plans. 

Back Country Byways 

Desired Future Conditions for Back Country Byways

BB-1. Provide for interconnectivity between local communities and to work in 

partnership for the regional development of eco- and recreational tourism. 

BB-2. Expose visitors to the local recreational resources, various multiple-use 

management programs and interpret natural, cultural, geological, and scenic 

features.
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 110

May 2007

BB-3. Manage these corridors in a manner consistent with the intrinsic values that 

will allow for a future byway designation. 

Designations

BB-4. An estimated 17 miles of the Parker Dam Road will continue as a designated 

National Back Country Byway (see Map 28). 

BB-5. An estimated 20 miles of the Plomosa Road is identified for nomination as a 

designated National Back Country Byway, which will be managed in 

partnership with local communities (see Map 28). 

BB-6. An estimated 47 miles of the Parker-Bouse-Swansea loop are identified for 

nomination as a designated National Back Country Byway, which will be 

managed in partnership with local communities (see Map 28). 

Management Actions for Back Country Byways

BB-7. Acquire easements where needed to ensure long-term public access. 

BB-8. Directional, safety, and interpretive signing will be installed to enhance public 

use, enjoyment, and stewardship of the route. A list of potential interpretive 

topics is in included in Appendix K. 

BB-9. Back Country Byways that cross bighorn sheep habitat will include protection 

measures such as but not limited to: speed limits of 25 miles per hour (mph) 

and warning signs and or speed bumps. 

Monitoring for Back Country Byways

The existing Back Country Byways visitation and facilities will be monitored annually to 

document effectiveness of interpretive messages, management actions, and to determine 

conditions and trends. Visitor use data and resources will be monitored to establish 

baseline conditions on the two potential byways, during the development of the TMPs. 

Specific monitoring requirements will be addressed in the development of the individual 

National Back Country Byway Plans and nomination packages. 

Potential Wild and Scenic River 

Desired Future Conditions for Potential Wild and Scenic Rivers

WR-1. Eligible stream segments will be managed to preserve their suitability for 

inclusion into the Wild and Scenic River System. Outstandingly remarkable 

values must be protected and the free-flowing character of the stream segments 

cannot be modified. 

WR-2. A new segment may be identified by the BLM for inclusion in the Wild and 

Scenic River system after possible acquisition of private property (Planet 

Ranch) on the Bill Williams River. A study/EIS will be completed within 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 111

May 2007

5 years of acquisition to determine the suitability of the segment for inclusion 

in the Wild and Scenic River system. 

Designations

WR-3. This RMP will not change the final Arizona Statewide Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Legislative Environmental Impact Statement and Study Report/Record of 

Decision (December 1994) determination that approximately 20.5 miles of the 

Bill Williams River are suitable for inclusion into the National Wild and Scenic 

Rivers System, classified as follows (see Map 29): 

 Segment 1 will be 8.3 miles in length, covering 2,314 acres, and 

determined suitable as Wild. 

 Segment 2 will be 5.1 miles in length, covering 494 acres, and determined 

suitable as Scenic. 

 Segment 3 will be 6.2 miles in length, covering 1,850 acres, and 

determined suitable as Wild. 

Congress has not acted on these determinations. Pending congressional action, these 

segments will be managed to protect the outstandingly remarkable values identified as 

making the segments eligible for protection under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. 

Management Actions for Potential Wild and Scenic Rivers

WR-4. The Management Actions listed in the final Arizona Statewide Wild and Scenic 

Rivers Legislative Environmental Impact Statement and Study Report/Record 

of Decision (Bureau of Land Management 1994) will apply only after Congress 

designates the Bill Williams River as Wild and Scenic. The ongoing 

management actions also listed in the final Arizona Statewide Wild and Scenic 

Rivers EIS would continue regardless of wild and scenic river designation. See 

Appendix K, Special Designations.

Monitoring for Potential Wild and Scenic Rivers

The segments suitable for inclusion into the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System will 

be monitored annually to assure the segments remain eligible for future Congressional 

action. This monitoring can be accomplished in conjunction with the monitoring done 

for Swansea and Rawhide Mountain Wilderness and Three River Riparian ACEC.

Additional hydrological and ecological standards for the Bill Williams River will be 

developed and monitored as part of BLM’s participation with Bill Williams River 

Steering Committee. 

Travel Management 

OHV area designations as defined in 43 CFR 8340.0-5(f), (g) and (h) and further 

specified in 43 CFR 8342.1 are made in this Approved RMP throughout the planning 

area. The BLM’s OHV area designations are listed below: 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 112

May 2007

 Open area means an area where all types of vehicle use are permitted at all times and 

anywhere in the area. Use is subject to the operating regulations and vehicle 

standards set forth in 43 CFR 8341 and 8342. 

 Limited area means an area restricted at certain times, in certain areas, and/or to 

certain vehicular use. These restrictions may be of any type but can generally be 

accommodated within the following type of categories: 

 numbers of vehicles 

 types of vehicles 

 time or season of vehicle use 

 authorized user only 

 use on existing roads and trails 

 use on designated roads and trails 

 Closed area means an area where any motorized use is prohibited. Use of motorized 

vehicles in closed areas may be allowed for certain reasons; however, such use will 

be made only with the approval of the authorized officer. 

The BLM will designate a Travel Management Network (TMN) for the planning area 

within 5 years of adoption of this Approved RMP through the TMP. The TMP will 

evaluate and designate all individual routes/trails for use within the planning area unless 

specified elsewhere in this Approved RMP. The BLM will follow the process as listed in 

Appendix B, Administrative Actions and Standard Operating Procedures, of this 

Approved RMP, when creating the TMN, including evaluating routes using the criteria 

listed in the Route Evaluation Tree in Appendix L. Map 30 identifies the six travel 

management areas that will be used in the development of the TMP. 

Desired Future Conditions 

TM-1. Designations will be made and management implemented for a balance of 

opportunities for the entire range of motorized and non-motorized access 

needs, while in balance with other resource values found on public lands. 

TM-2. Reasonable, safe, and environmentally sound access will be provided to 

visitors, local residents, licensed or permitted activities, and property owners. 

Lake Havasu Field Office will be linked with other state, regional, and land 

management agencies or interest groups to better facilitate travel management. 

TM-3. Travel between communities within the planning area will be made safer. 

TM-4. Public access easements will be acquired across private or state lands where 

public access to federal lands and waterways is not available. 

TM-5. Instill and strengthen a more effective and responsible user ethic through public 

outreach programs for motorized and non-motorized users. 
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a$

!"a$

!"e$

!"e$

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Ariz

o

n

a

Nevada

I¡

I¡

?u

Mohave County

La Paz County

Yavapai County Maricopa

County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

I¡

I¡

I¡

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

Bill Williams

River

BOUSE

HAVASU

ALAMO

WENDEN

BULLHEAD

CACTUS PLAIN

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R14WR15WR16WR17WR18WR19WR20WR21WR22W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 30 Travel Management Areas

and Route Inventory Index

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

30A

30B

30C

30D

30E

30F

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

These detailed maps

(1:62,500) are available

on the RMP CD, website,

or on request from the

field office

County Roads

Travel Management Areas / Route Inventory Maps

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Paved

Maintained Unpaved

Rivers and Canals

Lakes
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 113

May 2007

TM-6. The BLM will continue to provide motorized and non-motorized access across 

public lands, with emphasis on development of non-motorized trails and 

trailheads.

TM-7. The BLM will assess its responsibility to manage boat related transportation 

opportunities as they relate to BLM facilities on the Colorado River and Lake 

Havasu and to develop and implement management practices accordingly. 

TM-8. Opportunities for “touring” and “loop” travel beyond the boundaries of the 

planning area will be maintained or enhanced when creating the travel 

management network for the planning area. 

Land Use Allocations 

TM-9. OHV area designations are shown in Table 8 and on Map 31. Generally, the 

planning area will be classified as “limited to existing roads and trails” for 

motorized travel, unless a specific classification has been applied to the area as 

in Table 8. Existing roads and trails for motorized use will be defined as those 

routes and trails found on route inventories completed in the period between 

1990 and 2004 and shown on the Lake Havasu Field Office inventory maps 

(Map 32 and the six detailed electronic maps with inserts found in the attached 

CD).

Estimated acreages by OHV area designation are shown below in Table 8. 

Table 8. OHV Area Designations 

General Description of 

Classification 

Estimated Acres of Public 

Lands In the Approved RMP 

(Map 31) 

Open 9,637 

Closed 120,990 

Limited 

 Limited to authorized users only 71,752 

 Limited to existing roads and 

trails

941,352 

 Limited to designated roads and 

trailsa

164,348 

 Limited to existing roads and 

trails—seasonal use 

30,943

 Limited to designated roads and 

trails—seasonal use 

5,049 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 114

May 2007

TM-10. Washes in areas designated Open, are available for motorized travel. In areas 

designated “existing road or trails” only washes with routes shown on 

inventory maps will be open to motorized travel. After the TMP is completed 

only washes with designated routes will be open for travel. All other washes 

will be closed to motorized travel unless at a later date reviewed as a new route 

or trail and evaluated under the route evaluation process as outlined in 

Appendix L. 

TM-11. Between the ROD and the completion of the TMP, three areas totaling 

30,943 acres (see Map 31) will retain seasonal closures for motorized vehicles 

from January 1 to June 30, to protect sensitive habitats, ACEC values, 

recreational settings, and/or cultural sites. These areas were originally 

seasonally closed under the YRMP for bighorn sheep lambing grounds. All 

routes in these areas will be evaluated and designated in the TMP and the area 

allocation dropped. This does not affect areas currently limited to designated 

routes.

TM-12. “Limited to Existing Roads and Trails” areas will be converted to “Limited to 

Designated Roads and Trails” following the Travel Management Network 

Plan.

TM-13. Wheeled non-motorized carts will be allowed except in WAs. 

TM-14. Motorized vehicles may be allowed to pull off an existing/designated route 

100 feet either side of centerline. This use shall be monitored on a continuing 

basis. If monitoring results show effects that exceed limits of acceptable 

change, motorized vehicles will not be allowed to pull off a designated route 

100 feet either side of centerline in those areas where resource damage has 

exceeded limits of acceptable change. 

TM-15. Technical Vehicle Specialized Sport Sites could be identified and managed as 

an RMZ or specific sites within RMZ or the ERMA and not part of the travel 

management network. 

TM-16. Foot and equestrian cross-country travel will be allowed on public lands. 

California and Arizona state laws consider bicycles vehicles and cross-country 

travel will not be allowed except in designated open areas. Except in WAs, all 

roads and trails will be open to bicycles unless designated otherwise. 

TM-17. Public lands within the Gibraltar Mountain Interdisciplinary Management 

Planning Area, except in the WA and the proposed Shea Road/Osborne Wash 

Open Area, will be classified as limited to designated roads and trails or limited 

to designated routes closed seasonally. These designated trails and routes were 

established under the 2001 Gibraltar Mountain Interdisciplinary Management 

Plan (see Map 31). 
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Ariz

o

n

a

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave

County

La Paz

County

Yavapai County Maricopa

County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

Bill Williams

River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R14WR15WR16WR17WR18WR19WR20WR21WR22W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 31 Off-Highway Vehicle Area Designations

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

Parker Strip

Gibraltar

Cactus Plain

La Posa

Swansea

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

* "Limited to Existing Roads and Trails" areas will be converted

to "Limited to Designated Roads and Trails" following completion

of the Travel Management Plan.

OHV Area Designations

County Roads

Open

Closed

Limited to Authorized Users Only

Limited to Existing Roads and Trails *

Limited to Designated Roads and Trails

Limited to Existing Roads and Trails - Seasonal Use *

Shea Road/Osborne Wash OHV Area

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Paved

Maintained Unpaved

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Standard Wash OHV Area
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a

!"a

!"e

!"e

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

Calif

ornia

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

u?

Mohave County

La Paz County

Y

a

v

apai

Count

y

Maricopa

C

ounty

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La

P

a

z

Count

y

M

oha

v

e Count

y

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE

HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big

Sandy

River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

PHOENIX

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

May 2007

T17N

T16.5

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R17WR18WR19WR20WR21W R16W R14WR15W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 32 Existing Routes

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Roads

GPS Route Inventory

Paved Roads

Unpaved Roads

Unpaved Routes

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Larger route inventory maps

(1:62,500) are available

on the RMP CD, website,

or on request from the

field office
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 115

May 2007

TM-18. Public lands within the La Posa Management Planning Area and within the 

Lake Havasu Field Office planning area will be classified as limited to 

designated roads and trails. These designated trails and routes were established 

under the La Posa Interdisciplinary Management Plan (Bureau of Land 

Management 1997b) (see Map 31). 

TM-19. Public lands within the Parker Strip Recreation Area, except in developed 

facilities and the two OHV areas, will be classified as limited to designated 

roads and trails. These designated trails and routes were established under the 

1993 Parker Strip Recreation Area Management Plan (see Map 31). 

TM-20. Public lands within the Swansea Townsite will be classified as limited to 

designated roads and trails. These designated trails and routes were established 

under the Swansea Historic District Cultural Resource Management Plan

(Bureau of Land Management 1997c) (see Map 31). 

TM-21. Individual designated routes within the four areas listed above may be 

revaluated in the TMP, only if it can be shown that sensitive resources or 

unique recreational opportunities are impacted by the earlier designations. 

TM-22. The 2,602 acres in the Crossroads and Copper Basin OHV areas will remain 

designated open to intensive OHV use. The Recreation Project Plan for the 

Parker Strip Off-Highway Vehicle Area and Routes was completed in 1996, 

and no changes in management are proposed (Bureau of Land Management 

1996).

TM-23. Approximately 602 acres identified as resource protection sites in previous 

implementation documents (including activity level plans or NEPA actions) 

will be designated Closed (see Map 31). (Note: Sites smaller than 5 acres are 

not shown.) 

TM-24. Standard Wash and Shea Road/Osborne Wash RMZs will be allocated “Open” 

following compliance with NHPA and the Endangered Species Act and the 

successful resolution of adverse effects to historic properties and threatened 

and endangered species. Until these consultations are completed in these two 

RMZs, travel will remain restricted to existing roads and trails. 

TM-25. The Southern bluff RMZ above the Colorado River in the Colorado River 

Nature Center SRMA will be limited to authorized users for motorized 

vehicles.

TM-26. Within Lake Havasu Aubrey Hills area, motorized use will be limited to 

authorized users. (See Map 31 and Biological Resources.)

TM-27. Approximately 5,023 acres identified as protection sites in previous plans 

would be designated as “limited” and the specific concerns for these areas will 

be identified as evaluation criteria and addressed through the route evaluation 

and designation process.
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 116

May 2007

Refer to the discussion in the Special Designations section for additional motorized 

vehicle provisions in these areas (see Map 28). 

Management Actions 

TM-28. To maintain the natural landscape in lands managed for maintaining wilderness 

characteristics, vehicles will be limited to existing routes until the route 

designation process is complete. Each route will be evaluated on individual 

merit and designated open, limited, or closed. Non-motorized access may 

include development of some trails or, to minimize disturbance of the ground 

surface, be limited to marking foot routes with posts. 

TM-29. The BLM will require permittees (e.g., for hunting, wood gathering, livestock 

operators) to comply with field office route designations. Exceptions may be 

authorized on a case-by-case basis. 

TM-30. Impacts of motorized activity (except for authorized vehicles) will be evaluated 

and the areas converted to limited to administrative access to motorized 

vehicles within 0.25 mile of any spring. If necessary to maintain access, a new 

route may be established. 

TM-31. Specific routes or portions of specific routes through WHAs established for 

special status species may be closed to vehicular traffic (except for 

administrative use) during the seasons when the habitats are being used and 

will be addressed during the route designation process. 

TM-32. No new permanent motorized routes will be authorized in lands managed to 

maintain wilderness characteristics, except those required by law. 

TM-33. Upon completion of the TMP process, the route network will be limited to 

designated roads, primitive roads, and trails. Upon completion of each TMP, a 

map will be published showing the status, maintenance intensity, and other 

relevant information for all roads, primitive roads, and trails within each 

respective Travel Management Area. 

TM-34. The BLM will not develop, endorse, or establish route or trail ratings. The 

BLM may describe physical characteristics of a route. 

TM-35. Proposals for new roads, routes, or trails (including but not limited to ROWs 

and/or administrative needs) will be evaluated and the route designated in 

conjunction with the NEPA process (see Appendix L). 

TM-36. Use of authorized ROWs will be managed for public access and through the 

TMPs designated either open or limited. 

TM-37. On BLM published maps, areas designated as limited to authorized users will 

be shown as closed to general motorized use. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 117

May 2007

TM-38. All rockcrawling activities will be limited to locations away from special status 

species. This will be a consideration in the Route Evaluation Process. 

TM-39. Prior to completing the TMP and route designation process, any vehicle routes 

not represented on the route inventory maps will be subject to restoration 

actions as described in Administrative Actions and Standard Operating 

Procedures, Appendix B. After site-specific cultural and wildlife clearances 

are accomplished, the restoration action could be completed without further 

NEPA or public notice. 

TM-40. Through the route designation process, the BLM will decrease Bill Williams 

River vehicle access crossings to two sites downstream of Alamo Dam. The 

BLM will continue working with landowners to provide non-motorized access 

to the river. 

Monitoring

TMPs will be developed and include prescriptions and monitoring strategies. 

In the 5 years prior to the completion of the TMP, monitoring of OHV use on the interim 

route network will be completed in conjunction with other resource programs. Mitigation 

measures (such as those listed in Appendix L, Travel Management) may be initiated 

where impacts from OHV use impacts sensitive resources. The interim route network 

includes the “Existing Roads and Trails” as defined by the Route Inventory Maps. The 

inventory maps include routes already designated in previous activity plans and these 

designations still apply. These areas/routes will be monitored for compliance. 

Land Health Assessments will determine upland conditions and trend as a part of all 

TMPs and serve as a baseline measure for any further monitoring required to measure 

management success in that area. This will include route restoration prescriptions to 

satisfy land health objectives, and monitoring strategy to measure progress and 

management success. Revegetation and soil stabilization prescriptions associated with 

utility and transportation corridor work, plus monitoring requirements will be addressed 

as part of this effort on existing corridors; new proposals will have prescriptions and 

monitoring strategies addressed in the NEPA process. 

At the end of many roads and trails exists an abandoned mine. Therefore, the TMP is an 

opportunity to identify abandoned mines as an inventory for risk assessment, 

management actions, and further monitoring to assure public and environmental health. 

Abandoned mine lands identified through this process will be included in the BLM 

database. Sites with high risk factors will be included in the Annual Planning Update 

Report and Summary. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 118

May 2007

Visual Resource Management 

Visual resource values are managed in accordance with Visual Resource Management 

(VRM) class objectives (see Map 33). VRM classes are allocated for all areas of BLMadministered land, based on an inventory of visual resources and management 

considerations for other land uses. The following criteria were used in determining the 

VRM Management Class allocations for this plan: 

 The overall management emphasis intended for each alternative. 

 Recognize all applicable Special Designations and all Land Use Allocations as VRM 

classifications are applied. 

 Assure that other management activities and land uses being provided for in a 

specific area may be achieved within the VRM Class objective being set, consistent 

with Special Designations and Land Use Allocations. 

 Use of the least restrictive class that still achieves objectives to attain Desired Future 

Conditions.

Desired Future Conditions 

VR-1. VRM Class I – The objective of this class is to preserve the existing character 

of the landscape. This class provides for the natural ecological changes; 

however, it does not preclude very limited management activity. The level of 

change of the characteristic landscape should be very low and must not attract 

attention.

VR-2. VRM Class II – The objective of this class is to retain the existing character of 

the landscape. The level of change to the characteristic landscape should be 

low. Management activities may be seen, but should not attract the attention of 

the casual observer. Any changes must repeat the basic elements of form, line, 

color, and texture found in the predominant natural features of the 

characteristic landscape. 

VR-3. VRM Class III – The objective of this class is to partially retain the existing 

character of the landscape. The level of change to the characteristic landscape 

should be moderate. Management activities may attract attention but should 

not dominate the view of the casual observer. Changes should repeat the basic 

elements found in the predominant natural features of the characteristic 

landscape.

VR-4. VRM Class IV – The objective of this class is to provide for management 

activities that require major modification of the existing character of the 

landscape. The level of change to the characteristic landscape can be high.

These management activities may dominate the view and be the major focus of 

viewer attention. However, every attempt should be made to minimize the 

impact of these activities through careful location, minimal disturbance, and 

repeating the basic elements. 
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a$

!"a$

!"e$

!"e$

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Ariz

o

n

a

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

?u

Mohave

County

La Paz

County

Yavapai County Maricopa

County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

Bill Williams River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R14WR15WR16WR17WR18WR19WR20WR21WR22W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 33 Visual Resource Management

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

VRM Classes

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

(applies to BLM-administered lands)
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 119

May 2007

Land Use Allocations (Shown in Map 33) 

VR-5. Class I: 179,133 acres 

VR-6. Class II: 253,367 acres 

VR-7. Class III: 521,356 acres 

VR-8. Class IV: 405,247 acres 

Management Actions 

VR-9. Visual resource design techniques and best management practices will be used 

to mitigate the potential for short- and long-term visual impacts from other uses 

and activities. 

VR-10. Contrast ratings are required for major projects proposed on public lands that 

fall within VRM Class I, II, and III areas that have high sensitivity levels.

Contrast-rating procedures are described in Handbook H-8341-1 and outlined 

in Appendix B, Administrative Actions and Standard Operating Procedures.

VR-11. The BLM will protect the scenic quality in a corridor on each side of SR 95 

from south of Lake Havasu City to the Bill Williams River, a distance of 

approximately 20 miles. The width of the corridor will be 0.5 mile to either 

side of the paved shoulders of SR 95 (Map 33). Public lands in this scenic 

corridor will generally be managed to VRM Class II or III objectives. Physical 

improvements to existing leases or activities such as ROWs will be managed 

per existing agreements. 

Monitoring

Since the overall VRM goal is to minimize visual impacts, mitigating measures will be 

prepared for all adverse contrasts that can be reduced. These measures will be evaluated 

for effectiveness in meeting VRM Management Objectives as part of compliance 

monitoring. 

Some or all of the Key Observation Points (KOPs) used during the VRM inventory, and 

the establishment of new KOPs identified by changing conditions, plans, or actions will 

be evaluated in VRM Class I, II, and III areas and monitored for changes in landscape 

character every 5 years in rotation. 

Wild Burro Management 

The management of wild burros on public land is accomplished at the minimum level 

necessary to assure the herd’s free-roaming character, health, and self-sustaining ability 

in accordance with the Act. Herd areas (HAs) are limited to the geographic areas 

identified as being habitat used by wild burros at the time of passage of the Act (Map 34). 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 120

May 2007

Herd Management Areas (HMAs) are established on areas within HAs through the land 

use planning process, within which wild burros can be managed for the long term. Upon 

designation as an HMA, wild burros shall be managed as an integral component of the 

public lands on the basis of multiple uses and in a manner that maintains an ecological 

balance (Map 35). 

Desired Future Conditions 

HB-1. Viable, color-diverse burro populations will be maintained within the HMA, 

while maintaining a thriving natural ecological balance with other resources 

and consistent with other management agencies’ objectives (including wildlife, 

riparian and upland vegetation, recreation, and others). 

Land Use Allocations 

HB-2. In accordance with the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, non-BLMadministered lands including the Alamo Wildlife Area, will be excluded from 

HMAs. These lands will be excluded from determinations of Appropriate 

Management Level (AML) for burros within the HMA. Wild burros that use 

non-BLM lands as part of their habitat remain protected under the Wild Horse 

and Burro Act; therefore, any removal actions remain the responsibility of the 

BLM.

The California side of the Havasu HMA (Havasu-CA HMA) will be managed 

in accordance with the Northern and Eastern Colorado Desert Coordinated 

Management Plan, which combines the Havasu-CA HMA with the 

Chemehuevi HMA (Bureau of Land Management 2002b). The combined area 

will be named Chemehuevi HMA and the initial AML will be 108 burros. 

Based on the manageability analysis found in Appendix M, wild burros will 

not be managed within the Little Harquahala HA boundaries; therefore, the HA 

will not be designated as an HMA and the BLM does not intend to maintain a 

burro herd in this areas. 

HB-3. The eastern boundary of the Alamo HMA will run west from the southern 

boundary of the Alamo Wildlife Area, and then extend south from the state 

land block within the Palmerita Allotment, excluding the Alamo Wildlife Area, 

state, and private land. This demarcation will provide protection for threatened 

and endangered species, riparian, and wildlife issues. 

HB-4. The area north of Lake Havasu City (west of SR 95 and east of the Colorado 

River) will be excluded from the Havasu HMA due to increasing population 

pressures, traffic concerns, and refuge conflicts. 

HB-5. The initial AML levels will be adjusted based on the AMLs in the existing 

plans, the effects of boundary changes on the critical area, and existing 

monitoring data, which is the basis for the AML. 
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a$

!"a$

!"e$

!"e$

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Ariz

o

n

a

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

?u

Mohave

County

La Paz

County

Yavapai County Maricopa

County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

Bill Williams River

ALAMO

HA

HAVASU-AZ

HA

LITTLE

HARQUAHALA

HA

HAVASU-CA

HA

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R14WR15WR16WR17WR18WR19WR20WR21WR22W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Map 34 Wild Horse and Burro Herd Areas

Burro Herd Areas (HA) administered by LHFO plans

Herd Areas administered by other field office plans

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a$

!"a$

!"e$

!"e$

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Ariz

o

n

a

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

?u

Mohave

County

La Paz

County

Yavapai County Maricopa

County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

Bill Williams River

ALAMO

HMA

HAVASU-AZ

HMA

LITTLE

HARQUAHALA

HA

HAVASU-CA HMA

(part of Chemeheuvi

HMA)

KFO - BLACK

MOUNTAIN HMA

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R14WR15WR16WR17WR18WR19WR20WR21WR22W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 35 Wild Burro Herd Management Areas

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan

Burro Herd Management Areas (HMA) administered by LHFO RMP

Burro Herd Areas (HA) administered by LHFO RMP

Burro HMAs within LHFO boundary, administered by adjacent FO plans

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Burro HAs within LHFO boundary, administered by adjacent FO plans
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 121

May 2007

Management Actions 

HB-6. Management of burros in the Alamo HMA will consider and assess the fish 

and wildlife conservation purposes and objectives for the Alamo Wildlife Area 

and the mandates of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act and the 

Endangered Species Act. The purposes and objectives for the Wildlife Area 

are outlined in AGFD’s Alamo Wildlife Area Management Plan. AGFD has 

indicated that they will periodically (approximately every 5 years) review and 

possibly revise the plan. The BLM will manage the burros in consultation with 

AGFD and USFWS consistent with the Alamo Wildlife Area Management 

Plan. Decisions concerning burros within the wildlife area will be consistent 

with federal laws and regulations, including the Wild Free-Roaming Horse and 

Burro Act of 1971, as amended 1976 and 1978. 

The BLM does not intend to maintain burros that are outside of HMA 

boundaries but are within the HAs, nor maintain burros that are within HA that 

have not been designated as an HMA. Burro use will occur within the Alamo 

Wildlife Area as outlined in the Alamo Wildlife Area Management Plan. 

Burro use may occur within the Santa Maria and Big Sandy corridors at levels 

developed cooperatively with AGFD and USFWS. 

The BLM and AGFD will work collaboratively to provide wild burros with 

access to water in Alamo Lake within specific areas of the Alamo Wildlife 

Area. Such access will be through agreement with AGFD and compatible with 

the goals and objectives of the wildlife area as outlined in the Alamo Wildlife 

Area Management Plan. 

The level of burro use that is compatible and acceptable within the Alamo 

Wildlife Area will be cooperatively determined by AGFD and the BLM and 

identified in the Alamo Wildlife Area Plan. The BLM, AGFD, and USFWS 

will work together to establish key monitoring areas within sensitive riparian 

habitat. AGFD has indicated that they believe burro use will be compatible 

with the purposes of the wildlife area if annual bark stripping of live trees does 

not exceed 3% in any of the key areas. Additional upland monitoring sites and 

associated levels of acceptable use may be established within the Alamo 

Wildlife Area if resource damage by burros is observed in those areas. 

The BLM will target burro removals in sensitive habitat areas and work with 

AGFD and USFWS to develop other management practices (if needed) such as 

the construction of fencing and alternative water sources to maintain levels of 

acceptable burro use within the wildlife area and to protect sensitive habitats. 

The BLM will evaluate all monitoring data, population data, and removal data 

every 5 years to assess whether the current AML continues to be appropriate 

for all HMAs (Havasu and Alamo). During the evaluation process, monitoring 

protocols and additional data needs will be analyzed. The evaluation will 

consider acceptable levels of use within the Alamo Wildlife Area. The 

evaluation and any adjustments in AML will be conducted in coordination and 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 122

May 2007

consultation with the AGFD and USFWS. The AGFD has stated that they will 

periodically re-evaluate monitoring and acceptable burro use levels within the 

Alamo Wildlife Area. Every effort will be made to insure that these 

evaluations occur as concurrently and collaborative as feasible. 

HB-7. Any new fence construction within burro HMAs will not prevent burro access 

to water, unless the water has been developed for a specific purpose (such as 

wildlife catchments) that will make it necessary to exclude burros. 

HB-8. The guidelines and criteria for adjusting AML will include the use of 

monitoring data and be coordinated with affected resources and agencies. 

HB-9. Safety issues will continue to be handled as emergency/nuisance removals, 

receiving top priority to correct public safety concerns. Additionally, the BLM 

will work with ADOT to create accessible safe crossings for wildlife and wild 

burros.

HB-10. The initial Appropriate Management Levels for wild burros (the number of 

wild burros to be managed with the HMA) in the Approved RMP are listed 

below. Acreages within the HMAs appear in Table 9: 

Alamo: 160 

Havasu-AZ: 166 

Havasu-CA/Chemehuevi: 108 

Table 9. Acreages within Herd Management Areas 

HMA Acreage 

 Alamo 189,237 

 Havasu AZ 268,271 

 Havasu-CA/Chemehuevi 24,318 

Monitoring

Monitoring data will continue to be collected on the Havasu and Alamo HMAs to ensure 

proper use and to provide a tool to evaluate the Appropriate Management Level. The 

data collected include climate, actual use, utilization, and trend. Population data will 

continue to be collected in coordination with AGFD every 3 to 5 years through 

collaborative census techniques. Age and sex data are collected following removals of 

excess burros. Census flights and burro removals will be reported in the Annual

Planning Update Report and Summary.

The simultaneous double-count census method has been tested in coordination with the 

AGFD as a technique for accurately estimating burro populations. As any technique 

becomes available, the BLM and AGFD will work collaboratively to test its 

effectiveness. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 123

May 2007

Wilderness Characteristics 

Desired Future Conditions 

WC-1. The following wilderness characteristics will be maintained or enhanced where 

lands are allocated for that purpose: 

Naturalness – Lands and resources exhibit a high degree of naturalness when 

affected primarily by the forces of nature and where the imprint of human 

activity is substantially unnoticeable. Naturalness attributes may include the 

presence or absence of roads and trails, fences, wildlife facilities and other 

improvements; the nature and extent of landscape modifications; the presence 

of native vegetation communities; and the connectivity of habitats. Wildlife 

populations and habitat are recognized as important aspects of the naturalness 

and will be actively managed. 

Solitude – Visitors may have outstanding opportunities for solitude when the 

sights, sounds, and evidence of other people are rare or infrequent, where 

visitors can be isolated, alone or secluded from others. 

Primitive and Unconfined Recreation – Visitors may have outstanding 

opportunities for primitive and unconfined types of recreation where the use of 

the area is through non-motorized, non-mechanical means off designated routes 

or as specifically excepted, and where no or minimal developed recreation 

facilities are encountered. 

Land Use Allocations 

WC-2. 41,590 acres will be managed to maintain wilderness characteristics (Map 36). 

Management Actions 

WC-3. Use of motor vehicles and mechanical transport, and the construction of 

temporary roads, structures, and installations will be allowed for emergency 

purposes. Any emergency actions will be conducted in a manner that creates 

the least disturbance and will be reclaimed as soon as possible after the 

situation has ended. 

WC-4. Use of non-motorized wheeled carts (game carriers) will be allowed. 

WC-5. The administrative use of motorized/mechanized equipment for natural and 

cultural resource management will be allowed. Administrative activities 

include, but are not limited to, water supplementation, collar retrieval, and 

capture/release of wildlife, maintenance/repair and reconstruction or 

construction of wildlife waters. Cross-country travel for administrative 

purposes will be permitted only with prior approval by the authorized officer. 

Any administrative actions will be conducted in a manner that creates the least 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 124

May 2007

disturbance and reclaimed as soon as possible after the administrative need has 

ended.

WC-6. Surface-disturbing activities or the permanent placement of structures 

including the rerouting of inventoried and/or designated routes will be allowed 

only when the level of change to the landscape is low. Though such changes 

may be seen, they will not attract the attention of the casual observer, subject to 

criteria outlined below.1

WC-7. Develop and maintain recreation facilities only when compatible with 

maintaining wilderness characteristics or when needed to protect resources or 

provide for public safety. 

WC-8. Maintenance of existing facilities will be allowed. 

WC-9. Decrease the visual effect of facilities on naturalness or scenic resources, when 

the opportunity arises, during reconstruction, replacement, or major 

maintenance of new or existing facilities. 

WC-10. Vending operations and concession leases will be prohibited. Other temporary 

commercial or recreation permits that meet the land use plan objectives for the 

area could be issued. These permits include, but not limited to, SRPs for 

backcountry guides or temporary land use authorizations for filming. 

WC-11. Public lands within lands managed to maintain wilderness characteristics will 

be retained in public ownership. 

 

1

 Project consideration criteria: In general, projects with a small footprint that, across the area as a 

whole, would benefit maintenance of wilderness characteristics and are compatible with other resource 

objectives could be approved. Criteria to consider include: 

 Need for project to protect natural and cultural resources. 

 Opportunity to manage and control public use or provide for public safety. 

 Opportunity to restore or enhance natural, cultural, or visual resources and meet resource 

objectives. 

 Magnitude of long-term effect (positive or negative) on naturalness and resources. 

 Ability to restore the use area after the project is completed to its previous natural state. 

 Size and scale of project. 

 Compatibility with the specified VRM zone and recreation settings. 

 Loss of opportunity for solitude and primitive recreation. 

 Potential for project or use to be accommodated outside of area. 

When approved, projects would be completed using the least impacting methods that could be 

reasonably used to accomplish the project, considering resource effects as well as labor effort and cost, 

including designs for the facility to blend into the landscape, consideration of site selection and use of 

a low profile, design facilities that would require minimal maintenance, and use of best management 

practices to minimize surface and vegetation disturbance during construction. When completed, a 

restoration plan would be implemented to actively restore disturbed areas. 
#

#

#

#

#

#

!"a$

!"a$

!"e$

!"e$

I}

?1⁄2

?Ù

?Ù

?Ù

?À

Iv

Iv

California

Arizona

Nevada

IÂ

IÂ

?u

Mohave County

La Paz County

Yavapai County Maricopa County

San Bernardino County

Riverside County

IÂ

IÂ

IÂ

La Paz County Mohave County

WENDEN

AGUILA

PARKER

BULLHEAD

CITY

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

KINGMAN

Lake

Havasu

Alamo

Lake

Central Arizona Project

Colorado River Bill Williams River

Lake

Mohave

Santa Maria River

Big Sandy River

0 10 20 5 Miles

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

LAKE HAVASU FIELD OFFICE

!

!

Arizona

PLANNING

AREA

LAKE HAVASU

CITY

PHOENIX

May 2007

T21N

T20N

T19N

T18N

T17N

T16.5N

T16N

T15N

T14N

T13N

T12N

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

R22W R21W R20W R19W R18W R17W R16W R15W R14W

T11N

T10N

T09N

T08N

T07N

T06N

T05N

T04N

T03N

T02N

T01N

R20E R21E

R21E R22E R23E R24E R25E

R26E

R27E

The Bureau of Land Management makes

no warranties, implied or expressed,

with respect to information shown on

this map.

Map 36 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics

T01S

T02S

R13W R12W R11W R10W

± 0 10 20 5 Kilometers

Lands with Wilderness Characteristics

Trails within Lands with Wilderness Characteristics

Lake Havasu Field Office Planning Area Boundary

County Boundaries

Township Grid

Interstate Highways

US and State Highways

Rivers and Canals

Lakes

Record of Decision /

Approved Resource Management Plan
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 125

May 2007

WC-12. Acquire state and private inholdings from willing sellers whenever practicable, 

within lands managed to maintain wilderness characteristics. 

WC-13. Recreational or hobby collecting of mineral specimens when conducted 

without location of a mining claim and limited to hand collection and detection 

equipment may be allowed. 

MI-8. Mineral material development will only be authorized on lands managed to 

maintain wilderness characteristics when there will be no lasting impacts to 

solitude, unconfined recreation, and naturalness. 

MI-14. Surface occupancy for mineral leases will be permitted on lands managed to 

maintain wilderness characteristics when there will be no lasting impacts to 

solitude, unconfined recreation, and naturalness. 

WC-14. Existing livestock grazing operations and support facilities are allowed to 

continue.

WC-15. During fire suppression operations, minimum impact suppression techniques 

will be used. 

WC-16. Prescribed fires are allowed in conformity with a fire management plan so long 

as it is consistent with improving or maintaining the area’s wilderness 

characteristics.

WC-17. Vegetative manipulation to control noxious, exotic, or invasive plant species is 

allowed when there is no effective alternative and when the control is 

necessary to maintain the natural ecological balances within the area. Control 

may include manual, chemical, and biological treatment provided it will not 

cause adverse impacts to the wilderness characteristics. 

WC-18. Rehabilitation, stabilization, reconstruction, and restoration work on prehistoric 

and historic sites and structures, as well as, excavations and surface collection 

may be specifically permitted if wilderness characteristics are maintained. 

Monitoring

Lands managed for wilderness characteristics will be monitored to determine the 

effectiveness of management prescriptions to maintain naturalness, solitude, and 

Primitive Unconfined Recreation as defined in IM 2003-275 – Change 1 Attachment 2 

(see Appendix A, Applicable Laws, Regulations, Policy, and Planning Criteria).

Monitoring can be completed in conjunction with other resource programs, such as 

Recreation, Travel Management (TMP), Biological Resources (Land Health Standards). 

Monitoring will be conducted in rotation (one area per year or as needed.) Results and 

conclusions of this work will be presented in the 5-year plan evaluation. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 126

May 2007

Public Involvement 

The BLM will continue to actively seek the views of the public, using techniques such as 

news releases and mass mailings to ask for participation and to inform the public of new 

and ongoing project proposals (including the status of the TMP), site-specific planning, 

and opportunities and timeframes for comment. The public is encouraged to contact the 

BLM (Lake Havasu Field Office at 2610 Sweetwater Avenue, Lake Havasu City, 

Arizona 86406) and request that their name be placed in the field office mailing list 

along with their specific area of interest (e.g., recreation, cultural, or mineral) for future 

projects. The public may also make this request by calling (928) 505-1200. 

The BLM will also continue to coordinate, both formally and informally, with the 

numerous federal and state agencies, American Indian Tribes, local agencies, and 

officials interested and involved in the management of public lands in the planning area. 

Management Plan Implementation 

Plan implementation is a continuous and active process. Decisions presented in the 

Management Decisions section of this Approved RMP are of three types: Immediate, 

One-Time, and Long-Term. 

Immediate Decisions 

These decisions go into effect upon signature of the Record of Decision and Approved 

RMP. These include decisions such as the allocation of lands as available or unavailable 

for disposal, ACEC designations, and minerals actions. Immediate decisions require no 

additional analysis and provide the framework for any subsequent activities proposed in 

the planning area. Proposals for actions such as land adjustments and other allocationbased actions will be reviewed against these decisions/allocations to determine if the 

proposal is in conformance with the plan. 

One-Time Decisions 

These decisions include those that are implemented after additional site-specific analysis 

is completed. Examples are implementation of the development of an ACEC plan or 

TMP. One-time decisions usually require additional analysis and are prioritized as part 

of the BLM budget process. Priorities for implementation of “one-time” RMP decisions 

will be based on several criteria, including:

 Current and projected resource needs and demands. 

 National and statewide BLM management direction and program emphasis. 

 Funding.
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 127

May 2007

Long-Term Guidance/Life of Plan Direction 

These decisions include the goals, objectives (Desired Future Conditions), and 

management actions established by the plan that are applied during site-specific analyses 

and activity planning. This guidance is applied whether the action is initiated by the 

BLM or by a non-BLM project proponent. Long-term guidance and plan direction is 

incorporated into BLM management as implementation-level planning and project 

analysis occurs. For instance, if any developer, including the BLM, proposes 

construction of a new launch ramp on Lake Havasu that involves public land, that 

proposal would need to be in harmony with the goals, allocations, and actions established 

through this Approved RMP relative to that parcel of land, for the associated biological, 

prescribed recreation settings, VRM, and lands interests. If the proposal was in 

compliance with the BLM’s long-term guidance, it could easily move onto the next level 

of assessment. In short, these decisions “guide” BLM decision-makers in what is, and is 

not acceptable through the life of the plan. 

General Implementation Schedule of “One-Time” 

Actions

Decisions in the Approved RMP will be implemented over a period of years depending 

on budget and staff availability. Appendix N identifies the priority and schedules for 

projects. Most of these actions require additional analysis and site-specific activity 

planning. The priority list and schedule will assist BLM managers and staff members in 

preparing budget requests and in scheduling work. However, the proposed priorities 

must be considered tentative and will be affected by future funding, changing program 

priorities, non-discretionary workloads, community dynamics, and cooperation by 

partners and external publics. 

Implementation Updates 

The BLM will prepare an Annual Planning Update Report and Summary on the 

implementation of the Approved RMP. This report will be released in January of the 

year following the fiscal year reviewed (for example, January 2009 for Fiscal Year 2008) 

and will be available to the public on the Internet, with hard copies available upon 

request. Annual review of the plan will provide consistent tracking of accomplishments 

and provide information that can be used to develop annual budget requests to continue 

implementation. 

Maintaining the Plan 

Land use plan decisions and supporting information can be maintained to reflect minor 

changes in data, but maintenance is limited to refining, documenting, and/or clarifying 

previously approved decisions. Some examples of maintenance actions include: 

 Correcting minor data, typographical, mapping, or tabular data errors. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 128

May 2007

 Refining baseline information as a result of new inventory data (e.g., changing the 

boundary of an archaeological district, refining the known habitat of special status 

species, or adjusting the boundary of a fire management unit based on updated fire 

regime condition class inventory, fire occurrence, monitoring data, and/or 

demographic changes). 

The BLM expects that new information gathered from field inventories and assessments, 

research, other agency studies, and other sources will update baseline data and/or support 

new management techniques, best management practices, and scientific principles. 

Adaptive management strategies may be used when monitoring data is available as long 

as the goals and objectives of the plan are met (see Plan Evaluation and Adaptive 

Management). In other words, where monitoring shows land use plan actions or best 

management practices are not effective, modifications or adjustments may occur within 

the plan without amendment or revision of the plan as long as assumptions and impacts 

disclosed in the analysis remain valid and broad-scale goals and objectives are not 

changed.

Plan maintenance will be documented in supporting records (see Appendix O for an 

example of a Plan Maintenance Roster) and reported in annual planning updates. Plan 

maintenance does not require formal public involvement, inter-agency coordination, or 

the NEPA analysis required for making new land use plan decisions. 

Changing the Plan 

Land use plan decisions are changed through either a plan amendment or a plan revision. 

Amendments and revisions are accomplished with public input and the appropriate level 

of environmental analysis. 

Plan amendments are often prompted by the need to: 

 consider an action that does not conform to the plan, 

 implement a policy that changes land use plan decisions, 

 respond to changed uses on public lands, and 

 consider significant new information from resource assessments, monitoring, or 

scientific studies that change land use plan decisions. 

Plan revisions involve preparation of a new RMP to replace an existing RMP. Revisions 

are necessary if monitoring and evaluation findings, new data, new or revised policy, or 

changes in circumstances indicate that decisions for an entire plan, or a major portion of 

the plan, no longer serve as a useful guide for resource management. 

The Approved RMP may be changed, should conditions warrant, through a plan 

amendment. A plan amendment may become necessary if major changes are needed or 

in consideration of a proposal or action that is not in conformance with the plan. The 

results of monitoring, evaluation of new data, or policy changes and changing public 

needs might also provide the impetus for an amendment. Generally, an amendment is 

issue-specific. If several areas of the plan become outdated or otherwise obsolete, a plan 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 129

May 2007

amendment may become necessary. Amendments are accomplished with public input 

and the appropriate level of environmental analysis. 

Plan Evaluation and Adaptive Management 

Plan Evaluation 

Evaluation is a process in which the plan and monitoring data are reviewed to see if 

management goals and objectives are being met and if management direction is sound. 

Land use plan evaluations determine if decisions are being implemented, whether 

mitigation measures are satisfactory, whether there are significant changes in the related 

plans of other entities, whether there is new data of significance to the plan, and if 

decisions should be changed through amendment. Monitoring data gathered over time is 

examined and used to draw conclusions on whether management actions are meeting 

stated objectives, and if not, why they are failing. Conclusions are then used to make 

recommendations on whether to continue current management or to identify what 

changes need to be made in management practices to meet objectives. 

The BLM will use land use plan evaluations to determine if the decisions in the 

Approved RMP, supported by the accompanying NEPA analysis, are still valid in light of 

new information and monitoring data. Evaluation of the Approved RMP will generally 

be conducted every 5 years, unless unexpected actions, new information, or significant 

changes in other plans, legislation, or litigation triggers an evaluation. 

The following estimated evaluation schedule will be followed for the Lake Havasu Field 

Office RMP: 

 2012

 2017

 2022

 2027

Evaluations will follow the protocols established by the BLM Land Use Planning 

Handbook (H-1601-1) or other appropriate guidance in effect when the evaluation is 

initiated.

Adaptive Management 

As defined by the Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance, adaptive management 

is a system of management practices based on clearly identified outcomes, monitoring to 

determine if management actions are meeting outcomes, and, if not, facilitating 

management changes that will best ensure that outcomes are met or re-evaluated. 
Bureau of Land Management Approved Resource Management Plan

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 130

May 2007

As described in the DRMP/DEIS and the PRMP/FEIS, the Lake Havasu Field Office 

Approved RMP fosters “adaptiveness” by the presentation of desired future conditions 

that focus on reaching outcomes rather than identifying inflexible standards and 

prescriptions that may not be applicable in certain situations. 

When land use plan actions or best management practices are found to be ineffective, 

modifications may occur without amendment of the plan as long as assumptions and 

impacts disclosed in the analysis remain valid and broad-scale goals and objectives are 

not changed. This approach, as depicted on Figure 1, uses on-the-ground monitoring, 

review of scientific information, and consideration of practical experience to adjust 

management and modify implementation of the plan to reach the desired outcome. See 

Appendix P for a Plan Monitoring Roster. 
FIGURE 1: MONITORING MODEL FLOW DIAGRAM

1. Trigger 

T1 Trigger

2. Identify 

Monitoring

3. Commit to 

Monitor

4. Develop 

Monitoring Plan

5. Collect Data 

6. Manage Data 7. Analyze 

Data & Report 

Findings

8. Take Action 

Adjust

Management
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 131

May 2007

Glossary

A

ACCESS: The ability to legally make use of route or way across public or private lands; 

without barriers to use by the public or a specified user. 

ACQUIRED PUBLIC LANDS: Lands in federal ownership that the government obtained as a 

gift or by purchase, exchange, or condemnation. Also see PUBLIC LANDS. 

ACQUISITION: The activity of obtaining land and/or interest in land through purchase, 

exchange, donation, or condemnation. 

ACTIVITY PLAN: A detailed and specific plan for managing a single resource program or plan 

element undertaken as needed to implement the more general resource management plan (RMP) 

decisions. BLM prepares activity plans for specific areas to reach specific resource management 

objectives within stated time frames. Synonymous with Implementation Plan. 

ALLOTMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN (AMP): A livestock grazing management plan dealing 

with a specific unit of rangeland and based on multiple use resource management objectives. The 

AMP considers livestock grazing in relation to other uses of rangelands and to renewable 

resources (e.g., watershed, vegetation, and wildlife). An AMP establishes the seasons of use, 

number of livestock to be permitted on rangelands, and the range improvements needed. 

ALL TERRAIN VEHICLE (ATV): A two- to six-wheeled vehicle equipped with low-pressure 

tires and a seat straddled by the rider.

ANIMAL UNIT: One mature (1,000-pound) cow or the equivalent based upon an average daily 

forage consumption of 26 pounds of dry matter per day. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 132

May 2007

ANIMAL UNIT MONTH (AUM): The amount of forage needed to sustain one cow, five sheep, 

or five goats for a month. 

APPROPRIATE MANAGEMENT LEVEL: That “optimum number” of wild horses, which 

results in a thriving ecological balance and avoids a deterioration of the range. 

AQUATIC HABITATS: Habitats confined to streams, rivers, springs, lakes, ponds, reservoirs, 

and other water bodies.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL FEATURE: Non-portable object, not recoverable from its matrix 

(usually in an archaeological site) without destroying its integrity. Examples are rock paintings, 

hearths, postholes, floors, and walls. 

AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (ACECs): Areas where special 

management attention is required to protect and prevent irreparable damage to important cultural, 

historic, or scenic values, fish and wildlife resources, or other natural systems or processes, or to 

protect life and safety from natural hazard under section 202I(3) of the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act of 1976.(FLPMA) 

ARIZONA REVISED STATUE ARS 17-301B [USE OF FIREARMS]: A person shall not 

take wildlife, except aquatic wildlife, or discharge a firearm or shoot any other device from a 

motor vehicle, including an automobile, aircraft, train or powerboat, or from a sailboat, boat 

under sail, or a floating object towed by powerboat or sailboat except as expressly permitted by 

the commission. No person may knowingly discharge any firearm or shoot any other device 

upon, from, across, or into a road or railway. 

ARIZONA STANDARDS FOR RANGELAND HEALTH AND GUIDELINES FOR 

GRAZING ADMINISTRATION: Standards and guidelines developed collaboratively by BLM 

and the Arizona Resource Advisory Council (RAC) to address the minimum requirements of the 

Department of the Interior’s final rule for Grazing Administration, effective August 21, 1995. 

AUTHORIZED: Invested with legal authority through a written agreement, permit, or other 

legal document by the BLM. 

AVAILABLE FORAGE: Forage that can be grazed and still allow sustained forage production 

on rangeland. Available forage may or may not be authorized for grazing. 

B

BACA BILL: The Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act of 2000, commonly referred to as 

the Baca Bill, amended FLPMA to allow a percentage of receipts from qualifying land sales and 

equalization payments from qualifying exchanges to be returned to the Department. 

BACK COUNTRY BYWAYS: A component of the national scenic byway system that focuses 

primarily on corridors along back country roads that have high scenic, historic, archaeological, or 

other public interest values. The road may vary from a single-track bike trail to a low-speed, 

paved road that traverses back country areas. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 133

May 2007

BASIN AND RANGE: A landscape characterized by a series of fault block mountains 

separated by sediment-filled basins. 

BENEFIT (RECREATION/SOCIETAL): A benefit is defined as an improved condition or the 

prevention of a worse condition. Benefits of leisure and recreation engagements can be realized 

by individuals (e.g., improved physical and psychological well-being), groups of individuals 

(strengthened bonds among family and friends), communities (economic gain from tourism), 

society (the cumulative effects of individual and group benefits), and the environment (a result of 

a stronger environmental ethic among individuals). 

BENEFITS-BASED MANAGEMENT (RECREATION/SOCIETAL): Benefits-based 

management is an approach to park and recreation management that focuses on the positive 

outcomes of engaging in recreational experiences. 

BIG GAME: Large species of wildlife that are hunted, such as elk, deer, bighorn sheep, and 

pronghorn antelope. 

BIGHORN SHEEP HABITAT: Area is open to non-vehicular traffic year around (e.g., hiking, 

biking, and equestrian). Restrictions vary by location and are listed in RMP. Typically, roads are 

closed during lambing season (January 1–June 30). 

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT: Information prepared by or under the direction of a federal 

agency to determine whether a proposed action is likely to: 1) harm threatened or endangered 

species or designated critical habitat, 2) jeopardize the existence of species that are proposed for 

listing, or 3) adversely modify proposed critical habitat. Biological assessments must be prepared 

for major construction activities. The outcome of a biological assessment determines whether 

formal Section 7 consultation or a conference is needed. Also see BIOLOGICAL 

EVALUATION. 

BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY (BIODIVERSITY): The full range of variability within and among 

living organisms and the ecological complexes in which they occur. Biological diversity 

encompasses ecosystem or community diversity, species diversity, and genetic diversity. 

BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION: The gathering and evaluation of information on proposed 

endangered and threatened species and critical and proposed critical habitat for actions that do not 

require a biological assessment. Also see BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT. 

BIOLOGICAL OPINION: A document that includes the following: 1) the opinion of the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service as to whether a federal action 

is likely to jeopardize the existence of a species listed as threatened or endangered or destroy or 

adversely modify designated critical habitat, 2) a summary of the information on which the 

opinion is based, and 3) a detailed discussion of the effects of the action on listed species or 

designated critical habitat. 

BLM SENSITIVE SPECIES: See SENSITIVE SPECIES. 

BOSQUE: Woodland dominated by trees more than 15 feet tall. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 134

May 2007

C

CAMPING, SHORT TERM: Camping for short terms of up to 14 days (in any 28-day period) 

on BLM-managed primitive or undeveloped public land. 

CANDIDATE SPECIES: Species not protected under the Endangered Species Act but being 

considered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for inclusion on the list of federally threatened 

and endangered species. 

CASUAL USE (RECREATION): Noncommercial or non-organized group or individual 

activities on public land. Complies with land use decisions and designations, (e.g., Special Area 

Designations), does not award cash prizes, is not publicly advertised, poses minimal risk for 

damage to public land or related water resource values, and generally requires no monitoring. If 

the use goes beyond those conditions, the activity should be treated as any other organized 

recreational group or competitive activity or event for which BLM would require the event 

organizer to obtain an SRP. 

CASUAL USE (MINING): Mining that only negligibly disturbs federal lands and resources and 

does not include the use of mechanized earth moving equipment or explosives or motorized 

equipment. Casual use generally includes panning, non-motorized sluicing, and collecting 

mineral specimens using hand tools. 

CATTLE GUARD: A device placed in a road, usually a grate or series of metal bars placed 

perpendicular to the flow of traffic, which allows free passage of vehicles but which livestock 

will not cross. 

CHAINING: A mechanical vegetation treatment in which two tractors drag an anchor chain 

extended between them over the terrain to uproot brush and small trees. 

CLOSED AREA: Closed area mean an area where motorized vehicle use is prohibited. Use of 

motorized vehicles in closed areas may be allowed for certain reasons; however, such use shall be 

made only with the approval of the authorized officer. 

COLORADO RIVER FLOODPLAIN: Combined area of the Colorado River floodway and the 

Colorado floodway fringes (See Public Law 99-450). 

COLORADO RIVER FLOODWAY: The channel of the Colorado River and that part of the 

floodplain that are necessary to safely convey the floodway flow of either a one-in-one hundredyear flow consisting of controlled releases and tributary inflow or a flow of 40,000 cfs, which 

ever is greater. 

COLORADO RIVER FLOODWAY FRINGE: That area subject to inundation by flood of 

varying magnitude up to and including the floodway flow, but which is not required for safe 

conveyance of the floodway flow, and is not included in the computation of the Colorado River 

floodway elevation. 

COMMERCIAL USE: Recreational use of public lands and related waters for business or 

financial gain.
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 135

May 2007

COMMERCIAL COLLECTION: The collection of plant materials (mainly seeds) that are 

harvested for commerce whether for seed distribution and/or for plant production. 

COMMUNITY: A collective term used to describe an assemblage of organisms living together; 

an association of living organisms having mutual relationships among themselves and with their 

environment and thus functioning at least to some degree as an ecological unit. 

COMMUNITY RECREATION-TOURISM MARKET: A community or communities 

dependent on public lands recreation and/or related tourism use, growth, and/or development. 

Major investments in facilities and visitor assistance are authorized within SRMAs where BLM’s 

strategy is to target demonstrated community recreation-tourism market demand. Here, 

recreation management actions are geared toward meeting primary recreation-tourism market 

demand for specific activity, experience, and benefit opportunities. These opportunities are 

produced through maintenance of prescribed natural resource and/or community setting character 

and by 

COMPETITIVE USE: 1) Any organized, sanctioned, or structured use, event, or activity on 

public land in which two or more contestants compete and either or both of the following 

elements apply: (i) Participants register, enter, or complete an application for the event; 

(ii) A predetermined course or area is designated; or 2) One or more individuals contesting an 

established record such as for speed or endurance.

CONSERVATION EASEMENT: An easement to assure the permanent preservation of land in 

its natural state or in whatever degree of naturalness the land has when the easement is granted.

Also see EASEMENT. 

CONSERVATION FOR FUTURE USE: This category is reserved for any unusual cultural 

resource that, because of scarcity, a research importance, cultural importance, architectural 

interest, or comparable reasons, is not currently appropriate for consideration as the subject of 

scientific or historical study that would result in its physical alteration. A cultural property or 

location included in this category is considered worthy of segregation from all other land or 

resource uses, including cultural resource uses, that would threaten the maintenance of the present 

condition or setting, as pertinent, and it will remain in this category until specific provisions are 

met in the future. A cultural resource will be separated and protected from other non-compatible 

land uses and preserved in place because a) that particular site type is scarce or unique, b) its 

information potential cannot be realized through available archaeological methods, or c) it 

represents an outstanding example of a particular site type. 

CONTINUITY: Habitat that is uninterrupted by urbanization or other factors. Large continuous 

blocks of habitat with corridors that connect other similar blocks of habitat can create a continuity 

of habitat types. Large blocks of habitat can create healthy vegetative communities, fish and 

wildlife populations. 

CORRIDOR: See DESIGNATED CORRIDOR. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 136

May 2007

COVER: 1) Plants or plant parts, living or dead, on the surface of the ground; 2) plants or 

objects used by wild animals for nesting, rearing of young, escape from predators, or protection 

from harmful environmental conditions.

CRITICAL ELEMENT: The BLM NEPA Handbook (H-1790-1), Appendix 5 lists critical 

elements of the human environment and notes the need to reflect consideration of these resources 

or values in all forms of NEPA analysis. This list is intended to present the minimum of elements 

that must be addressed: air quality, ACECs, cultural resources, prime and unique farmlands, 

floodplains, Native American religious concerns, threatened and endangered specifies, hazardous 

and solid wastes, water quality, wetlands and riparian zones, suitable and designated Wild and 

Scenic Rivers and Wilderness (and Wilderness Study Areas). 

CRITICAL HABITAT, DESIGNATED: Specific parts of an area that are occupied by a 

federally listed threatened or endangered plant or animal at the time it is listed and that contain 

physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species or that may require 

special management or protection. Critical habitat may also include specific areas outside an area 

occupied by a federally listed species if the Secretary of the Interior determines that these areas 

are essential for conserving the species. 

CROSS COUNTRY TRAVEL: Leaving designated, existing, or open route or trail, by either 

motorized or non-motorized transportation. 

CULTURAL PROPERTY: A definite location of past activity, occupation, or use including, 

but not limited to, archaeological, historic or architectural sites; structures or places with 

important public and scientific uses; and may include sites or places of traditional cultural or 

religious importance to specified social and/or cultural groups. 

CULTURAL RESOURCES: Any material remains of human life or activities that are at least 

50 years old and of archaeological interest. Cultural resource is a broad, general term meaning 

any cultural property (see CULTURAL PROPERTY) and any traditional lifeway value. 

CULTURAL RESOURCE INVENTORY (SURVEY): A descriptive listing and 

documentation including photographs and maps of cultural resources. Included in an inventory 

are the processes of locating, identifying, and recording sites, structures, buildings, objects, and 

districts through library and archival research, information from persons knowledgeable about 

cultural resources, and on-the-ground surveys of varying intensity. 

Class I: A professionally prepared study that compiles, analyzes, and synthesizes all 

available data on an area’s cultural resources. Information sources for this study include 

published and unpublished documents, BLM inventory records, institutional site files, 

and state and National Register files. Class I inventories may have prehistoric, historic, 

and ethnological and sociological elements. These inventories are periodically updated to 

include new data from other studies and Class II and III inventories. 

Class II: A professionally conducted, statistically based sample survey designed to 

describe the probable density, diversity, and distribution of cultural properties in a large 

area. This survey is achieved by projecting the results of an intensive survey carried out 

over limited parts of the target area. Within individual sample units, survey aims, 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 137

May 2007

methods, and intensities are the same as those applied in Class III inventories. To 

improve statistical reliability, Class II inventories may be conducted in several phases 

with different sample designs. 

Class III: A professionally conducted intensive survey of an entire target area aimed at 

locating and recording all visible cultural properties. In a Class III survey, trained 

observers commonly conduct systematic inspections by walking a series of close-interval 

parallel transects until they have thoroughly examined an area. 

D

DECISION RECORD: A manager’s decision on a categorical exclusion review or an 

environmental assessment. Comparable to the record of decision for an environmental impact 

statement, the decision record includes: 1) a finding of no significant impact, 2) a decision to 

prepare an environmental impact statement, or 3) a decision not to proceed with a proposal. Also 

see RECORD OF DECISION. 

DEFERRED ROTATION GRAZING: Moving grazing animals to various parts of a range in 

succeeding years or seasons to provide for seed production, plant vigor, and seedling growth. 

DESIGNATED CORRIDOR: BLM’s preferred route for placing rights-of-way for utilities 

(e.g., pipelines and powerlines) and transportation (e.g., highways and railroads). 

DESIRED PLANT COMMUNITY: The plant community that has been determined through a 

land use or management plan to best meet the plan’s objectives for a site. A real, documented 

plant community that embodies the resource attributes needed for the present or potential use of 

an area, the desired plant community is consistent with the site’s capability to produce the 

required resource attributes through natural succession, management intervention, or a 

combination of both. 

DESERT TORTOISE HABITAT: Roads closed February through November. Any 

construction needs to be monitored. Habitat compensation required for disturbance. 

DESIGNATED ROADS AND TRAILS: Legal term used in CFR 8340 — OFF ROAD 

VEHICLES as a type of limited area designation. The term “roads and trails” includes all types 

routes use by off highway vehicles. 

DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS: Land use plans must describe the outcomes in terms of 

specific goals and objectives. Goals are usually not quantifiable. Standards are descriptions of 

healthy, sustainable lands. They may describe sight specific or watershed scale. 

DESTINATION RECREATION – TOURISM MARKET: National or regional recreationtourism visitors and other constituents who value public lands as recreation-tourism destinations. 

Major investments in facilities and visitor assistance are authorized within SRMAs where BLM’s 

strategy is to target demonstrated destination recreation-tourism market demand. Here, recreation 

management actions are geared toward meeting primary recreation-tourism market demand for 

specific activity, experience, and benefit opportunities. These opportunities are produced through 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 138

May 2007

maintenance of prescribed natural resource setting character and by structuring and implementing 

management, marketing, monitoring, and administrative actions accordingly. 

DEVELOPED RECREATION SITES AND AREAS: Those sites and areas that contain 

structures or capital improvements primarily used by the public for recreation purposes. Such 

sites or areas may include such features as: delineated spaces for parking, camping, or boat 

launching; sanitary facilities; potable water; grills or fire rings; or controlled access. 

DISCHARGED FROM MANAGEMENT: This category is assigned to cultural properties that 

have no remaining identifiable use. Most often these are prehistoric and historic archaeological 

properties, such as small surface scatters of artifacts or debris, whose limited research potential is 

effectively exhausted as soon as they have been documented. Also, more complex archaeological 

properties that have had their salient information collected and preserved through mitigation or 

research may be discharged from management, as should cultural properties destroyed by any 

natural event or human activity. Properties discharged from management remain in the 

inventory, but they are removed from further management attention and do not constrain other 

land uses. 

DISPERSED CAMPING: Generally staying on public lands overnight outside of developed 

campgrounds or established recreational sites. 

DISPOSAL: Through the land use planning process, lands may be identified for release through 

several methods: R&PP patent, competitive sales or exchange. Tracts identified for disposal 

must meet criteria identified in the regulations. 

E

EASEMENT: The right to use land in a certain way granted by a landowner to a second party. 

BLM acquires two basic types of easements, conservation easements for the protection of 

resources and access easements to enhance the ability of the public to use and enjoy the public 

lands. Also see CONSERVATION EASEMENT. 

ECOLOGICAL SITE (RANGE SITE): A distinctive kind of land that has specific physical 

characteristics and that differs from other kinds of land in its ability to produce a distinctive kind 

and amount of vegetation. 

ECOLOGICAL SITE DESCRIPTIONS (RANGE SITE GUIDE): Descriptions of the 

following characteristics of an ecological site: soils, physical features, climatic features, 

associated hydrologic features, plant communities possible on the site, plant community 

dynamics, annual production estimates and distribution of production throughout the year, 

associated animal communities, associated and similar sites, and interpretations for management. 

ECOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY: The basic inventory of present and potential vegetation 

on BLM rangelands. Ecological sites are differentiated on the basis of significant differences in 

kind, proportion, or amount of plant species present in the plant community. The ecological site 

inventory utilizes soils, the existing plant community, and ecological site data to determine the 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 139

May 2007

appropriate ecological site for a specific area of rangeland and to assign the appropriate 

ecological status. 

ECOLOGICAL STATUS: Ecological status is the present state of vegetation of a range site in 

relation to the potential natural community for that site. It is an expression of the relative degree 

to which the kinds, proportions, and amounts of plants in a plant community resemble that of the 

potential natural plant community for the site. Four classes are used to express the degree to 

which the production or composition of the present plant community reflects that of the potential 

natural community (climax). 

ECOLOGICAL SITE RATING (ECOLOGICAL CONDITION/ ECOLOGICAL STATUS):

The present state of vegetation of an ecological site in relation to the potential natural community 

for the site. Independent of the site’s use, the ecological site rating is an expression of the relative 

degree to which the kinds, proportions, and amounts of plants in a community resemble those of 

the potential natural community. The four ecological status classes correspond to 0–25%, 25–

50%, 51–75%, or 76–100% similarity to the potential natural community and are called earlyseral, mid-seral, late-seral, and potential natural community, respectively. 

EDGES: Breaks in continuity of vegetation allowing predation on species utilizing the area. 

ELIGIBLE RIVER SEGMENT: Qualification of a river for inclusion into the National Wild 

and Scenic Rivers System by determining that it is free flowing and, with its adjacent land area, 

has at least one river-related value considered to be outstandingly remarkable. 

ENDANGERED SPECIES: An animal or plant species that is in danger of extinction 

throughout all or a significant portion of its range (as defined in the Endangered Species Act 

Amendments of 1982). Also see THREATENED SPECIES. 

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA): A concise public document for which a federal 

agency is responsible. An EA serves: 1) to briefly provide enough evidence and analysis for 

determining whether to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) or a finding of no 

significant impact and to aid an agency’s compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act 

when no EIS is needed; and 2) to facilitate preparing an EIS when one is needed. Also see 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT. 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS): An analytical document that portrays 

potential impacts on the human environment of a particular course of action and its possible 

alternatives. Required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), an EIS is prepared for 

use by decision makers to weigh the environmental consequences of a potential decision. Also 

see ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. 

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE (EJ): The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all 

people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income in developing, implementing, and 

enforcing environmental laws, regulations, and policies. 

EPHEMERAL ALLOTMENTS: Allotments that are only authorized for grazing when there is 

adequate growth of annual vegetation (in spring). 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 140

May 2007

EPHEMERAL FORAGE: Part-time or seasonal forage; forage produced by annual forage 

species.

EPHEMERAL STREAM: A stream or portion of a stream that: 1) flows only in direct 

response to precipitation, 2) receives little or no water from springs or no long continued supply 

from snow or other sources, and 3) has a channel that is always above the water table. 

EXCAVATION: The scientific examination of an archaeological site through layer-by-layer 

removal and study of the contents within prescribed surface units (e.g., square meters). 

EXCHANGE: A trading of public lands (surface and/or subsurface estates) that usually do not 

have high public value for lands in other ownerships that do have value for public use, 

management, and enjoyment. The exchange may be for the benefit of other federal agencies as 

well as for BLM. 

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11644 (February 8 1972): An executive order is a Presidential 

directive that carries the weight of law. This order requires areas and trails to be designated 

“open,” “closed,” or “limited” within 1 year of the above date. 

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11989 (May 24 1977): An executive order is a Presidential directive 

that carries the weight of law. This order provides for special protection for areas and trails on 

the public lands when it is determined that off-road vehicles will cause or are causing 

considerable adverse effects 

EXTENSIVE RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREA (ERMA): A public lands unit 

identified in land use plans containing all acreage not identified as a SRMA. Recreation 

management actions within an ERMA are limited to only those of a custodial nature. 

EXISTING ROADS AND TRAILS: Legal term used in CFR 8340 — OFF ROAD VEHICLES 

as a type of limited area designation. The term “roads and trails” includes all types routes use by 

off-highway vehicles. For the LHFO RMP “existing roads and trails” would be those roads and 

trails identified on the Route Inventory Maps as of the date of the Record of Decision. 

EXOTIC SPECIES: A species of plant or animal that is not native to the area where it is found. 

Any species that is not indigenous, native, or naturalized. 

EXPERIMENTAL USE: This category may be applied to a cultural property judged well-suited 

for controlled experimental study, to be conducted by BLM or others concerned with the 

techniques of managing cultural properties, which would result in the property’s alteration, 

possibly including loss of integrity and destruction of physical elements. Committing cultural 

properties or the data they contain to loss must be justified in terms of specific information that 

would be gained and how it would aid in the management of other cultural properties. 

Experimental study should aim toward understanding the kinds and rates of natural or 

human-caused deterioration, testing the effectiveness of protection measures, or developing new 

research or interpretation methods and similar kinds of practical management information. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 141

May 2007

F

FEDERAL LAND POLICY AND MANAGEMENT ACT (FLPMA): The act that: 1) set out, 

for the Bureau of Land Management, standards for managing the public lands including land use 

planning, sales, withdrawals, acquisitions, and exchanges; 2) authorized the setting up of local 

advisory councils representing major citizens groups interested in land use planning and 

management; 3) established criteria for reviewing proposed wilderness areas; and 4) provided 

guidelines for other aspects of public land management such as grazing. 

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI): A document that is prepared by a 

federal agency and that briefly explains why an action (not otherwise excluded from the 

requirement to prepare an environmental impact statement [EIS]) would not significantly affect 

the human environment and not require an EIS. 

FIREARMS, USE OF: See ARIZONA REVISED STATUTE ARS 17-301B [USE OF 

FIREARMS]. 

FIRE MANAGEMENT: The integration of fire protection, prescribed burning, and fire ecology 

knowledge into multiple use planning, decision-making, and land management. 

FIRE SUPPRESSION: All the work of extinguishing or confining a fire beginning with its 

discovery. 

FIRE SUPPRESSION RESOURCES: People, equipment, services, and supplies available or 

potentially available for assignment to incidents. 

FLOODPLAIN, FLOODWAY, FLOODWAY FRINGE: See COLORADO RIVER. 

FORAGE: All browse and herbage that is available and acceptable to grazing animals or that 

may be harvested for feed. 

FUEL LOAD (IN FIRE SUPPRESSION): The ovendry weight of fuel per unit area usually 

expressed in tons/acre. 

FUNDAMENTALS OF RANGELAND HEALTH: As Described in 43CFR 4180, the 

conditions in which 1) rangelands are in proper functioning physical condition, 2) ecological 

process are supporting healthy biotic populations and communities, 3) water quality is meeting 

state standards and BLM objectives, and 4) special status species habitat is being restored or 

maintained.

FUNCTIONING WATERS (WILDLIFE): A well, catchment, spring, reservoir, or other feature 

(human made or natural) that provides a reliable source of potable water on a yearlong basis. For 

such a source of water to be considered functional, the quality and quantity of water must be 

sufficient to sustain native wildlife populations in the local area. For example, a reservoir that 

fills up during monsoon rains, but goes dry in a few weeks, is not functional from a wildlife 

standpoint. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 142

May 2007

G

GRAZING CAPACITY (CARRYING CAPACITY): The highest livestock stocking rate 

possible without damaging vegetation or related resources. Grazing capacity may vary from year 

to year or in the same area because of fluctuating forage production. 

GRAZING CYCLE: The amount of time required for livestock to rotate completely through all 

the pastures in an allotment management plan. 

GRAZING PERMIT/LICENSE/LEASE: Official written permission to graze a specific 

number, kind, and class of livestock for a specified period on a defined rangeland. 

GRAZING PRIVILEGES: The use of public land for livestock grazing under permits or leases. 

GRAZING REST: Any period during which no livestock grazing is allowed within an area. 

GRAZING SEASON: An established period for which grazing permits are issued. 

GRAZING SYSTEM: A systematic sequence of grazing use and nonuse of an allotment to meet 

multiple use goals by improving the quality and amount of vegetation. 

GROUND COVER: See COVER. 

GROUND LITTER: See LITTER. 

GROUNDWATER: Subsurface water and underground streams that supply wells and springs. 

Use of groundwater in Arizona does not require a water right but must only be “reasonable.” 

Groundwater is separated from surface water by the type of alluvium in which the water is found. 

Water in the younger, floodplain alluvium is considered surface water. Water in the older, basinfill alluvium is considered groundwater. 

GUZZLER: A structure that provides water to wildlife from a water collection source. 

H

HABITAT: The natural environment of a plant or animal: 1) Specific parameters of physical 

conditions used by a single species, a group of species, or a large community. The major 

components of habitat are generally considered to be food, water, cover, and living space; 2) the 

natural living space of an organism. 

HERD AREA: The geographic area identified as having been used by wild horse or burro herds 

as their habitat in 1971. 

HERD MANAGEMENT AREA: Public land under the jurisdiction of the BLM that has been 

designated for special management emphasizing the maintenance of an established wild horse 

and/or wild burro herd. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 143

May 2007

HERD MANAGEMENT AREA PLAN: An action plan that prescribes measures for the 

protection, management, and control of wild horses and burros and their habitat on one or more 

herd management areas, in conformance with decisions made in approved management 

framework or resource management plans. 

HISTORICAL SITE: An archaeological site that is more than 50 years old and dates to the 

historic period, commonly after contact with Europeans and when history is recorded in writing. 

These sites include, but are not limited to, wagon roads, railroads, mill sites, mining sites, 

ranching sites, homesteads, and military sites. 

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: A site-specific plan written to implement decisions made in a 

land use plan. An implementation plan usually selects and applies best management practices to 

meet land use plan objectives. Implementation plans are synonymous with “activity” plans. 

Examples of implementation plans include interdisciplinary management plans, habitat 

management plans, and allotment management plans. 

IMPROVE GRAZING ALLOTMENTS (“I” Category): These allotments are best described 

by one or more of the following characteristics: vegetation or watershed conditions are not 

satisfactory; the allotment’s potential production is high to moderate, but it is producing below its 

potential; there are substantive conflicts with other resource uses; the allotment’s size, physical 

characteristics, and the anticipated benefits from changes in management would warrant investing 

public funds for range improvements and supervision. 

INFILTRATION: The downward entry of water into the soil or other material. 

INFRASTRUCTURE: The set of systems and facilities that support a region or community’s 

social and economic structures. Examples of such systems include energy, transportation, 

communication, education, medical service, and fire and police protection. 

INHALABLE PARTICULATE MATTER (PM 10): Particulate matter in ambient air 

exceeding 10 microns in diameter. Also see PARTICULATE MATTER and 

FINEPARTICULATE MATTER. 

INTERMITTENT STREAM: A stream that generally flows during wet seasons but is dry during 

dry seasons. 

INVASIVE: An “invasive species” is defined as a species that is 1) non-native (or alien) to the 

ecosystem under consideration and 2) whose introduction causes or is likely to cause economic or 

environmental harm or harm to human health. Human actions are the primary means of invasive 

species introductions. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 144

May 2007

J

K

L

LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND: Established by the Land and Water 

Conservation Fund Act, a fund that the federal government can use to acquire and develop land 

and water for conservation and outdoor recreation and to help states in planning for, acquiring, 

and developing land and water areas and facilities. 

LAND CLASSIFICATION: A process for determining the suitability of public lands for certain 

types of disposal or lease under the public land laws or for retention under multiple use 

management.

LAND TENURE: The right to exclusively occupy and use a specified area of land. Tenure may 

also be limited to certain resources (“resource tenure”) such as timber but not to all resources in a 

given area. Tenure may be held by individuals, communities, government, or corporations. 

LAND USE ALLOCATION: The identification in a land use plan of the activities and 

foreseeable development that are allowed, restricted, or excluded for all or part of the planning 

area, based on desired future conditions. 

LAND USE AUTHORIZATION: BLM’s authorizing through leases, permits, and easements of 

uses of the public land. Land use authorizations may allow occupancy, recreational residences 

and cabin sites, farming, manufacturing, outdoor recreation concessions, National Guard 

maneuvers, and many other uses. 

LAND USE PLAN: A set of decisions that establish management direction for land within an 

administrative area, as prescribed under the planning provisions of FLPMA; an assimilation of 

land-use-plan-level decisions developed through the planning process, regardless of the scale at 

which the decisions were developed. 

LAND USE PLAN DECISION: Establishes desired outcomes and actions needed to achieve 

them. Decisions are reached using the BLM planning process. When they are presented to the 

public as proposed decisions, they can be protested to the BLM Director. They are not appealable 

to Interior Board of Land Appeals. 

LEASABLE MINERALS: Minerals whose extraction from federally managed land requires a 

lease and the payment of royalties. Leasable minerals include coal, oil and gas, oil shale and tar 

sands potash, phosphate, sodium, and geothermal steam. 

LEAVE NO TRACE: A nationwide (and international) program to help visitors with their 

decisions when they travel and camp on America’s public lands. The program strives to educate 

visitors about the nature of their recreational impacts as well as techniques to prevent and 

minimize such impacts. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 145

May 2007

LIMITED AREAS: Limited area means an area restricted at certain times, in certain areas, 

and/or to certain vehicular use. These restrictions may be of any type but can generally be 

accommodated within the following type of categories. Numbers of vehicles; types of vehicles; 

time or season of vehicle use; permitted or licensed use only; use on existing roads and trails; use 

on designated roads and trails; and other restrictions. 

LITTER: The uppermost layer of organic debris on the soil surface, essentially freshly fallen or 

slightly decomposed vegetal material. 

LIVE FUEL MOISTURE: See FUEL MOISTURE. 

LIVESTOCK PERFORMANCE: The efficiency of livestock within an operation as measured 

by such indicators as percent calf crop, weaned calf weights, animal death rates, and cull cow 

weights.

LIVESTOCK TRESPASS: The unauthorized grazing of livestock. 

LOCATABLE MINERALS: Minerals subject to exploration, development, and disposal by 

staking mining claims as authorized by the Mining Law of 1872, as amended. This includes 

deposits of gold, silver, and other uncommon minerals not subject to lease or sale. 

LONG TERM VISITOR AREA (LTVA): With the purchase of a permit, visitors may camp for 

the entire winter season (September 15 to April 15). Permit holders may move from one LTVA 

to another without incurring additional user fees. 

LOWER COLORADO RIVER MULTI-SPECIES CONSERVATION PLAN (LCRMSCP):

This plan was conceived in 1995 by a partnership of water interests on the Lower River. It was 

approved in 2005 for a period of 50 years, with the following two-pronged objective: 

1) Conserving threatened and endangered species habitat, moving listed species toward 

recovery, and reducing further listing of species associated with the lower Colorado 

River.

2) Accommodating current water diversions and power production, plus optimizing 

future water benefits to water users to the extent allowable by law. 

LOW-INCOME POPULATION: Persons living below the poverty level based on total income, 

of $18,244 for a family household of four people (two adults and two children) based on the 2002 

official measure of poverty. 

M

MAJOR RIGHTS-OF-WAY: Rights-of-way along which pass transmission lines (consisting of 

115kV or higher) used to transmit large blocks of energy to load centers for distribution. 

MAINTAIN GRAZING ALLOTMENTS (“M” Category): These allotments are best 

described by one or more of the following characteristics: vegetation and watershed conditions 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 146

May 2007

are satisfactory; the allotment has the potential for high resource production and is producing 

close to its potential; there are no serious resource use conflicts; and/or the allotment’s size and 

physical characteristics would warrant investment of public funds for range improvements and 

supervision.

MAINTENANCE: The work required keeping a facility in such a condition that it may be 

continuously utilized at its original or designed capacity and efficiency, and for its intended 

purposes.

MANAGEMENT ACTIONS: Land use plans must identify the actions needed to achieve the 

desired outcomes, including actions to restore or protect land health. These actions include 

proactive measures (e.g., measures that will be taken to enhance watershed function and 

condition) as well as measures or criteria that will be applied to guide day-to-day activities 

occurring on public land. 

MANAGEMENT USE: A cultural resource is used for controlled experimental study that would 

result in its physical alteration. This study is conducted to obtain specific information on a) the 

kinds and rates of natural and human-caused deterioration or b) the effectiveness of protection 

measures.

MINERAL ENTRY: The filing of a claim on public land to obtain the right to any minerals it 

may contain. 

MINERAL ESTATE: The ownership of minerals, including rights necessary for access, 

exploration, development, mining, ore dressing, and transportation operations. 

MINERAL MATERIAL DISPOSAL: The sale of sand, gravel, decorative rock, or other 

materials defined in 43 CFR 3600. 

MINERAL MATERIALS: Materials such as common varieties of sand, stone, gravel, pumice, 

pumicite, and clay that are not obtainable under the mining or leasing laws but that can be 

acquired under the Mineral Materials Act of 1947, as amended. See also SALEABLE 

MINERALS. 

MINERAL RIGHTS: Mineral rights outstanding are third-party rights, an interest in minerals 

not owned by the person or party conveying the land to the United States. It is an exception in a 

deed that is the result of prior conveyance separating title of certain minerals from the surface 

estate.

MINERAL WITHDRAWAL: A formal order that withholds federal lands and minerals from 

entry under the Mining Law of 1872 and closes the area to mineral location (staking mining 

claims), development, and leasing. 

MINING CLAIM: A mining claim is a selected parcel of Federal Land, valuable for a specific 

mineral deposit or deposits, for which a right of possession has been asserted under the General 

Mining Law. This right is restricted to the development and extraction of a mineral deposit. The 

rights granted by a mining claim protect against a challenge by the United States and other 

claimants only after the discovery of a valuable mineral deposit. The two types of mining claims 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 147

May 2007

are lode and placer. In addition, mill sites and tunnel sites may be located to provide support 

facilities for lode and placer mining. 

MINING DISTRICT: An area, usually designated by name, with described or understood 

boundaries, where minerals are found and mined under rules prescribed by the miners, consistent 

with the Mining Law of 1872. 

MINING PLAN OF OPERATIONS: A plan for mineral exploration and development that a 

mining operator must submit to BLM for approval for all mining, milling, and bulk sampling of 

more than 1,000 tons or more and for exploration disturbing more than 5 acres or on special status 

lands, including wilderness, areas of critical environmental concern, national monuments, 

national conservation areas, and lands containing proposed or listed threatened or endangered 

species or their critical habitat. A plan of operations must document in detail all actions that the 

operator plans to take from exploration through reclamation. 

MINORITY: Individual(s) classified by Office of Management and Budget’s Directive No.15 as 

Black/African American, Hispanic, Asian and Pacific Islander, American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, 

and other non-white persons. 

MINORITY POPULATION: Minority populations are identified as either: (1) the minority 

population of the affected area exceeds 50 %, or (2) the minority population percentage of the 

affected area is meaningfully greater than the minority population percentage in the general 

population or other appropriate unit of geographic analysis. 

MONITORING: The collection of information to determine the effects of resource management 

and detect changing resource trends, needs, and conditions. 

MULTIPLE USE: A combination of balanced and diverse resource uses that considers longterm needs for renewable and nonrenewable resources, including recreation, wildlife, rangeland, 

timber, minerals, and watershed protection; and scenic, scientific, and cultural values. 

N

NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (NAAQS): The allowable 

concentrations of air pollutants in the ambient (public outdoor) air specified in 40 CFR 50.

National ambient air quality standards are based on the air quality criteria and divided into 

primary standards (“sensitive” populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly) and 

secondary standards (allowing an adequate margin of safety to protect the public welfare). 

Welfare is defined as including effects on soils, water, crops, vegetation, and human-made 

materials. 

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (NEPA): The federal law, going into effect 

on January 1, 1970, which established a national policy for the environment and requires federal 

agencies 1) to become aware of the environmental ramifications of their proposed actions, 2) to 

fully disclose to the public proposed federal actions and provide a mechanism for public input to 

federal decision making, and 3) to prepare environmental impact statements for every major 

action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 148

May 2007

NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT OF 1966, AS AMENDED (NHPA): A

federal statute that established a federal program to further the efforts of private agencies and 

individuals in preserving the Nation’s historic and cultural foundations. NHPA 1) authorized the 

National Register of Historic Places, 2) established the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

and a National Trust Fund to administer grants for historic preservation, and 3) authorized the 

development of regulations to require federal agencies to consider the effects of federally assisted 

activities on properties included on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. 

NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT: An area containing sites of cultural significance that is 

listed on the National Register of Historic Places. See NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC 

PLACES.

NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES: The official list, established by the 

National Historic Preservation Act, of the Nation’s cultural resources worthy of preservation. 

The National Register lists archeological, historic, and architectural properties (e.g., districts, 

sites, buildings, structures, and objects) nominated for their local, state, or national significance 

by state and federal agencies and approved by the National Register Staff. The National Park 

Service maintains the National Register. Also see NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION 

ACT.

NATIONAL REGISTER QUALITY (CULTURAL RESOURCES): Cultural resource 

properties that meet the National Register criteria and have been determined eligible for 

nomination to the National Register of Historic Places because of their local, state, or national 

significance.

NATIONAL TRAILS: The National Trail System Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-543) authorized 

creation of a national trail system composed of National Recreation Trails, National Scenic 

Trails, and National Historic Trails. While National Scenic Trails and National Historic Trails 

may be designated only by an act of Congress, National Recreation Trails may be designated by 

the Secretary of Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture to recognize exemplary trails of local and 

regional significance in response to an application from the trail’s managing agency or 

organization. Through designation, these trails are recognized as part of America’s national 

system of trails. 

NATIONAL WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS SYSTEM: A system of nationally designated 

rivers and their immediate environments that have outstanding scenic, recreational, geologic, fish 

and wildlife, historical, cultural, and other similar values and are preserved in a free-flowing 

condition. The system consists of three types of streams: 1) recreation—rivers or sections of 

rivers that are readily accessible by road or railroad and that may have some development along 

their shorelines and may have undergone some impoundments or diversion in the past, 2) 

scenic—rivers or sections of rivers free of impoundments with shorelines or watersheds still 

largely undeveloped but accessible in places by roads, and 3) wild—rivers or sections of rivers 

free of impoundments and generally inaccessible except by trails with watersheds or shorelines 

essentially primitive and waters unpolluted. 

NATIVE SPECIES: A species of plant or animal that naturally occurs in the area and that was 

not introduced by humans (indigenous). 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 149

May 2007

NATURAL SCENIC AREA (NSA): Allocation made in the YUMA RMP that is associated 

with special management prescriptions. It has no legal authority but is a management tool. 

NAVIGABLE WASHES: A wash or arroyo that is wide enough for a vehicle to pass through 

without damage to vegetation or bank soils and generally has a sandy streambed. 

NICHE: (See Recreation) 

NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION: Precipitation-oriented runoff that transports pollutants 

from surrounding landscape to waterways. Non-point source pollutants typically include 

fertilizers, pesticides, oils, solvents, metals, feces, sediment, and other wastes commonly found 

on the surface throughout human communities. 

NONUSE: An authorization that BLM issues to applicants for nonuse of grazing privileges in 

whole or part, usually for one grazing season. 

NO SURFACE OCCUPANCY: A mineral leasing stipulation that prohibits occupancy or 

disturbance on all or part of the lease surface to protect special values of uses. Lessees may 

explore for or exploit the minerals under leases restricted by this stipulation by using directional 

drilling from sites outside the no surface occupancy area. 

NOXIOUS PLANT: An unwanted plant specified by federal or state laws as being undesirable 

and requiring control. Noxious weeds are usually non-native and highly invasive. 

O

OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE (OHV): Any vehicle capable of or designed for travel on or 

immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain, deriving motive power from any source 

other than muscle. OHVs exclude: 1) any non-amphibious registered motorboat; 2), any fire, 

emergency, or law enforcement vehicle while being used for official or emergency purposes; 3) 

any vehicle whose use is expressly authorized by a permit, lease, license, agreement, or contract 

issued by an authorized officer or otherwise approved; 4) vehicles in official use; and 5) any 

combat or combat support vehicle when used in times of national defense emergencies. 

OHV DESIGNATION: Public lands designated for off-highway vehicle use. Lands in the 

LHFO planning area are designated as “Open,” “Closed,” or “Limited” for OHV use. 

OPEN AREA: Open area means an area where all types of vehicle use are permitted at all 

times, anywhere in the area is subject to the operating regulations and vehicle standards set forth 

in 43 CFR 8341 and 8342. 

ORGANIZED GROUP ACTIVITY: Structured, ordered, consolidated, or scheduled event on, 

or occupation of, public lands for the purpose of recreational use that is not commercial or 

competitive. 

OUTCOMES (TARGETED, BENEFITS-BASED, SOCIETAL): Outcomes create a focal 

point for the expression of the ultimate benefit that would be produced for each recreation 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 150

May 2007

management land use zone under different assumptions of management goals, they serve to 

articulate the collections of recreation activities, recreation experiences, societal benefits, and 

environmental settings. Historically, research has shown a strong variation in psychological 

experiences desired by recreational users across different use management zones. 

P

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES (FOSSILS): The physical remains of plants and 

animals preserved in soils and sedimentary rock formations. Paleontological resources are 

important for understanding past environments, environmental change, and the evolution of life. 

PALENTOLOGY: A science dealing with the life forms of past geological periods as known 

from fossil remains. 

PARTICULATE MATTER: Fine liquid or solid particles suspended in the air and consisting of 

dust, smoke, mist, fumes, and compounds containing sulfur, nitrogen, and metals. Also see FINE 

PARTICULATE MATTER and INHALABLE PARTICULATE MATTER. 

PERENNIAL/EPHEMERAL ALLOTMENTS: Allotments that are authorized for yearlong 

grazing of a specific number of animals and can add additional livestock when there is adequate 

growth of annual vegetation. 

PERENNIAL PLANT: A plant that has a life cycle of 3 or more years. Also see ANNUAL 

PLANT.

PERENNIAL STREAM: A stream that flows continuously during all seasons of the year. 

PERSONAL INCOME: The sum of wage and salary payments, other labor income, 

proprietors’ income, rental income of persons, personal dividend and interest income, and transfer 

payments to persons, less personal contributions for social insurance. 

PLAN OF OPERATIONS: See MINING PLAN OF OPERATIONS 

PLANNING CRITERIA: The standards, rules, and other factors developed by managers and 

interdisciplinary teams for their use in forming judgments about decision making, analysis and 

data collection during planning. Planning criteria streamline and simplify the resource 

management planning actions.

PLANT COMMUNITY: Assemblage of plant populations in a defined area or physical habitat; 

an aggregation of plants similar in species composition and structure, occupying similar habitats 

over the landscape. 

POINT SOURCE POLLUTION: The discharge of pollution into the environment from a point, 

typically a pipe. 

PRESCRIBED FIRE (BURNING): The planned applying of fire to rangeland vegetation and 

fuels under specified conditions of fuels, weather, and other variables to allow the fire to remain 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 151

May 2007

in a predetermined area to achieve such site specific objectives as controlling certain plant 

species; enhancing growth, reproduction, or vigor of plant species; managing fuel loads; and 

managing vegetation community types. 

PRESCRIBED RECREATION SETTING: A term used to summarize the broad description 

of the desired experiences, environmental settings, and potential activities included in the desired 

future outcome for an area. The general definition for each prescription class (see Appendix I) 

matches those which were used to define the ROS/WROS inventory classes. 

PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY: (SEE RECREATION-TOURISM MARKET) 

PRIME FARMLAND: As defined by the Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981, land that has 

the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing food, feed, fiber, 

forage, oilseed, and other agricultural crops with minimum inputs of fuel, fertilizer, pesticides, 

and labor; and without intolerable soil erosion, as determined by the Secretary of Agriculture. 

Prime farmland includes land with the above characteristics, but is being used to produce 

livestock and timber. It does not include land already in or committed to urban development or 

water storage. Also see UNIQUE FARMLAND. 

PRIMITIVE RECREATION: Recreation that provides opportunities for isolation from the 

evidence of humans, a vastness of scale, feeling a part of the natural environment, having a high 

degree of challenge and risk, and using outdoor skills. Primitive recreation is characterized by 

meeting nature on its own terms, without comfort or convenience of facilities.

PRIMITIVE ROAD: A linear route managed for use by four-wheel-drive or high-clearance 

vehicles. Primitive roads do not normally meet any BLM road design standards. 

PRIORITY WILDLIFE HABITAT AREA: General areas that are managed to enhance the 

habitat of one or more priority wildlife species. These areas are now called Wildlife Habitat 

Management Areas (WHMAs). 

PRIORITY WILDLIFE SPECIES: Includes all federally listed threatened, endangered or 

candidate species and all species of concern (BLM sensitive and state designated). 

PROPER FUNCTIONING CONDITION (RIPARIAN WETLAND AREAS): The condition 

where 1) enough vegetation, land form, or large woody debris is present to dissipate the stream 

energy of high water flows, thereby reducing erosion and improving water quality; 2) sediments 

are filtered, bedload is captured, and floodplains develop; 3) flood water retention and ground 

water recharge are improved, root masses that stabilize streambanks against cutting action 

develop, and diverse ponding and channel characteristics are created to provide the habitat and 

the water depth, duration, and temperature needed for fish production, waterfowl breeding, and 

other uses; and 4) greater biodiversity is supported. 

PUBLIC LANDS: As defined by Public Law 94-579 (Federal Land Policy and Management 

Act of 1976), lands and interest in land owned by the United States and administered by the 

Secretary of the Interior, through BLM, regardless of how the United States acquired possession. 

In common usage, public lands may refer to all federal land, no matter what agency manages it. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 152

May 2007

PUBLIC USE: A cultural property is eligible for consideration as an interpretive exhibit-inplace, a subject of supervised participation in scientific or historical study, a subject of 

unsupervised collecting under permit or related educational and recreational uses by members of 

the general public. 

Q

R

RANGE IMPROVEMENT: Any activity or program on or relating to the public lands designed 

to improve forage production, change vegetation composition, control use patterns, provide 

water, stabilize soil and water conditions, or provide habitat for livestock and wildlife. Range 

improvements may be structural or nonstructural. 

Structural Improvement: requires placement or construction to facilitate the 

management or control the distribution and movement of animals. Such improvements 

may include fences, wells, troughs, reservoirs, pipelines, and cattleguards. 

Nonstructural Improvement: consist of practices or treatments that improve 

resource conditions (e.g., seedings; chemical, mechanical, and biological plant control; 

prescribed burning; water spreaders; pitting; chiseling; and contour furrowing).

RANGELAND: A kind of land on which the native vegetation, climax, or natural potential 

consists predominately of grasses, grass-like plants, forbs, or shrubs. Rangeland includes lands 

revegetated naturally or artificially to provide a plant cover that is managed like native 

vegetation. Rangelands may consist of natural grasslands, savannas, shrublands, moist deserts, 

tundra, alpine communities, coastal marshes, and wet meadows. 

RAPTOR: A raptor is a bird of prey that is known for its predatory habits of feeding on other 

animals. This group of birds possesses several unique anatomical characteristics that allow them 

to be superior hunters. These characteristics include excellent sensory abilities, such as binocular 

vision and keen hearing in order to detect prey; large, powerful grasping feet with razor-sharp 

talons for catching prey; and generally large hooked bills that can tear prey apart. They include 

diurnal or daytime species such as hawks, falcons, ospreys, and eagles; and nocturnal or 

nighttime species such as owls. 

RAPTOR HABITAT: Raptors have specific requirements that their habitat must provide, 

including food and water, cover from weather, space in which to gather food, and a large enough 

area to attract mates, establish nesting locations (aeries), and find safe corridors between habitats. 

Raptors generally nest in low densities and need large areas for successful breeding. Drainage of 

wetlands, urban expansion, and exotic plant invasions are all affecting raptor habitats. 

RECORD OF DECISION: A document signed by a responsible official recording a decision 

that was preceded by the preparing of an environmental impact statement. Also see DECISION 

RECORD.
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 153

May 2007

RECOVERY: Improvement in the status of the listed threatened or endangered species to the 

point at which listing is no longer appropriate under the criteria set forth in Section 4 of the 

Endangered Species Act. Also, the process by which a species and/or its ecosystems are restored 

to such an extent that the species is self-sustaining and future survival in the wild can be ensured. 

RECREATION AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN (RAMP): A plan prepared for recreation 

areas requiring special management. 

RECREATION AND PUBLIC PURPOSES ACT of 1926 (44 Stat. 741, as amended; 43 

U.S.C. 869 et seq.): An act of Congress that allows lease or acquisition of public land to be 

used for recreation or public purposes by local government entities (county or city governments) 

and non-profit organizations. 

RECREATION AND PUBLIC PURPOSE (R&PP) LEASE: A federal statue that allows the 

disposal of public lands to any state, local, federal, or political instrumentality or non-profit 

organization for any recreational or public purpose, at the discretion of the authorized officer. 

RECREATION MANAGEMENT ZONES (RMZs): Subunits within a SRMA managed for 

distinctly different recreation products. Recreation products are comprised of recreation 

opportunities, the natural resource and community settings within which they occur, and the 

administrative and service environment created by all affecting recreation-tourism provides, 

within which recreation participation occurs. (SEE Special recreation management area) 

RECREATION NICHE: The place or position within the strategically targeted recreationtourism market for each SRMA that is most suitable (i.e., capable of producing certain specific 

kinds of recreation opportunities) and appropriate (i.e., most responsive to identified visitor or 

resident customers), given available supply and current demand, for the production of specific 

recreation opportunities and the sustainable maintenance of accompanying natural resource 

and/or community setting character. 

RECREATION OPPORTUNITY SPECTRUM (ROS): One of the existing tools for 

classifying recreation environments (existing and desired) along a continuum ranging from 

primitive, low-use, and inconspicuous administration to urban, high-use, and a highly visible 

administrative presence. This continuum recognizes variation among various components of any 

landscape’s physical, social, and administrative attributes; and resulting descriptions (of existing 

conditions) and prescriptions (of desired future conditions) define recreation setting character. 

RECREATION SETTINGS: The collective, distinguishing attributes of landscapes that 

sometimes actually determine, what kinds of recreation opportunities are produced. 

RECREATION – TOURISM MARKET: Recreation-tourism visitors, affected community 

residents, affecting local governments and private sector business, or other constituents and the 

communities or other places where these customers originate (local, regional, national, or 

international). Based on analysis of supply and demand, land uses plans strategically identify 

primary recreation-tourism markets for each SRMA—destination, community, or undeveloped. 

RECREATIONAL ROCK COLLECTING: See ROCKHOUNDING. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 154

May 2007

RESOURCE ADVISORY COUNCILS (RACs): Advisory councils appointed by the 

Secretary of the Interior and consisting of representatives of major public land interest groups 

(e.g., commodity industries, recreation, environmental and local area interests) in a state or 

smaller area. RACs advise the BLM, focusing on a full array of multiple-use public land issues. 

RACs also help develop fundamentals for rangeland health and guidelines for livestock grazing. 

RESOURCE MANGEMENT PLAN (RMP): A BLM planning document that is prepared in 

accord with Section 202 of FLPMA that presents systematic guidelines for making resource 

management decisions for a resource area. An RMP is based on an analysis of an area’s 

resources, its existing management, and its capability for alternative uses. RMPs are issue 

oriented and developed by an interdisciplinary team with public participation. 

RIGHT-OF-WAY (ROW): A permit or easement that authorizes the use of lands for certain 

specified purposes, commonly for pipelines, roads, telephone lines, or powerlines. 

RIGHT-OF-WAY CORRIDOR: A parcel of land that has been identified by law, Secretarial 

order, through a land use plan or by other management decision as being the preferred location 

for existing and future right-of-way grants and suitable to accommodate one type of right-of-way 

or one or more rights-of-way which are similar, identical or compatible. 

RIPARIAN: Pertaining to or situated on or along the bank of streams, lakes, and reservoirs. 

RIPARIAN AREA: Riparian areas are the green, vegetated areas on each side of streams and 

rivers. They serve many important functions, including purifying water by removing sediments 

and other contaminants; reducing the risk of flooding and associated damage; reducing stream 

channel and streambank erosion; increasing available water and stream flow duration by holding 

water in stream banks and aquifers; supporting a diversity of plant and wildlife species; 

maintaining a habitat for healthy fish populations; providing water, forage, and shade for wildlife 

and livestock; and creating opportunities for recreationists to fish, camp, picnic, and enjoy other 

activities. They can be a form of wetland transition between permanently saturated wetlands and 

upland areas. Riparian areas exhibit vegetation or physical characteristics that reflect the 

influence of permanent surface or subsurface water. Typical riparian areas include lands along, 

adjacent to, or contiguous with perennially and intermittently flowing rivers and streams, and the 

shores of lakes and reservoirs with stable water levels. Excluded are ephemeral streams or 

washes that lack riparian vegetation and depend on free water in the soil. 

ROAD: A linear route declared a road by the owner, managed for use by low-clearance vehicles 

having four or more wheels, and maintained for regular and continuous use. 

ROADSIDE: A general term denoting the area adjoining the outer edge of the road. 

ROCK CRAWLING: The use of specialized motor vehicles for the purpose of traversing 

difficult terrain. Also known as Extreme Technical Trail driving. 

ROCKHOUNDING: The free collection of rock, mineral and semi-precious gemstones, 

invertebrate fossils, and petrified wood in reasonable amounts. BLM Arizona defines reasonable 

limits for personal use as up to 25 pounds per day, plus one piece, with a total of 250 pounds per 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 155

May 2007

person, per year. Rockhounding does not include removal aid by motorized mechanical devices, 

including heavy equipment or explosives. 

ROUTE: any motorized, non-motorized, or mechanized transportation corridor. Corridor may 

either be terrestrial or a waterway. “Roads,” “trails,” and/or “ways” are considered routes. 

RUNOFF: The portion of a drainage area’s precipitation that flows from the area. 

R.S. 2477: Revised Statute 2477 was enacted as part of the Mining Law of 1866, during a time 

when the federal government’s focus was on encouraging settlement and development of the 

West. Congress passed R.S. 2477 to ensure miners’ routes to their claims and cattlemen’s trails 

for their herds by granting rights-of-way over any federal land not otherwise set aside. Although 

Congress repealed the statute in 1976 with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, it did 

not terminate rights-of-way in existence at that time. As part of the new law in 1976, Congress 

recognized all valid existing claims to these rights-of-way as of that date. 

S

SALEABLE MINERALS: Common variety minerals on the public lands, such as sand and 

gravel, which are used mainly for construction and are disposed by sales or free use permits to 

local governments. See also MINERAL MATERIALS. 

SCIENTIFIC USE: This category applies to any cultural property determined to be available for 

consideration as the subject of scientific or historical study at the present time, using currently 

available research techniques. Study indicates methods that would result in the property’s 

physical alteration or destruction. This category applies almost entirely to prehistoric and historic 

archaeological properties, where this method of use is generally archaeological excavation, 

controlled surface collection, and/or controlled recordation (data recovery). Recommendation to 

allocate individual properties to this use must be based on documentation of the kinds of data the 

property is thought to contain and the data’s importance for pursuing specific research topics. 

SCOPING: An early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed in an 

environmental impact statement and the significant issues related to a proposed action. 

SHOULDER: The portion of the roadway contiguous to the travelway for accommodation of 

stopped vehicles. 

SEASONAL GRAZING: Grazing restricted to a specific season. 

SECTION: 640 acres or 1 square mile. 

SECTION 404 PERMIT: A permit required by the Clean Water Act, under specified 

circumstances, when dredge or fill material is placed in the waters of the United States, including 

wetlands.
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 156

May 2007

SECTION 7 CONSULTATION: The requirement of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act 

that all federal agencies consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine 

Fisheries Service if a proposed action might affect a federally listed species or its critical habitat. 

SEDIMENT: Solid material that originates mostly from disintegrated rocks and is transported 

by, suspended in, or deposited from water. Sediment includes chemical and biochemical 

precipitates and decomposed organic material such as humus. 

SENSITIVE SHEEP HABITAT: Habitat identified by BLM and AZGFD that provides one or 

more essential biological elements including: lambing areas, migration routes, mineral licks, 

water source, and foraging areas. 

SHEEP-FREE FORAGE: Alfalfa, hay, and other forage that has not been grown on fields 

grazed by domestic sheep. 

SIKES ACT OF 1974: A federal law that promoted federal-state cooperation in managing 

wildlife habitats on both BLM and Forest Service lands. The act required BLM to work with 

state wildlife agencies to plan the development and maintenance of wildlife habitats and had as its 

main tool, the habitat management plan. 

SIMULTANEOUS DOUBLE COUNT: A census technique to estimate animal populations. 

The technique uses tandem observers counting groups of animals on the same transect. 

SOCIO-CULTURAL USE: A social and/or cultural group perceives that a cultural resource, 

place, structure, or geographic location has characteristics that help to maintain the group’s 

heritage or identity. 

SOIL MOISTURE: The water content stored in a soil. 

SPECIAL CULTURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AREA: An area containing cultural 

resources (e.g., archaeological sites, historic sites, or places of traditional cultural importance) 

that are particularly important for public use, scientific use, traditional use, or other uses as 

defined in BLM Manual 8110.4.identified 

SPECIAL DESIGNATION: These are nationally recognized land use designations for 

protection of one or more sensitive resources. Designations may include ACECs, Back Country 

Byways, Wild and Scenic Rivers, Wilderness Areas, and Wilderness Study Areas. 

SPECIAL RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREA: (SRMA): A public lands unit identified 

in land use plans to direct recreation funding and personnel to fulfill commitments made to 

provide specific structured recreation opportunities (i.e., activity, experience, and benefit 

opportunities). Both land use plan decisions and subsequent implementing actions for recreation 

in each SRMA are geared to a strategically identified primary market-destination, community, or 

undeveloped. 

SPECIAL RECREATION PERMIT (SRP): An authorization that allows for specific 

nonexclusive permitted recreational uses of the public lands and related waters. SRPs are issued 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 157

May 2007

to control visitor use, protect recreational and natural resources, provide for the health and safety 

of visitors, and accommodate commercial recreational uses. 

SPLIT-ESTATE: Land whose surface rights and mineral rights are owned by different entities. 

SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES: Plant or animal species listed as endangered, threatened, 

candidate or sensitive by federal or state governments. 

SPECIAL VEHICLE RECREATION ACTIVITIES: Recreation activities that require special, 

custom, modified, usually motorized OHV equipment that involves site-specific landscape 

elements required for a specialized sport. Examples include: rock crawling and motorcycle 

trials.

SPUR: A route that exists for a unique use, such as access to a specific use or feature. Uses 

include, but are not limited to recreational and commercial. Features include, but are not limited 

to, campsites, mines, or range developments. A spur route is connected to a designated route. 

Spur routes should be designated in the TMP. 

STAKEHOLDERS(S): A person, party, group, organization, or agency interested either 

through ownership, management jurisdiction, share, or socioeconomic reliance in a location, area, 

or specific resource. 

STAGING AREA: An area where participants in an activity gather and make final preparations 

for the activity. 

STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR RANGELAND HEALTH: See Arizona Standards 

for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing Administration.

STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER (SHPO): The official within and 

authorized by each state at the request of the Secretary of the Interior to act as liaison for the 

National Historic Preservation Act. Also see NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT. 

STATE LANDS: See STATE TRUST LANDS. 

STATE TRUST LANDS: Lands granted to Arizona by the Federal government at territorial 

establishment and at statehood. Totaling 10.9 million acres, these lands are managed by the 

Arizona State Land Department to yield revenue over the long term for the 14 trust beneficiaries. 

The chief beneficiary consists of the public schools. Whenever Arizona sells or leases these lands 

and their natural resources, it must pay the beneficiaries. Revenues from land sales are 

maintained in a permanent fund managed by the State Treasurer, and interest from this fund is 

paid to the beneficiaries. 

STREAMBANK: The portion of a stream channel that restricts the sideward movement of water 

at normal water levels. The streambank’s gradient often exceeds 45° and exhibits a distinct break 

in slope from the stream bottom. 

STREAMBANK STABILITY: A streambank’s relative resistance to erosion, which is 

measured as a percentage of alteration to streambanks. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 158

May 2007

SURFACE OCCUPANCY: See NO SURFACE OCCUPANCY. 

T

TAILINGS: The waste matter from ore after the extraction of economically recoverable metals 

and minerals. 

TAKE: As defined by the Endangered Species Act, “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, 

kill, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.” 

TARGET SPECIES: Plant species to be reduced or eliminated by a vegetation treatment. Also 

see VEGETATION TREATMENTS. 

TERRESTRIAL SPECIES: Ground dwelling plants and animals. 

THREATENED SPECIES: Any plant or animal species likely to become endangered within 

the foreseeable future throughout all or part of its range and designated by the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service under the Endangered Species Act. Also see ENDANGERED SPECIES.

TITLE 5: That section of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act that allows BLM to 

authorize certain types of rights-of-way. 

TRADITIONAL LIFEWAY VALUE: The quality of being useful to the maintenance of a 

specified social and/or cultural group’s traditional systems of 1) religious belief, 2) cultural 

practice, or 3) social interaction, not closely identified with definite locations. Another group’s 

shared values are abstract, nonmaterial, ascribed ideas that one cannot know about without being 

told.

TRADITIONAL USE: This category is to be applied to any cultural resource that is perceived 

by a specified social and/or cultural group as having attributes that contribute to maintaining the 

heritage or existence of that group. This use category signifies that the cultural resource is to be 

managed in a way that takes those attributes into account, as applicable. 

TRAIL: (Interagency definition): linear route managed for human powered, stock, or 

off-highway vehicle forms of recreation or for historic or heritage values. Trails are not generally 

managed for use by four wheel drive or high clearance vehicles. 

TRAILHEAD: The terminus of a hiking, horse, or bicycle trail, accessible by motor vehicle and 

sometimes having parking, signs, a visitor register, and camping and sanitary facilities. 

TRAVEL MANAGEMENT NETWORK: A system that addresses access requirements to 

public lands. This includes, but is not limited to: Title 5 rights-of-way, RS 2477 Roads, OHV 

routes, county maintained roads, trails (hiking, equestrian, bike, and vehicular), authorized or 

permitted uses (ranchers, miners, and other agencies), and ADA needs. The network aims to also 

improve the lack of legal access to public lands over private or state lands. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 159

May 2007

TREAD LIGHTLY: A not-for-profit organization whose mission is to increase awareness of 

ways to enjoy the great outdoors while minimizing human impacts. 

U

UNIQUE FARMLAND: As defined by the Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981, land other 

than prime farmland that is used for producing specific high-value food and fiber crops, as 

determined by the Secretary of Agriculture. Unique farmland has the special combination of soil 

quality, location, growing season, and moisture supply needed to economically produce sustained 

high quality or high yields of specific crops when treated and managed according to acceptable 

farming methods. Examples of such crops include citrus, tree nuts, olives, cranberries, fruits, and 

vegetables. Also see PRIME FARMLAND. 

UNAUTHORIZED USE: Any use of the public lands not authorized or permitted. 

USER ETHIC: All visitors arrive at the public lands with a set of perceptions, habits, activities, 

and values, which, based upon their socialization, they determine to be appropriate or 

inappropriate behaviors. These ethics change over time, by region of the country, and by group 

affiliation/norms. Some ethics are less impacting to the natural setting. When a user group or 

subset of a user group is observed to demonstrate a poor user ethic, it may be valuable to provide 

information and interpretation in order to seek a change in user ethic. 

UPLANDS: Lands at higher elevations than the alluvial plain or low stream terrace; all lands 

outside the riparian-wetland and aquatic zones. 

V

VANDALISM (CULTURAL RESOURCE): The unauthorized collecting, excavating, or 

defacing of cultural resources. 

VALID EXISTING RIGHTS: Locatable mineral development rights that existed when FLPMA 

was enacted in 1976. Some areas are segregated from entry and location under the Mining Law 

to protect certain values or allow certain uses. Mining claims that existed as of the effective date 

of the segregation may still be valid if they can meet the test of discovery of a valuable mineral 

required under the Mining Law. Determining the validity of mining claims located on segregated 

lands requires BLM to conduct a valid existing rights determination. 

VEGETATION TREATMENTS: Treatments that improve vegetation condition or production. 

Such treatments may include seedings; prescribed burning; or chemical, mechanical, and 

biological plant control. 

VENDING: the sale of goods or services, not from a permanent structure, associated with 

recreation on the public lands or related waters, such as food, beverages, clothing, firewood, 

souvenirs, photographs, or film (video or still), or equipment repairs. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 160

May 2007

VERTICAL MULCHING: A reclamation strategy, designed to conform to adjacent vegetation 

and terrain, for restoring roads, trails, and other disturbed areas in desert tortoise and other 

sensitive species’ habitats. This technique involves the placement of structure (live vegetation, 

rocks, dead shrubs and “snags,” bunchgrasses, and various woody materials) within the confines 

of the treatment area, both on the ground surface and in a vertical manner. 

VISITOR SERVICES: The delivery, to the visiting public, of use information, interpretation, 

and use rules. Visitor services may be provided in written form (maps and brochures), signing, or 

the direct face-to-face contact with a BLM Park Ranger or other visitor services staff. Emergency 

services and visitor assistance are also included as visitor services. The goal of visitor services is 

to improve the visitor experience, provide a BLM presence, and protect the resource. 

VISUAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (VRM): A BLM developed system used to evaluate 

the visual resources of a given area to determine what degree of protection, rehabilitation, or 

enhancement is desirable and possible. 

W, X, Y, Z 

WASH: A channel or miniature valley cut by concentrated runoff but through which water 

commonly flows only during and immediately after heavy rains, or while snow is melting. 

WATERSHED (CATCHMENT): A topographically delineated area that is drained by a stream 

system, that is, the total land area above some point on a stream or river that drains water past that 

point. The watershed is a hydrologic unit often used as a physical-biological unit and a 

socioeconomic-political unit for planning and managing natural resources. 

WATERSHED CONDITION (WATERSHED HEALTH): The comparison of watershed 

processes to normal or expected measurements of properties such as soil cover, erosion rate, 

runoff rate, and groundwater table elevation; an assessment or categorization of an area by 

erosion conditions, erosion hazards, and the soil moisture/temperature regime. 

WATERSHED FUNCTION: The combination of processes attributed to watersheds as part of 

the hydrologic cycle including interception of rain by plants, rocks, and litter; surface storage by 

the soil; groundwater storage; stream channel storage; soil evaporation; plant transpiration; and 

runoff. These processes affect the following properties of the watershed: runoff rate, water 

infiltration rate, soil building rate, soil erosion rate, groundwater recharge rate, groundwater 

discharge rate, water table elevation, and surface water discharge. These properties in turn affect 

plant communities through soil attributes, including soil parent material, soil moisture, and 

nutrients; stream and rivers through flooding duration and magnitude; and sediment load, which 

structures the dimension, pattern, and profile of channels; and lakes and reservoirs through 

sedimentation and nutrient input. 

WAY: As used herein, a road-like feature used by vehicles having four or more wheels, but not 

declared a road by the owner and which receives no maintenance to guarantee regular and 

continuous use. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 161

May 2007

WETLAND: An area that is inundated or saturated by surface- or ground water often and long 

enough to support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil. Wetlands 

include marshes, shallows, lakeshores, cienegas, and riparian areas. 

WILD and SCENIC RIVER CORRIDOR: See NATIONAL WILD and SCENIC RIVER 

SYSTEM.

WITHDRAWAL: As defined in FLPMA: “Withholding an area of Federal land from 

settlement, sale, location, or entry, under some or all of the general land laws, for the purpose of 

limiting activities under those laws in order to maintain other public values in the area or 

reserving the area for a particular public purpose or program; or transferring jurisdiction over an 

area of Federal land, other than ’property’ governed by the Federal Property and Administrative 

Services Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 471) from one department, bureau or agency to another 

department, bureau or agency.” 

WILD BURROS: All unbranded and unclaimed burros using public lands as all or part of their 

habitat.

WILDERNESS: Area designated by Congress to protect their wilderness values or 

characteristics as described under the Wilderness Act of 1964. 

WILDERNESS CHARACTERISTICS: features of the land and are specifically identified in 

BLM Instruction Memorandum (IM) No. 2003-275 – Change 1 as naturalness, solitude, and 

primitive/unconfined recreation. 

WILDERNESS STUDY AREA (WSA): A roadless area of public lands that the BLM has 

determined possesses the wilderness qualities described in the Wilderness Act of 1964. The 

WSA system was established under Section 603 of FLPMA as a means of identifying for 

Congress those public lands that possess wilderness characteristics described by the Wilderness 

Act of 1964. Congress can designate WSAs, release them from study status, or maintain their 

wilderness study status. 

WILDFIRE: Any wildland fire that is not meeting management objectives and therefore requires 

a suppression response. 

WILDLAND FIRE: Any non-structure fire, other than prescribed fire, that occurs in the 

wildland.

WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE (WUI): Areas where urban fuels directly meet natural 

fuels. This is primarily within 20–60 meters (66–200 feet) of houses, where fire most directly 

threatens the house, and where a defensible zone can be developed. 

WILDLIFE: A broad term that includes birds, reptiles, amphibians, and non-domesticated 

mammals. 

WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS (WHAs): General areas that are managed to enhance the 

habitat of one or more priority wildlife species. These areas were previously called Priority 

Wildlife Habitat. 
Bureau of Land Management Glossary

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 162

May 2007

WITHDRAWAL: An action that restricts the disposition of public lands and holds them for 

specific public purposes; public lands that have been dedicated to public purpose. Also see 

MINERAL WITHDRAWAL.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 163

May 2007

References Cited 

Arizona Game and Fish Department, Arizona State Parks, The Nature 

Conservancy, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Bureau of Land 

Management, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. 2005. Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Cooperation 

and Coordination within the Bill Williams River Watershed in Southwest 

Arizona. The BLM became signatory on January 3, 2005. 

Bureau of Land Management. 1980. The California Desert Conservation Area 

Plan. Desert District, Riverside, CA. 

———. 1983. Lower Gila North Management Framework Plan. Phoenix 

District Office, Phoenix, AZ. 

———. 1987. Final Yuma District Resource Management Plan and 

Environmental Impact Statement. Yuma District Office, Yuma, AZ. 

———. 1988a. Lower Gila South Resource Management Plan and 

Environmental Impact Statement. Phoenix District Office, Phoenix, AZ. 

———. 1988b. Desert Tortoise Habitat Management on Public Lands: A 

Rangewide Plan. Washington, D.C. 

———. 1993. Parker Strip Recreation Area Management Plan. BLM Havasu 

Resource Area, Yuma District Office. Yuma, AZ. 

———. 1994. Arizona Statewide Wild and Scenic Rivers Legislative 

Environmental Impact Statement. Arizona State Office, Phoenix, AZ. 
Bureau of Land Management References

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 164

May 2007

———. 1995. Kingman Resource Area Resource Management Plan and Final 

Environmental Impact Statement. Kingman Resource Area Office, Kingman, 

AZ.

———. 1996. Recreation Project Plan for the Parker Strip Off-Highway 

Vehicle Area and Routes. BLM Havasu Field Office, Lake Havasu, AZ. 

———. 1997a. Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for 

Grazing Administration. Arizona State Office, Phoenix, AZ. 

———. 1997b. La Posa Interdisciplinary Management Plan. Yuma Field 

Office, Yuma, AZ. 

———. 1997c. Swansea Historic District Cultural Resource Management 

Plan: A Review of Past Management and Proposed Decisions for the Future 

Public Use of Swansea. Lake Havasu Field Office, Lake Havasu, AZ. 

———. 2001. Gibraltar Mountain Interdisciplinary Management Plan. Lake 

Havasu Field Office, Lake Havasu City, AZ. 

———. 2002a. Resource Management Plan Scoping Report. Lake Havasu 

Field Office, Lake Havasu City, AZ. 

———. 2002b. Northern and Eastern Colorado Desert Coordinated 

Management Plan (NECO Plan). California Desert District Office, 

Riverside, CA. 

———. 2003. Arizona Statewide Land Use Plan Amendment for Fire, Fuels, 

and Air Quality Management. Arizona State Office, Phoenix, AZ. 

———. 2004. Proposed Statewide LUP Amendment for Fire, Fuels & Air 

Quality Management. Arizona State Office, Phoenix, AZ. 

———. 2005. Approved Amendment to the Lower Gila North Management 

Framework Plan and the Lower Gila South Resource Management Plan and 

Decision Record. Phoenix, AZ. 

———. 2006. Lake Havasu Coordinated Fisheries Management Plan. Lake 

Havasu Field Office. Lake Havasu City, AZ. 

Bureau of Land Management and USDA Forest Service. 2002. Interagency

Standards for Fire and Aviation Operations. Washington, D.C.

Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Metropolitan 

Water District of Southern California. 2004. Lower Colorado River MultiSpecies Conservation Program. Volume I, II, III, IV, and V. Available:

<http://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/g2000/mscpdocs.html>. 
Bureau of Land Management References

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 165

May 2007

California Partners in Flight. 2006. The Desert Bird Conservation Plan: a 

Strategy for Protecting and Managing Desert Habitats and Associated Birds 

in the Mojave and Colorado Deserts. Version 1.0. Available: 

<http://www.prbo.org/calpif/plans.html>. 

City of Bullhead City. 2002. City of Bullhead City General Plan Update.

Bullhead City, AZ: DFD. 

Cunning, Dan. President and CEO. Lake Havasu Convention and Visitors 

Bureau. Lake Havasu, AZ. November 17, 2004––telephone conversation 

regarding the number of annual visitors to the Lake Havasu region. 

La Paz County. 2005. La Paz County Comprehensive Plan. Revised March 

2005. Adopted April 2005. La Paz County, Parker, AZ. 

Lake Havasu City. 2002. Lake Havasu City General Plan 2001. Revised 

December 2004. Partners for Strategic Action, Inc. Lake Havasu City, AZ. 

Latta, M. J., C. J. Beardmore, and T. E. Corman. 1999. Arizona Partners in 

Flight Bird Conservation Plan. Version 1.0. Nongame and Endangered 

Wildlife Program Technical Report 142. Arizona Game and Fish 

Department. Phoenix, Arizona. 

Mohave County. 1995. Mohave County, Arizona, General Plan. Kansas City, 

MO: Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle. 

National Interagency Fire Center. 2001. Review and Update of the 1995 Federal 

Wildland Fire Management Policy January 2001. Available: 

<http://www.nifc.gov/fire_policy/history/index.htm>. 

Parker Town Council and Staff, Planning and Zoning Commission. 1996. Town

of Parker General Plan. Partners for Strategic Action, Inc. Fountain Hills, 

AZ.

Riparian Habitat Joint Venture. 2004. The Riparian Bird Conservation Plan: a 

Strategy for Reversing the Decline of Riparian Associated Birds in 

California. California Partners in Flight. Available: 

<http://www.prbo.org/calpif/riparian.v-2.pdf>.

San Bernardino County. 2001. General Plan. Economic Development and 

Public Services Group. Land Use Services Department. San Bernardino, 

CA.

Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Metropolitan 

Water District of Southern California. 2004. Lower Colorado River MultiSpecies Conservation Program. Volume I, II, III, IV, and V. Available:

<http://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/g2000/mscpdocs.html>. 
Bureau of Land Management References

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 166

May 2007

U.S. Department of the Interior. 1964. Lower Colorado River Land Use Plan.

Washington, D.C. 

U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management. 2004. Proposed 

Statewide LUP Amendment for Fire, Fuels and Air Quality Management.

Arizona State Office, Phoenix, AZ. 

———. 2006. Lake Havasu Field Office Proposed Resource Management Plan 

and Final Environmental Impact Statement. Lake Havasu, AZ. 

U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management, Arizona State 

Office, and Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. 1997. 

Cooperative Agreement. ADEZ Contract No. 98-0094. Agreement number 

22021. Filed with the Secretary of State November 6. 

U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management, and the California 

State Water Resources Control Board. 1993. Memorandum of 

Understanding for Planning and Coordination of Nonpoint Source Water 

Quality Policies and Activities. 1993. Signed January 27. 

U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Bureau of 

Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, 

Arizona Game and Fish Department, California Department of Fish and 

Game, and Anglers United, Inc. 2006. Lake Havasu Fisheries Improvement 

Program Partnership 2006 Memorandum of Understanding. BLM 

Agreement No. AZ-932-0601. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2006. Biological Opinion on the 

Effects of the Lake Havasu Field Office (LHFO) Proposed Resource 

Management Plan. Arizona Ecological Services Field Office. Phoenix, AZ. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Canadian Wildlife Service, 

SEMARNAP Mexico. 1998. Update North American Waterfowl 

Management Plan. Washington, D.C.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 167

May 2007

Index

A

Adaptive Management, 14, 45, 128, 129 

Administrative Actions, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 (in the Record of Decision); 14, 47, 99, 103, 112, 117, 

119, 123 see also Appendix B 

Alamo Dam, 2, 12, 41, 117 

Alamo Lake, 11, 121 

Alamo Wildlife Area, 120, 121 

Alternatives

Overview

Alternative 1 (No Action), pp. 8-9 (in the Record of Decision) 

Alternative 2, p. 9 (in the Record of Decision) 

Alternative 3, p. 9 (in the Record of Decision) 

Alternative 4, p. 9 (in the Record of Decision) 

Proposed Plan, Alternative 5, pp. 9-10 (in the Record of Decision) 

American Indian Tribes, see also individual tribes, 14 (in the Record of Decision); 2, 6, 12, 126 

Applicable laws, regulations, policy, and planning criteria, see Appendix A 

Appropriate Management Levels (AMLs), 120, 121, 122 

Approved Amendment to the Lower Gila North Management Framework Plan and the Lower 

Gila South Resource Management Plan and Decision Record (LGNSA), 3 (in the Record of 

Decision); 1 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs), see also Special Designations; Appendix K; 

Map 28; 4, 5, 9, 11 (in the Record of Decision); 5, 21, 28, 30, 33, 37, 39, 41, 100, 104, 106, 

108, 109, 111, 114, 126 

Decision Code AC, 106-109 
Bureau of Land Management Index

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 168

May 2007

Arizona (State and miscellaneous), 1, 3, 5, 7, 11, 12, 14, 15 (in the Record of Decision); 12, 15, 

16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 39, 41, 46, 57, 65, 66, 68, 74, 85, 87, 100, 101, 

103, 104, 105, 107, 111, 112, 114, 120, 124, 125, 126 

 Planning Overview, 1-10 

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), 12 

Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), 14 (in the Record of Decision); 6, 7, 39, 122 

Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD), 5, 14 (in the Record of Decision); 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 

21, 85, 87, 121, 122 

Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing Administration (Standards 

and Guidelines), 12 (in the Record of Decision) 

Arizona State Parks, 3, 6, 12, 66, 68, 85, 87 

Arizona Statewide Wild and Scenic Rivers Legislative Environmental Impact Statement, 7, 111 

Atlantic and Pacific (A&P) Railroad, 28 

Availability of the Plan, p. 14 (in the Record of Decision) 

B

Back Country Byways, see also Special Designations; Appendix K; Map 28; 4, 33, 109, 110 

Decision Code BB, 109-110 

Beale Slough Riparian and Cultural ACEC, 43, 106, 108, 109 

Beale’s Wagon Road, 107 

Big Sandy River, 11, 121 

Bighorn sheep, 16, 18, 19, 107, 110, 114 

Habitat, see Map 10 

Bill Williams River, 2, 11, 22, 60, 106, 110, 111, 117, 119 

Riparian Zones, see Map 8 

Bill Williams River Corridor Steering Committee, 11, 12 

Bill Williams River National Wildlife Refuge, 2, 60 

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, see also Appendix C 

Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management 

Decision Code WF, 13, 17-21 

Special Status Species Management 

Decision Code TE, 13, 21-24, 29 

Vegetation and Riparian Management 

Decision Codes VM and RP, 15-17 

Watershed Management 

Decision Code WS, 25 

Black Peak Special Cultural Resource Management Area (SCRMA), 28 
Bureau of Land Management Index

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 169

May 2007

Bonytail chub, 16, 24 

Bouse, see also Camp Bouse, 40, 94, 99, 110 

Brenda, 99 

Bullhead Bajada, 28, 39, 43, 44, 107, 108, 109 

Bullhead Bajada Natural and Cultural ACEC, 39, 43, 44, 107, 108 

Bullhead Bajada Special Cultural Resource Management Area (SCRMA), 28 

Bullhead City General Plan (2002), 12 

Bullhead City, Arizona, 2, 6, 12, 48, 49, 107 

Bureau of Land Management 

 Planning Overview, 1-13 

 Management Decisions, 19-36 

Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), 14 (in the Record of Decision); 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 16, 22, 

28, 107; see also Map 3, Bureau of Reclamation Withdrawn and Acquired Lands

C

California (State and miscellaneous), 3, 11, 12, 14 (in the Record of Decision); 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 10, 

12, 13, 16, 21, 22, 30, 40, 57, 72, 101, 114, 120 

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), 6, 8, 21, 72 

Camp Bouse, 28 

Camping, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 109; as activity in Special Recreation Management Areas 

(SRMAs), see Tables 7a through 7g, pp. 48-96 

Central Arizona Project (CAP), 9, 40 

Chemehuevi Indian Tribe, 2, 6 

Clarifications, 7-8 (in the Record of Decision) 

Clean Water Act, 10, 12 

Collaboration/Partnership Relationship, 6 

Colorado Desert, 120, 164, 165, 170 

Colorado River, 2, 3, 8, 9, 12, 24, 29, 43, 49, 50, 51, 53, 72, 102, 107, 113, 115, 120 

Riparian Zones, see Map 7 

Colorado River Indian Tribes, 2, 6, 29, 41 

Colorado River Nature Center Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA), see Table 7a, 

pp. 48-50, 48, 97, 115 

Comments, see also Protest, 2, 5, 9, 11 (in the Record of Decision); 4, 5 

Communication sites, 37, 41; see also Map 15 and Table 5, p. 41 

Compact disc (CD), 113 

Concessions, 39, 62, 68, 100 

Congress of the United States, 4 (in the Record of Decision); 2, 7, 8, 105, 111 

Cooperating agencies, 7-9 
Bureau of Land Management Index

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 170

May 2007

Craggy Wash, 8, 102 

Crossman Peak, 28, 39, 88, 98, 102, 107, 108, 109 

Crossman Peak Scenic ACEC, 39, 107, 108; see also Appendix K, 

Culling’s Well, 28 

CULTURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, see also Appendix E 

Categories for Cultural Resource Allocation, Table 2, p. 26 

Decision Code CL, 26-29 

Desired Future Conditions, 26 

Land Use Allocations, 26-28 

Management Actions, 28-29 

Monitoring, 29-30 

D

Davis Dam, 2, 8 

Department Manual (DM), 8, 9 

Department of the Interior (DOI), 12 (in the Record of Decision); 8, 9, 10 

Desert bighorn sheep, see Bighorn sheep 

Desert tortoise, see Mojave Desert tortoise and Sonoran Desert tortoise; see also Map 11 

Desired Future Conditions, see individual resource topics 

Disposal lands, see Appendix G for legal descriptions; see also Map 14 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), 2, 7, 9, 14 (in the Record of Decision); 2, 5, 130 

Draft Resource Management Plan (DRMP), 7, 9, 14 (in the Record of Decision); 2, 5, 130 

E

Effectiveness monitoring, see Plan Monitoring 

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (16 USC 1531) et seq., as amended, 6, 10, 22 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), 3, 8, 12, 14 (in the Record of Decision); 2, 4, 110, 111 

Ephemeral allotments, 46 

Extensive Recreational Management Area (ERMA), 47, 96, 97, 99, 103, 114; see also Table 7h, 

p 96 and Map 21 

F

Federal Highway Administration, 14 (in the Record of Decision); 6, 7 

Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976, 3, 4, 10, 11 (in the Record of 

Decision); 2, 5, 12, 36, 37, 38 

Federal Register (FR), 8, 14 (in the Record of Decision); 4, 27 

Field Manager recommendation, 15 (in the Record of Decision) 
Bureau of Land Management Index

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 171

May 2007

Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), 1, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 (in the Record of 

Decision); 2, 10, 19, 22, 40, 130 

FIRE MANAGEMENT, see also Map 13, Vegetation Communities for Fire Management

Decision Code FM, 30-34 

Desired Future Conditions, 30 

Land Use Allocations, 30-31 

Management Actions, 31-34 

Monitoring, 34 

Fire Management Plan, 31 

Fish habitat, 11, 16, 19, 20, 24, 60, 65, 103 

Fisheries, 6 (in the Record of Decision); 2, 6, 11, 14, 20, 24, 57, 101 

Fishing, 11, 56, 57, 60, 61, 62, 65, 66, 67, 101 

Fort Mojave Indian Tribe, 2, 6 

G

Gibraltar Mountain Interdisciplinary Management Plan and Environmental Assessment, 9 

Gibraltar Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA), see Table 7e, pp. 76-85, 98, 102; see 

also Map 23 

Grazing, see Rangeland Management/Grazing; see also Appendix H and Map 19 

H

Harcuvar Mountains, 2, 44 

Harcuvar Mountain East as Special Cultural Resource Management Area (SCRMA), 28 

Harcuvar Mountain West as Special Cultural Resource Management Area (SCRMA), 28 

Hardy Toll Road, 28 

Hargus Cabin, 28 

Havasu-AZ Herd Management Area (HMA), 122 

Havasu-CA Herd Management Area (HMA), 120 

Havasu National Wildlife Refuge, 2 

Havasu Resource Area of the Yuma District, 1 

Havasu Urban Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA), see Table 7f, pp. 85-91, 98, 102; 

see also Map 24 

Hazardous Materials, 37 

Herd Management Areas (HMAs) see Wild burros, individual Herd Management Areas; see also

Map 35 and Table 9 

Hiking, 11 (in the Record of Decision); 101, 109; as activity in Special Recreation Management 

Areas (SRMAs), see Tables 7a through 7g, pp. 48-96 

Hopi Tribe, 2, 6 
Bureau of Land Management Index

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 172

May 2007

Hualapai Tribe, 2, 6 

Hunting, 11 (in the Record of Decision); 53, 55, 76, 82, 93, 95, 102, 109, 116 

I

Implementation Monitoring, see Plan Monitoring 

Implementation Decisions, 6 (in the Record of Decision) 

Inholdings, 3, 37, 125 

Intaglio, 27; see also Appendix E 

Intergovernmental, inter-agency, and tribal relationships, 6 

Interstate (I) 10, 40 

Interstate (I) 40, 40 

Issues addressed, 4-5 

Issues considered but not further analyzed, 6 

J, K

Kingman Resource Area Resource Management Plan (KRMP), 3 (in the Record of Decision); 1 

L

La Paz County Comprehensive Plan (March 2005 Revised Draft), 12 

La Paz County, Arizona, 1, 6, 12, 76 

Lake Havasu, 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15 (in the Record of Decision); 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 

22, 23, 24, 25, 30, 31, 35, 37, 38, 39, 47, 104, 108, 112, 113, 115, 119, 120, 126, 127, 129, 130; 

see also Lake Havasu Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA) 

 Planning Overview, 1-13 

Lake Havasu City General Plan (2001), 12, 165 

Lake Havasu City, Arizona, 5, 14 (in the Record of Decision); 2, 6, 12, 20, 65, 85, 88, 89, 98, 

102, 107, 119, 120, 126 

Lake Havasu/Colorado River Regional Management Area, 10, 11, 14; see also Map 4; 

Lake Havasu Convention and Visitor Center, 2 

Lake Havasu Coordinated Fisheries Management Plan (January 2005), 13 

Lake Havasu Field Office (LHFO), 1, 2, 8, 9, 14, 15 (in the Record of Decision); 1, 4, 6, 7 8, 9, 

12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 21, 22, 23, 30, 31, 35, 37, 38, 39, 47, 99, 100, 101, 102, 112, 113, 115, 126, 

129, 130 

Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Scoping Report, 4 

Lake Havasu Fisheries Improvement Partnership, 11 

Lake Havasu Shoreline Program, 8 (in the Record of Decision) 

Lake Havasu Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA), see Table 7b, pp. 51-68, 88, 97, 

101, 102; see also Map 22 

Land status/surface management, see Table 1, p. 3 
Bureau of Land Management Index

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 173

May 2007

Land use allocations, see individual resource topics 

Land Use Planning Handbook (H-1601-1), 129 

Land use plans, see individual plan titles

LANDS AND REALTY PROGRAM, see also rights-of-way, utility corridors, Appendix G 

Decision Code LR, 28, 29, 37-41 

Land Use Allocations, 37-38 

Use Authorizations, 38-41 

Monitoring, 41 

Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Planning Criteria, see Appendix A 

LGNSA, see Approved Amendment to the Lower Gila North Management Framework Plan and 

the Lower Gila South Resource Management Plan and Decision Record

Little Harquahala Herd Area, 120, see also, Appendix M 

Livestock grazing, 4, 11, 12, 46, 125; see also Rangeland Management/Grazing and Appendix H 

Long-Term Visitor Areas (LTVAs), 100 

Lower Colorado River Land Use Plan, 8 

Lower Colorado River Multiple Species Conservation Program (LCRMSCP), 9, 16, 22, 39, 101, 

107

Lower Gila North Management Framework Plan (LGNMFP); see also Approved Amendment to 

the Lower Gila North Management Framework Plan and the Lower Gila South Resource 

Management Plan and Decision Record (LGNSA), 3 (in the Record of Decision); 1 

Lower Gila South Resource Management Plan (LGSRMP); see also, Approved Amendment to the 

Lower Gila North Management Framework Plan and the Lower Gila South Resource 

Management Plan and Decision Record (LGNSA), 3 (in the Record of Decision); 1 

M

Management actions, see individual resource topics 

Management concerns, 9 (in the Record of Decision); 4 

Management considerations (in selecting the Approved RMP), 10-12 (in the Record of Decision) 

Maricopa County, Arizona, 1 

McGuffie Cabin, 28 

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), 6, 16, 22 

Migratory Bird Executive Order 13186, 16, 21 

MINERAL RESOURCES; see also Maps 16, 17, 18

Decision Code MI, 28, 42-44, 125 

Land Use Allocations, 42-44 

Monitoring, 44 

Reasonable Forseeable Development, 42 
Bureau of Land Management Index

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 174

May 2007

Mining, 7, 27, 28, 42, 74, 75, 78, 79, 106, 125 

Mining Law of 1872, as amended, 42 

Mission, 5, 9, 11, 13 

Mitigation Measures, 12 (in the Record of Decision) 

Modifications, 3, 6, 14 (in the Record of Decision) 

Mohave County General Plan (1995), 12 

Mohave County, Arizona, 1, 6, 12, 89 

Mojave Desert tortoise, 16, 22 

Habitat, see Map 11 

Monitoring, see Plan Monitoring 

Monkey Head, 16 

Multiple-use management, 9, 35, 109 

N

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 2, 3, 4, 12, 14 (in the Record of Decision); 2, 7, 13, 

20, 22, 41, 43, 99, 100, 103, 115, 116, 117, 128, 129 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended 1992, 4, 6, 10, 30, 115 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), 27, 29, 37, 41, 106, 107, 108 

Nature Conservancy, 12, 21 

Needles, California, 6 

Needles Revegetation Site, 16 

Nevada (State and miscellaneous), 2 

Notice of Availability, 14 (in the Record of Decision) 

Notice of Intent (NOI), 14 (in the Record of Decision); 4 

O

Off-highway vehicles (OHV), 2, 4, 8, 43, 51, 70, 72, 74, 78, 102, 103, 111, 115, 117; see also

Table 7e, pp. 80-83; Table 7f, pp. 85-90; Table 7g, pp. 91-96 

Area designations, see Table 8, p. 113 and Map 31 

Competitive events 

Parker 400, 100 

Open house meetings, 14 (in the Record of Decision) 

P

Paintball, 100 

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Decision Code GL, 44-45 
Bureau of Land Management Index

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 175

May 2007

Desired Future Conditions, 44 

Land Use Allocations, 44-45 

Management Actions, 45 

Monitoring, 45 

Resource Classifications, Table 6, p. 45 

Parker 400, see Off-highway vehicles/Competitive events 

Parker, Arizona, 2, 6, 17, 21, 40, 60, 61, 62, 68, 70, 72, 97, 98, 100, 101, 110, 115 

Parker-Bouse-Swansea, nomination as a National Back Country Byway, p. 110; see also

Appendix K 

Parker Dam, see also, Appendix J, 2, 21, 60, 61, 97, 110 

Parker Dam Road (Back Country Byway), 110 

Parker Strip Recreation Area, 8, 98, 115 

Parker Strip Recreation Area Management Plan, 98, 115 

Parker Strip Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA), 8 (in the Record of Decision); see

Table 7c, pp. 68-73, 68; see also Map 21 

Petroglyphs, 27 

Pictographs, 27 

Plan Evaluation, 128, 129 

Plan Maintenance Roster, 8 (in the Record of Decision); 128; see also Appendix O 

Plan Monitoring, pp. 12-13 (in the Record of Decision) 

Implementation Monitoring, pp. 12-13 (in the Record of Decision) 

Effectiveness Monitoring, p. 13 (in the Record of Decision) 

Validation Monitoring, p. 13 (in the Record of Decision) 

Plan Monitoring Roster, 8, 13 (in the Record of Decision); 130; see also Appendix P 

Plan priorities, see Appendix N 

Planet Ranch, 110 

Planning area description, Table 1, Map 1

Planning criteria, 5, 13, 125; see also Appendix A 

Planning process, 7, 9, 14, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 26, 57, 103, 120 

Plomosa Mountains, 28, 93, 99 

Plomosa Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA), see Table 7g, pp. 91-96, 99, 102; see 

also Map 25 

Policies, Laws, Regulations, and Planning Criteria, see Appendix A 

Population, 10 (in the Record of Decision); 2, 3, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 48, 52, 55, 120, 121, 122 

Preferred Alternative, 2, 9 (in the Record of Decision); 2, 5 

Prescribed Recreation Settings, see Map 20 

Previous Resource Management Plan and Management Franwork Plan boundaries, see Map 2 

Project lands, 7, 8 
Bureau of Land Management Index

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 176

May 2007

Proposed Resource Management Plan (PRMP), 1, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 (in the Record of 

Decision); 2, 19, 22, 40, 130 

Protest, 1, 3, 6, 7, 9 (in the Record of Decision); 4 

Public health and safety, 11, 47, 99 

Public involvement, pp. 13-14 (in the Record of Decision) 

Purpose and need, 1-2 

Q, R

RANGELAND MANAGEMENT/GRAZING, see also, Appendix H, Map 19 

Decision Code GM, 45-46 

Desired Future Conditions, 45-46 

Land Use Allocations, 46 

Management Actions, 46 

Monitoring, 46 

Rawhide Mountain Wilderness, 111 

Razorback sucker, 16, 24 

Recreation and Public Purposes Act (R&PP), 5, 25, 35, 36, 38, 100 

RECREATION MANAGEMENT, see also, Individual Special Recreation Management 

Areas; Appendix I; Map 20; Map 27 

Decision Code RR, 48-102 

Desired Future Conditions, 48-96 

Land Use Allocations, 97-99 

Management Actions, 99-102 

Monitoring, 102-104 

Recreation Management Zone (RMZ), 47, 97, 98, 99, 101, 102, 103, 114, 115; in Special 

Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs), see Tables 7a through 7g, pp. 48-96 

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS), 18, 99 

Recreational Management Areas, see Map 21 

Related plans, 16, 129; see also Map 2, Previous Resource Management Plan and Management 

Franwork Plan Boundaries 

Rights-of-way (ROWs) see also, Lands and Realty Program, 9, 26, 28, 37, 38, 39, 40, 116, 119 

Riparian resources, see Vegetarian and Riparian Management in Biological Resource 

Management 

Riparian zones, Bill Williams River Management Unit, see Map 8 

Riparian zones, Colorado River Management Unit, see Map 7 

Rock art, 27 

Rockhounding, 51, 72, 74, 80, 88, 90, 95 
Bureau of Land Management Index

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 177

May 2007

Route designation, 11, 18, 28, 116, 117 

Route inventory (existing routes), see Map 30, Map 32 

Routes, 2, 11, 7, 9, 18, 38, 72, 83, 86, 100, 109, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 123, 124 

Allocated Competitive Use Routes, see Map 26 

ROW corridors designations summary, see Table 4, p. 40 

S

Sacred areas/sites, 26, 29 

Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, 2, 6 

San Bernardino County Plan (2001), 12 

San Bernardino County, California, 1, 6, 12 

Santa Maria River, 11 

Schwanbeck’s Store, 27 

Scoping process/issues, 4 

Seasonal population changes, 2 

Secretary of the Interior (Secretary), 2, 8, 9, 12 

Section 110 field inventories, 30 

Shoreline fishing, 11, 57, 60, 61, 65, 66, 101 

Sikes Act, 10 

Soil, Water, Air Resources, see Watershed Management in Biological Resources 

Sonoran Desert, 16, 18, 23 

Sonoran Desert tortoise, 22, 107 

Habitat, see Map 11 

SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS, see also Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, Back 

Country Byways, Wild and Scenic Rivers, Wilderness Areas, and Wilderness Studay Areas, 

Appendix K, Maps 28 and 29 

Congressional Designations, 104-106 

Administrative Designations, 106-111 

Special Cultural Resource Management Areas (SCRMAs), 28, 29, 170; see also Map 12 

Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs), see individual SRMAs 

Special Recreation Permits (SRPs), 57, 65, 66, 67, 100, 101, 104, 124 

Special status species, see Biological Resource Management, Special Status Species Management 

Species of concern, see Biological Resource Management, Special Status Species Management 

Sport fishery, 21 

Stakeholder relationships, 10-12 

Standard Operating Procedures, see Appendix B 

State Route (SR) 95, 5, 39, 97, 119, 120 
Bureau of Land Management Index

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 178

May 2007

Supplemental rules, see Appendix A 

Sustained yield management, 10, 11 (in the Record of Decision); 2, 5, 11, 45 

Swansea Historic District ACEC, 106, 108, 109 

Swansea Special Cultural Resource Management Area (SCRMA), 28 

Swansea Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA), see Table 7d, pp. 74-75, 98, 101 

Swansea Townsite, 28, 43, 44, 106, 109, 115 

T

Threatened and Endangered (T&E) species, see also Biological Resource Management, Special 

Status Species Management 

Three Rivers Riparian Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), 43, 44, 106, 108, 109 

Title 43, Code of Federal Regulations, 2 

Topock-Needles Special Cultural Resource Management Area (SCRMA), 28 

Town of Parker General Plan (June 1996), 12 

TRAVEL MANAGEMENT, see also, Appendix L, Map 30, Travel Management Areas and 

Route Inventory Index 

Decision Code TM, 6, 28, 39, 112-117 

Desired Future Conditions, 112-113 

Land Use Allocations, 113-116 

Management Actions, 116-117 

Monitoring, 117 

Travel Management Network (TMN), 112 

Travel Management Plans, p. 2 (in the Record of Decision); 17, 18, 21, 110, 112, 114, 

115, 116, 117, 125, 126 

Typical management actions, see Appendix B 

U

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), 3, 12 

U.S. Congress, see Congress of the United States 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 3, 6, 10, 11, 12, 16, 19, 22, 32, 33, 34, 72, 85, 87, 121 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 11 

United States Code (USC), 7, 37 

Utility corridors, 5, 16, 37, 40; see also Map 15, rights-of-way, Lands and Realty Program 

V

Validation Monitoring, see Plan Monitoring 

Vegetation, see Biological Resource Management, Vegetation and Riparian Management; 

Appendix F; see also Map 5 and Map 13 and Table 3 
Bureau of Land Management Index

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 179

May 2007

Vision, 13 

VISUAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (VRM), see also Map 33 

Decision Code VR, 118-119 

Desired Future Conditions, 118 

Land Use Allocations, 119 

Management Actions, 119 

Monitoring, 119 

W

Water quality, 15 

Water resources, see Appendix D 

Watermaster for the Lower Colorado River, 8 

Wenden, Arizona, 2 

Whipple Mountains, 51, 97 

Wild and Scenic Rivers, 15, 16, 39, 110, 111; see also, Special Designations, Appendix K 

Decision Code WR, 110-111 

WILD BURRO MANAGEMENT, see also Appendix M, Map 34, and Map 35 

Decision Code HB, 120-122 

Desired Future Conditions, 120 

Land Use Allocations, 120 

Management Actions, 121-122 

Monitoring, 122 

Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act of 1971, as amended, 121 

Wilderness Areas, 16, 104, 105; see also, Special Designations; Map 29; Appendix K 

Decision Code WM, 104-105 

WILDERNESS CHARACTERISTICS, see also Map 36 

Decision Code WC, 6, 123-125 

Desired Future Conditions, 123 

Land Use Allocations, 123 

Management Actions, 123-125 

Monitoring, 125 

Wilderness Study Area (WSA), 16, 105; see also, Special Designations, Map 29, Appendix K 

Wildlife Habitat Area (WHA), 2, 16, 18, 22, 38, 39, 116; see also, Map 6 

Wildlife movement corridors, see Map 9 

Wildlife waters, 6, 20, 123 
Bureau of Land Management Index

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 180

May 2007

X, Y, Z

Yavapai County, Arizona, 1 

Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe, 2, 6 

Yuma District Resource Management Plan as amended (YRMP), 3 (in the Record of Decision); 

1, 31, 102, 114 

Yuma Field Office, 30 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 181

May 2007

Acronyms and Abbreviations 

A&P Atlantic & Pacific Railroad 

ACEC Area of Critical Environmental Concern 

ADOT Arizona Department of Transportation 

AGFD Arizona Game and Fish Department 

AML Appropriate Management Level 

Approved RMP Approved Lake Havasu Field Office Resource 

Management Plan 

ATV all-terrain vehicle 

AZLUP Arizona Statewide Land Use Plan Amendment for 

Fire, Fuels, and Air Quality Management

BA Biological Assessment 

BLM Bureau of Land Management 

CAP Central Arizona Project 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

CS Communication Site 

DM Department of the Interior Departmental Manual 

DPC Desired Plant Community 

DRMP/DEIS Draft Resource Management Plan/Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement 

EIS Environmental Impact Statement 

ERMA Extensive Recreation Management Area 

ESA Endangered Species Act 

FAMS Facilities Maintenance Information System 
Bureau of Land Management Acronyms and Abbreviations

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 182

May 2007

FHA Fish Habitat Area 

FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act 

HA Herd Area 

Havasu-CA HMA California side of the Havasu HMA 

HMA Herd Management Area 

IBLA Interior Board of Land Appeals 

KOP Key Observation Point 

KRMP Kingman Resource Area Resource Management Plan 

LCRMSCP Lower Colorado River Multiple Species Conservation 

Program

LGNSA Approved Amendment to the Lower Gila North 

Management Framework Plan and the Lower Gila 

South Resource Management Plan and Decision 

Record

LGSRMP Lower Gila South Resource Management Plan 

LTVAs Long-Term Visitor Areas 

MIST Minimum Impact Suppression Tactics 

MOU Memorandum of Understanding 

mph miles per hour 

MSCP Multi-Species Conservation Program 

MWD Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 

NECO Plan Northern and Eastern Colorado Desert Coordinated 

Management Plan 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act 

NRHP National Register of Historic Places 

OHV off-highway vehicle 

PRMP/FEIS Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final 

Environmental Impact Statement 

PWC personal watercraft 

R&PP Recreation and Public Purposes Act 

RFD reasonable foreseeable development 

RMIS Recreation Management Information System 

RMZ Recreation Management Zone 

ROS Recreation Opportunity Spectrum 

ROW right-of-way 

SCRMA Special Cultural Resource Management Area 

SR State Route 

SRMA Special Recreation Management Area 

SRP Special Recreational Permit 
Bureau of Land Management Acronyms and Abbreviations

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 183

May 2007

T&E Threatened and Endangered 

TMN Travel Management Network 

TMP Travel Management Plan 

USC United States Code 

USGS U.S. Geological Survey 

UTV utility vehicle 

VRM Visual Resource Management 

WA Wilderness Area 

WHA Wildlife Habitat Area 

WSA Wilderness Study Area 

YCR Yuma Clapper Rail 

YRMP Yuma District Resource Management Plan 

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 185

May 2007

List of Preparers 

Though individuals have primary responsibility for preparing sections of an 

RMP, the document is an interdisciplinary team effort. In addition, internal 

review of the document occurs throughout preparation. Specialists at the BLM’s 

district, state, and Washington office levels both review the analysis and supply 

information. Contributions by individual preparers may be subject to revision by 

other BLM specialists and by management during internal review. 

Name Job Title Experience/Expertise Primary Responsibility 

Adams, Doug Fisheries 

Biologist

20 years State of LA 

4 years BLM 

Fisheries and Aquatic 

Resources

Allert, Les Computer 

Specialist

30 years Federal Service 

20 years BLM 

Computer Support and GIS 

Mapping 

Barnes, Cindy GIS Specialist 22 years BLM RMP Core Team. GIS 

Specialist; Maps and Data 

Bates, Christine Renewable 

Resources

Advisor

25 years Federal Service 

6 years BLM 

RMP Core Team. Biological 

Resources, Biological 

Assessment 

Blomquist, Brad Recreation 

Planner 

24 years BLM, 5 years NPS. 

Both positions involved law 

enforcement and outdoor 

recreation planning/ 

management. 

Recreation Resource 

Bodman, Cory Realty Specialist 13 years BLM Lands/Realty and Soils 

Bouldin, Brent Lead Editor 32 years of experience in 

technical, environmental, and 

general publication 

Co-editor 

Coyle, Charles Editor 11 years of experience in 

environmental publication 

Co-editor 
Bureau of Land Management List of Preparers

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 186

May 2007

Name Job Title Experience/Expertise Primary Responsibility 

De Witt, Peter Lake Park Ranger Contractor Recreation and Travel 

Management, Field 

Observations

Dodson, Amanda Geologist 6 years BLM Minerals Resources 

Gatto, Angela Wildlife Biologist 7 years Federal Service 

2 year BLM 

Biological Resources 

Henderson, Mike Assistant Field 

Manager, 

Recreation and 

Visitor Services 

30 years BLM Technical Review 

Koch, Kirk Lake Havasu 

Fisheries Program 

Manager (Special 

Program 

Manager) 

28 years BLM in aquatic and 

water-related resource 

management 

Water/Soil/Air, Riparian, and 

Aquatic Habitat 

Lichtkoppler,

Richard

Economist, 

Bureau of 

Reclamation 

22 years of Federal Service: 

1 year, BLM; 3 years, General 

Services Administration; 

9 years, National Park 

Service; 9 years, Bureau of 

Reclamation 

Economics and park planning 

Socio-economics and 

Environmental Justice 

Lovato,

Bernadette

Lead Concession 

Management 

Specialist

16 years Federal Service: 

15 years experience in 

Concession Management 

Programs (10 years with 

National Park Service and 

5 years with BLM) 

Concessions 

McCoy, Myron Recreation 

Planner 

21 years Federal Service: 

16 years BLM, 5 years 

National Park Service 

Recreation Resources, Travel 

Management 

Miller-Allert, Jill Recreation 

Planner, 

Wilderness 

30 years Federal Service: 

17 years BLM, 10 years Corps 

of Engineers, 3 years National 

Park Service 

RMP Core Team 

Special Designations, VRM, 

and Wilderness 

Characteristics 

Murray, Sarah C. Archaeologist 18 years with BLM Cultural and Paleontological 

Resources

Oyler, Roger H. Senior Rangeland 

Management 

Specialist

31 years BLM Range Management and 

Burro Management 

Parry, Bill Civil Engineer 

Tech, Safety 

Officer

30 years Federal Service: 

20 years BLM, 10 years U.S. 

Forest Service Fire Dept 

Training Captain 

Public Health and Safety and 

Engineering 
Bureau of Land Management List of Preparers

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan 187

May 2007

Name Job Title Experience/Expertise Primary Responsibility 

Rosalez, Maria Realty Specialist 32 years Federal Service: 

11 years BLM, 21 years 

NOAA 

Lands/Realty

Smith, Tim Field Manager 28 years BLM Management Oversight 

Taylor, Patricia Assistant Field 

Manager, Lands 

and Customer 

Services

29 years BLM Technical Review 

Trafton, Gina Planning and 

Environmental 

Coordinator 

28 years Federal Service: 

6 years BLM 

Planning, economics, natural 

resource management 

RMP Team Lead 

Williams, Diane Public Affairs 

Specialist

27 years Federal Service: 

12 Congressional, 15 BLM 

Public Affairs, Publications, 

Outreach, and FOIA 

Wilson, Mike Recreation 

Planner 

35 years Federal Service: 

15 years National Park 

Service, 20 years with BLM 

Technical review of recreation 

analysis

Wolff-White, 

Catherine

Environmental 

Protection

Specialist

23 years Federal Service: 

Oklahoma RMP Team, Texas 

RMP Team Plan Amendments 

Public Safety and Hazmat 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-i

May 2007

Contents

Appendix A 

Applicable Laws, Regulations, Policy, 

and Planning Criteria 

Programmatic Documents ..........................................................A-1

Environmental Laws and Executive Orders ..............................A-2

Recreation & Public Purposes Act................................................... A-2

Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970 and Amendments of 1977 and 1990.. A-2

Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1977...................................................... A-3

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 

Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 and the Superfund 

Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) ............ A-3

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 ........... A-4

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) of 1974 ....................................... A-4

Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976.......... A-4

Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, as amended and supplemented.......... A-5

Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978.................................. A-5

Arizona Standards and Guidelines .................................................. A-5

Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) of 1976.................................. A-9

The Wilderness Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-577)..................................... A-10

The Arizona Desert Wilderness Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-628) ......... A-10

The California Desert Protection Act (CDPA) of 1994 

(P.L. 103-433) .......................................................................... A-11

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA) of 1968................................. A-11

EO 11988, “Floodplain Management,” May 24, 1977.................... A-11

EO 11990, “Protection of Wetlands,” May 24, 1977 ...................... A-11

Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) of 1990 ......................................... A-12

Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973........................................ A-12

Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, amended in 1936, 1960, 

1968, 1969, 1974, 1978, 1986, and 1989 ................................ A-12

EO 13186, “Conservation of Migratory Birds,” January 10, 2001 .. A-13

EO 11514, “Protection and Enhancement of Environmental 

Quality,” March 5, 1970............................................................ A-13

EO 13175, “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments” .......................................................................... A-13

Presidential Executive Memorandum September 23, 2004........... A-14

Secretarial Order 3206................................................................... A-14

Economic and Social Factors: Environmental Quality 

Improvement Act (EQIA) of 1970............................................. A-14

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, 

as amended ............................................................................. A-14

Archaeological Resource Protection Act (ARPA) of 1979 ............. A-15

American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 and

Amendments of 1994............................................................... A-15
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-ii

May 2007

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act 

(NAGPRA) of 1990 .................................................................. A-16

EO 11593, “Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural 

Environment,” May 13, 1971.................................................... A-16

EO 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice

in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” 

February 11, 1994.................................................................... A-16

EO 13007, “Indian Sacred Sites,” May 24, 1996 ........................... A-17

EO 13287, “Preserve America,” March 3, 2003............................. A-17

Case Law on Supplementation of NEPA ....................................... A-17

Planning Criteria......................................................................A-17 

Supplementary Rules ..............................................................A-19 

Supplementary Rules for the Lake Havasu Field Office, 

43 CFR 8365.1-6 ..................................................................... A-19

Part I – September 15, 2003.................................................... A-19

Part II – October 12, 1995........................................................ A-19

Part III – Supplemental Rules That Are Still Valid.................... A-20

Part I – September 15, 2003.................................................... A-20

Part II – October 12, 1995........................................................ A-28

Part III - Supplementary Rules Brought forward from Past 

Rules That Are Still Valid...................................................... A-32 

Instruction Memorandum No. 2003-275, Change 1...............A-33 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-1

May 2007

Appendix A 

Applicable Laws, Regulations, Policy, and 

Planning Criteria 

When considering the affected environment, physical, biological, economic, and social 

factors must be considered. In addition to the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA), other environmental laws and Executive Orders (EOs) should be considered 

when preparing EAs and EISs. These laws are summarized below. 

Programmatic Documents 

A number of existing management plans, programmatic documents, and standards and 

guidelines were considered in the preparation of the Approved RMP. These documents 

have been examined not only to assure appropriate integration and compliance, but also 

to identify information that is still appropriate for inclusion in the Approved RMP and/or 

decisions that are still valid and can be carried forward into the documents being 

prepared. Activity plans that have been tiered off these plans have also been considered 

in this planning effort, but may require revision to be consistent with the Approved RMP. 

These documents include: 

 Kingman Resource Management Plan (Bureau of Land Management, Kingman 

Resource Area Office 1995) 

 Yuma District Resource Management Plan as amended (Bureau of Land 

Management, Yuma District Office 1987) 

 Lower Gila North Management Framework Plan as amended (Bureau of Land 

Management, Phoenix District Office 1983) 

 Approved Amendment to the Lower Gila North Management Framework Plan 

and the Lower Gila South Resource Management Plan and Decision Record

(LGNSA) (Bureau of Land Management, Phoenix District Office 2005) 

 Lower Gila South Resource Management Plan as amended (Bureau of Land 

Management, Phoenix District Office 1988) 

 Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing 

Administration (Bureau of Land Management, Arizona State Office 1997) 

 Arizona Statewide Land Use Plan Amendment for Fire, Fuels, and Air Quality 

Management (Bureau of Land Management, Arizona State Office September 

2003)
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-2

May 2007

 Arizona Statewide Wild and Scenic Rivers Legislative Environmental Impact 

Statement (Bureau of Land Management, Arizona State Office 1994) 

Environmental Laws and Executive Orders 

Recreation & Public Purposes Act 

Recognizing the strong public need for a nationwide system of parks and other 

recreational and public purposes areas, the Congress, in 1954, enacted the Recreation and 

Public Purposes Act 68 statute 173; 43 United states Code 896 et. seq.) as a complete 

revision of the Recreation Act of 1926 (44 Stat. 741). This law is administered by the 

Bureau of Land Management. 

The act authorizes the sale or lease of public lands for recreational or public purposes to 

state and local governments and to qualified nonprofit organizations. Examples of 

typical uses under the act are historic monuments sites, campgrounds, schools, 

firehouses, law enforcement facilities, municipal facilities, landfills, hospitals, parks, and 

fairgrounds.

Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970 and Amendments of 1977 

and 1990 

The CAA recognizes that increases in air pollution result in danger to public health and 

welfare. To protect and enhance the quality of the Nation’s air resources, the CAA 

authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set six National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQSs), which regulate carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, 

ozone, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter pollution emissions. The CAA seeks to 

reduce or eliminate the creation of pollutants at their source, and designates this 

responsibility to state and local governments. States are directed to utilize financial and 

technical assistance as well as leadership from the federal government to develop 

implementation plans to achieve NAAQS. Geographic areas are officially designated by 

the EPA as being in attainment or non-attainment to pollutants in relation to their 

compliance with NAAQS. Geographic regions established for air quality planning 

purposes are designated as Air Quality Control Regions (AQCR). Pollutant 

concentration levels are measured at designated monitoring stations within the AQCR. 

An area is designated as unclassifiable where insufficient monitoring data exists. Section 

309 of the CAA authorizes the EPA to review and comment on impact statements 

prepared by other agencies. 

An agency should consider what effect an action may have on NAAQS due to short-term 

increases in air pollution during construction as well as long-term increases resulting 

from changes in traffic patterns. For actions in attainment areas, a federal agency may 

also be subject to EPA’s Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations.

These regulations apply to new major stationary sources and modifications to such 

sources. Although few agency facilities will actually emit pollutants, increases in 

pollution can result from a change in traffic patterns or volume. Section 118 of the CAA 

waives federal immunity from complying with the CAA and states that all federal 

agencies will comply with all federal- and state-approved requirements. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-3

May 2007

Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1977 

The CWA, a 1977 amendment to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, is 

administered by the EPA and sets the basic structure for regulating discharges of 

pollutants into waters of the United States. The CWA requires the EPA to establish water 

quality standards for specified contaminants in surface waters and forbids the discharge 

of pollutants from a point source into navigable waters without a National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. NPDES permits are issued by EPA or 

the appropriate State if it has assumed responsibility. Section 404 of the CWA 

establishes a federal program to regulate the discharge of dredged and fill material into 

waters of the United States. Section 404 permits are issued by the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (USACE). Waters of the United States include interstate and intrastate lakes, 

rivers, streams, and wetlands that are used for commerce, recreation, industry, sources of 

fish, and other purposes. The objective of the Act is to restore and maintain the chemical, 

physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters. Each agency should consider 

the impact on water quality from actions such as the discharge of dredge or fill material 

into United States waters from construction, or the discharge of pollutants as a result of 

facility occupation. 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 

and the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization 

Act of 1986 (SARA) 

CERCLA authorizes the EPA to respond to spills and other releases of hazardous 

substances to the environment, and authorizes the National Oil and Hazardous Substances 

Pollution Contingency Plan. CERCLA also provides a federal “Superfund” to respond to 

emergencies immediately. Although the “Superfund” provides funds for clean up of sites 

where potentially responsible parties (PRPs) cannot be identified, the EPA is authorized 

to recover funds through damages collected from responsible parties. This funding 

process places the economic burden for cleanup on polluters. SARA mandates strong 

cleanup standards, and authorizes the EPA to use a variety of incentives to encourage 

settlements. Title III of SARA authorizes the Emergency Planning and Community 

Right to Know Act (EPCRA), which requires facility operators with “hazardous 

substances” or “extremely hazardous substances” to prepare comprehensive emergency 

plans and to report accidental releases. EO 12856, “Federal Compliance with 

Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements,” requires federal agencies 

to comply with the provisions EPCRA. If a federal agency acquires a contaminated site it 

can be held liable for clean up as the property owner/operator. A federal agency can also 

incur liability if it leases a property, as the courts have found lessees liable as “owners.” 

However, if the agency exercises due diligence by conducting a Phase I Environmental 

Site Assessment, it may claim the “innocent purchaser” defense under CERCLA.

According to Title 42 United States Code (USC) 9601(35), the current owner/operator 

must show it undertook “all appropriate inquiry into the previous ownership and uses of 

the property consistent with good commercial or customary practice” before buying the 

property to use this defense. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-4

May 2007

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 

1976

RCRA, an amendment to the Solid Waste Disposal Act, authorizes the EPA to provide 

for “cradle-to-grave” management of hazardous waste, and sets a framework for the 

management of non-hazardous municipal solid waste. Under RCRA, hazardous waste is 

controlled from generation to disposal through tracking and permitting systems, and 

restrictions and controls on the placement of waste on or into the land. Under RCRA, a 

waste is defined as hazardous if it is ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic, or listed by the 

EPA as being hazardous. With the 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments 

(HSWA), Congress targeted stricter standards for waste disposal and encouraged 

pollution prevention by prohibiting the land disposal of particular wastes. The HSWA 

amendments strengthen control of both hazardous and nonhazardous waste and 

emphasize the prevention of pollution of groundwater. 

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) of 1974 

The SDWA establishes a federal program to monitor and increase the safety of all 

commercially and publicly supplied drinking water. Congress amended the SDWA in 

1986, mandating dramatic changes in nationwide safeguards for drinking water and 

establishing new federal enforcement responsibility on the part of the EPA. The 1986 

amendments to the SDWA require the EPA to establish Maximum Contaminant Levels 

(MCLs), Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs) and Best Available Technology 

(BAT) treatment techniques for organic, inorganic, radioactive, and microbial 

contaminants and turbidity. MCLGs are maximum concentrations below which no 

negative human health effects are known to exist. The 1996 amendments set current 

federal MCLs, MCLGs, and BATs for organic, inorganic, microbiological, and 

radiological contaminants in public drinking water supplies. 

Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 

1976

FLPMA and the regulations contained in 43 CFR Part 1600 govern the Bureau of Land 

Management planning process. Land Use Plans ensure that public lands are managed in 

accordance with the intent of Congress as stated in FLPMA, under the principles of 

multiple use and sustained yield. As required by FLPMA, the public lands must be 

managed in a manner that protects the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, 

environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, and archaeological values; that, 

where appropriate, will preserve and protect certain public lands in their natural 

condition, that will provide food and habitat for fish and wildlife and domestic animals; 

and that will provide for outdoor recreation and human occupancy and use by 

encouraging collaboration and public participation throughout the planning process. In 

addition, the public lands must be managed in a manner that recognizes the Nation’s need 

for domestic sources of minerals, food, timber, and fiber from the public lands. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-5

May 2007

Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, as amended and 

supplemented

The Taylor Grazing Act was the federal government’s first effort to regulate grazing on 

federal public lands. The act established grazing districts of vacant, unappropriated, and 

unreserved land from any parts of the public domain (excluding Alaska) that are not 

national forests, parks, and monuments; Indian reservations; railroad grant lands; or 

revested Coos Bay Wagon Road grant lands; and which are valuable chiefly for grazing 

and raising forage crops. Residents and stock owners pay an annual fee to obtain a 

grazing permit that is used to manage livestock grazing in established districts. Grazing 

Administration Regulations (43 CFR 4100) provide for the development of state 

Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing Management. The Standards 

and Guidelines are approved through Bureau of Land Management planning and NEPA 

processes.

Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 

The Public Rangelands Improvement Act was instituted to improve the conditions on 

public rangelands. Rangelands are defined as lands administered by the Secretary of the 

Interior through the Bureau of Land Management or the Secretary of Agriculture through 

the Forest Service in 16 contiguous western states, including Arizona, on which there is 

domestic livestock grazing or which the appropriate Secretary determines may be suitable 

for domestic livestock grazing. Rangeland quality is determined by soil quality, forage 

values, wildlife habitat, watershed and plant communities, the current state of vegetation 

in a site in relation to its potential, and the relative degree to which the kinds, proportions, 

and amounts of vegetation in a plant community resemble the desired plant community. 

The act requires a national rangelands inventory and consistent federal management 

policies. In addition, the act provides funding for range improvement projects. 

Arizona Standards and Guidelines 

Arizona Standards and Guidelines (S&G) for grazing administration have been developed 

through a collaborative process involving the Bureau of Land Management State S&G 

Team and the Arizona Resource Advisory Council. Together, through meetings, 

conference calls, correspondence, and Open Houses with the public, the BLM State Team 

and RAC prepared Standards and Guidelines to address the minimum requirements 

outlined in the grazing regulations. The Standards and Guidelines, criteria for meeting 

Standards, and indicators are an integrated document that conforms to the fundamentals 

of rangeland health and the requirements of the regulations when taken as a whole. 

Upland sites, riparian-wetland areas, and desired resource conditions are each addressed 

by a standard and associated guidelines. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-6

May 2007

Standard 1: Upland Sites

Upland soils exhibit infiltration, permeability, and erosion rates that are appropriate to 

soil type, climate and landform (ecological site). 

Criteria for meeting Standard 1: 

Soil conditions support proper functioning of hydrologic, energy, and nutrient 

cycles. Many factors interact to maintain stable soils and healthy soil conditions, 

including appropriate amounts of vegetative cover, litter, and soil porosity and 

organic matter. Under property functioning conditions, rates of soil loss and 

infiltration are consistent with the potential of the site. 

Ground cover in the form of plants, litter or rock is present in pattern, kind, and 

amount sufficient to prevent accelerated erosion for the ecological site; or ground 

cover is increasing as determined by monitoring over an established period of 

time.

Signs of accelerated erosion are minimal or diminishing for the ecological site as 

determined by monitoring over an established period of time. 

 As indicated by such factors as: 

 Ground Cover 

litter

live vegetation, amount and type (e.g., grass, shrubs, trees, etc.) 

rock

 Signs of erosion 

flow pattern 

gullies

rills

plant pedestaling 

Exceptions and exemptions (where applicable): 

 none

Guidelines:

1-1. Management activities will maintain or promote ground cover that will provide for 

infiltration, permeability, soil moisture storage, and soil stability appropriate for the 

ecological sites within management units. The ground cover should maintain soil 

organisms and plants and animals to support the hydrologic and nutrient cycles, and 

energy flow. Ground cover and signs of erosion are surrogate measures for hydrologic 

and nutrient cycles and energy flow. 

1-2. When grazing practices alone are not likely to restore areas of low infiltration or 

permeability, land management treatments may be designed and implemented to attain 

improvement. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-7

May 2007

Standard 2: Riparian-Wetland Sites

Riparian-wetland areas are in properly functioning condition. 

Criteria for meeting Standard 2: 

Stream channel morphology and functions are appropriate for proper functioning 

condition for existing climate, landform, and channel reach characteristics. 

Riparian-wetland areas are functioning properly when adequate vegetation, 

landform or large woody debris is present to dissipate stream energy associated 

with high water flows. 

Riparian-wetland functioning conditions assessments are based on examination 

of hydrologic, vegetative, soil and erosion-deposition factors. BLM has 

developed a standard checklist to address these factors and make functional 

assessments. Riparian-wetland areas are functioning properly as indicated by the 

results of the application of the appropriate checklist. 

The checklist for riparian areas is in the Technical Reference 1737-9 “Process for 

Assessing Proper Functioning Condition.” The checklist for wetlands is in 

Technical Reference 1737-11 “Process for Assessing Proper Functioning 

Conditions for Lentic Riparian-Wetland Areas.” These checklists are reprinted 

on the pages following the Guidelines for Standard 3. 

 As indicated by such factors as: 

 Gradient

 Width/depth ratio 

 Channel roughness and sinuosity of stream channel 

 Bank stabilization 

 Reduced erosion 

 Captured sediment 

 Ground-water recharge 

 Dissipation of energy by vegetation 

Exceptions and exemptions (where applicable): 

 Dirt tanks, wells, and other water facilities constructed or placed at a 

location for the purpose of providing water for livestock and/or 

wildlife and which have not been determined through local planning 

efforts to provide for riparian or wetland habitat are exempt. 

 Water impoundments permitted for construction, mining, or other 

similar activities are exempt. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-8

May 2007

Guidelines:

2-1. Management practices maintain or promote sufficient vegetation to maintain, 

improve or restore riparian-wetland functions of energy dissipation, sediment capture, 

groundwater recharge and stream bank stability, thus promoting stream channel 

morphology (e.g., gradient, width/depth ratio, channel roughness and sinuosity) and 

functions appropriate to climate and landform. 

2-2. New facilities are located away from riparian-wetland areas if they conflict with 

achieving or maintaining riparian-wetland function. Existing facilities are used in a way 

that does not conflict with riparian-wetland functions or are relocated or modified when 

incompatible with riparian-wetland functions. 

2-3. The development of springs and seeps or other projects affecting water and 

associated resources shall be designed to protect ecological functions and processes. 

Standard 3: Desired Resource Conditions

Productive and diverse upland and riparian-wetland plant communities of native species 

exist and are maintained. 

Criteria for meeting Standard 3: 

Upland and riparian-wetland plant communities meet desired plant community 

objectives. Plant community objectives are determined with consideration for all 

multiple uses. Objectives also address native species, and the requirements of the 

Taylor Grazing Act, Federal Land Policy and Management Act, Endangered 

Species Act, Clean Water Act, and appropriate laws, regulations, and policies. 

Desired plant community objectives will be developed to assure that soil 

conditions and ecosystem function described in Standards 1 and 2 are met. They 

detail a site-specific plant community, which when obtained, will assure 

rangeland health, State water quality standards, and habitat for endangered 

threatened, and sensitive species. Thus, desired plant community objectives will 

be used as an indicator of ecosystem function and rangeland health. 

 As indicated by such factors as: 

 Composition 

 Structure

 Distribution

Exceptions and exemptions (where applicable): 

 Ecological sites or stream reaches on which a change in existing 

vegetation is physically, biologically, or economically impractical. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-9

May 2007

Guidelines:

3-1. The use and perpetuation of native species will be emphasized. However, when 

restoring or rehabilitating disturbed or degraded rangelands, non-intrusive, non-native 

plant species are appropriate for use where native species (a) are not available, (b) are not 

economically feasible, (c) cannot achieve ecological objectives as well as non-native 

species, and/or (d) cannot compete with already established non-native species. 

3-2. Conservation of Federal threatened or endangered, proposed, candidate, and other 

special status species is promoted by the maintenance or restoration of their habitats. 

3-3. Management practices maintain, restore, or enhance water quality in conformance 

with State or Federal standards. 

3-4. Intensity, season and frequency of use, and distribution of grazing use should 

provide for growth and reproduction of those plant species needed to reach desired plant 

community objectives. 

3-5. Grazing on designated ephemeral (annual and perennial) rangeland may be 

authorized if the following conditions are met: 

 Ephemeral vegetation is present in draws, washes, and under shrubs and has 

grown to useable levels at the time grazing begins. 

 Sufficient surface and subsurface soil moisture exists for continued plant growth. 

 Serviceable waters are capable of providing for proper grazing distribution. 

 Sufficient annual vegetation will remain on site to satisfy other resource 

concerns, (i.e., watershed, wildlife, and burros). 

 Monitoring is conducted during grazing to determine if objectives are being met. 

3-6. Management practices will target those populations of noxious weeds that can be 

controlled or eliminated by approved methods. 

3-7. Management practices to achieve desired plant communities will consider protection 

and conservation of known cultural resources, including historical sites, and prehistoric 

sites and plants of significance to Native American peoples. 

Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) of 1976 

Title I of the Toxic Substance Control Act established requirements and authorities to 

identify and control toxic chemical hazards to human health and the environment. TSCA 

authorized the EPA to gather information on chemical risks, require companies to test 

chemicals for toxic effects, and regulate chemicals with unreasonable risk. TSCA also 

singled out polychlorinated bi-phenyls (PCBs) for regulation, which as a result are being 

phased out. TSCA and its regulations govern the manufacture, processing, distribution, 

use, marking, storage, disposal, cleanup, and release reporting requirements for numerous 

chemicals like PCBs. PCBs are persistent when released into the environment and 

accumulate in the tissues of living organisms. They have been shown to cause adverse 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-10

May 2007

health effects on laboratory animals and may cause adverse health effects in humans. 

TSCA Title II provides statutory framework for “Asbestos Hazard Emergency 

Response,” which applies only to schools. TSCA Title III, “Indoor Radon Abatement,” 

states indoor air in buildings of the United States should be as free of radon as the outside 

ambient air. Federal agencies are required to conduct studies on the extent of radon 

contamination in buildings they own. TSCA Title IV, “Lead Exposure Reduction,” 

directs Federal agencies to “...conduct a comprehensive program to promote safe, 

effective, and affordable monitoring, detection, and abatement of lead-based paint and 

other lead exposure hazards.” Further, any federal agency having jurisdiction over a 

property or facility must comply with all federal, state, interstate, and local requirements 

concerning lead-based paint.

The Wilderness Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-577) 

Established the National Wilderness Preservation System to be composed of federally 

owned areas designated by Congress as wilderness areas. These areas should be 

administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such a way that will 

leave them unimpaired for the future use and enjoyment as wilderness, to provide for the 

protection of their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of 

information regarding their use and enjoyment as wilderness. 

Criteria set by Congress within this Act states that wilderness areas have the following 

characteristics: (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 confined types 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 Act 

also set the accepted uses of designated Wilderness Areas and what uses are prohibited. 

The act sets special provisions for an agency’s continuing management of existing or 

grandfathered rights such as mining and grazing and other agency mission related 

activities.

The provisions of the Wilderness Act were not applied to BLM administered lands when 

this act was first passed. It was not until the passage of FLPMA in 1976 that the BLM 

was directed to begin inventories for its lands as possible candidates for inclusion into the 

National Wilderness Preservation System. 

The Arizona Desert Wilderness Act of 1990 

(P.L. 101-628) 

In furtherance of the purpose of the Wilderness Act, the following public lands in five 

areas within LHFO were designated as components of the National Wilderness 

Preservation System: approximately 14,630 acres as East Cactus Plain Wilderness, 

41,600 acres as Rawhide Mountains Wilderness, 25,287 acres as Harcuvar Mountains 

Wilderness, 18,805 acres as Gibraltar Mountain Wilderness, and 15,755 acres as Swansea 

Wilderness. The Act also retained 57,800 of public lands as “Cactus Plain Wilderness 

Study Area,” (WSA). This WSA continues to be managed under section 603 of Federal 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-11

May 2007

Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, pertaining to its management in a manner that 

does not impair its suitability for preservation as wilderness at a later date. 

The California Desert Protection Act (CDPA) of 1994 

(P.L. 103-433) 

This act designated lands in the California Desert as wilderness, established Death Valley 

and Joshua Tree National Parks, and established the Mojave National Preserve. The law 

designated certain lands in the California Desert Conservation Area, and the Yuma 

District (including LHFO) as three wilderness areas: 1) approximately 70,520 acres, 

which will be known as the Whipple Mountain Wilderness, 2) approximately 

64,320 acres which will be known as the Chemehuevi Mountains Wilderness Area, 

3) approximately 48,850 acres which will be known as the Dead Mountains Wilderness. 

Each wilderness area designated would be administered by BLM in accordance with the 

provisions of the Wilderness Act, except that any reference to the effective date of the 

Wilderness Act shall be deemed to be a reference to the effective date of this title.

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA) of 1968 

By recognizing the outstandingly remarkable values of specific rivers of the Nation, the 

WSRA provides for a national wild and scenic river system. These selected rivers and 

their immediate environment are preserved in a free-flowing condition, without dams or 

other construction. The policy not only protects the water quality of the selected rivers 

but also provides for the enjoyment of present and future generations. Any river in a 

free-flowing condition and that has one or more of the outstandingly remarkable values 

mentioned in the act is eligible for inclusion, and can be authorized as such by an Act of 

Congress, an act of State legislature, or by the Secretary of Interior upon the 

recommendation of the Governor of the State(s) through which the river flows. 

EO 11988, “Floodplain Management,” May 24, 1977 

EO 11988 directs agencies to consider alternatives to avoid adverse effects and 

incompatible development in floodplains. An agency may locate a facility in a floodplain 

if the head of the agency finds there is no practicable alternative. If no practicable 

alternative is found, the agency must minimize potential harm to the floodplain and 

circulate a notice explaining why the action is to be located in the floodplain prior to 

taking action. Finally, new construction in a floodplain must apply accepted 

floodproofing and flood protection to include elevating structures above the base flood 

level rather than filling in land. 

EO 11990, “Protection of Wetlands,” May 24, 1977 

EO 11990 directs agencies to consider alternatives to avoid adverse effects and 

incompatible development in wetlands. Federal agencies are to avoid new construction 

in wetlands, unless the agency finds there is no practicable alternative to construction in 

the wetland, and the proposed construction incorporates all possible measures to limit 

harm to the wetland. Agencies should use economic and environmental data, agency 

mission statements, and any other pertinent information when deciding whether or not to 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-12

May 2007

build in wetlands. EO 11990 directs each agency to provide for early public review of 

plans for construction in wetlands. 

Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) of 1990 

The PPA encourages manufacturers to avoid the generation of pollution by modifying 

equipment and processes, redesigning products, substituting raw materials, and making 

improvements in management techniques, training, and inventory control. EO 12856, 

“Federal Compliance with Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution Prevention 

Requirements,” requires federal agencies to comply with the provisions of the PPA and 

also requires federal agencies to ensure all necessary actions are taken to prevent 

pollution. In addition, in Federal Register Volume 58 Number 18 (January 29, 1993), the 

Council on Environmental Quality provides guidance to Federal agencies on how to 

“...incorporate pollution prevention principles, techniques, and mechanisms into their 

planning and decision making processes and to evaluate and report those efforts, as 

appropriate, in documents pursuant to NEPA.” 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 

The ESA establishes a federal program to conserve, protect, and restore threatened and 

endangered plants and animals and their habitats. The ESA specifically charges federal 

agencies with the responsibility of using their authority to conserve threatened and 

endangered species. All federal agencies must ensure that any action they authorize, 

fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of an endangered or 

threatened species or result in the destruction of critical habitat for these species, unless 

the agency has been granted an exemption. The Secretary of the Interior, using the best 

available scientific data, determines which species are officially endangered or 

threatened, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) maintains the list. A list of 

federal endangered species may be obtained from the Endangered Species Division, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service (703-358-2171). States may also have their own lists of 

threatened and endangered species, which may be obtained by calling the appropriate 

State Fish and Wildlife office. Some species, such as the bald eagle, also have laws 

specifically for their protection (e.g., Bald Eagle Protection Act). 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, amended in 1936, 

1960, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1978, 1986, and 1989

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act implements treaties and conventions between the United 

States, Canada, Japan, Mexico, and the former Soviet Union for the protection of 

migratory birds. Unless otherwise permitted by regulations, the Act makes it unlawful to 

pursue, hunt, take, capture or kill; attempt to take, capture or kill; possess, offer to or sell, 

barter, purchase, deliver or cause to be shipped, exported, imported, transported, carried 

or received any migratory bird, part, nest, egg or product, manufactured or not. The Act 

also make it unlawful to ship, transport or carry from one state, territory, or district to 

another, or through a foreign country, any bird, part, nest or egg that was captured, killed, 

taken, shipped, transported or carried contrary to the laws from where it was obtained; 

and import from Canada any bird, part, nest or egg obtained contrary to the laws of the 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-13

May 2007

province from which it was obtained. The U.S. Department of the Interior has authority 

to arrest, with or without a warrant, a person violating the Act. 

EO 13186, “Conservation of Migratory Birds,” 

January 10, 2001 

EO 13186 creates a more comprehensive strategy for the conservation of migratory birds 

by the federal government. The Order provides a specific framework for the federal 

government’s compliance with its treaty obligations to Canada, Mexico, Russia, and 

Japan. The Order provides broad guidelines on conservation responsibilities and requires 

the development of more detailed guidance in Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) 

within 2 years of its implementation. The Order will be coordinated and implemented by 

the Fish and Wildlife Service. The MOU will outline how federal agencies will promote 

conservation of migratory birds. The Order will requires the support of various 

conservation planning efforts already in progress; incorporation of bird conservation 

considerations into agency planning, including NEPA analyses; and reporting annually 

on the level of take of migratory birds. 

EO 11514, “Protection and Enhancement of 

Environmental Quality,” March 5, 1970 

EO 11514 states the President, with assistance from the CEQ, will lead a national effort 

to provide leadership in protecting and enhancing the environment for the purpose of 

sustaining and enriching human life. Federal agencies are directed to meet national 

environmental goals through their policies, programs, and plans. Agencies should also 

continually monitor and evaluate their activities to protect and enhance the quality of the 

environment. Consistent with NEPA, agencies are directed to share information about 

existing or potential environmental problems with all interested parties, including the 

public, in order to obtain their views. 

EO 13175, “Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments” 

Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 

signed on May 14, 1998 and reissued in November 6, 2000 directs federal agencies to 

respect tribal self-government and sovereignty, tribal rights, and tribal responsibilities 

whenever they formulate policies “significantly or uniquely affecting Indian tribal 

governments.” When developing regulatory policies, agencies should provide for 

“meaningful and timely” consultation with tribes, and must also consider the compliance 

costs imposed upon tribal governments. The Order further states: “On issues relating to 

tribal self-government, trust resources or treaty and other rights, each agency should 

explore and, where appropriate, use consensual mechanisms for developing regulations, 

including negotiated rule-making.” 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-14

May 2007

Presidential Executive Memorandum September 23, 

2004

On September 23, 2004, President George W. Bush issued Executive Memorandum 

Government-to-Government Relationship with Tribal Governments recommitting the 

federal government to work with federally-recognized Native American tribal 

governments on a government-to-government basis and strongly supporting and 

respecting tribal sovereignty and self-determination. 

Secretarial Order 3206 

On June 5, 1997, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce 

(Secretaries) issued this order pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 USC 

1531, as amended (the Act), the federal-tribal trust relationship, and other federal law. 

Specifically, this Order clarifies the responsibilities of the component agencies, bureaus 

and offices of the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce 

(Departments), when actions taken under authority of the Act and associated 

implementing regulations affect, or may affect, Indian lands, tribal trust resources, or the 

exercise of American Indian tribal rights, as defined in this Order. This Order further 

acknowledges the trust responsibility and treaty obligations of the United States toward 

Indian tribes and tribal members and its government-to-government relationship in 

dealing with tribes. Accordingly, the Departments will carry out their responsibilities 

under the Act in a manner that harmonizes the federal trust responsibility to tribes, tribal 

sovereignty, and statutory missions of the Departments, and that strives to ensure that 

Indian tribes do not bear a disproportionate burden for the conservation of listed species, 

so as to avoid or minimize the potential for conflict and confrontation. 

Economic and Social Factors: Environmental Quality 

Improvement Act (EQIA) of 1970 

The EQIA ensures that each federal agency conducting or supporting public works 

activities affecting the environment implements policies that are established under 

existing law. The EQIA also created the Office Environmental Quality to provide 

professional and administrative staff for the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). 

The Director of the Office of Environmental Quality assists and advises the President on 

federal policies and programs affecting environmental quality. The Office of 

Environmental Quality reviews the adequacy of existing environmental monitoring and 

predicting systems, and assists federal agencies in appraising the effectiveness of existing 

and proposed facilities that affect environmental quality. 

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, 

as amended 

The NHPA sets forth national policy to identify and preserve properties of State, local, 

and national significance. The Act establishes the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation (Council), State Historic Preservation Officers, and the National Register of 

Historic Places (NRHP). The Council advises the President, Congress, and federal 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-15

May 2007

agencies on historic preservation issues. Section 106 of the act directs federal agencies to 

take into account effects of their undertakings (actions and authorizations) on properties 

included in or eligible for NRHP. Section 110 sets inventory, nomination, protection, 

and preservation responsibilities for federally owned cultural properties. Section 106 of 

the act is implemented by regulations of the Council, 36 CFR Part 800. The Bureau of 

Land Management in Arizona complies with Section 106 according to a national 

Programmatic Agreement dated March 26, 1997, supplemented by a Protocol between 

the BLM Arizona State Director and the Arizona State Historic Preservation Officer. 

The agency should coordinate studies and documents prepared under Section 106 with 

NEPA where appropriate. However, NEPA and NHPA are separate statutes and 

compliance with one does not constitute compliance with the other. For example, actions 

that qualify for a categorical exclusion under NEPA may still require Section 106 review 

under NHPA. The agency official is responsible for to identifying properties in the area 

of potential effects and whether they are included or eligible for inclusion in the National 

Register of Historic Places. Section 110 of the NHPA requires federal agencies to 

identify, evaluate, and nominate historic property under agency control to the National 

Register of Historic Places. 

Archaeological Resource Protection Act (ARPA) of 

1979

ARPA protects archaeological resources on public and Indian lands. It provides 

felony-level penalties for the unauthorized excavation, removal, damage, alteration or 

defacement of any archaeological resource, defined as material remains of past human 

life or activities which are at least 100 years old. Before archaeological resources are 

excavated or removed from public lands, the federal land manager must issue a permit 

detailing the time, scope, location, and specific purpose of the proposed work. ARPA 

also fosters the exchange of information about archaeological resources between 

governmental agencies, the professional archaeological community, and private 

individuals. ARPA is implemented by regulations found in 43 CFR Part 7. 

American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 and 

Amendments of 1994 

The American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 recognizes that freedom of religion 

for all people is an inherent right, and traditional American Indian religions are an 

indispensable and irreplaceable part of Indian life. It also recognized the lack of federal 

policy on this issue and made it the policy of the United States to protect and preserve the 

inherent right of religious freedom for Native Americans. The 1994 Amendments 

provide clear legal protection for the religious use of peyote cactus as a religious 

sacrament. Federal agencies are responsible for evaluating their actions and policies to 

determine if changes should be made to protect and preserve the religious cultural rights 

and practices of Native Americans. These evaluations must be made in consultation with 

native traditional religious leaders. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-16

May 2007

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation 

Act (NAGPRA) of 1990

NAGPRA establishes rights of Indian tribes to claim ownership of certain “cultural 

items,” defined as Native American human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and 

objects of cultural patrimony held or controlled by federal agencies. Cultural items 

discovered on federal or tribal lands are, in order of primacy, the property of lineal 

descendants, if these can be determined, the tribe owning the land where the items were 

discovered, of the tribe with the closest cultural affiliation with the items. Discoveries of 

cultural items on federal or tribal land must be reported to the appropriate Indian tribe 

and the federal agency with jurisdiction over the land. If the discovery is made as a result 

of a land use, activity in the area must stop and the items must be protected pending the 

outcome of consultation with the affiliated tribe. 

EO 11593, “Protection and Enhancement of the 

Cultural Environment,” May 13, 1971

EO 11593 directs the federal government to provide leadership in the preservation, 

restoration, and maintenance of the historic and cultural environment. Federal agencies 

are required to locate and evaluate all federal sites under their jurisdiction or control that 

may qualify for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Agencies must allow 

the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation to comment on the alteration, demolition, 

sale, or transfer of property that is likely to meet the criteria for listing as determined by 

the Secretary of the Interior in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer. 

Agencies must also initiate procedures to maintain federally owned sites listed on the 

National Register. 

EO 12898, “Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations,” February 11, 1994 

EO 12898 directs federal agencies to make achieving environmental justice part of their 

mission. Agencies must identify and address adverse human health and/or environmental 

effects its activities have on minority and low-income populations and develop agencywide environmental justice strategies. The strategy must list “...programs, policies, 

planning and public participation processes, enforcement, and/or rulemakings related to 

human health or the environment that should be revised to promote enforcement of all 

health and environmental statutes in areas with minority populations and low-income 

populations, ensure greater public participation, improve research and data collection 

relating to the health of and environment of minority populations and low-income 

populations, and identify differential patterns of consumption of natural resources among 

minority populations and low-income populations.” A copy of the strategy and progress 

reports must be provided to the Federal Working Group on Environmental Justice. 

Responsibility for compliance with this EO lies with each federal agency. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-17

May 2007

EO 13007, “Indian Sacred Sites,” May 24, 1996

EO 13007 provides that agencies managing federal lands, to the extent practicable, 

permitted by law, and not inconsistent with agency functions, shall accommodate Indian 

religious practitioners’ access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites, shall avoid 

adversely affecting the physical integrity of such sites, and shall maintain the 

confidentiality of such sites. Federal agencies are responsible for informing tribes of 

proposed actions that could restrict future access to or ceremonial use of, or adversely 

affect the physical integrity of, sacred sites. 

EO 13287, “Preserve America,” March 3, 2003 

EO 13287 orders the federal government to take a leadership role in protection, 

enhancement, and contemporary use of historic properties owned by the federal 

government, and promote intergovernmental cooperation and partnerships for 

preservation and use of historic properties. The order established new accountability for 

agencies with regard to inventories and stewardship. 

Case Law on Supplementation of NEPA 

The lead case from the United States Supreme Court on supplementation is Marsh v. 

Oregon Natural Resources Council, 490 U.S. 360 (1989). It provides that “an agency 

need not supplement an EIS every time new information comes to light after the EIS is 

finalized. To require otherwise would render agency decision-making intractable, always 

awaiting updated information only to find the new information outdated by the time the 

decision is made.” Id. at 373. 

Rather, to trigger supplementation obligations, the new information must be sufficient to 

show that the proposed action will affect the quality of the human environment “in a 

significant manner or to a significant extent not already considered.” Id. at 374. 

Planning Criteria

During preparation of the plan, the BLM with input from the public, develops planning 

criteria that serves to: 

 Constrain and guide the development of the Plan. 

 Determine how the planning team approaches the development of alternatives. 

 Determine how the planning team approaches selection of the Preferred 

Alternative.

Additional planning criteria can be added at any point in the planning process. 

The following are the Draft Planning Criteria as of the printing of this document: 

1. The Plan will be completed in compliance with the Federal Land Management and 

Policy Act, The Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, 

and all other relevant federal law and executive orders (including wilderness 

legislation), and management policies of the BLM.. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-18

May 2007

2. The planning team will work collaboratively with the States of Arizona and 

California, Mohave,

La Paz, Maricopa, Yavapai and San Bernardino counties, tribal governments, 

municipal governments, other federal agencies and all other interested groups, 

agencies and individuals. 

3. Where planning decisions have previously been made that still apply, those decisions 

will be carried forward into these Plans. 

4. The planning process will include an Environmental Impact Statement that will 

comply with the National Environmental Policy Act standards. 

5. The Plan will set forth a framework for managing recreational activities in order to 

maintain existing natural landscapes and to provide for the enjoyment and safety of 

the visiting public. 

6. Laws and regulations regulate the management of grazing. The Plan will incorporate 

the statewide standards and guidelines established by the Arizona Bureau of Land 

Management State Director and approved by the Secretary of the Interior. It will 

present out a strategy for ensuring that proper grazing practices are followed while 

preserving habitats for sensitive plant and wildlife species. Livestock grazing is 

permitted, pursuant to the terms and conditions of existing permits and leases. 

Appropriate best management practices will be followed to protect rangeland 

resources, and where necessary, to mitigate any conflicts with other uses and values. 

Administrative actions to assure compliance with existing permit/lease requirements, 

to modify permits and leases, to monitor and supervise grazing use, and to remedy 

unauthorized grazing use will continue. 

7. Consultations will be conducted with American Indian Tribes in accordance with 

policy and tribal concerns will be given due consideration. The planning process will 

include the consideration of any impacts on Indian trust assets. 

8. Coordination with the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) will be 

conducted throughout the Plan. 

9. The Plan will identify opportunities for using cultural properties for scientific, 

educational, recreational, or experimental purposes. 

10. The lifestyles of area residents, including activities of grazing, hunting, motorized 

use and recreation, will be recognized in the Plan. 

11. The Plan will recognize the State’s authority to manage wildlife, including hunting 

and fishing, within the planning area in accordance with the current Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU). 

12. The Plan will address transportation, route management, and access, and identify 

which routes/roads should remain open to accommodate resource users, recreational 

users, protection of resource values, and administrative needs. 

13. The existing BLM wilderness inventory and vehicle route inventory will provide a 

basis for consideration of any new wilderness-related proposals. Such proposals will 

be assessed consistent with appropriate BLM policy and guidance. 

14. Lands that will be open to mineral leasing will be identified in the Plan. Where the 

plan identifies lands as open to mineral leasing, it will also define any constraints to 

surface use. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-19

May 2007

15. Ecological status and Ecological Site Inventory will be completed as necessary 

consistent with rangeland management policy. 

16. Visual Resource Management classification will be conducted to address the public’s 

concerns about open space and natural vistas. 

17. The Plans will designate which acquired lands currently not segregated from mining 

by overriding actions (i.e., Wilderness) should be opened to mining location. 

18. Consultations with the Fish and Wildlife Service will take place throughout the Plan 

process in accordance with the recent MOU. 

19. Minerals management will be consistent with FLPMA and existing policy and 

regulation including the Mining and Minerals Policy Act of 1970, Section 102(a)(12) 

of FLPMA, the National Materials and Minerals Policy, Research and Development 

Act of 1980, and current BLM Mineral Resources policy. 

20. National, State, and local policy on management of Noxious Weeds will be 

considered in the plans. Where possible, management practices that control invasive 

plant species will be emphasized. 

21. Management of wild burros within the California portion of the Havasu HMA will be 

in accordance with the NECO Plan. Management of wild burros within the Arizona 

portion of the Havasu HMA will be in accordance with the existing Herd 

Management Area Plan, as amended by subsequent land use plans. Management of 

the Alamo Herd Management Area will be guided primarily by management 

prescriptions developed through the Lake Havasu RMP, since Alamo HMA only has 

an interim Herd Management Area Plan. There are existing monitoring studies on 

these HMAs and future adjustments in the AML, either up or down, will be based on 

the monitoring data. 

Supplementary Rules 

At the time of publication of the Approved RMP, the revised Supplementary Rules 

covering the decisions in the Approved RMP have not been finalized. When the revised 

rules become final, they will replace those listed below. 

Supplementary Rules for the Lake Havasu Field 

Office, 43 CFR 8365.1-6 

Part I – September 15, 2003 

1. Lake Havasu Shoreline 

2. Parker Strip Recreation Area 

3. Craggy Wash 

Part II – October 12, 1995 

1. Swansea 

2. Aubrey Hills Area 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-20

May 2007

3. Desert Bighorn Sheep Habitat 

Part III – Supplemental Rules That Are Still Valid 

1. BLM lands in Arizona 

2. BLM lands in California 

3. BLM lands in Yuma, Lake Havasu Field Office, and California Desert District 

Part I – September 15, 2003 

[Federal Register: September 15, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 178)] 

[Notices] 

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] 

[DOCID:fr15se03-108] 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[AZ-070-07-1230-00: 8371] 

Notice of Final Supplementary Rules for the BLM-Managed Shoreline of Lake Havasu, 

the Parker Strip Recreation Area, and the Craggy Wash Area, in Mohave and La Paz 

Counties, AZ and in San Bernardino County, CA 

AGENCY: Lake Havasu Field Office, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Interior. 

SUMMARY: This notice contains Supplementary Rules for the BLM-managed shoreline 

of Lake Havasu, a manmade lake on the Colorado River located in Arizona and 

California, including the boat-access campsites; supplementary rules for the Parker Strip 

Recreation Area, located along the Colorado River downstream from Lake Havasu; and 

supplementary rules for the Craggy Wash area, located north of the Lake Havasu City 

Municipal Airport (AZ). These supplementary rules are part of the implementation of the 

ongoing management of the Lake Havasu Shoreline Program. The supplementary rules 

replace existing rules for the Parker Strip Recreation Area and for the Crossroads and 

Empire Landing Campgrounds. Heavy visitation during the fall, winter and spring makes 

new supplementary rules for Craggy Wash necessary. The supplementary rules will help 

reduce conflicts among a wide variety of multiple users. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 15, 2003. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Henderson, Assistant Field 

Manager, or Bryan Pittman, Field Staff Law Enforcement Ranger, Bureau of Land 

Management, Lake Havasu Field Office, 2610 Sweetwater Avenue, Lake Havasu City, 

Arizona 86406, telephone (928) 505-1200. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

 I. Background 

 II. Discussion of Supplementary Rules 

 III. Procedural Matters 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-21

May 2007

I. Background 

The supplementary rules for the Lake Havasu Shoreline areas are part of the ongoing 

management of the Lake Havasu Shoreline Program. The program, initiated in 1997, 

manages the shoreline riparian area. It includes the pre-existing shoreline campsites as 

federal fee recreation sites under the authorities described in 36 CFR part 71. The sites 

had been developed as designated fee sites by the Arizona State Parks Department while 

these lands were under a lease administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The 

lease was voluntarily terminated, leaving the sites to return to the jurisdiction of BLM. 

The primary purpose of the Lake Havasu Shoreline Program is to provide areas for 

boating, camping, and day use. The recreation sites, designated as camp or day use sites, 

are in most cases the traditional use areas of boat camping visitors. Arizona State Parks 

selected designated sites using criteria based on visitor use patterns, availability of 

shoreline access, and a need to establish sanitation facilities along heavily used shoreline 

areas. This program was established to accommodate the increasing demand for boat 

accessible site safety and property, to provide natural resource protection through 

improved management of the camping use and the riparian area. The designation of fee 

campsites assures that specific locations are available for such use year after year. 

The Parker Strip Recreation Area is a heavily used area that contains campgrounds, day 

use areas, boat ramps, picnic areas, concession operated resorts, and a National 

Backcountry Byway. Authority for the designation of fee campsites is contained in Title 

43, Code of Federal Regulations, part 8360, subpart 8365, sections 2 and 2-3. Authority 

for the payment of fees is in 36 CFR, subpart 71. Authority for including this program in 

the Fee Demonstration Pilot Program was contained in the Omnibus Budget 

Reconciliation Act of 1993 (Pub. L. 103-66) and the FY 1996 Appropriations Act 

(Pub. L. 104-134). 

The Craggy Wash area is located north of the Lake Havasu City Municipal Airport and 

east of State Route 95. It is a heavily used dispersed camping area during the cooler part 

of the year. The area is also frequented by target shooters, off-road vehicle operators, 

sightseers, bicyclists, and hikers. More than 300 people may be present at the same time 

on frequent occasions. 

The Proposed Supplementary Rules for the BLM-Managed Shoreline of Lake Havasu, 

the Parker Strip Recreation Area, and the Craggy Wash Area, in Mohave and LaPaz 

Counties, AZ, and San Bernardino County, CA, were published in the Federal Register 

on June 16, 2003. Changes in the proposed rules to the final rules resulted from internal 

review of comments received from the Arizona Game and Fish Department. These 

changes related to the distance (one-quarter mile) from occupied recreation sites that 

firearms may be discharged (Rules 14 and 27); and that except in designated OHV Open 

areas, vehicles must be operated on existing roads, trails, and washes (Rule 31). 

II. Discussion of Supplementary Rules 

The final supplementary rules for Lake Havasu Shoreline supercede the Rules for Lake 

Havasu Shoreline, published on May 21, 1998 (63 FR 27995). The shoreline 

supplementary rules would apply to the BLM-managed lands located within 1,000 linear 

feet of the high water mark (450 foot elevation line) of Lake Havasu, located in Mohave 

and La Paz Counties, Arizona and in San Bernardino County, California. These rules 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-22

May 2007

also apply to the portions of Lake Havasu located within 500 linear feet of designated 

campsites, day use sites, boat ramps, fishing docks, boat docks and swimming beaches. 

Included in this are the following currently designated campsites listed generally from 

North to South: 

Bluebird 1, 2 

Wren Cove 1, 2, 3 

Mallard Cove 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 

Teal Point 1, 2 

Widgeon Key 1, 2, 4 

Road Runner 2, 3, 4 

Solitude Cove 

Balance Rock Cove 

Friendly Island 1, 2, 3, 4 

Goose Bay 1, 2 

Pilot Rock 1, 2, 3 

Steamboat Cove 1, 2, 3, 4 

Buzzard Cove 

Eagle Cove 

Eagle Point 

Ewe Camp 

Rachel’s Camp 

Burned Camp 

Linda’s Camp 

Sand Isle 1, 2, 3, 4 

Standard Wash 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 

Echo Cove 1, 2, 3, 4 

Coyote Cove 1, 2 

BLM 1, 2 

Whyte’s Retreat 1, 2 

Rocky Landing 1, 2, 3, 4 

Satellite Cove 1, 2, 3 

Hum Hum Cove 1, 2 

Cove of the Little Foxes 

Disneyland 1, 2, 3, 4 

Gnat Keys 1, 2, 3, 4 

Hi Isle 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15 

Big Horn 1, 3, 4 

Bass Bay 1, 2 

Larned Landing 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 

Bill Williams 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 

The final supplementary rules for the Parker Strip Recreation Area supercede Rules for 

Parker Strip Recreation Area, published on October 12, 1995 (60 FR 53194), and rules 

for Empire Landing and Crossroads Campgrounds, published on May 18, 1998 (63 FR 

27316). The Parker Strip rules apply to the Parker Strip Recreation Area, which is 

defined as follows: 

Gila and Salt River Meridian, Arizona 

 T11N, R18W, Sec. 15, 16, 22, 28, and 34. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-23

May 2007

 T10N, R18W, Sec. 5 (W1/2, NW1/4, SW1/4), Sec. 6, Sec. 7, Lots 1-4, (NE1/4, 

N1/2, SE1/4, SW1/4, SE1/4), Sec. 18 (Lot 1, NW1/4, NE1/4). 

 T10N, R19W, Sec. 12, Sec. 13 (N1/2, N1/2, N1/2, SW1/4, NE1/4, NW1/4, 

SE1/4, NE1/4, N1/2, SE1/4, NW1/4, SW1/4, NW1/4, W1/2, SW1/4), Sec. 14, 22 

and 23. Section 24 (W1/2, NW1/4). 

San Bernardino Meridian, California 

 T2N, R27E, all. 

 T2N, R26E, Sec. 1, 11-15, 21-27 and 34-36. 

 T1N, R26E, Sec. 2, 3, 10, and 11. 

The final supplementary rules for Craggy Wash dispersed camping area would be new, 

made necessary by heavy visitation during the fall, winter, and spring. The Craggy Wash 

area is defined as public lands located with the following legal description: 

 T14N, R20W, sec. 4 (N1/2), sec. 3 (N1/2), sec. 2 (N1/2). 

 T15N, R20W, sec. 33, 34, 35, 36. 

BLM has developed the shoreline, Parker Strip, and Craggy Wash supplementary rules to 

manage continued multiple use of the sites. These rules will be available in the Lake 

Havasu Field Office, and BLM will post them at the sites affected. Most of the shoreline 

supplementary rules that follow were first published in 1998. We have expanded the area 

of applicability to include all of the BLM-managed shoreline of Lake Havasu in Arizona 

and California. The previous supplementary rules applicable to the lake shoreline were 

limited to the areas in the vicinity of the shoreline campsites. The term “recreation site” 

includes any developed campsite, day-use site, or similar recreational development. The 

supplementary rules that follow also apply to the surface of Lake Havasu located within 

500 linear feet of designated campsites. Acts occurring in that portion of the lake have a 

direct impact on, and connection with, public safety and resource protection of the 

campsite areas. 

III. Procedural Matters 

The principal author of these supplementary rules is Bryan Pittman, Field Staff Law 

Enforcement Ranger, BLM Lake Havasu Field Office. 

Regulatory Planning and Review (EO 12866) 

These supplementary rules are not significant and are not subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866. 

(1) These supplementary rules will not have an effect of $100 million or more on the 

economy. They will not adversely affect in a material way the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or state, 

local, or tribal governments or communities. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-24

May 2007

(2) These supplementary rules will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise 

interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency. 

(3) These supplementary rules do not alter the budgetary effects or entitlements, grants, 

user fees, or loan programs or the rights or obligations of their recipients. 

(4) These supplementary rules do not raise novel legal or policy issues. 

The supplementary rules will not affect legal commercial activity, but merely contain 

rules of conduct for public use of a limited selection of public lands. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Department of the Interior certifies that these supplementary rules will not have a 

significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 USC 601 et seq.). The supplementary rules will not affect legal 

commercial activity, but will govern conduct for public use of a limited selection of 

public lands. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) 

These supplementary rules do not constitute a major rule under 5 USC 804(2), the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

These supplementary rules: 

 Do not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. (See the 

discussion under Regulatory Planning and Review, above.) 

 Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual 

industries, federal, state, or local government agencies, or geographic regions. 

See the discussion above under Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

 Do not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with 

foreign-based enterprises. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

These supplementary rules do not impose an unfunded mandate on state, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per year. The 

supplementary rules do not have a significant or unique effect on state, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. The supplementary rules have no effect on 

governmental or tribal entities. A statement containing the information required by the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 USC 1531 et seq.) is not required. 

Takings (E.O. 12630) 

In accordance with Executive Order 12630, the supplementary rules do not have 

significant takings implications. The enforcement provision in the supplementary rules 

does not include any language requiring or authorizing forfeiture of personal property or 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-25

May 2007

any property rights. EO 12630 addresses concerns based on the Fifth Amendment 

dealing with private property taken for public use without compensation. The land 

covered by the supplementary rules is public land managed by the Bureau of Land 

Management; therefore, no private property is affected. A takings implications 

assessment is not required. 

Federalism (E.O. 13132) 

In accordance with Executive Order 13132, BLM finds that the supplementary rules do 

not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism 

summary impact statement. The supplementary rules do not have substantial direct 

effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, 

or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 

government. The supplementary rules do not preempt state law. 

Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) 

In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of the Solicitor has determined 

that these supplementary rules do not unduly burden the judicial system and meet the 

requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. 

Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (E.O. 13175) 

In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have found that this final rule would not 

include policies that have tribal implications. The supplementary rules would not affect 

lands held for the benefit of Indians, Aleuts, or Eskimos. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

These supplementary rules do not contain information collection requirements that the 

Office of Management and Budget must approve under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

These supplementary rules do not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting 

the quality of the human environment. A detailed statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 is not required. 

Under the authority of 43 U.S.C. 1733a and 43 CFR 8360.0-7, BLM establishes the 

following supplementary rules. 

Dated: August 4, 2003. 

Elaine Y. Zielinski, State Director, Bureau of Land Management, Arizona. 

Supplementary Rules for Lake Havasu Shoreline Area 

1. You must purchase a permit in order to use a designated recreation site, including 

occupying a site for any use exceeding 20 minutes. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-26

May 2007

2. You must not moor any watercraft or floating platform at a recreation site or offshore 

in the vicinity or cove of any such site for more than 20 minutes without purchasing a 

permit. The fee for a use permit will be in accordance with the fee schedule, 

requirements, and procedures that BLM established under the Recreation Fee 

Demonstration Pilot Program, and are payable in U.S. funds only. 

3. You must present the appropriate use permit upon demand to any authorized BLM 

official inspecting the site. If you are away from the campsite, the permit must be 

visibly displayed in accordance with posted instructions, or in the manner directed by 

a BLM official. 

4. You must not reassign or transfer your permit to another individual or group and/or 

campsite(s). 

5. Any authorized BLM official may revoke your permit, without reimbursement, if you 

violate any BLM rule or regulation. If BLM revokes your permit, you must remove 

all personal property and leave the recreation site within one hour of notice. 

6. A recreation site is considered occupied after you have paid the appropriate permit 

fee, you have taken possession of the site by placing personal property at the site, and 

the permit is displayed in accordance with written instructions or as directed by a 

BLM official. You must not occupy a site in violation of instructions from a BLM 

official, or when there is reason to believe that the unit is properly occupied by 

another person or persons. 

7. Except for authorized federal, state, or local personnel, during the commission of 

their duties, a permitted site cannot be occupied by other visitors without the consent 

of the permittee. 

8. You must not occupy a site designated as “day use” between sunset and sunrise. 

9. A single vessel and its occupants may not occupy more than one site. 

10. During the hours of 10 p.m. to 6 a.m., in accordance with applicable state time zone 

standards, you must maintain quiet within normal hearing range of the designated 

recreation sites. 

11. You must not cut or collect any firewood, including dead and down wood and all 

other vegetative material. 

12. You must not moor vessels to vegetation, signs, shade ramadas, tables, grills or fire 

rings, toilets, trash receptacles, or other objects or structures not designed for such 

use.

13. You must not beach or moor a vessel in excess of posted time limits. 

14. You must not discharge or use firearms or projectile weapons inside or within a 

quarter-mile of any occupied recreation site. 

15. You must not discharge or possess any fireworks. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-27

May 2007

16. You must keep the site free of litter and trash during the period of occupancy. You 

must remove all personal property, and the site must be clean, upon your departure. 

17. You must keep pets on a leash no longer than six (6) feet. 

18. You must not leave pets unattended, and you must remove pet waste from the site or 

dispose of it in available trash receptacles. 

19. You must not violate any provisions of boating laws as described in Title 5, Chapter 

3, of the Arizona Revised Statutes or in the California Harbors and Navigation Code 

(as applicable). 

20. Possession of alcoholic beverages by a person under the age of 21 years is prohibited. 

21. Consumption of alcoholic beverages by a person under the age of 21 years is 

prohibited in the portions of the affected area that are located within Arizona. 

22. You must not possess glass beverage containers on land or in the water. You may 

possess glass beverage containers only within the confines of a vessel. 

23. Reserving recreation sites in any manner, including leaving personal property 

unattended overnight, is prohibited. 

24. Recreation sites used for camping activities must be occupied overnight by the 

permittee. 

25. You must not leave personal property unattended for more than 24 hours. Personal 

property left unattended beyond such time limit is subject to disposition under the 

Federal Property and Administration Services Act of 1949, as amended (40 U.S.C. 

484(m)). 

Supplementary Rules for the Parker Strip Recreation Area 

Rules number 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 15, 16, 20, 21, 23, 24, and 25 of the Lake Havasu 

Shoreline Supplementary Rules also apply to the Parker Strip Recreation Area. In 

addition, the following rules apply to the Parker Strip Recreation Area: 

26. You must not park or operate vehicles in violation of posted restrictions. 

27. Except in designated OHV Open areas, you must operate vehicles only on existing 

roads, trails, and washes. 

28. Vehicles operated between Parker Dam Road and the Colorado River in California 

must be legal for highway operation. You may operate non-highway legal golf carts 

in this area only within concession resorts and facilities, and within BLM-managed 

campgrounds. 

29. Within one-half mile of Parker Dam Road, you may camp only in designated 

campsites. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-28

May 2007

30. Disorderly conduct is prohibited. 

31. You must not discharge or use firearms in California within 1 mile of Parker Dam 

Road. In Arizona, you must not discharge or use firearms within one quarter-mile of 

any occupied recreation site or residential structure. 

32. In BLM-managed campgrounds, no more than 8 persons may occupy a single 

campsite. 

Supplementary Rules for Craggy Wash 

From October 1 through April 30 of each year, the following supplementary rules are in 

effect:

1. You must maintain your campsite free of trash and litter. 

2. You must not discharge a firearm for the purpose of target practice or plinking. You 

may engage in legitimate hunting activities. 

3. You must not operate a motor vehicle at a speed greater than 15 mph. 

4. You must maintain quiet within hearing range of any other person or camp unit 

between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. You must not operate a generator during these hours. 

5. You must not collect firewood, including any dead and down wood, or any other 

vegetative material. 

6. You must restrain a pet with a leash not longer than six (6) feet. 

7. You must not leave a pet unattended. 

8. You must not possess or discharge fireworks. 

9. You must not leave personal property unattended for more than 24 hours. 

Penalties

The authority for these supplementary rules is provided in 43 CFR 8365.1-6. Persons 

who violate these rules are subject to arrest, and upon conviction may be fined up to 

$100,000 and/or imprisoned for not more than 12 months, as amended by 18 U.S.C. 3571 

and 18 U.S.C. 3581. 

Part II – October 12, 1995 

[FR Doc. 03-23445 Filed 9-12-03; 8:45 a.m.] 

Billing Code 4310-32-P 

[Federal Register: October 12, 1995 (Volume 60, Number 197)] 

[Notices] 

[Page 53194-53195] 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-29

May 2007

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] 

[DOCID:fr12oc95-67] 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

[AZ-050-05-1210-00; 8365] 

Arizona: Establishment of Supplementary Rules for the Parker Strip Recreation Area, 

Swansea Townsite, Aubrey Hills, and Desert Bighorn Sheep Lambing Grounds 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. 

ACTION: Publication of supplementary rules for the Parker Strip Recreation Area, 

Swansea Townsite, Aubrey Hills, and Desert Bighorn Sheep Lambing Grounds. 

SUMMARY: To implement decisions of the Yuma Resource Management Plan and the 

Parker Strip Recreation Management Plan, to protect valuable and fragile natural and 

cultural resources, and to provide for public safety and enjoyment, the following 

supplementary rules are established for the lands described. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 1995. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leslie Allert, Outdoor Recreation 

Planner or Mark Harris, Ranger, Havasu Resource Area, 3189 Sweetwater Avenue, Lake 

Havasu City, Arizona 86406, telephone (520) 855-8017. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: To protect valuable and fragile natural and 

cultural resources and to provide for public enjoyment the following supplementary rules 

are established for the areas described. 

Parker Strip Recreation Area

This section is replaced by Supplemental rules in Federal Register: September 15, 2003 

(Volume 68, Number 178). 

Swansea Townsite 

The following rules apply within the Swansea Townsite area, which is described as 

follows:

Gila and Salt River Meridian, Arizona 

T. 10 N., R. 15 W., 

Sec. 28, W1/2 SW1/4; 

Sec. 29, S1/2; 

Sec. 32, N1/2; 

Sec. 33, W1/2 NW1/4. 

Vehicles

Taking any vehicle through, around, or beyond a restrictive sign, recognizable barricade, 

fence, or traffic control barrier is prohibited. Operation of a vehicle in a wash, off a 

roadway, or on an unsigned historic roadway is prohibited. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-30

May 2007

Camping

Camping is permitted only at designated sites. Camping stay is limited to 3 days in any 

30-day period. 

Wood Collection 

No wood collection is permitted within the Townsite, including but not limited to dead 

and down wood, live plants, and lumber from historic structures. 

Collection of Artifacts 

No item may be collected or removed from the Townsite without the written permission 

of the Havasu Resource Area Manager. This includes but is not limited to old cans, nails, 

lumber, bricks, or glassware, whole or broken. 

Safety

Climbing, leaning, sitting, or walking on the remains of the walled structures at Swansea 

inherently damages the structures, is unsafe, and is therefore prohibited. No person shall 

enter into any fenced area, shaft, tunnel, or structure. 

Fires

Fires are allowed only at the designated sites and must be located in the fire ring 

provided. Construction of new fire rings is prohibited. 

Aubrey Hills Area 

The Aubrey Hills Area is defined as that public land south of the Lake Havasu City 

limits, west of Highway 95, east of the Colorado River, and north of the Bill Williams 

River, not including the area of SARA Park. No motorized vehicles are allowed off 

paved roads. This does not include authorized agency service vehicles for authorized 

rights-of-way or for ownership access to private land. 

Desert Bighorn Sheep Lambing Grounds and Year Long Use Areas 

The following rules apply to public lands during the period of January 1 through June 30 

in any year in all bighorn sheep lambing grounds and year-round use areas whose 

boundaries are defined as follows. 

Gila and Salt River Meridian, Arizona 

North Mohave Mountains 

T. 15 N., R. 20 W., 

Sec 4, 5, 8-10, 15, 16, 20-22, 28, & 29; 

Sec 27 NW1/4. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-31

May 2007

Crossman Peak 

T. 14 N., R. 18 W., 

Sec 7 W1/2 W1/2; 

Sec 17 SW1/4; 

Sec 18-20. 

T. 15 N., R. 18 W., 

Sec 31 SW1/4. 

T. 14 N., R. 19 W., 

Sec 1 W1/2 W1/2; 

Sec 2-4; 

Sec 5 E1/2; 

Sec 9-16. 

T. 15 N., R. 19 W., 

Sec 28, 30, & 32-36. 

T. 15 N., R. 20 W., 

Sec 25 NE1/4. 

Paloma Wash 

T. 12 N., R. 17 W., 

Sec 17 S1/2 S1/2; 

Sec 19 NE1/4; 

Sec 21 SW1/4; 

Sec 27 SW1/4 SW1/4; 

Sec 33 N1/2 N1/2; 

Sec 34 NW1/4 NW1/4. 

Little Black Mountains 

T. 11 N., R. 17 W., 

Sec 3, 10, 11, 14, 15, 22, 23, & 26; 

Sec 12 W1/2, W1/2 SE1/4; 

Sec 13 W1/2, W1/2 E1/2; 

Sec 21 E1/2; 

Sec 25 W1/2; 

Sec 27 NE1/4. 

T. 12 N., R. 17 W., 

Sec 34 SE1/4; 

Sec 35 SW1/4 SW1/4. 

The North Mesa 

T. 11 N., R. 17 W., 

Sec 19 SW1/4; 

Sec 28 SW1/4; 

Sec 29 S1/2; 

Sec 30 all; 

Sec 31 N1/2; 

Sec 32 N1/2; 

Sec 33 N1/2. 

T. 11 N., R. 18 W., 

Sec 22 NE1/4; 

Sec 23-26; 

Sec 27 E1/2 E1/2; 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-32

May 2007

Sec 35 N1/2 N1/2; 

Sec 36 N1/2, N1/2 SE1/4. 

No motorized vehicles are allowed off paved roads. This does not include authorized 

agency service vehicles for authorized rights-of-way or for ownership access to private 

land.

Authority: The authority for establishing supplementary rules is contained in Title 43 

Subpart 8365, Section 1-6. These rules will be available in the Havasu Resource Area 

Office, which manages these lands. A violation of a supplementary rule is punishable as 

class A misdemeanor. 

Dated: October 2, 1995. 

Judith I. Reed, District manager 

[FR Doc. 95-25208 Filed 10-11-95; 8:45 a.m.] 

Billing Code 4310-32-P 

Part III - Supplementary Rules Brought forward from Past 

Rules That Are Still Valid. 

See attached Federal Regulations as sited after each rule. 

All BLM Lands in Arizona 

1. Minor in possession of alcohol is prohibited. Minor consumption of alcohol is 

prohibited. FR 98-21831 

This rule went into effect October 1, 1998. 

All BLM Lands in California 

1. Minor in possession of alcohol is prohibited. FR 93-7611 

This rule went into effect April 2, 1993. 

All BLM Lands in the Yuma and Lake Havasu Field Offices and the California 

Desert District 

1. Camping is restricted to 14 days within any period of 28 consecutive days. After the 

14th day campers must move outside of a 25-mile radius of the previous location. 

FR 64-30021 

This rule went into effect July 30, 1964. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-33

May 2007

Instruction Memorandum No. 2003-275, Change 1

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240 

October 23, 2003 

 In Reply Refer To: 

 1610 (210) P 

Ref. IM No. 2003-195 

IM No. 2003-274 

IM No. 2003-275 

EMS TRANSMISSION 10/23/2003 

Instruction Memorandum No. 2003-275 – Change 1 

Expires: 09/30/2004 

To: All State Directors 

From: Assistant Director, Renewable Resources and Planning 

Subject: Consideration of Wilderness Characteristics in Land Use Plans 

(Excluding Alaska) 

Program Area: Land Use Planning 

Purpose: This Instruction Memorandum corrects the reference to the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) used twice in the “Reviewing New Information” section of Instruction 

Memorandum No. 2003-275. No other changes to Instruction Memorandum No. 2003-275 have 

been made.

This Instruction Memorandum (IM) provides guidance regarding the consideration of wilderness 

characteristics in the land use planning process. In addition the IM sets forth policy to comply 

with the settlement in Utah v. Norton and the decision to apply the terms of the settlement 

Bureau-wide, excluding Alaska. The IM applies to all other public lands, except approximately 

6.5 million acres of public land designated by Congress as wilderness, 15.5 million acres of 

wilderness study areas (WSAs) already established by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 

or Congress, and any other lands not designated by Congress but subject to specific provisions of 

law that direct BLM to manage those lands as if they were congressionally designated wilderness 

or WSAs. The IM also modifies the Land Use Planning Handbook (H-1601-1) to delete a 

statement that land use plan decisions include designation of WSAs. 

Background: The BLM submitted wilderness suitability recommendations to Congress pursuant 

to Section 603 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) by October 21, 1993. 

BLM, however, continued to inventory for wilderness characteristics under the authority of 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-34

May 2007

Section 201 of FLPMA and made formal determinations regarding wilderness character 

consistent with the definition of wilderness as described in Section 2 (c) of the Wilderness Act of 

1964. The BLM assumed that Section 202 of FLPMA authorized designation, through the land 

use planning process, of additional WSAs. These Section 202 WSAs, according to the BLM’s 

Interim Management Policy (IMP), as modified in 1995, would be managed to retain their 

suitability as wilderness (non-impairment provision) until Congress designated them as 

wilderness or they were made 

available for other land uses by the decisions resulting from a new land use planning process. 

In Utah v. Norton, the State of Utah, Utah School and Institutional Trust Land Administration, 

and the Utah Association of Counties filed suit challenging the authority of the BLM to conduct 

wilderness inventories after completion of the Section 603 identification, study, and 

recommendation processes. The Department of the Interior and the plaintiffs agreed to a 

settlement in April 2003.

The settlement acknowledges: (1) that the BLM’s authority to conduct wilderness reviews, 

including the establishment of new WSAs, expired no later than October 21, 1993, with the 

submission of the wilderness suitability recommendations to Congress pursuant to Section 603 of 

the FLPMA; and (2) that the BLM is without authority to establish new WSAs. The settlement 

did not, however, diminish the BLM’s authority under Section 201 of the FLPMA to inventory 

public land resources and other values, including characteristics associated with the concept of 

wilderness, and to consider such information during land use planning.

Consistent with the settlement, the BLM rescinded the Wilderness Inventory and Study 

Procedures Handbook (H-1630-1). See IM-2003-195, dated June 20, 2003. It is, therefore, no 

longer BLM policy to continue to make formal determinations regarding wilderness character, 

designate new WSAs through the land use planning process, or manage any lands – except WSAs 

established under Section 603 of the FLPMA and other existing WSAs – in accordance with the 

non-impairment standard prescribed in the IMP. 

Refer to IM 2003- 274 for general guidance regarding interpretation of the Utah v. Norton

wilderness lawsuit settlement. 

Policy/Action:

Nothing in this guidance changes current policy on the management of designated wilderness and 

existing WSAs. The BLM will continue to protect and manage congressionally designated 

wilderness and existing WSAs according to the provisions of applicable laws and the BLM’s 

wilderness program policies. Those lands designated as WSAs in the BLM’s land use plans after 

October 21, 1993, may continue to be managed consistent with the decisions contained in the 

approved land use plan. 

The BLM will not designate new WSAs through the land use planning process. In addition, the 

BLM will not allocate any additional lands to be managed under the non-impairment standard 

prescribed in the IMP. Instead, the BLM may consider information on wilderness characteristics, 

along with information on other uses and values, when preparing land use plans. Wilderness 

characteristics are features associated with the concept of wilderness that may be considered in 

land use planning (see Attachment #1). 

The BLM will involve the public in the planning process to determine the best mix of resource 

use and protection consistent with the multiple-use and other criteria established in the FLPMA 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-35

May 2007

and other applicable laws, regulations and policies. Lands with wilderness characteristics may be 

managed to protect and/or preserve some or all of those characteristics. This may include 

protecting certain lands in their natural condition and/or providing opportunities for solitude, or 

primitive and unconfined types of recreation. 

The BLM can make a variety of land use plan decisions to protect wilderness characteristics, such 

as establishing Visual Resource Management (VRM) class objectives to guide the placement of 

roads, trails, and other facilities; establishing conditions of use to be attached to permits, leases, 

and other authorizations to achieve the desired level of resource protection; and designating lands 

as open, closed, or limited to Off Highway Vehicles (OHV) to achieve a desired visitor 

experience.

The BLM also has authority to designate Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) 

where special management attention is required to protect and prevent irreparable damage to 

important cultural, historic, or scenic values, fish and wildlife resources or other natural systems 

or processes, or to protect life and safety from natural hazards. To qualify for consideration of 

the ACEC designation, such values must have substantial significance and value, with qualities of 

more than local significance and special worth, consequence, meaning, distinctiveness, or cause 

for concern. Where ACEC values and wilderness characteristics coincide, the special 

management associated with an ACEC, if designated, may also protect wilderness characteristics. 

See BLM Manual 1613, Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, for more information. 

See the Land Use Planning Handbook, H-1601-1, Section II, Land Use Plan Decisions and 

Attachment #1 of this IM for more information about making land use plan decisions to 

accomplish goals and objectives for resource management. 

Considering wilderness characteristics in the land use planning process may result in several 

outcomes, including, but not limited to: 1) emphasizing other multiple uses as a priority over 

protecting wilderness characteristics; 2) emphasizing other multiple uses while applying 

management restrictions (conditions of use, mitigation measures) to reduce impacts to some or all 

of the wilderness characteristics; 3) emphasizing the protection of some or all of the wilderness 

characteristics as a priority over other multiple uses (though the area will not be designated a 

WSA).

The BLM is authorized to implement current land use plans until those plans are revised or 

amended (if appropriate), provided the implementation actions conform to the approved plans and 

are supported by adequate National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation, usually an 

environmental assessment (EA), environmental impact statement (EIS), or Categorical Exclusion 

(CE).

If the BLM determines that an area has wilderness characteristics that warrant consideration in 

the land use planning process, the BLM may initiate a plan amendment (or revision) with an 

accompanying NEPA document (EIS or EA) to consider changes to the current land use plan 

decisions. A decision regarding the timing of the plan amendment (or revision) is at the 

discretion of the State Director, and depends on the level of public interest, the position of State 

and local governments and cooperators, the adequacy of available information, funding, and other 

factors.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-36

May 2007

BLM Wilderness Inventories and Public Wilderness Proposals 

Typically, the resource information contained in the BLM wilderness inventories was collected to 

support a land use planning process. Public wilderness proposals represent a land use proposal. 

In either case, the BLM is authorized to consider such information during preparation of a land 

use plan amendment or revision. For example, information contained in BLM wilderness 

inventories and public wilderness proposals may be considered when developing the affected 

environment section of the NEPA document that accompanies the land use plan. The information 

may also be used to develop the range of alternatives or to analyze the environmental impacts to 

the various natural, biological, and cultural resources-such as air, soil, water, vegetation, cultural, 

paleontological, visual, special status species, fish and wildlife-as well as resource uses- such as 

forestry, livestock grazing, recreation, lands and realty, coal, and fluid minerals. Refer to the 

Land Use Planning Handbook, H-1601-1, Appendix C, for guidance concerning the resources and 

resource uses to be considered in land use plans. 

Alternatives are developed to reflect a reasonable range of management options considering all 

applicable information sources, such as the results of scoping, coordination with cooperating 

agencies, and practicality of management. The boundary of an area being considered in the land 

use plan for management of wilderness characteristics, therefore, is dependent on many factors 

and may or may not exactly follow the boundary of previous inventory areas. 

Reviewing New Information

When implementing land use plans, the BLM must, as with any new information, determine if the 

BLM wilderness inventories or public wilderness proposals contain significant new 

circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the proposed 

action or impacts that have not previously been analyzed. Since every land use plan and 

supporting NEPA document is different, this determination will need to be done on a 

case-by-case basis. New information or changed circumstances alone, however, or the failure to 

consider a factor or matter of little consequence, is not a sufficient basis to require additional 

NEPA consideration prior to implementing a previously approved decision. 

If the new information is sufficient to show that the action will affect the quality of the human 

environment in a significant manner or to a significant extent not already considered, then a 

supplemental NEPA document shall be prepared (40 CFR 1502.9). 

To help determine whether the new information or circumstances are significant, the BLM should 

look at the definition of “significantly” at 40 CFR 1508.27, which requires consideration of both 

context and intensity. See Attachment 2 for more information regarding the review of new 

wilderness information during plan implementation. 

The analysis of new information and the BLM’s determination regarding its significance should 

be documented, using, as an example, the Documentation of Land Use Plan Conformance and 

NEPA Adequacy (DNA) worksheet. 

It is important to note that the BLM must review the new information only when it is relevant to a 

pending decision or its environmental effects. When no action is being considered, the BLM may 

defer the reviews until a more appropriate time, such as when preparing a land use plan 

amendment or revision. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-37

May 2007

Using New Information on Lands with Wilderness Characteristics to Implement Approved 

Land Use Plans 

The BLM wilderness inventories and public wilderness proposals may contain new information 

on land and resource conditions that can be used in a variety of day-to-day operations. Examples 

of using the new information in day-to-day operations include applying new mitigation measures 

to on-the-ground projects; establishing reclamation standards; updating the BLM’s resource 

databases; refining previously approved plan decisions (plan maintenance) to correct data, 

typographical, or mapping errors in the planning records; or implementing the decisions of the 

land use plan, such as when selecting routes in areas designated as limited to OHV travel. 

When preparing NEPA documents for actions that implement the approved plan, the BLM may 

also use the information on lands and resources contained in BLM wilderness inventories and 

public wilderness proposals to describe the affected environment, and environmental impacts to 

the various natural, biological, and cultural resources. For example, information on naturalness 

may help describe the condition and trend of important wildlife habitat and could be included in 

the affected environment discussion if applicable. Similarly, information on the presence of 

roads and other facilities may be used to describe the current status of visual resources as well as 

the potential for the proposed action to affect those resources. Provided relevant new information 

is considered in the NEPA document in this fashion, it is not necessary to analyze impacts to the 

area identified by BLM wilderness inventories or public wilderness proposals as having 

wilderness characteristics. 

If a NEPA document is being prepared for an action affecting lands with wilderness 

characteristics, and those characteristics are currently being considered in an on-going land use 

planning process, the BLM may acknowledge the status of the planning process and describe how 

the proposed action might affect future management considerations. 

This may be accomplished in the discussion of the no action alternative or in the section of the 

NEPA document on plan conformance. The fact that the BLM is considering alternative 

management goals for the affected lands in a pending land use plan revision or amendment, 

however, does not change the management or use of those lands during the interim. The BLM is 

authorized to implement current land use plans until those plans are revised or amended, if 

appropriate, and may acknowledge on-going planning efforts to ensure that the decision-maker 

and the public are fully informed of the consequences of the proposed action. 

Effect on On-going plans 

This policy may require some BLM Field Offices to modify current Resource Management Plan 

(RMP) efforts. For RMPs where a Draft RMP/EIS has not been issued, Field Offices must ensure 

that the Draft RMP/EIS is consistent with this IM. If the BLM has already discussed or identified 

possible WSA designations with the public, BLM must explain the change in policy. There is no 

requirement, however, to reinitiate scoping or provide an additional comment period before 

releasing the Draft RMP/EIS since the public will be provided an opportunity to comment on the 

draft, including the range of alternatives and proposed management prescriptions. 

For Draft RMP/EISs already issued that include designation of new WSAs in an alternative, it 

will be necessary to modify the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. If the effects of an alternative 

modified to comply with this policy are within the range of alternatives already analyzed in the 

Draft RMP/EIS, preparing a supplement to the Draft RMP/EIS is not necessary. Each affected 

Field Office must determine the need for a supplement in consultation with WO-210. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-38

May 2007

After receiving this guidance, State and Field Offices have 45 days to consider the implications of 

this IM in coordination with WO-210. In addition, within 45 days, State Directors will review 

and update their existing State and field office policies and other guidance and make necessary 

modifications to comply with the terms of this IM. 

Timeframes: This policy is in effect immediately. 

Budget Impact: This policy is expected to increase slightly the costs of ongoing planning efforts 

as modifications are made to planning documents to comply with this IM. For all other land use 

plans the policy should result in diminished costs. 

Manual/Handbook Sections Affected: That sentence in the Land Use Planning Handbook 

(H-1601-1, Appendix C, Part III.B.1.a, Page 18) that directs BLM to “Designate WSAs to be 

managed under the interim management policy (H-8550-1),” is hereby deleted. No other portions 

of H-1601-1 are affected. 

The Wilderness Inventory and Study Procedures Handbook (H-6310-1) was rescinded in 

“Rescission of National Level Policy Guidance on Wilderness Review and Land Use Planning” 

(IM-2003-195).

Coordination: This guidance was coordinated with WO-170, WO-200 and WO-300. 

Contact: For further information, contact Mike Mottice at (202) 452-0362 or Geoff Middaugh at 

(202) 785-6592. 

Signed by: Authenticated by: 

James G. Kenna Barbara J. Brown 

Acting Assistant Director Policy & Records Group, WO-560 

Renewable Resources and Planning 

2 Attachments 

1- Definitions of Wilderness Characteristics for the Purpose of Land 

Use Planning and Management Considerations to Accomplish Plan 

Goals and Objectives (1 p) 

2- Review of New Wilderness Information during Plan Implementation (2 pp)
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-39

May 2007

Attachment 1 

Definitions of Wilderness Characteristics for the Purpose of Land Use Planning and 

Management Considerations to Accomplish Plan Goals and Objectives

Definitions:

Wilderness Characteristics. Features of the land associated with the concept of wilderness that 

may be considered in land use planning when BLM determines that those characteristics are 

reasonably present, of sufficient value (condition, uniqueness, relevance, importance) and need 

(trend, risk), and are practical to manage. 

Naturalness. Lands and resources exhibit a high degree of naturalness when affected primarily 

by the forces of nature and where the imprint of human activity is substantially unnoticeable. 

BLM has authority to inventory, assess, and/or monitor the attributes of the lands and resources 

on public lands, which, taken together, are an indication of an area’s naturalness. These attributes 

may include the presence or absence of roads and trails, fences and other improvements; the 

nature and extent of landscape modifications; the presence of native vegetation communities; and 

the connectivity of habitats. 

Solitude and Primitive/Unconfined Recreation. Visitors may have outstanding opportunities 

for solitude, or primitive and unconfined types of recreation when the sights, sounds, and 

evidence of other people are rare or infrequent, where visitors can be isolated, alone or secluded 

from others, where the use of the area is through non-motorized, non-mechanical means, and 

where no or minimal developed recreation facilities are encountered. 

Management Considerations: 

A decision to protect or preserve certain lands in their natural condition, if appropriate, or provide 

outstanding opportunities for solitude, or primitive and unconfined types of recreation may be 

made at the conclusion of the land use planning process. Land use plan decisions may include 

establishing goals and objectives that describe the desired future condition of the land and 

resources, desired outcome of the recreation experience, and allowable uses. BLM may also 

identify the management actions necessary to achieve the intended goals and objectives, 

including the conditions of use that would be attached to permits, leases, and other authorizations 

to avoid or minimize impacts to the affected natural, biological, and cultural resources and other 

land uses. In some cases, when BLM determines that certain uses of the land could be 

incompatible with the achievement of other desired goals and objectives, those uses could be 

conditioned to the extent necessary to reach the necessary level of resource protection.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-40

May 2007

Attachment 2 

Review of New Wilderness Information during Plan Implementation 

The Land Use Planning Handbook (H-1601-1) provides some criteria to use when reviewing new 

information. Other factors to consider when reviewing new information contained in BLM 

wilderness inventories or public wilderness proposals that may be relevant to an implementation 

action are: 

1. Was the information on land and resource conditions available to the BLM and 

adequately considered within the range, scope, and analysis of the alternatives in the 

plan/EIS or other NEPA document, and is there adequate documentation to that affect? 

2. Does the new information suggest significant changes in land and resource conditions 

have occurred since the plan/EIS or other NEPA document was completed? 

3. Though BLM may not have formally disclosed in existing NEPA documents the impacts 

to the wilderness characteristics that have been identified in new inventories or public 

wilderness proposals, did BLM reasonably consider the environmental effects to the 

lands and resources that contribute to the wilderness characteristics in relevant NEPA 

documents? 

4. Does the new information suggest that the impacts to those lands, if analyzed today, 

would be significantly different than the impacts already disclosed in the plan EIS or 

other NEPA document(s)? 

5. Can BLM condition use of the lands for which new information exists in such a way that 

the effects of the action would not be significantly different from the effects already 

described?

6. Is the information at such a scale that BLM would ordinarily use the new information to 

make land use plan level decisions or is it more appropriate to consider for 

implementation level decisions? 

New information or changed circumstances alone, however, or the failure to consider a factor or 

matter of little consequence, may not be sufficient basis to require additional NEPA consideration 

prior to implementing a previously approved decision. For example, the fact that roads and trails 

have become overgrown since previous inventories were completed represents a changed 

circumstance. Such change is most likely the result of natural environmental processes and, 

alone, may not be sufficient to require the preparation of additional NEPA documentation. The 

fact that BLM did not specifically analyze impacts of the proposed action on wilderness 

characteristics identified since the current land use plan or NEPA document was prepared is not 

an omission that, alone, would indicate that additional NEPA consideration is required. In all 

cases then, BLM should evaluate: 1) the extent to which the new information presents potential 

significant environmental consequences associated with the proposed action that were not 

analyzed in the previous NEPA analysis; and 2) whether those consequences are of significant 

gravity in context or intensity. 

Case Law on Supplementation of NEPA 

The lead case from the United States Supreme Court on supplementation is Marsh v. Oregon 

Natural Resources Council, 490 U.S. 360 (1989). It provides that “an agency need not 

supplement an EIS every time new information comes to light after the EIS is finalized. To 

require otherwise would render agency decision-making intractable, always awaiting updated 

information only to find the new information outdated by the time the decision is made.” Id. at 

373.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan A-41

May 2007

Rather, to trigger supplementation obligations, the new information must be sufficient to show 

that the proposed action will affect the quality of the human environment “in a significant manner 

or to a significant extent not already considered.” Id. at 374. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-i

May 2007

Contents

Appendix B 

Administrative Actions and Standard 

Operating Procedures 

Air Quality.......................................................................................................... B-1 

Standard Operating Procedures......................................................................... B-1 

Biological Resources ....................................................................................... B-2 

Administrative Actions ........................................................................................ B-2

Standard Operating Procedures......................................................................... B-7 

Cultural Resources ......................................................................................... B-12 

Administrative Actions ...................................................................................... B-12 

Fire Management Response .......................................................................... B-14 

Standard Operating Procedures....................................................................... B-14 

Lake Havasu/Colorado River Regional Management Area ......................... B-15 

Administrative Actions ...................................................................................... B-15 

Land Tenure .................................................................................................... B-16 

Standard Operating Procedures....................................................................... B-16 

Law Enforcement ............................................................................................ B-18 

Standard Operating Procedures....................................................................... B-18 

Mineral Resources .......................................................................................... B-21 

Standard Operating Procedures....................................................................... B-21 

Paleontological Resources ............................................................................ B-23 

Administrative Actions ...................................................................................... B-23 

Public Education and Interpretation ............................................................. B-24 

Standard Operating Procedures....................................................................... B-24 

Rangeland Management/Grazing .................................................................. B-25 

Standard Operating Procedures....................................................................... B-25 

Recreation Management ................................................................................ B-26 

Administrative Actions ...................................................................................... B-26 

Standard Operating Procedures....................................................................... B-37 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-ii

May 2007

Special Designations...................................................................................... B-40 

Administrative Actions ...................................................................................... B-40 

ACECs.................................................................................................... B-40 

Wilderness.............................................................................................. B-41 

Wild and Scenic River Management....................................................... B-41 

Travel Management ........................................................................................ B-41 

Administrative Actions ...................................................................................... B-41 

Standard Operating Procedures....................................................................... B-43 

Visual Resource Management ....................................................................... B-45 

Standard Operating Procedures....................................................................... B-45 

Water Resources............................................................................................. B-46 

Standard Operating Procedures....................................................................... B-46 

Wild Burro Management................................................................................. B-47 

Administrative Actions ...................................................................................... B-47 

Standard Operating Procedures....................................................................... B-47 

Wilderness Characteristics............................................................................ B-48 

Administrative Actions ...................................................................................... B-48 

Standard Operating Procedures....................................................................... B-48 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-1

May 2007

Appendix B 

Administrative Actions and 

Standard Operating Procedures 

This appendix includes Administrative Actions and Standard Operating Procedures by program 

area. The information that follows pertains to BLM-administered public lands in the Lake 

Havasu Field Office area, except as noted. The BLM will maintain the practices, procedures, and 

policies listed below. 

Administrative Actions are not land use plan decisions. However, these are day-to-day nonground disturbing activities and are an important component when considering program activities. 

These activities are often required by FLPMA and do not require NEPA analysis or a written 

decision by a responsible official to be accomplished. Examples include mapping, surveying, 

inventorying, monitoring, and collecting information needed such as research and studies. 

Standard Operating Procedures are based on laws, regulations, executive orders, BLM 

planning manuals, policies, instruction memoranda, and applicable planning documents. 

Air Quality 

Standard Operating Procedures 

The Clean Air Act of 1970 and the 1990 amendments govern air quality. The objective 

of the LHFO air resource program is to maintain and/or improve air quality as established 

by the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, achieve State Implementation Plan goals 

for non-attainment areas, and reduce emissions from point/non-point sources. The 

Mohave Desert Air Quality Management District covers the California lands within the 

planning area. Within Arizona, air quality in various portions of the planning area is 

regulated as follows: 

Open Areas, Dry Washes, and Riverbeds: The control of airborne dust from open 

areas, dry washes, and river beds is addressed in Arizona Rules and Regulations for Air 

Pollution Control, R9-3-404 A-C. 

Roadways and Streets: Regulation R9-3-405 A prohibits the use, repair, building, or 

rebuilding of roadways without taking reasonable dust abatement measures. 

Mineral Tailings: Regulation R9-3-408 addresses prohibition on permitting or allowing 

construction on mineral tailings piles. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-2

May 2007

Fire Management: Regulations R9-3-402 and 403 direct BLM to follow permitting 

procedures before conducting any prescribed burning projects, to ensure that smoke from 

fires does not degrade air quality. Section 118 of the Clean Air Act (49.501 of the 

Arizona Laws Relating to Environmental Quality) charges ADEQ to protect the health 

and welfare of Arizona residents from adverse impacts of air pollution. Those wishing to 

conduct prescribed burns must contact ADEQ. 

Biological Resources 

Administrative Actions 

Vegetation and Riparian Management 

 All riparian areas including springs within the WHAs will be assessed to achieve 

proper functioning condition or desired plant community composition for native 

species (see Maps 6, 7, and 8 in the Approved RMP). 

Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management 

 Mitigate adverse effects on migratory species habitat. 

 Replace the quality and quantity of important migratory bird habitat that is lost due to 

the BLM permitted activities. 

 Initiate, collaborate, and/or support projects related to conservation measures set 

forth in the following plans: the Migratory Bird Executive Order 13186, Arizona

Partners in Flight Bird Conservation Plan, Partners in Flight Desert and Riparian 

Bird Conservation Plans, USFWS North American Waterfowl Management Plan, and 

LCRMSCP.

 Identify potential bird conservation projects and seek grant funding. 

 No net loss of Category I and II Sonoran Desert tortoise habitat. 

 In Category I and II Sonoran Desert tortoise habitat, only range improvements that 

will not conflict with tortoise populations will be allowed (see Map 11 in the 

Approved RMP). 

 Implement and/or support desert tortoise research and studies, especially relating to 

management issues and overall population viability. 

 Manage tortoise habitats using an ecosystem management approach with emphasis 

on maintaining or restoring natural biological diversity. 

 Institute a “no net loss” in quantity or quality of desert tortoise habitat especially in 

Category I and II habitat. 

 Implement conservation strategies and recommendations in the Sonoran Desert 

Tortoise Conservation Strategy (in preparation) by the Arizona Interagency Desert 

Tortoise Team. 

 Recognize Key Habitat Areas designated by the Arizona Interagency Desert Tortoise 

Team and institute Management Actions that protect or enhance the viability of these 

areas.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-3

May 2007

 Develop and implement land acquisitions and disposals strategies that use the best 

available information to provide habitat to sustain viable populations of tortoises 

throughout their range. 

 Enhance and restore habitat corridors that connect significant desert tortoise 

subpopulations.

 Coordinate and support efforts from AGFD and other agencies in the planning and 

implementation of strategies designed for long-term survival of tortoise populations. 

 Incorporate information from current and future research and studies into short-term 

and long-term planning, especially new information on genetics, dispersal corridors, 

connectivity, and population viability. 

 Habitat management categories and boundaries will be revised as new scientific 

population information becomes available. 

 The BLM will address and include restoration measures in decision documents to 

offset the loss of quality or quantity of Category III tortoise habitat. 

 In Category I and II tortoise habitats, all motorized and non-motorized competitive 

events will be restricted between March 31 and October 15; all other use requests 

will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Compensation for conflicts may be 

required to achieve protection of quantity or quality of desert tortoise habitat. 

 Desert tortoise Management Actions appropriate to each category goal will be 

applied to habitat areas, consistent with the current desert tortoise management plan. 

 Provide access to and promote awareness of opportunities for the public participation 

and enjoyment of U.S. recreational fishery resources. 

 Support outreach programs designed to stimulate angler participation in the 

conservation and restoration of aquatic systems. 

 Achieve habitat quality and quantity of riparian areas within the foraging range of 

bald eagles to maintain nesting and wintering birds within the Bill Williams and 

Colorado River drainages (see Maps 7 and 8 in the Approved RMP). 

 Coordinate with the Southwestern Bald Eagle Management Committee to continue 

implementation of the guidelines set forth in the Arizona Conservation Assessment 

and Strategy Plan for the bald eagle in Arizona. 

 Continue to support federal and state agencies efforts to protect and enhance Bald 

eagle breeding areas on all BLM lands. 

 In cooperation with the AGFD, initiate winter bald eagle counts on the Lower 

Colorado River in areas not currently covered by the AGFD. 

 Wildlife habitat improvement projects will be implemented where necessary to 

stabilize or improve unsatisfactory or declining wildlife habitat condition. These 

projects will be identified through habitat management plans (under the Sikes Act), 

Inter-agency cooperative resource management plans (e.g., AGFD, CDFG, USFWS 

plans, etc.), and/or interdisciplinary coordinated resource management plans (e.g., 

ACEC, Wilderness). 

 The BLM will manage fish and wildlife habitats in cooperation with stakeholders to 

sustain diversified multiple-use habitat benefits in the planning area. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-4

May 2007

 Existing aquatic habitat improvements will be monitored periodically to document 

long-term durability and fishery results. 

 The BLM will cooperate with other agencies to actively manage for native fish 

populations and habitat. 

 The facility known as Partners Point will be retained and maintained by the BLM and

cooperating parties to facilitate aquatic habitat management and other BLM 

management requirements. 

Special Status Species Management 

 Comply with Section 7 (a) of the Endangered Species Act by carrying out positive 

actions promoting and the recovery of listed and proposed populations, and by 

assuring that BLM actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of the Mojave 

desert tortoise. 

 Maintain stable, viable populations, and protect existing tortoise habitat values and 

increased populations where possible. Retain all-natural shelter sites, caliche caves, 

or similar features used by Mohave desert tortoises for sheltering and maintain 

unfragmented habitat. 

 When possible employ a precautionary principle in Sonoran desert tortoise habitat 

management using the best available information until site-specific research can be 

conducted.

 To the extent possible avoid and minimize impacts on the Mojave Desert Tortoise 

(LCRMSCP). 

 Protect existing occupied Mohave desert tortoise habitat (LCRMSCP). 

 No disposal of known occupied Mohave desert tortoise habitat. 

 Avoid impacts on individual tortoise and their burrows. 

 Develop increased awareness of tortoise resources on the public lands. 

 Establish manageable boundaries for the two designated OHV areas, Cross Roads 

and Copper Basin. The BLM will survey the OHV area boundaries and record 

unauthorized access into closed areas. If the annual surveys indicate that current 

boundary management is not preventing access into protected Mojave Desert tortoise 

habitat, more secure boundary management such as fencing will be implemented. 

 Assure that all personnel working within desert tortoise habitat on public lands are 

knowledgeable about the tortoise and its resource. 

 Develop a strong awareness of tortoises and their habitats, particularly in the BLM 

planning, environmental assessment and budget processes. 

 Record and document all Mojave Desert tortoise sightings (tortoises and sign) into 

appropriate special status species databases for future work. 

 Provide and protect adequate habitat and sufficient range for all life stages of 

endangered fish to support survival of recovering populations. 

 Investigate habitat requirements for all bonytail chub and razorback sucker life stages 

and provide those habitats where feasible. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-5

May 2007

 Minimize the risk of hazardous materials spills and/or releases by BLM approved 

activities.

 Provide leadership to cooperatively quantify water-quality problems and affect longterm improvement. 

 Provide for the long-term management and protection of bonytail chub and razorback 

sucker populations and their habitats beyond delisting (i.e., conservation plans). 

 Minimize the threats and adverse impacts to the bonytail chub and their habitats. 

 Participate in an education program to increase public awareness of bonytail chub 

and razorback sucker.

 Participate with other agencies in the recovery, conservation, research, management 

and monitoring activities. 

 Provide leadership with other agencies to ensure adequate protection from overutilization of identified bonytail chub and razorback sucker habitat. 

 Minimize the threats and adverse impacts to the razorback sucker and their habitats. 

 Aggressively work with all federal agencies to identify and minimize conflicts 

between recreational fisheries and their respective responsibilities under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973. 

 Preserve and maintain breeding habitat to support populations of Yuma Clapper Rail 

within Lake Havasu Field Office. 

 Maintain existing important YCR habitat areas. 

 Preserve winter habitat of the Yuma Clapper Rail within the Lake Havasu Field 

Office.

 Carry out a program of public conservation, education, and planning directed towards 

preservation of rail habitat. 

 Avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate to the extent possible disturbance in occupied 

Yuma clapper rail territories during the breeding and molting seasons (March 15-

September 1). 

 Assure implementation of laws, policies, and agreements that benefit the flycatcher. 

 To the extent practical, avoid and minimize disturbance of the Southwestern willow 

flycatcher during the breeding season (May 1 through September 30). 

 Review and evaluate existing USFWS riparian restoration programs within the Lake 

Havasu Field Office to determine how these programs may be modified to maximize 

conservation for the SWWF. 

 Avoid intense and repeated human disturbance from Western yellow-billed cuckoo 

nesting areas especially from May 20 through September 1. 

 Increase cooperation between state and federal agencies and private organizations 

regarding Western yellow-billed cuckoo habitat. 

 Establish riparian corridors and “island” habitats to allow natural dispersal and 

recolonization of historic Western yellow-billed cuckoo habitats. 

 Establish areas near existing Western yellow-billed cuckoo occupied habitat for 

restoration, before focusing on areas further away. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-6

May 2007

 Apply the conservation measures for Southwestern willow flycatcher for potential or 

suitable Western yellow-billed cuckoo habitat. 

 Removal of state-listed protected plants will be in accordance with state law and will 

only be authorized through state permit. Additional restrictions will include: 

collection within a sample population will not exceed 20% (Way et al. 2002) of any 

one species, and collection of dead and down ironwood and cactus skeletons under a 

state permit will be limited to an approximate combined weight not to exceed 

10 pounds per year. 

 Natural open space will be maintained for special status species (e.g., burrowing owls 

and other migratory species) in the planning for new facility development and these 

species will be considered when issuing authorizations for public lands. 

 The BLM will cooperate with other authorities in the recovery strategies found in the 

Management Plan for the Big-River Fishes of the Lower Colorado River Basin, as 

approved in 2005. 

 Management strategies intended to contribute to and assist with basin-wide 

recovery of the bonytail chub, razorback sucker, and other endangered fishes of 

the Lower Colorado River will be adopted. 

 Acquisition of non-federal lands will be prioritized based on the potential to enhance 

the conservation and management of threatened or endangered species habitat, 

riparian habitat, desert tortoise habitat, key big game habitat, or improve the overall 

manageability of wildlife habitat. 

 Based on changes in species density and/or habitat quality Sonoran Desert tortoise 

habitat will be compensated in accordance with the Management Plan for the 

Sonoran Desert Population of the Desert Tortoise in Arizona 1996 or future updates. 

 The BLM will cooperate with other agencies to actively manage, protect, and/or 

improve special status species habitat to maintain and/or increase populations to 

achieve common goals and objectives. Wildlife habitat, both aquatic and terrestrial, 

will be managed in cooperation with the state and federal wildlife agencies and other 

interested parties to conserve or improve the habitat of all sensitive species, all native 

species, and those resident species that have recreational value. 

 Conduct surveys in all Mojave Desert tortoise habitats in the planning area to 

determine population density estimates. Coordinate with the survey protocols being 

evaluated and developed by the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan Assessment 

Committee, to determine which survey protocol will be most appropriate for this 

area.

Invasive or Noxious Species Management 

 The BLM will cooperate on a landscape basis with other authorities to educate the 

community to the risks to the environment from invasive and noxious species. In 

cooperation with other authorities the BLM will research the means of control, 

monitor the resources affected, and implement control actions when needed. 

Riparian, wetland areas, shoreline, and all springs (see Maps 7 and 8 in the Approved 

RMP) will be evaluated and invasive or noxious species will be eradicated if 

possible. Areas from which the invasive or noxious species are removed will 

subsequently be re-vegetated with suitable bank-stabilizing species. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-7

May 2007

 To help stop the spread of invasive or noxious weeds, the BLM will provide 

educational material to equestrian users on the use of certified weed-free hay, straw, 

pellets, hay cubes, and processed grains. 

Watershed Management 

 Identify recreational fishing opportunities that are limited by water quality and 

habitat degradation and promote restoration to support viable, healthy, and, where 

feasible, recreational fisheries. 

 The BLM will work with local agencies and private entities through public outreach 

to minimize the risk of hazardous spills that occur on BLM lands. Operations to 

assure that the Colorado River meets water quality standards for fish and wildlife 

species will be actively reviewed. 

 The BLM will coordinate and collaborate in the management of the Bill Williams 

River below Alamo Dam with neighboring landowners and appropriate state and 

federal agencies to sustain the river flow, vegetation and wildlife diversity, and wild 

and scenic outstandingly remarkable values. 

 The BLM will cooperate with appropriate interests to develop a cooperative 

watershed program to assure the use of best management practices in the watershed 

to safeguard against pollutant sediments degrading aquatic habitat conditions. 

 The BLM will quantify, file for, and protect water rights, including those for instream 

flows, on streams, springs, and other water sources important to wildlife, fish, and 

riparian values. 

Standard Operating Procedures 

The LHFO planning area provides unique habitat for federally listed and special status 

species. This diversity of habitats also supports a wide variety of more common game 

and non-game fish and wildlife species. If not properly managed, other uses of the public 

lands can damage wildlife habitat. The BLM’s Fundamentals of Rangeland Health 

(43 CFR 4180) addresses habitats that have been restored or may make significant 

progress towards restoration, as well as those that are actively being maintained for 

federally listed threatened, endangered, proposed, and candidate species, and other 

special status species. The BLM Arizona’s Standards for Rangeland Health include 

provisions for ensuring that productive and diverse upland and riparian wetland plant 

communities of native species exist and are maintained. 

No activities or projects that would jeopardize the continued existence of federally listed 

threatened or endangered plant or wildlife species, or species proposed for listing (see 

table 3-3), will be permitted on BLM-administered lands. 

Vegetation and Riparian Management 

Standard operating procedures and treatment methods will be used in a vegetation 

treatment program. BLM policies and guidance for public land treatments will be 

followed in implementing all treatment methods. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-8

May 2007

 Impacts to vegetation from construction, recreation, and other activities will be 

minimized or avoided. Unavoidable impacts will be mitigated. Where impacts to 

vegetation occur beyond approved boundaries, vegetative rehabilitation with suitable 

seed mix or root stock will follow. 

 Where plants will normally be lost due to development or disturbance of public land, 

salvage of useable native plants and parts of plants will be permitted. Plants and 

parts of plants will be removed from public land pursuant to applicable state law and 

federal regulations governing sale and/or transportation of plants. 

 All future activity-level plans will identify desired plant communities on a site-bysite basis. Existing and potentially suitable riparian habitat will be occupied by 

native trees and other woody species. Available and current information will be 

utilized (e.g., National Resource Conservation Service site guides). 

 Riparian, wetland areas, and all springs will be evaluated and rehabilitated to achieve 

proper functioning condition. 

 Practice will continue to adhere to the guidelines provided in BLM Manual 

Handbook H-1740-1, Renewable Resource Improvement and Treatment Guidelines 

and Procedures (1987). 

 Programmatic documents such as the BLM’s Environmental Impact Statement for 

Vegetation Treatments, Watersheds and Wildlife Habitats on Public Lands

Administered by the BLM in the Western United States, Including Alaska (1991) will 

be followed as will other general and specific program policy. 

 Management and implementation of all resource programs will comply with the 

Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing Administration 

(1997).

 The desired plant community standard for upland sites will provide native vegetation 

for adequate wildlife habitat and improved watershed function based on monitoring 

and ecological site potential. Upland sites include 5% or greater dry-weight 

composition of native perennial grass, as limited by the potential of the ecological 

site as described by National Resource Conservation Service Ecological Site Guides.

 The desired plant community for upland sites will have long-term, stable populations 

of cacti and agaves where the sites have the potential for such plant communities. 

 The desired plant community standard for riparian areas will consist of streambanks 

dominated (>50%) by native species from the genera Scirpus, Carex, Juncus, and

Eleocharis. The size class distribution of native riparian obligate trees will be >15% 

seedlings, >15% mid-size, and >15% large size (dependent of the existing conditions 

and potential of the site). Size classes are defined as follows: seedlings are < 1 inch 

basal diameter, mid-sizes are 1–6 inches in basal diameter, and large sizes are 

>6 inches in basal diameter. 

 Allowable use livestock grazing within the ranges of the Southwestern willow 

flycatcher will conform to the guidelines described in the “Not Likely to Adversely 

Affect” section of Guidance Criteria for Determinations of Effects of Grazing Permit 

Issuance and Renewal on Threatened and Endangered Species (Bureau of Land 

Management and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona and New Mexico, 1999), 

or any subsequent agreed-upon amendment to these guidelines. 

 Adverse impacts to natural plant and animal communities associated with invasive 

species will be reduced. Efforts to control or eradicate invasive wildlife species will 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-9

May 2007

be carried out in cooperation and collaboration with AGFD. A monitoring, 

management, and educational program will be established to reduce the insurgence of 

plants classified as invasive by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

 The use and perpetuation of native plant species will be emphasized. However, when 

restoring or rehabilitating disturbed or degraded rangelands, non-intrusive, nonnative plant species are appropriate for use where native species: (a) are not 

available, (b) are not economically feasible, (c) cannot achieve ecological objectives 

as well as non-native species, and/or (d) cannot compete with already established 

non-native species. 

 The evaluation of vehicle routes, in conjunction with the route designation process, 

will consider the effect on wildlife habitat values. Routes that conflict with 

maintenance of sensitive wildlife habitat values will be mitigated. Mitigation could 

include, but will not necessarily be limited to: route closure, seasonal use restriction, 

rerouting, vehicle type restrictions, vehicle speed restrictions, or other mitigation 

measures appropriate to the nature of the conflict. 

 Additionally, in coordination with AGFD, the BLM will develop specific drought 

policy for LHFO to address continued livestock grazing impacts on wildlife habitat 

values during drought. This policy will address the need for timely response, 

sufficient vegetation recovery periods, indicators of drought recovery, and 

appropriate Management Actions. 

Vegetation Treatment 

Standard operating procedures and treatment methods will be used in a vegetation 

treatment program. BLM policies and guidance for public land treatments will be 

followed in implementing all treatment methods. Many guidelines are provided in BLM 

Handbook H-1740-1, Renewable Resource Improvement and Treatment Guidelines and 

Procedures (1987); in BLM Arizona’s Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines 

for Grazing Administration (1997); in programmatic documents such as BLM’s 

Environmental Impact Statement for Vegetation Treatments, Watersheds and Wildlife 

Habitats on Public Lands Administered by the BLM in the Western United States, 

Including Alaska (1991); and in other general and specific program policy, procedures, 

and standards pertinent to implementation of renewable resource improvements. The 

manual, chemical, mechanical, biological, and/or fire treatment methods described in 

Appendix F, Vegetation Treatments, would be used for all alternatives. 

Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management 

Fish

In 1993, Lake Havasu Fisheries Improvement Program Environmental Assessment

(No. AZ-050-92-013) approved the enhancement of 875 acres of fish habitat in 42 

separate coves and approved rearing 30,000 endangered razorback sucker and 30,000 

endangered bonytail chub to 300 millimeters in length for population augmentation into 

Lake Havasu. The Environmental Assessment was supported by Yuma RMP decisions 

to improve wildlife habitat where needed. The seven-member Lake Havasu Fisheries 

Improvement Partnership was formed through a Memorandum of Understanding to 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-10

May 2007

accomplish these two decisions and to develop at least six barrier-free shoreline fishing 

facilities on Lake Havasu (Bureau of Land Management 1993a). 

By the end of 2001, a total of 30,017 razorback sucker had been stocked to Lake Havasu, 

and by August 2004 more than 24,000 bonytail chub had been released into the lake. 

Fish habitat improvement goals on Lake Havasu were accomplished in November 2002. 

On December 5, 2003 the Lake Havasu Fisheries Improvement Partnership dedicated the 

fifth barrier-free shoreline fishing facility on Lake Havasu. 

The Lake Havasu Fisheries Improvement Partnership is committed to achieving the 

30,000 bonytail chub stocking goal and constructing the sixth recreational shoreline 

fishing site as soon as possible. The Partnership is also committed verbally to 

maintaining these improvements for public safety and functionality, and to monitoring 

fish populations within the lake to achieve the best possible understanding of population 

dynamics and habitat needs for all fish in the reservoir. 

LHFO/BLM will utilize the following guidance as common to all alternatives: 

 Ensure that all proposed BLM activities and authorizations in the planning area are 

reviewed and conducted in compliance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 

(ESA). Federal and state-listed species and critical habitats are protected by 

requiring site-specific evaluations and clearances. The findings of these evaluations 

may result in mitigation and/or some restrictions to plans or even disallow use and 

occupancy that would be in violation of the ESA by detrimentally affecting 

endangered or threatened species or their habitats. Any action that may affect 

federally listed species also requires consultation with USFWS under Section 7 of 

ESA.

 Provide opportunities for training and utilization of volunteers. 

 Coordinate with state governments, tribes, and other governmental entities (under 

existing agreements and any new arrangements deemed necessary) to disseminate 

and exchange information and cooperate in Management Actions, consistent with 

applicable legal authorities and other directives. 

 Establish collaborative research partnerships with academic institutions, professional 

and non-profit organizations, and other governmental entities. 

 Evaluate needs for new data regarding population, distribution, and habitat 

requirements for special status species. 

 Implement actions identified in recovery plans for listed species and protection of 

critical habitat. Monitoring of bonytail chub and razorback sucker populations will 

be conducted, in cooperation with the Lake Havasu Fisheries Improvement 

Partnership.

 Ensure that decisions are being implemented as scheduled and provide continuing 

evaluation of consistency with state and local plans and programs. 

 Protect water quality to meet federal and state standards, and ensure the needs of fish 

and wildlife resources are met along with the needs of people. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-11

May 2007

Wildlife

Wildlife habitat use of riparian lands is managed in a manner consistent with BLM 

Manual 6740 (Wetland-Riparian Area Protection and Management), Federal floodplain 

management regulations, Reclamation needs, and floodway clearance obligations of the 

International Boundary and Water Commission. 

The State wildlife agencies of California and Arizona establish regulations and 

enforcement concerning fish and wildlife on all lands administered by the LHFO. 

Nothing will be construed as affecting the jurisdiction or responsibilities of the State 

agencies on these lands. Fishing, hunting and trapping are allowable activities on these 

lands.

The BLM will provide diverse and high-quality habitats by restoration and maintenance 

of the native diversity, natural distribution, and abundance of wildlife species within the 

LHFO planning area, with sufficient resources and in a manner that perpetrates naturally 

functioning ecosystem processes. 

The BLM will conserve, enhance, and restore wildlife habitats, including conservation of 

natural springs, wetlands, and streams through cooperative partnerships with the federal, 

state, county, city, and private entities. 

The BLM will identify, minimize, and mitigate for wildlife habitat degradation, loss, and 

fragmentation. 

The BLM will coordinate and cooperate with federal and state agencies, along with 

partners, to assess the need to maintain, improve, and/or adjust the density or distribution 

of wildlife waters throughout the planning area to maintain the presence of water for 

wildlife populations across their range. 

The development of springs and seeps, or other projects affecting water and associated 

resources, will be designed to protect ecological functions and processes and to continue 

to provide habitat at the source for endemic invertebrates that may be present.

Water developments for purposes other than wildlife will include design features that will 

ensure safe and continued access to water by wildlife. 

Special Status Species Management 

Consistent with requirements of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, LHFO 

will continue an active program to benefit endangered species and to ensure that no 

activities funded, authorized, or carried out by the BLM jeopardize the continued 

existence of any listed wildlife species or their essential habitats. The BLM will not 

dispose of lands occupied by species that are listed or proposed to be listed as threatened 

or endangered under the Endangered Species Act. 

The BLM will utilize all means available to identify, protect, and conserve special status 

species habitat, then manage these habitats in consultation with authorities and in 

conformance with recovery and conservation management plans. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-12

May 2007

The BLM will cooperate with other appropriate authorities to achieve desired populations 

for special status species. 

Wind turbines, transmission lines, and telecommunication sites will conform with 

guidelines developed by the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to minimize 

impacts to special status species. 

The BLM will follow the Department of Interior’s Rangewide Plans for Special Status 

Species on Public Lands.

Cultural Resources 

Administrative Actions 

 Design and maintain facilities in a manner that preserves the visual integrity of 

cultural resource settings and cultural landscapes, in accordance with Visual 

Resource Management (VRM) objectives established in this Approved RMP. 

 Avoid the disturbance or removal of Native American human remains and associated 

items to the extent possible. Avoid directing site visitors toward areas where these 

items could be observed or disturbed. 

 Implement physical and administrative protection measures to stop, limit, or repair 

damage and vandalism to sites. On a site-specific basis, these measures may include 

route closures, route realignment, restrictions on grazing or other uses, construction 

of fences or other types of barriers, construction of erosion control measures, 

backfilling or stabilization of structures, or placement of signs. 

 Maintain the placement and condition of fiberglass post signs with the message of the 

Arizona Site Steward Program on sites that are vulnerable to vandalism. Install 

protective signs in a manner that avoids drawing attention to sites. 

 Include stipulations in special recreation permits to ensure that commercial tour 

operations will not damage cultural resources. Require tour operators to report any 

new vandalism or damage to sites. 

 Ensure that all undertakings and authorizations for land and resource use are 

reviewed and conducted in compliance with Section 106 of NHPA, the 

Archaeological Resources Protection Act, the Native American Graves Protection 

and Repatriation Act, and other applicable laws. 

 Complete Class II (sample) and Class III (intensive) field inventories to identify 

cultural resources and evaluate the condition of sites, in accordance with Section 110 

of NHPA. Seek to inventory 100 - 400 acres per year for cultural values. Use the 

information obtained through these archaeological surveys to allocate sites to 

appropriate use categories, develop protection measures, and integrate survey results 

into research designs and interpretation efforts. 

 Complete documentary research and oral histories to gain a better understanding of 

cultural resources associated with homesteading, mining, ranching, and other 

historical period activities. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-13

May 2007

 Establish collaborative research partnerships with academic institutions, professional 

and non-profit organizations, and advocational organizations. Provide opportunities 

for volunteer training and participation in site documentation, research, protection, 

and educational projects. 

 Continue to consult with the Chemehuevi Indian Tribe, Colorado River Indian 

Tribes, Fort Mojave Indian Tribe, Hopi Tribe, Hualapai Tribe, Salt River PimaMaricopa Indian Community, Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe, and other interested 

Indian tribes to identify places of traditional importance and associated access needs. 

Develop measures for management and protection of such places that may be 

identified by tribes during the life of the Approved RMP. 

 Honor tribal requests to protect the confidentiality of sensitive information to the 

extent permitted by law. 

 Restrict public information about the specific locations of sites that are not allocated 

to public use (selected for interpretive and educational uses). 

 Coordinate with state governments, tribes, and other governmental entities (under 

existing agreements and any new arrangements deemed necessary) to disseminate 

and exchange information and cooperate in Management Actions consistent with 

applicable legal authorities and other directives. 

 Provide opportunities for Native American participation in research and 

interpretation.

 Continue to participate in educational outreach efforts that highlight the values of 

cultural heritage resources and the need to protect the resources. 

 Implement procedures for systematic monitoring of all sites developed or authorized 

for public visitation. 

 Require that holders of special recreation permits provide site visitors with 

appropriate educational information on archaeological site etiquette and resource 

conservation.

 Continue support of the Site Steward Program. 

 Develop cultural resource protection systems for selected cultural resources that have 

either a high level of significance or a history of vandalism. 

 Reduce or eliminate indirect impacts of land uses on cultural resources as identified 

through study plots. 

 Provide immediate and long-term in-place preservation and protection of selected 

cultural resources that are threatened or deteriorating. 

 Specific management prescriptions for the sites managed for Traditional Use will be 

developed in consultation with the Indian tribes to which they are culturally 

important. 

 The BLM will identify sacred areas in consultation with Indian tribes and, where 

practicable, limit land uses to those that do not conflict with ascribed values. 

 The BLM will identify sacred areas or sites within the Crossman Peak Natural Scenic 

Area or ACEC in consultation with Indian tribes and, where practicable, limit land 

uses to those that do not conflict with ascribed values. 

 Nominate eligible properties to NRHP. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-14

May 2007

 All previously submitted NRHP nominations will be evaluated, and those that merit 

listing will be resubmitted. 

 Additional sites determined to be significant will be nominated to NRHP. Possible 

sites include petroglyphs, pictographs, previously unidentified intaglios, and large 

habitation sites. 

 Conduct mapping and site documentation prior to interpretive development or use for 

commercial tours to the extent needed to preserve archaeological data, plan for 

interpretive facilities, and provide a baseline condition assessment for monitoring 

changes associated with visitor use. 

 Identify priority areas for inventory. 

 Define priority areas for new field inventories (Section 110 surveys) based primarily 

on imminent threats or land use conflicts in areas having a relatively high probability 

for significant sites. 

 If appropriate and feasible, amend the Recreation and Public Purposes Act (R&PP) 

leases to preserve and protect any identified significant cultural resources. 

In accordance with 60 FR 53194-53195, the BLM will: 

 Limit camping and fires at Swansea Townsite to designated campgrounds.

 Prohibit firewood collection within the town site at Swansea.

 Prohibit driving in Swansea Townsite except on designated open and signed routes. 

Fire Management Response 

Standard Operating Procedures 

The appropriate management response concept represents a range of available 

management responses to wildland fires. Responses range from full fire suppression to 

managing fires for resource benefits (fire use). Management responses applied to a fire 

will be identified in the fire management plans and will be based on objectives derived 

from the area’s land use allocation, as determined in the Arizona Statewide Land Use 

Plan Amendment for Fire, Fuels and Air Quality Management (Bureau of Land 

Management 2003); relative risk to resources, the public, and firefighters; potential 

complexity; and the ability to defend management boundaries. Any wildland fire can be 

aggressively suppressed and any fire that occurs in an area designated for fire use can be 

managed for resource benefits if it meets the prescribed criteria from an approved fire 

management plan. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-15

May 2007

Lake Havasu/Colorado River 

Regional Management Area 

Administrative Actions 

Because of the multi-jurisdictional nature of the issues, and the complexity of 

management on Lake Havasu, the BLM recognized the need for collaboration. However, 

many issues are beyond the scope of this plan. To facilitate regional collaboration, BLM 

identified the Lake Havasu/Colorado River Management Area (see Map 4 in the 

approved RMP). A coordinated Lake Management Plan should be completed for the 

Lake Havasu/Colorado River Regional Management Area that would engage all of the 

involved jurisdictions and stakeholders on a voluntary basis. This plan would be a multiyear, multi-agency coordinated effort with the mission of defining the issues, 

responsibilities, and action items required to maintain a quality lake recreation 

experience, properly functioning habitat (both terrestrial and aquatic), and common 

management relationships and goals among the jurisdictions. This is not plan allocation 

of any sort, nor is it a proposed management action. 

 Consensus will be sought with other jurisdictions and resource stakeholders to 

cooperatively manage the identified area with agreed vision and objectives to foster 

improvement of all resource values. 

 Partners, agencies, and other organizations will cooperate to create dynamic 

management systems for the future of the Lake Havasu/Colorado River Regional 

Management Area. 

 Each resource or resource use, whether part of the social, economic, or environmental 

setting will be given emphasis in the planning and management of the area. 

 The public will see the cooperative management of the area and understand the 

importance of each resource and how the resources and resource uses are inseparably 

intertwined.

 The BLM will work cooperatively with local and regional plans to monitor lake 

issues within the BLM’s authority. 

 Management to provide compatibility across the Lake Havasu/Colorado River 

Regional Management Area will be developed between jurisdictions and will address 

the multitude of issues that affect the region. 

 A strategy will be created that recognizes the importance of each individual resource 

and the strong links among them in maintaining the unique environment. Planning 

concerning this area will be interdisciplinary, cooperative in nature, and provide 

balanced management to specific areas within the Lake Havasu/Colorado River 

Regional Management Area. 

 The creation of a Lake Havasu/Colorado River Regional Management Area board, 

council, and/or friends group will be supported in the interest of gaining partners to 

collaboratively approach the management of the area for the benefit of all resource 

stakeholders
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-16

May 2007

 A communication model (e.g., informational and interpretive media) will be 

fashioned that will address common and needed visitor services across the Lake 

Havasu/Colorado River Regional Management Area and between jurisdictions. 

Land Tenure 

Standard Operating Procedures 

Acquisition

Land and Water Conservation Fund: Congressionally appropriated funds are provided 

for conservation of significant resources within designated project areas. 

Baca Bill: The Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act of 2000, commonly referred to 

as the Baca Bill, amended FLPMA to allow a percentage of receipts from qualifying land 

sales and equalization payments from qualifying exchanges to be returned to the BLM. 

Acquisition of lands using Baca receipts is limited to the purchase of private and state 

parcels within the boundaries of Special Designations (such as, but not limited to ACEC, 

Wilderness, WSA, and Wild and Scenic River etc.) as designated in this Approved RMP. 

Easements: The BLM acquires two basic types of easements: conservation easements 

for the protection of resources and access easements to enhance the ability of the public 

to use and enjoy the public lands. 

Exchanges (43 CFR 2200) are generally undertaken at the request of an external 

customer or proponent. The BLM must make a determination of public interest before 

processing an exchange. The regulations require that an exchange proponent cover at 

least half the processing costs of an exchange if the BLM decides to pursue the action.

Disposal

FLPMA Sales: Sales are discretionary actions undertaken by the BLM either in 

response to a request from an external customer or in furtherance of land use plan 

decisions to dispose of lands no longer needed by the federal government. If a 

determination is made that there are no known mineral values, or where a reservation of 

the minerals to the United States would interfere with or preclude non-mineral 

development and the non-mineral development is a more beneficial use of the land than 

the mineral development, the BLM will not dispose of the surface and mineral estates. 

BLM policy requires the use of competitive sale procedures unless the authorized officer 

determines the public interest will be best served by modified competitive bidding or 

direct (non-competitive) sale. In no case may the lands be sold for less than fair market 

value.

Baca Sales: Baca sales are processed the same as FLPMA sales but the receipts are 

returned to the BLM and can be used for enhancement of resource programs and/or 

purchase of high-value resources. Lands considered Baca sale lands are those that were 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-17

May 2007

identified for disposal by sale in land use plans in place at the passage of the Baca 

Legislation, P.L. 106-248 (July 25, 2000). 

Recreation and Public Purposes (R&PP) Act Patents: R&PP actions are externally 

generated actions typically requested in support of community development. Normally, 

lands are leased until substantially developed as intended, and then a patent can be issued. 

However, in situations where there is potential for contaminants to create a liability for 

the government, lands are transferred without first requiring the lease, and the 

reversionary provision of the transfer is limited to lands that have not been contaminated. 

Even after lands are patented, the BLM has a continuing responsibility for ensuring 

compliance with the terms of the patent. If the patented lands are not used as described in 

the Plan of Development, the land could revert to the U.S. Government. 

Split Estate: Landowners or prospective landowners may request purchase of the 

minerals underlying their surface estate when there are no known mineral values, or 

where the reservation of the minerals interferes with or precludes appropriate nonmineral development and such development is more beneficial use of the land than the 

mineral development. Split estate also occurs when the federal government owns the 

surface and the minerals are owned by a private entity. This type of split estate is 

addressed in the Mineral Resources section of this appendix.

Public lands have potential for disposal when they are isolated and/or difficult to manage. 

Disposal actions are usually in response to a public request or application that results in a 

title transfer, wherein the lands leave the public domain. The lands are sold at their fair 

market value. All public lands will be retained unless specifically identified for disposal. 

Leases/Permits 

BLM will review all leases and permits prior to land use adjustments. 

Withdrawal 

LHFO will continue to review existing withdrawals periodically to ensure that the 

reasons for the withdrawal are still valid and that only the acreage needed is retained in 

withdrawn status. LHFO policy will be to continue to minimize the amount of land 

withdrawn (particularly from mining and mineral leasing) in favor of leases, permits, or 

cooperative use agreements, which are more flexible. 

Use Authorization 

Rights-of-Way 

Under the authority of FLPMA and the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, the LHFO grants 

ROWs and temporary use permits to qualified individuals, businesses, and government 

entities for use of public lands. LHFO processes ROW applications for access, oil and 

gas, pipeline, power line, water line, telephone lines, fiber optic lines, communication 

sites, etc. All ROW applications will continue to receive environmental review on a 

case-by-case basis. The public may use motorized vehicles on existing and future road 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-18

May 2007

ROWs unless they are specially closed by a mitigation stipulation(s) or other designations 

such as ACEC, Wilderness etc. The use of these ROWs does not give the public the right 

to enter or use private property without the permission of the landowner. 

Specific proposals for ROWs within corridors will still be required to go through the 

environmental and permitting process. 

Corridors/Communication Sites 

To the extent possible, new ROWs will be located within or parallel to existing ROWs or 

ROW corridors to minimize resource impacts. Designated corridors will be the preferred 

location for major utility ROWs. 

Leases/Permits

Permits or leases issued under the 43 CFR 2920 regulations will not be issued for less 

than fair market value rent. 

Renewable Energy 

The BLM will consider the need for the production and distribution of energy and the 

need to encourage the development of renewable energy sources. Future applications 

will undergo site-specific environmental analysis as part of the ROW or commercial lease 

process.

Law Enforcement 

Standard Operating Procedures 

LHFO presently has two law enforcement rangers who report to the Field Office 

Manager. The current table of organization approved for LHFO includes one Field Staff 

Ranger and one Field Ranger. 

The priorities of the law enforcement program include drug interdiction, homeland 

security, vandalism, illegal dumping, closure violations, occupancy trespass, wilderness 

violations, camping limit violations, arson, archaeological and historical site damage, 

vegetative damage and theft, OHV use violations, and human-caused wildland fires. The 

majority of the law enforcement activities are associated with the area’s highly active 

recreation program and its year-round visitor use. 

LHFO manages areas of important wildlife habitat that are a primary law enforcement 

concern. The protection of these resources includes monitoring camping activities, 

investigating human-caused wildland fires, enforcing seasonal closures of bighorn sheep 

habitat, and enforcing OHV restrictions. Thefts of cacti occur periodically in the Alamo 

Lake area. LHFO also maintains revegetation sites, habitat mitigation areas, and growout coves for endangered fish. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-19

May 2007

Law enforcement priorities are accomplished by rangers through routine patrols of highuse areas and known locations of repeated violations. Reports of violations by resource 

specialists and the public result in a significant portion of the investigative leads and 

enforcement actions by the ranger staff. 

Numerous other agencies with law enforcement missions cooperate with BLM rangers on 

a wide variety of enforcement actions. These agencies include, but are not limited to, the 

Arizona Department of Public Safety, the California Highway Patrol, Bullhead City and 

Lake Havasu City Police Departments, Mohave and La Paz County Sheriff’s 

Departments, San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department, USFWS, National Park 

Service, AGFD, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and Arizona State 

Parks Department. Reclamation law enforcement authority for all U.S. Bureau of 

Reclamation lands (613 DM 1) has been delegated to the BLM. 

The following topics represent program priorities that are present and of special 

significance to the law enforcement program. The list is not all-inclusive and is subject 

to change as conditions and emphases evolve. 

Employee and Public Safety 

Increased pressure from urban interface, growth in visitor use at recreation sites, and the 

escalation of anti-government sentiment has heightened the awareness of possible 

conflict in the field. 

Confrontations between public land users are becoming more frequent. Gang activities in 

the recreation sites and back country areas have increased as evidenced by incidents of 

vandalism and graffiti at facilities and back country areas, by law enforcement contacts 

and third party reports. Public lands near urban areas provide relative isolation and have 

experienced an increase in criminal activities, including homicides, stolen vehicles, and 

the illegal disposal of household and commercial wastes. 

The Lower Colorado River corridor has received a steady increase in boating and 

camping recreation. This increase has been reflected in a growing number of boating 

accidents and problems related to alcohol and drug use. Increased use of the boat-in 

campsites has significantly increased the number of incidents involving alcohol, drug use, 

and natural resource destruction, requiring response from law enforcement. 

With its warm weather and southern travel route, the Lower Colorado River has a large 

transient population. These individuals commonly have criminal histories and present a 

threat to any public land users who might encounter them. The problem of transients has 

increased in past years in the Lake Havasu City, Needles, and Bullhead City areas. 

Drugs and Controlled Substance Manufacture 

LHFO has not had a significant drug problem relating to public lands. Waste from 

methamphetamine lab operations has been recovered on public lands, and occasional 

reports of marijuana cultivation have been received. In a 5-year period, one such site was 

located. However, the remote nature of the managed lands combined with infrequent 

patrols presents a significant opportunity for drug operations to exist without detection. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-20

May 2007

There is also personal use of drugs by public land users in both developed and 

undeveloped recreation sites within the LHFO management area. This problem is dealt 

with as encountered in the routine ranger patrols of these areas. 

Hazardous Materials 

The BLM will comply with all federal, state, and local environmental, health, and safety 

laws and regulations governing storage, handling, use, and disposal of hazardous 

materials and/or waste. 

BLM employees or the public may encounter solid waste and hazardous materials while 

on BLM-administered lands. Such materials or waste may include clandestine drug lab 

waste, unexploded military ordnance, mining wastes, domestic solid waste dumping, and 

transportation accidents, including hazardous material incidents on ROWs. BLM 

employees who may encounter such situations while in the field will be trained as 

mandated by the BLM and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 

requirements to recognize, retreat, and report any discovery. The BLM will notify state 

and federal agencies responsible for hazardous materials or waste responses and 

cleanups.

 The BLM will educate the public about the risks associated with abandoned mine 

land sites and unexploded ordnance through signs, bulletin boards, and/or kiosks. 

 When the current cleanup of hazardous materials sites is completed including Pacific 

Gas and Electric Company Topock and Big Bend Resort leaking underground storage 

tank, the BLM will continue to monitor sites for residual hazardous conditions as 

needed.

 The BLM will clean up any hazardous materials that are illegally dumped on public 

land.

Abandoned Mine Lands 

As funding is available, the Management Actions listed below will continue: 

 Inventory abandoned mine lands in high-use areas to determine mines that pose the 

greatest risk to public health and safety, and identify the sites that should be closed to 

protect biological and cultural resources. Through the information gathered from the 

inventories, the BLM will attempt to close all mines within 0.25 mile of developed 

recreation areas, campgrounds, access roads, and trails that pose the greatest risk to 

visiting public and mines that have significant cultural and biological resources. 

 Assess the impacts to waters of Arizona and California from abandoned mines, 

tailings, or mineral deposits within 1 mile of surface waters and reclaim sites 

presenting water quality concerns. 

 Method of closure will vary and be identified during site-specific NEPA analysis. 

 LHFO will inspect abandoned mine land sites to identify all physical hazards 

presenting a safety risk to the public and take appropriate action to mitigate any 

hazards.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-21

May 2007

 Take steps to prevent public access to abandoned mine land contaminated areas. 

 Notify the public of the conditions at an abandoned mine land site in close proximity 

to populated areas. 

 Where surveys indicate the potential for important bat habitat, the BLM and its 

partners will take appropriate actions, such as bat gates, to preserve the habitat while 

addressing the public hazards. 

 In cases where abandoned mine land remediation actions may affect biological, 

cultural, or historical resources, the impacts are mitigated by recording the resources, 

relocating the resources, or stabilizing significant resources, consistent with reducing 

the threat to public health and safety. 

Mineral Resources 

Standard Operating Procedures 

Acquired lands (excluding lands acquired by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 

[Reclamation]) will be opened to mineral entry unless critical resource values—including 

but not limited to special status species, eligible archeological sites, riparian habitat—or 

public health and safety require mineral withdrawal. 

Post mining use should be determined by the prevailing land use before the disturbance 

or as deemed appropriate by the authorized officer. 

The BLM will not normally allow mineral material disposal without the surface owner’s 

consent when the BLM owns the mineral estate but not the surface estate. Where private 

surface has been developed for non-mineral use, the BLM will limit or forego mineral 

materials sales and will seek the consent of the surface owner. On split estate lands, the 

BLM will not normally manage for solid mineral development without surface owner 

consent, unless it is determined to be detrimental to the public interest. 

Locatable Minerals 

Regulations contained in 43 CFR 3715 and 43 CFR 3809 provide for the management of 

surface disturbance associated with mineral exploration and development, including 

mining claim use and occupancy. The BLM reviews mining notices and plans in the time 

allotted as identified in the regulations. For notice-level operations, if time permits, a site 

visit will be conducted for lands identified in a mining notice by the geologist and an 

archeologist and biologist, if available. A site visit will always be conducted by the BLM 

during the processing of a Mining Plan of Operations. Mining plans and notice-level 

operations when mining claim occupancy is proposed will be assessed for impacts to 

desert tortoise habitat and will be mitigated to the extent allowable in 43 CFR 3809 

regulations.

Mining plans and notice-level operations when mining claim occupancy is proposed are 

required to have the proper NEPA documentation prepared. The BLM will work with 

operators to ensure that notices and plans are processed efficiently and in a timely 

manner. Reclamation plans and bonds are required for each notice and plan per 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-22

May 2007

regulation. The amount of such bonds is for the full amount required to complete 100% 

of the required reclamation as if the BLM were required to hire independent contractors 

to do the work. 

In addition to the requirements of 43 CFR 3715 and 43 CFR 3809, state and federal laws 

provide for numerous other permits, including but not limited to an Aquifer Protection 

Permit and a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Act (NPDES) permit, both issued 

by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ); a Section 404 permit 

issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and a flood control permit issued by the 

applicable county. Also, Arizona state law requires mining claimants to keep mining 

property in a safe condition. The State Mine Inspector’s office is responsible for 

enforcing this law. The BLM will cooperate with all interested agencies to ensure that 

operations conducted on BLM-administered lands are in full compliance with all federal, 

state, local health and safety, and environmental laws as required by 43 CFR 3715.5. 

All occupancy of mining claims must meet the requirements of 43 CFR 3715 and must 

meet the specific requirements of 43 CFR 3715.2. At a minimum, all occupancies will 

meet the requirements and standard stipulations contained in the BLM Arizona’s 1997 

Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Mining Claim Use and Occupancy.

In designated wilderness, any disturbance greater than casual use will be grounds for 

initiating a validity examination. Mining in wilderness is allowed only on claims with a 

valid discovery and location existing before designation. Before the BLM can approve 

Mining Plans of Operations submitted for work in a designated WA, a BLM mineral 

examiner must verify that a valid claim exists. The mineral examination and mineral 

report must confirm that minerals have been found and the evidence is of such character 

that a person of ordinary prudence would be justified in the further expenditure of her or 

his labor and means with a reasonable prospect of success in developing a valuable mine. 

Saleable Minerals 

The Material Sale Act of 1947 and 43 CFR 3600 provide for the disposal and regulation 

of mineral materials. Mineral material disposals will be administered on a case-by-case 

basis. Saleable minerals are sold at appraised value. Free use permits will continue to be 

issued to state and federal agencies, local communities, and nonprofit organizations as the 

need arises. Compensation will be required for new or expansions of mineral material 

disposal sites within desert tortoise Category I, II, and III habitat. Disposals from lands 

withdrawn or acquired on behalf of BOR are allowed pursuant to a March 25, 1983, 

Memorandum of Understanding between the BLM and Reclamation, which has 

administrative and surface management responsibility for disposal and use of mineral 

materials on project lands. Reclamation also has authority to allocate mineral materials 

for its own use. 

Leasable Minerals 

The Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970, and 43 CFR 3100–

3500 provide the regulatory framework for issuing mineral leases. These regulations 

apply where public interest exists for the development of oil, gas, sodium, potassium, and 

geothermal energy. Where the need is identified in this Approved RMP, stipulations 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-23

May 2007

intended to mitigate impacts to special status species, cultural areas, and other resources 

susceptible to impacts from leasing-related activities will be attached to leases where 

impacts could occur to sensitive species. Site-specific use authorization stipulations to 

protect sensitive resources may be required prior to approval of specific proposals. All 

leases will be subject to the terms and conditions of the standard lease form. 

The BLM will manage leasable minerals on all Reclamation withdrawn and acquired 

lands that are open to the mineral leasing laws. The BLM will request Reclamation’s 

consent and/or comments as to whether leasing is acceptable and, if so, any terms and 

conditions deemed necessary to protect the use for which the lands were withdrawn or 

acquired.

No leasing is permitted on lands with federal surface ownership and state or private 

subsurface ownership. If subsurface ownership is acquired, the lands will become 

available to leasing subject to the same stipulations that are placed on the surrounding 

lands.

Lands with state or private surface ownership and federal subsurface ownership are open 

to leasing. In such cases, the BLM requests the lessees to indicate that they have reached 

an agreement with the surface owners prior to entertaining these lands for oil and gas 

exploration or development activities. 

Lands that have been segregated from entry prior to disposal (e.g., R&PP lease and/or 

patent or sales) are open to oil and gas leasing unless specifically restricted in their 

classification. 

Paleontological Resources 

Administrative Actions 

 When evaluating proposed actions on public lands, apply the following goals and 

objectives:

 Identify areas and geological units (e.g., formations, members) containing 

paleontological resources. 

 Evaluate the potential of these areas to contain vertebrate fossils or noteworthy 

invertebrate or plant fossils. 

 Develop management recommendations (including mitigation measures in 

specific locations) to promote the scientific, educational, and recreational uses of 

fossils on public lands. 

 Develop a monitoring program on public lands where important paleontological 

localities have been identified. 

 The BLM will identify and protect significant fossil resources and allow for scientific 

research at paleontological sites, in accordance with the applicable permitting 

procedures.

 The BLM will include paleontological resources in its cultural resources public 

education programs. These programs will provide information directly related to 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-24

May 2007

procedures to be followed if fossilized items are found, and will specify fines for 

removing fossilized items from BLM-administered lands. 

 Newly identified vertebrate localities will be evaluated to assess their importance and 

the potential threat of loss. These findings will be used to determine an adequate 

monitoring program. 

 A records search for paleontological resources will be conducted on all major land 

use actions as appropriate. Surveys prior to, or monitoring during, ground-disturbing 

land uses will be conducted as necessary to protect significant paleontological values. 

 The BLM will survey for paleontological resources in Class 4 areas as funding 

becomes available. 

 The Golden Shores mammoth site will be monitored annually. Other localities with 

scientifically important fossils will be monitored annually or as needed to address 

potential threats. 

 Preserve and protect scientifically significant paleontological resources for scientific, 

educational, and recreational uses. 

 Ensure that all land use authorizations consider and are consistent with objectives for 

proactive use of scientifically significant paleontological resources. 

Public Education and Interpretation 

Standard Operating Procedures 

General information on the planning area may be obtained from LHFO. Some 

information is also presented in cooperatively funded maps and brochures. Supplies of 

brochures at visitor centers vary throughout the year. The current trend is to scan all 

brochures and maps onto computers, allowing information to be printed from computer 

web sites to replace material traditionally printed. The public is increasingly accessing 

these sites. The public generates significant amounts of information on the planning area 

through internet sites, guide books, and other publications. The exact amount, accuracy, 

or contents of such information is unknown, nor is it known if this information supports 

management objectives. 

The public may also obtain OHV maps and general guides by mail or by picking up 

copies at LHFO, which is located at 2610 Sweetwater Avenue, Lake Havasu City, 

AZ 86406. Brochures or maps are occasionally available at the historic Swansea 

Townsite or given out by volunteers. The main information source for most visitors to 

the planning area consists of displays on kiosks. 

LHFO presents informal and formal interpretive/educational programs for schools, 

universities, professional, and other groups. Often the requesting parties are professional 

organizations conducting seminars, field trips, or large conferences. Many informal 

requests for presentations are received with little notice, and BLM specialists may deliver 

formal or informal presentations depending on the time available for preparation. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-25

May 2007

Rangeland Management/Grazing 

Standard Operating Procedures 

Desired plant community objectives will be quantified for each allotment through the 

rangeland monitoring and evaluation process. Ecological site descriptions available 

through the National Resource Conservation Service and other data will be used as a 

guide for addressing site capabilities and/or potentials for change over time. These 

desired plant community objectives are vegetative values that the BLM is managing over 

the long term. Once established, desired plant community objectives will be updated and 

monitored based on indicators for Land Health Standard 3. This standard is derived from 

the Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health, developed through a collaborative process 

with the Arizona Resource Advisory Council, and identifies the characteristics of and 

management actions needed to promote and sustain healthy ecosystems on public lands. 

Monitoring studies will be used to determine conformance with the Arizona Standards 

for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing Administration. Monitoring studies 

generally include actual use, utilization, trend, and climate. The three management 

categories will be used to set priorities. These studies will be analyzed through the 

evaluation process to determine management actions needed to achieve standards and 

meet multiple-resource management objectives. 

Typical Range Improvements 

Following is a discussion of typical design features, construction practices, and 

implementation procedures for range improvements that could be constructed. The 

extent, location, and timing of such actions will be based on allotment-specific 

management objectives adopted through the evaluation process, interdisciplinary 

development and analysis of proposed actions, and funding. 

Fences 

All new fences will be built to BLM manual specifications. Fences will normally be 

constructed to provide exterior allotment boundaries, divide allotments into pastures, 

protect streams or other riparian areas, and control livestock. Most fences will be threewire or four-strand with steel posts spaced 16.5 feet apart with intermediate wire stays. 

Existing fences that create wildlife movement problems will be modified. Proposed 

fence lines will usually not be bladed or scraped. Gates or cattle guards will be installed 

where fences cross existing roads. 

All new or reconstructed fences in big game habitat, including desert bighorn sheep 

habitat, will meet specifications in BLM Handbook 1741-1 or be designed to allow for 

the movement of big game, including desert bighorn sheep. The BLM will consult with 

AGFD on the design and location of new fences. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-26

May 2007

Pipelines 

Wherever possible, water pipelines will be buried. The trench will be excavated by a 

backhoe, ditch witch, or similar equipment. Plastic pipe will be placed in the trench and 

the excavated material will be used to backfill. Most pipelines will have water tanks 

spaced as needed to achieve proper livestock distribution. 

Reservoirs

Stock pond sites will be selected based on available watershed and hydrologic 

information. All applicable state laws and regulations will be followed. 

Wells

Well sites will be selected based on geologic reports that predict the depth to reliable 

aquifers. All applicable state laws and regulations that apply to groundwater will be 

observed.

Supplemental Feed Authorization 

Supplemental feed must be authorized in advance. Supplemental feed means a feed that 

supplements the forage available from the public lands and is provided to improve 

livestock nutrition or rangeland management. 

If used, salt should be placed at least 0.25 mile from water sources to disperse impacts. 

Management actions outlined in the Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health and 

Guidelines for Grazing Administration will be applied to identify and correct potential 

erosion problems that could negatively impact other resources. Prioritized emphasis will 

be placed on those sites that might directly impact species that have been listed as 

threatened, endangered, or candidate species by USFWS. 

Recreation Management 

Administrative Actions 

 On-the-ground presence will be used to provide the delivery of visitor services, 

information, interpretation, and stewardship as a tool to protect public land resources. 

 Coordination will be conducted with general public, federal and state agencies, 

county and local governments, and Tribes in recreation planning and travel 

management. Working partnerships will be developed and sustained to this end. 

 “Tread Lightly, and Leave No Trace” travel and camping techniques will be 

encouraged throughout the lands managed by LHFO. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-27

May 2007

 All recreational shooting-related materials will be required to be removed upon 

competition of the activity. In addition, paintball ammunition must be classified 

biodegradable by the manufacturer. 

 Organized, competitive, and/or commercial specialized vehicle recreation activities 

will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis as part of an SRP process. 

Activity Planning Framework 

An activity planning framework outlines the direction and essential structure to attain 

management objectives and setting prescriptions for the ERMA and SRMA (with RMZs) 

identified in this plan. This guidance is intended to provide over-arching direction to 

future activity level plans that will be developed to implement the Approved RMP. This 

conceptual framework covers Management, Marketing, Monitoring, and Administrative 

measures to be addressed. 

Lake Havasu Field Office Extensive Recreation Management Area 

An activity level plan will not be written for the ERMA. Rather the LHFO will follow 

the structure established below to maintain the continuity of prescriptions found in the 

Prescribed Recreation Settings (see Map 20 in the Approved RMP). These actions are 

common to all of the ERMA unless otherwise noted. 

Management: 

 LHFO will limit management to custodial actions that would improve visitor safety 

and decrease user and resource conflicts. 

 Recreational opportunities and benefits will be maintained to meet the specific ROS 

settings as inventoried. 

 BLM may develop facilities such as trailheads, parking areas, bulletin boards, trails, 

and/or restrooms, consistent with public demand and as long as the action is 

environmentally sound and appropriate to the ROS setting. 

Marketing: 

 Focus visitor information services and products on dispersed recreation opportunities, 

resource protection, and public safety. 

 LHFO will incorporate “Tread Lightly” and/or “Leave No Trace” programs in all 

visitor related media. 

Monitoring: 

 ERMA will be monitored to insure that the environmental prescriptions and social 

outcomes are being met for the specific ROS settings previously inventoried. 

 Monitoring will be done by BLM staff through observations/studies of environmental 

conditions and by visitor service personal contacts with public land users. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-28

May 2007

Administrative:

 Visitors will realize the experience and benefits of the ERMA with little on site 

management controls and services other than signing for route designation and 

resource protection. 

 Organized, competitive, and/or commercial specialized vehicle recreation activities 

will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis as part of an SRP process. 

Colorado River Nature Center Special Recreation Management Area 

An inter-disciplinary and -agency activity level plan will be developed for the SRMA 

covering the River Side and Southern Bluff RMZs. The River Side RMZ will be 

managed consistently with AGFD’s property along the river, west of the RMZ. The 

following actions are common to all RMZs unless otherwise noted. 

Management: 

 Make local partnerships a high priority to develop and maintain the SRMA. 

 Work with AGFD to create ponds/wetland areas. 

 Maintain the SRMA as day-use area. 

 Develop and maintain nature trails, which provide for public education, use and 

protect resources within the SRMA. 

 Limit vehicle use to one maintained access route in River Side RMZ and only 

administrative use of routes in the Southern Bluff RMZ. 

 Rehabilitate closed roads that have no administrative benefits in the Southern Bluff 

RMZ.

 Contain parking facilities and roadways to prevent encroachment. 

Marketing: 

 Develop comprehensive interpretive plan, which includes all aspects of 

interpretation, education, and public outreach. 

 Strive to involve user groups, volunteers, and other interested members of the public 

to help maintain resources through partnerships, adoption programs, special events, 

and/or a “friends group.” 

 Work with AGFD and Bullhead City to create on-site interpretive media within River 

Side RMZ. 

 Work with local schools and teachers to create materials and/or curriculum to be used 

when visiting the nature center. 

Monitoring: 

 Assure objectives are being met and setting prescriptions are maintained. 

 Monitor implemented actions and evaluate effectiveness. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-29

May 2007

 Monitoring will be done by observations and visitor service personnel contacts with 

users.

 Evaluations by the partners will, at minimum, be done annually or as needed. 

Administrative:

 The BLM in collaboration with partners will establish a strong visitor services 

presence within the SRMA. 

 Work with Bullhead City Police, Mohave County Sheriff to assure the public safety 

is maintained within the SRMA. 

Lake Havasu Special Recreation Management Area 

A multi-jurisdictional cooperative management plan will be written for the LHSRMA 

and the eight associated RMZs (Whipple Mountains, North Aubrey, Aubrey Hills, AZ 

Shoreline, Havasu Springs, CA Shoreline, North Lake Havasu, and South Lake Havasu). 

Partnerships and collaboration with other jurisdictions on the lake including but not 

limited to the U.S. Coast Guard, County Sheriffs, BOR , ADGF, tribes and other federal, 

state and local entities will be sought to improve recreational management of the lake for 

sustainable environmental health and customer satisfaction. The following actions are 

common to all RMZs unless otherwise noted. 

Management: 

 Make local partnerships a high priority to develop and maintain the SRMA. 

Including working with Tri-State Water Ways Inter-agency Group and the Lake 

Havasu Fisheries Partnership to meet management objectives for the SRMA. 

 The BLM will, when practical, implement agreements with other political entities or 

private sector operators for the shared installation, operation, or maintenance of new 

developed recreation facilities under conditions appropriate to its agency mission and 

consistent with public demand. 

 On the AZ Shoreline RMZs, additional facilities could only be developed where there 

is a public demand and where the actions are environmentally sound and meet the 

ROS setting, experiences and benefits (DFC) set for the specific RMZs in the 

Approved RMP. On the CA Shoreline RMZs facilities will only be considered as a 

tool to manage user conflicts, protect natural resources, and assure public safety. 

 The BLM will identify, with signs and maps, those areas of undeveloped shoreline 

were camping will be allowed. Campfire rings will not be allowed and fires limited 

to developed sites where barbeques are provided. 

 The BLM will continue leadership of the Lake Havasu Fisheries Improvement 

Partnership, aiming to cooperatively manage the diverse, and healthy native and sport 

fishery, while working to maintain and enhance free public shoreline angling access. 

 Shoreline development will be through a coordinated approach, reviewed and 

approved through the Bureau of Reclamation to ensure compatibility with Parker 

Dam and Lake Havasu project’s uses as well as the Lower Colorado River Multiple 

Species Conservation Program.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-30

May 2007

 Develop and maintain non-motorized trails in the North Aubrey and Aubrey Hills for 

non-motorized recreational opportunities near an urban area. This would include a 

trail that would connect BLM Lands with Lake Havasu City Parks, State Parks 

Lands, and the Wildlife Refuges. 

 Restore closed roads that have no administrative benefits with in North Aubrey, 

Aubrey Hills, and Whipple Mountains RMZs. 

 Information and orientation materials dealing with recreation, maps, safety, and 

resource concerns will be posted on kiosks located at all primary access points and at 

critical areas within the SRMA. 

 Increase law enforcement patrols on the Lake during high use weekends and periods. 

 The BLM, in collaboration with partners, will establish a strong visitor services 

presence within the SRMA. Example: Visitors will see park rangers, maintenance 

workers, and law enforcement officers on a regular basis. Visitor services will be 

provided in accordance with desired ROS settings. 

 The BLM will continue leadership of the Lake Havasu Fisheries Improvement 

Partnership, and will continue to support the five existing handicapped-accessible 

shoreline fishing facilities constructed on Lake Havasu, plus those yet to be 

constructed. The five facilities are Mesquite Bay, Site Six, Bill Williams Refuge, 

Havasu Springs Resort, and Take-off Point. 

Marketing: 

 Develop comprehensive interpretive plans that will provide a unified interagency 

approach to all aspects of interpretation, education, and public outreach. 

 Provide high profile presence on the lake, through the use of visitor contact 

areas/facilities. Including use of mobile contact stations such as boats or trailers 

during high use periods. 

 Strive to involve user groups, volunteers, and other interested members of the public 

to help maintain resources through partnerships, adoption programs, special events, 

and/or a “friends group.” 

 Information and orientation materials dealing with recreation, maps, safety, and 

resource concerns will be posted on kiosks located at all primary access points and at 

critical areas within the SRMA. 

Monitoring: 

 In coordination with multi-jurisdictional partners, the BLM will participate in formal 

visitor demand, satisfaction, use, and preference surveys. 

 Resources will be evaluated to ensure that there be no net loss of quality regarding 

the recreation or natural resources that provide the targeted benefits and opportunities 

using the date of the adoption of this plan as a baseline. 

 Maintenance of resource and recreational benefits sustainability shall be paramount 

in all monitoring activities. 

 Monitoring will be accomplished formally using the best available science and 

techniques.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-31

May 2007

 At least on a monthly basis monitoring of all developed sites will be accomplished by 

staff to assure site conditions meet public health and safety requirements. 

 In coordination with multi-jurisdictional partners, the BLM will participate in natural 

resource monitoring activities and share that information in formal and informal 

cooperative groups to better understand “health of the river” objectives and 

applicable laws. 

Administrative:

 The BLM, in collaboration with partners, will establish a strong visitor services 

presence within the SRMA. 

 Work with law enforcement agencies with jurisdiction on the lake to assure the 

public safety is maintained within the SRMA. 

 Use thresholds will be determined from research and monitoring. Actions such as 

closures and use allocation will be considered to maintain sustainability of both the 

recreational opportunities and of natural resource condition. 

 The BLM will charge a day use/camping fees for BLM-developed sites within the 

area.

 The BLM will work to coordinate the fee structure and collections with other 

agencies, primarily Arizona State Parks within the Lake Havasu SRMA. 

 The BLM will work to coordinate organized events with partners. The BLM will 

require special recreational permits (SRPs) for organized events and activities that 

impact public lands comprising the lake bottom and shoreline. 

Parker Strip Special Recreation Management Area 

The 1993 Parker Strip Recreation Management Plan will be updated to assure that the 

SRMA with its three RMZs (Parker Strip Urban, Crossroads and Copper Basin, and the 

Parker Strip Backcountry) complies with the Approved RMP. The BLM, working 

closely with concessionaires, will ensure that the Plan’s objectives are being met. Listed 

below are only those implementation actions that are not covered by the current plan. 

These actions are common to all RMZs unless otherwise noted. 

Management: 

 The BLM will, when practical, implement agreements with other political entities or 

private sector operators for the shared installation or operation of new developed 

recreation facilities under conditions appropriate to its agency mission and consistent 

with public demand. All new concession facilities will be limited to east of the Back 

Country Byway. 

 The Parker Strip RMZ will be managed to provide a full array of facilities striving to 

meet the targeted benefits and desired outcomes for both its aquatic and terrestrial 

resources.

 Update the Back Country Byway Kiosks as needed. 

 Manage Parker Strip Backcountry RMZ to provide open space and targeted benefits. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-32

May 2007

 Manage the Crossroads and Copper Basin open areas, in partnership with the 

California State Park’s OHV Grant Programs with an emphasizing responsible OHV 

use, appreciation of natural resource values and public safety. 

Marketing: 

 The Rock House Information Center and Boat Ramp will serve as a central location 

to provide information which will help enhance the physical, social and a recreational 

setting for the wide spectrum of Parker Strip visitors. 

 Pursue local partnerships and cooperate with local agencies, chambers of commerce, 

and concessionaires to market the recreation opportunities in the Parker Strip RMZ to 

local, regional, national, and international visitors. 

Monitoring: 

 Monitoring will be performed by evaluating visitor use through traffic counters, 

recreation use permits, amount and types of revenue generated, and observations by 

site host volunteers, LE rangers, recreation and maintenance staff. 

 Employ visitor demand and preference surveys for visitors and concession customers 

to determine their level of satisfaction with existing facilities. 

Administrative:

 The BLM, in collaboration with partners, will establish a strong visitor services 

presence within the SRMA. 

 Continue to manage concessionaires through existing use authorizations. Maintain 

the front country experience through the use of law enforcement, visitor services, and 

fees.

 Coordinate with the San Bernardino County Sheriffs office on issues and concerns 

relating to public safety. 

Gibraltar Special Recreation Management Area 

The 2001 Gibraltar Mountain Interdisciplinary Plan will be updated to ensure that the 

total SRMA with its five RMZs (Gibraltar Wilderness, Cienega, Shea Hills, Buckskin 

Mesa, and the Shea Road/Osborne Wash RMZs) comply with Approved RMP decisions. 

Portions of the Shea Road/Osborne Wash were not covered in the planning area for 

Gibraltar Mountain Interdisciplinary Plan. These actions are common to all RMZs unless 

otherwise noted. 

Management: 

 Make local partnerships a high priority to develop and maintain the SRMA. 

 The BLM will continue to maintain bulletin boards and kiosks containing maps and 

information on natural, cultural, historical, and local features as well as public safety. 

Locations would be near main intersections, remote recreation areas, and popular 

sites.

 Maintain wilderness boundary signs and maps. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-33

May 2007

 Manage Shea Road/Osborn Wash RMZ for intensive OHV and dispersed camping. 

 The BLM will clearly establish the boundaries of Shea Road/Osborn Wash RMZ to 

contain OHV “freeplay” use to within the RMZ. 

 The BLM will establish non-motorized trailheads to discourage vehicle trespass into 

the Wilderness Area or the Wilderness Study Area. 

 If use analysis determines that visitor levels have increased and that dispersed 

camping presents significant conflicts with other resource values, the BLM may 

develop campgrounds or designate camping sites within the SRMA to manage those 

conflicts.

Marketing: 

 Will be directed to local/regional users. 

 The BLM, in collaboration with partners, will establish a strong visitor services 

presence within the Gibraltar SRMA. Example: Visitors will see park rangers, 

maintenance workers, and law enforcement officers on a regular basis. Visitor 

services will be provided consistent with the ROS setting, experiences and benefits 

(DFC) set for the specific RMZs in the Approved RMP. 

 The BLM will provide a presence in Shea Road/Osborne Wash RMZ during high use 

periods through the use of mobile contact stations. 

 Strive to involve user groups, volunteers, and other interested members of the public 

to help maintain resources through partnerships, adoption programs, special events, 

and/or a “friends group.” 

 Information and orientation materials dealing with recreational, maps, safety, and 

resource concerns will be posted on kiosks located at all primary access points and at 

critical areas within the SRMA. 

Monitoring: 

 Monitoring will be done by observations and visitor service contacts with users. 

 Resources will be evaluated to ensure that there be no net loss of quality regarding 

the recreation or natural resources that provide the targeted benefits and opportunities 

using the date of the adoption of this plan as a baseline. 

 At a minimum OHV use will be monitored monthly and more frequently if 

necessary, during the high use period. 

Administrative:

 The BLM in collaboration with partners will establish a strong visitor services 

presence within the SRMA. 

 Coordinate with the La Paz County Sheriffs Office on matters relating to public 

safety within this SRMA. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-34

May 2007

Havasu Urban Special Recreation Management Area 

An inter-disciplinary activity level plan will be written for Crossman Peak ACEC and 

this SRMA covering the three RMZs (Standard Wash, Crossman Peak, and Havasu 

Urban Interface). These actions are common to all RMZs unless otherwise noted. 

Management: 

 A task force of stakeholders will be established to coordinated an approach to 

managing the Havasu Urban SRMA to maintain the Lake Havasu view shed and 

desired ROS setting, experiences and benefits (DFC) set for the specific RMZs in the 

Approved RMP. 

 The BLM will, when practical, implement agreements with other political entities or 

private sector operators for the shared installation or operation of new developed 

recreation facilities under conditions appropriate to its agency mission and consistent 

with public demand. 

 The BLM will maintain bulletin boards and kiosks containing maps and information 

on natural, cultural, historical, and local features as well as public safety. Locations 

will be near main intersections, and remote popular recreational sites. 

 The BLM near developed communities will increase signage and enforcement of 

pertinent laws and regulations to manage camping and other recreation use. 

 Uncontrolled recreational shooting within the SRMA will be discouraged though 

increased patrols and ethics programs. 

 Implementation-level planning will make determinations as to where specific trails, 

trailheads, facilities and kiosks will be needed in conjunction with cultural and 

biological resource needs and mitigations. 

 Non-motorized use will be encouraged within the SRMA, by the establishment of 

trails and trailheads. 

 Dispersed camping will be discouraged with the Havasu Urban Interface RMZ. If 

use analysis determines that levels have increased, and that dispersed camping 

present significant conflicts with other resource values or with local community 

interfaces, the BLM will develop a campground or designate camping sites within the 

SRMA to manage those conflicts. 

Marketing: 

 Marketing will be regional in nature and would be commensurate with the ability of 

the area to maintain its ROS setting and provide the recreational experiences and 

benefits set for each RMZ. 

 Strive to involve user groups, volunteers, and other interested members of the public 

to help maintain resources through partnerships, adoption programs, special events, 

and/or a “friends group.” 

 Information and orientation materials dealing with recreation, maps, safety, and 

resource concerns will be posted on kiosks located at all primary access points and at 

critical areas within the SRMA. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-35

May 2007

Monitoring: 

 Resources will be evaluated to ensure that there be no net loss of quality regarding 

the recreation or natural resources that provide the targeted benefits and opportunities 

using the date of the adoption of this plan as a baseline. 

 Monitoring will be done through observations and by visitor service contacts with 

users.

Administrative:

 The BLM in, collaboration with partners, will establish a strong visitor services 

presence within the SRMA. 

 Coordinate with the Mohave County Sheriffs Office and other local enforcement 

agencies on issues and concerns relating to public safety within this SRMA. 

Plomosa Special Recreation Management Area 

The 1997 La Posa Interdisciplinary Management Plan covered much of the area within 

this SRMA. This plan will be used as a framework, and updated to ensure that the 

SRMA with its three RMZs (Back Country Byway, Plomosa Mountains, and Bouse 

Plain) comply with the Approved RMP. These actions are common to all RMZs unless 

otherwise noted. 

Management: 

 Co-manage the area with Yuma Field Office to meet DFC set in this Approved RMP 

and goals and objectives set in the 1997 La Posa Interdisciplinary Management Plan. 

 Cooperate with AGFD regarding sensitive species and their habitat. 

 Establish partnerships with La Paz County, the communities of Bouse and Quartzsite 

and others to nominate the Plomosa Road within the Back Country Byway RMZ as a 

Department of the Interior Back Country Byway. 

 Make determinations as to where specific trails, trailheads, facilities and kiosks will 

be needed in conjunction with the proposed Back Country Byway, and cultural and 

biological resource needs and mitigations. 

 Bouse Plain RMZ will continue to provide opportunities for dispersed recreation. 

Marketing: 

 Strive to involve user groups, volunteers, and other interested public to help maintain 

resources through partnerships, adoption programs, special events, and/or a “friends 

group.”

 Marketing will be commensurate with the ability of the RMZ to maintain the 

experience and recreational benefits, which are described in the DFC (Table 2-22 of 

the PRMP/FEIS). 

 Marketing for the Plomosa Road Back Country Byway will be regional in nature and 

in response to local visitation. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-36

May 2007

 In the Plomosa Mountains RMZ, no marketing will be done until use analysis 

determines that levels have increased, that recreation and tourism present significant 

conflicts with other resource values or that unforeseen recreation activities have 

emerged which present unique management challenges. 

 Tread Lightly travel and camping techniques will be encouraged throughout the lands 

managed by LHFO. 

Monitoring: 

 Resources will be evaluated to ensure that there be no net loss of quality regarding 

the recreation or natural resources that provide the targeted benefits and opportunities 

using the date of the adoption of this plan as a baseline. 

 Dispersed camping areas in the Bouse Plain will be monitored for the total number of 

conflicts with other resources and the ability to provide the targeted benefits. 

 Monitoring will be done through observations, visitor service contacts, site stewards, 

AGFD personnel and volunteers and using traffic counters, GPS and photo-telemetry. 

Administrative:

 The BLM, in collaboration with partners, will establish a strong visitor services 

presence within the SRMA, especially with AGFD. 

 Coordinate with the La Paz County Sheriffs Office on matters relating to public 

safety within this SRMA. 

 Swansea Special Recreation Management Area 

The implementation of recreation management for this SRMA will be incorporated into 

the implementation plan for the Swansea Historic District ACEC. The activity planning 

framework for this SRMA also incorporates the 1997 Swansea Historic District Cultural 

Resources Management Plan. These actions are covering all of the SRMA unless 

otherwise noted. 

Management: 

 Additional SRMA facilities will be considered to manage conflicts between visitor 

use and cultural resources or public and/or to maintain the identified recreational 

experiences and benefits for the public. 

 The BLM will continue working with volunteers such as the Friends of Swansea to 

maintain and enhance the cultural resources and educate the public. 

 Temporary closures will be utilized in parts of the Swansea SRMA while 

stabilization/preservation work and maintenance is completed, if necessary, for the 

protection of the work site and/or resources. 

 The current supplemental rules 43 CFR 8365.1-6 part 2 would be maintained, rules 

covering:

 Camping limitations (to developed sites campsites for no more than 3 days). 

 Fire restrictions. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-37

May 2007

 No collecting - fire wood or other items. 

 Safety closures of structures. 

 Except for legal hunting, the BLM will enforce the area as a no recreational shooting 

zone.

 Interpretive trails will continue to be developed and maintained. 

 Existing motorized route designations will be valid and incorporated into the ACEC 

and TMP plans. The BLM will rehab non-designated routes and trails. 

Marketing: 

 Develop opportunities to maintain resources through information/education to the 

public about cultural resources. 

 Pursue local partnerships with La Paz County and others to market the SRMA to 

local, regional, and national visitors. 

 Marketing will be commensurate with the ability of the area to maintain its remote 

setting.

Monitoring: 

 Maintenance of resource and recreational benefits sustainability shall be paramount 

in all monitoring activities. 

 Resources will be evaluated to ensure that there be no net loss of quality regarding 

the recreation or cultural resources that provide the targeted benefits and 

opportunities using the date of the adoption of this plan as a baseline. 

 Monitoring will be accomplished formally and informally using the best available 

science and techniques. 

Administrative:

 The BLM, in collaboration with partners and friends group, will establish a stronger 

visitor services presence within the SRMA. 

 SRP will be limited to those activities and events that will help public recognize the 

identified recreational experiences and benefits. No SRP for competitive events will 

be issued. 

 Coordinate with the La Paz County Sheriffs Office on issues and concerns relating to 

public safety within this SRMA. 

Standard Operating Procedures 

FLPMA provides for management of outdoor recreation resources on public lands.

Section 202(c) (9) calls for land use planning consistent with Statewide Comprehensive 

Outdoor Recreation Plans (1989, 1994, 2003). Other national laws that govern the 

management of recreation in LHFO include the National Trails System Act of 1968, as 

amended; the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1964, as amended; the 

Recreation and Public Purposes Act, as amended; and the Wilderness Act of 1964.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-38

May 2007

Public lands along the Colorado River are to be managed in conformance with the 

Colorado River Floodway Protection Act of October 8, 1986 (Public Law 99-450) as 

amended 1994. 

Generally, the goal of the LHFO outdoor recreation program is to ensure the continued 

availability of public land for a diverse array of quality outdoor recreation opportunities. 

Recreation use is managed to protect the health and safety of visitors; to protect natural, 

cultural, and other resource values; to stimulate enjoyment of public lands; and to resolve 

user conflicts. Visitor demands for new recreation will continue to influence the nature 

of recreational opportunities on public lands. 

Most public lands are managed to maintain a freedom of recreational choice with a 

minimum of regulatory constraints. Where the nature of the resource and visitation 

dictates, public lands can be managed as Special Recreation Management Areas 

(SRMA). Primary concerns in recreation management planning are for resource 

protection, public health and safety, and enjoyment. 

LHFO will continue using the following guidance to manage recreational use: 

 Concession leases are considered when necessary to provide developed commercial 

recreation opportunities in appropriate settings when and where it would not be 

feasible for the BLM or other government agencies to do so. These leases authorize 

the construction and/or implementation of long-term facilities and services that will 

require a substantial financial investment by private business or other nongovernmental entities. 

 Universal designs to facilitate needs of the physically challenged will be used in all 

or part of new construction or rebuilt BLM facilities. 

 The BLM will provide law enforcement rangers to protect natural and cultural 

resources and help provide for public health and safety. 

 The BLM will strive to make available staff members to provide visitor services, 

interpretive programs and maintain an agency presence within SRMAs. Their 

mission will be regularly to contact the public for resource information and 

environmental education. These staff members will be additional to law enforcement 

rangers.

 The BLM will fully support Arizona Revised Statute 17-308, Unlawful Camping (no 

camping within 0.25 mile of natural or human-made water hole). 

Special Recreation Permits 

Special Recreation Permits (SRPs) are authorizations allowing specific recreation uses of 

public lands and related waters. SRPs are issued to manage visitor use and protect 

natural and cultural resources while avoiding user conflicts. The legal authorities are the 

Federal Land Policy and Management Act, 43 USC 1701 et seq., and the Land and Water 

Conservation Fund Act, as amended, 16 USC 460l–6a. BLM Handbook H-2930-1 

Recreation Permit Administration application process contains applicable laws, policy, 

rules and regulations and conformance with resource planning decisions. The decision to 

authorize a proposed use depends on potential resource impacts, conflicts with other 

users, any public health and safety issues, past or present performance of the applicant 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-39

May 2007

with the BLM or other agencies, and LHFO receiving a complete SRP application in a 

timely manner to process and administer the permit. 

Types of Permits 

1. Commercial Use: recreational use of the public lands and related waters for 

business or financial gain. 

2. Competitive Use: any organized sanctioned or structured use, event or activity on 

public land and related waters in which two or more participants compete and 

(a) participants register, enter and/or complete an application; (b) a predetermined 

course or area is designated; or (c) participants contest an established record such as 

speed or endurance. 

3. Organized group activity or event: a structured, ordered, consolidated, or scheduled 

event or occupation of public lands for recreational purposes not considered 

commercial or competitive. 

4. Vending Use: use permitted to market, sell, or rent recreation-related goods or 

services including but not limited to, food, beverages, clothing, firewood, tool or 

equipment repair on public lands or related waters. 

Vending on Public Lands 

Vending is the marketing or sale of approved products or services to members of the 

public by a person or persons authorized by the BLM. 

Such sales may occur on concessions by parties to whom a concession lease has been 

issued. Concession leases are ordinarily utilized by the BLM where long-term operations 

are desired and where a sizeable investment by a non-government or private party is 

required to furnish real property improvements. 

Vending may also occur on a more restricted basis, for temporary or short periods at 

narrowly prescribed locations. For discussion in this plan, a vending permit is either a 

Special Recreation Permit or a Land Use Permit (43 CFR 2920, Leases, Permits and 

Easements), which may allow specific individuals commercial rights to sell services or 

items on public lands for a specified time period. Vending on Lake Havasu is included 

insofar as the vendor will anchor or operate within BLM-managed areas. 

The BLM will charge for its vending permits, and will never receive less than full fair 

value, which at a minimum will be its cost to issue and administer the vending permit. 

The BLM may submit vending endeavors to a competitive bidding process and/or such 

other requirements it deems necessary to ensure minimum impact on the resource, 

minimum commercial intrusion on visitors to public lands, and to ensure that maximum 

quality, safety, and value are offered to the public when vending operations are necessary

and appropriate.

Necessary means that the proposed vending contributes to visitor understanding and 

enjoyment of Lake Havasu, and that it enhances visitor experiences consistent with BLM 

resource values. Necessary also means that vending assists in managing visitor use and is 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-40

May 2007

an essential service or facility not available within a reasonable distance in the 

established business community. 

Appropriate means the proposed vending activity is consistent with resource management 

laws, regulations, and policies applicable and that it does not compromise public health 

and safety or significantly impact or impair resources or values. Appropriate also means 

that the proposed vending activity does not unduly conflict with other uses or provide 

unfair or undue competition with existing similar businesses. Vending also will not 

exclude the general public from participating in recreational opportunities. 

Vending authorizations are a privilege and revocable without compensation under 

conditions named by the BLM. The BLM has no obligation to issue or to renew a 

vending permit of any kind to any party. Vending permits are further managed according 

to BLM Handbook H-2930-1, Recreation Permit Administration (2003). 

Some commercial and organized group uses requiring Special Recreation Permits (SRPs) 

have little to no resource impacts, user conflicts, or health and safety concerns, and 

usually require little monitoring. Examples of such uses are hunting outfitter and guide 

operations, motorized tours, photography tours, nature hikes, dual-sport rides, horseback 

rides, and organized club campouts. Special stipulations for SRPs have been developed 

to protect natural resources, reduce user conflicts, and minimize health and safety risks. 

These stipulations are included with all authorized SRPs and must be followed to keep 

the permit valid (see Appendix I). 

Final decisions for permit issuance will be based on other valid concerns, including the 

following:

 performance

 other conflicting activities such as hunting seasons 

 the BLM’s ability to process the permit 

 other unforeseen circumstances 

The permittee must also comply with any special allocations or restrictions. Proposed 

uses that do not meet the above criteria will be subject to further environmental analysis. 

Special Designations 

Administrative Actions 

ACECs

 Partnerships will be sought to provide for cooperative management of the ACEC 

including but not limited, other agencies, city municipalities, and other interested 

stakeholders, e.g., Beale Slough. 

 The BLM will work with partners, local, state, and private landowners to secure 

conservation easements where necessary to protect designating values of ACEC. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-41

May 2007

Wilderness 

 Provide guidance for the application of nonconforming but accepted uses permitted 

by the Wilderness Act and subsequent laws. This guidance will be established in the 

following plans: 

 The East Cactus Plain Wilderness will be managed under the 1994 East Cactus 

Plain Wilderness Management Plan; this plan will be updated as needed. 

 Gibraltar Mountain WA will be managed under the 2001 Gibraltar Mountain 

Interdisciplinary Management Plan and updated as needed. 

 Segments of the Dead Mountains Wilderness, Chemehuevi Mountains 

Wilderness, and Whipple Mountains Wilderness plans will be completed in 

conjunction with the Needles Field Office. 

 An interdisciplinary plan will be developed for the Bill Williams River area, 

which will incorporate the Rawhide Mountains and Swansea WAs. 

 Harcuvar Mountains WAs will be managed under the East Harcuvar Mountains 

Interdisciplinary Management Plan, which is now in preparation. 

 Reduce unauthorized vehicle use in all WAs through use of visitor education outside 

of wilderness, construction of trailheads, and development of barriers and/or 

restoration of closed vehicle trails. 

 Sign wilderness boundaries along boundary roads at least every 0.2 mile or at 

specific sites of vehicle intrusion. 

Wild and Scenic River Management 

 Instream flow will be monitored to establish the minimum flow necessary to protect 

the outstandingly remarkable values. 

Travel Management 

Administrative Actions 

 The BLM will identify a Travel Management Network (TMN) through the 

development of an activity-level plan(s). 

 Area designations (e.g., open, closed, and limited) set in the Approved RMP will not 

be changed by the activity-level plan without an amendment to the Approved RMP. 

 Public scoping meetings will be held in local communities on the proposed TMN 

(route designations). 

 The BLM will evaluate the TMN as needed, and proposed new routes (motorized and 

non-motorized) will be considered during development of the TMP. 

 All routes will be analyzed during the route evaluation process, considering all uses 

and resources within the area. No use or resource will automatically predetermine a 

route decision. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-42

May 2007

 The BLM will continue to work with state or local agencies to provide necessary 

public access from their public roads to the secondary routes on public lands. 

 The BLM will help inform the public about requirements for access on or across 

private and state lands adjacent to LHFO lands. Any designated routes would not 

include non-BLM lands. 

 California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG)’s and AGFD’s use of motorized 

and mechanized equipment off designated routes is considered an administrative use 

and will be allowed in suitable locations (as agreed to by BLM, CDFG, and AGFD) 

for such purposes as the following: 

 water supplementation 

 collar retrieval 

 capture and release of wildlife 

 maintenance, repair, and building or rebuilding of wildlife 

The goals of the TMP will be in concurrence with BLM’s 2001 National Management Strategy 

for Motorized Off-Highway Vehicle Use on Public Lands. The plan(s) will: 

 Use the six Travel Management Areas (TMAs) to develop the TMP (see Map 30 in 

the Approved RMP). These areas are consistent with LHFO access guides, providing 

for more public familiarity. When establishing these TMAs, LHFO considered 

public use patterns on routes around local communities or other major recreational 

destinations, and other resource program goals and objectives. 

 Identify trails, ways, and routes in the LHFO planning area intended for motorized 

and non-motorized travel on public lands. 

 Improve legal access to public lands by identifying access needs across non-federal 

lands and recommend acquisition and funding strategies. 

 Provide reasonable access to private inholdings surrounded by public lands. 

 Be consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act and develop greater access for 

the physically challenged. 

 Set guidelines for managing roads and trails to protect resource values, promote 

public safety, and improve public compliance on designated routes. 

 Develop monitoring procedures sufficient to detect and evaluate related public safety 

or natural resource impacts so that management changes could occur, if needed. 

 Create an implementation schedule that must cover public education, mapping, 

signing of designated trails and routes, rehabilitation of closed routes, law 

enforcement, and maintenance. 

 Incorporate the effective use of volunteers to provide “on the ground” information 

and route marking/signing for the public. 

 Increase public involvement in the establishment, monitoring, and protection of 

routes/trails on public lands. 

 Set timelines for monitoring and plan review. 

Cross-country motorized use will be prohibited, except in designated open areas and for 

authorized administrative uses. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-43

May 2007

Standard Operating Procedures 

Public lands managed by the BLM are intermingled with other federal agencies, county, 

state, and private lands. Managing access to and across public lands is a vital task for the 

BLM. This authority includes but is not limited to items listed below. 

 Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 USC 1701 et seq.)

 Endangered Species Act (16 USC 1531 et seq.)

 National Trails System Act (16 USC 1241 et seq.)

 Americans with Disabilities Act 

 Executive Order 11644, Use of Off-Road Vehicles on Public Lands 

 Executive Order 11989, Off-Road Vehicles on Public Lands (Amendment to 

E.O. 11644) 

 FLPMA Title 5 rights-of-way 

 Revised Statute (RS) 2477 roads 

 National Management Strategy for Motorized Off-Highway Vehicle Use on Public 

Lands (2001) 

 National Mountain Bicycle Strategic Action Plan (2002) 

From IMAZ-2005-007: 

“Permittees (e.g., for hunting, wood gathering, livestock operators) shall comply with 

field office route designations. Exceptions may be authorized on a case-by-case basis.” 

“Outside of National Monuments and National Conservation Areas, motorized vehicles 

may be allowed through a resource management plan level decision to pull off a 

designated route 100 feet either side of centerline. This use shall be monitored on a 

continuing basis. If monitoring results show effects that exceed limits of acceptable 

change, motorized vehicles would not be allowed to pull off a designated route 100 feet 

either side of centerline.” 

“BLM would not develop, endorse, or publish road or trail ratings. BLM may describe 

physical characteristics of a route.” 

“Technical Vehicle Specialized Sport Site - could be managed as a Recreation 

Management Zone (RMZ), but not part of the travel management network.” 

Travel Management Network 

All paved roads and gravel/dirt roads maintained by a state, county, or city will 

automatically be included as open or limited in the TMP. 

All other routes, including roads, trails, ways, or navigable washes shown on the existing 

inventory will be designated by the plan as either an open route, a limited route by type of 

use or season, or a route closed to motorized use. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-44

May 2007

Each route would be evaluated by a BLM interdisciplinary team using the criteria derived 

from Executive Order 11644. Routes previously designated in an activity-level plan 

(e.g., Parker Strip Recreation Area Management Plan, Gibraltar Mountain 

Interdisciplinary Management Plan, and La Posa Interdisciplinary Management Plan)

will not be affected. New route numbers may be assigned to previously designated routes 

to incorporate them into the TMN. Individual routes within these areas may be 

reevaluated only if it can be shown that sensitive resources or recreational opportunities 

are impacted by the earlier designation. 

While areas of public lands designated as open will be exempt from route designation, 

specific routes crossing open areas may be identified as part of the TMN. 

On public lands designated as closed (e.g., WAs), no roads or trails will be designated 

open for motorized travel. Roads and trails may be designated limited by type of use 

(horse, hiking, or administrative) or by season of use such as seasonal restrictions to 

minimize disturbance to wildlife during the times of the year when they are rearing 

young. 

Revisions to the TMP would follow the same process described above, including public 

notification within the LHFO planning area, and will be subject to NEPA review and 

analysis. 

Legal decisions can conceivably have an effect on the designation of routes. 

Restoration of Closed Routes 

The BLM’s strategy for restoring closed routes or trespasses will be accomplished as 

rapidly as funding permits. Sensitive resources in immediate danger, or those that have 

been damaged by vehicle trespass would be a high priority for restoration. Typically, the 

restoration will be limited to that portion of the route or trespass that is in line of sight 

from an open route. The proposal for restoration will include: 

 Not repairing washed-out routes. 

 Using natural barriers, such as large boulders. 

 Using rocks and dead and down wood to obscure the route entryway. 

 Employing vertical mulching and pitting. 

 Ripping up the route bed and reseeding with vegetation natural to that area. 

 Utilizing fences or barriers. 

 Providing signage, including information to OHV users, on the need and value of 

resource protection. 

 Leaving the first 100 feet from the centerline of an open route unrestored to provide 

pullout areas or camping opportunities intended to discourage or prevent new ground 

disturbance elsewhere. 

Each route will be evaluated, and the least intrusive method will be used based on 

geography, topography, soils, hydrology, and vegetation. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-45

May 2007

Overflights

Aircraft overflights, including low-level helicopter and fixed-wing overflights by other 

agencies and other use of the airspace over public lands, are not regulated by the BLM. 

These uses occur now and would continue. 

Visual Resource Management 

Standard Operating Procedures 

Class objectives will help the BLM apply visual design techniques to ensure that surfacedisturbing activities are in harmony with their surroundings. A visual contrast rating 

process will be used for analysis, which involves comparing the project features with the 

major features in the existing landscape using the basic design elements of form, line, 

color, and texture. Visual design consideration will be incorporated into all surfacedisturbing projects regardless of size or potential impact. Emphasis is placed on the 

BLM providing inputs during the initial planning and design phase to minimize costly 

redesign and mitigation at later phases of a project. The overall goal of VRM analysis is 

to minimize visual impacts through development of mitigating measures. 

The BLM will analyze all surface-disturbing projects according to the guidelines and 

procedures provided in BLM Manual 8431-1, Visual Resource Contrast Rating. Visual 

simulations could be used in evaluating the visual resource effects of a project. These 

projects will be assessed for the degree of visual contrast from the landscape using the 

elements of form, line, color, and texture. Proposed surface-disturbing projects will be 

evaluated from Key Observation Points for the following factors: 

1. distance (project from Key Observation Points) 

2. angle of observation 

3. length of time the proposed project would be in view 

4. relative size or scale 

5. season of use 

6. light conditions 

7. recovery time 

8. spatial relationships 

9. atmospheric conditions 

10. motion 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-46

May 2007

Water Resources 

Standard Operating Procedures 

Watershed Management 

FLPMA defines the BLM’s multiple-use management mission to include protection of 

watersheds. FLPMA requires that public lands be managed to protect scientific, 

environmental, air and atmospheric, and water resources. FLPMA also requires that the 

BLM develop land use plans to guide the Management Actions on these lands, and that 

land use plans comply with state and federal air, water, and pollution standards. In 

addition, BLM Manual 7000 and executive orders provide field guidance in managing 

soil, water, and air. 

FLPMA requires compliance with the following laws: 

 Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act of 1935 

 Watershed Protection and Flood Control Act of 1954 

 Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act of 1974 

 Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 

 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

 Federal Pollution Control Act with amendments of 1972 

 Clean Water Act of 1989 

 Safe Drinking Water Act of 1977 

Water Resource Management Program 

The BLM’s water resource program consists of the following mandates: 

 To ensure the physical presence and legal availability of water on public lands. 

 To ensure that those waters meet or exceed federal and state water quality standards 

for specific uses. 

 To mitigate activities to prevent water quality degradation. 

The water resource program is divided into three parts: water inventory, water rights, and 

monitoring. 

BLM policy is to inventory all water resources on public lands it administers and to 

document and store this data in its Water Data Management System. 

BLM policy on water is to file for water rights on all water sources on public and 

acquired lands in accordance with State of Arizona or California water laws. This water 

policy also requires the BLM to file a request for a recommendation for use of the waters 

of the Lower Colorado River with either the State of Arizona or the Colorado River 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-47

May 2007

Board of California. Upon receiving a positive recommendation, the BLM will enter an 

Interagency Agreement with BOR to legalize its use of Colorado River water. The 

Secretary of the Interior has given BOR authority to enter Colorado River contracts along 

the Lower Colorado River. 

BLM policy is to monitor water quality to assess resource impacts from specific activities 

and to obtain baseline resource information. 

Non-point source pollution abatement authority is addressed in Section 319 of the Federal 

Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987 and the State of Arizona Environmental Quality 

Act of 1986. The BLM has agreements with both Arizona and California environmental 

departments regarding non-point source pollution controls and assures attainment of 

water quality to meet all designated beneficial uses. ADEQ monitors conditions and biannually publishes the status of water quality and any impaired waters. 

Wild Burro Management 

Administrative Actions 

Burro information will be included on bulletin boards and kiosks within HMAs. 

Standard Operating Procedures 

The BLM will coordinate with AGFD and other affected interests during its evaluation of 

any proposed decisions or actions concerning burro management. 

The BLM will work with AGFD to determine if Land Health Standards are being met 

and if any additional monitoring is needed to make such a determination. 

All burro-related activities will be conducted in a manner that ensures the safety of the 

burros and personnel involved. 

The BLM will continue to work collaboratively with AGFD to resolve burro-related 

issues.

Wild Burro Removals 

All wild burros that are removed are made available for adoption through the Wild Horse 

and Burro Adoption Program. 

Wild burros will be removed as nuisance animals whenever a safety problem becomes 

apparent (such as burros crossing highways, burro-related vehicle accidents, etc.). 

Removal of nuisance burros from private land is required when requested in writing from 

the landowner. Excess wild burros will be removed from the HMAs when the population 

exceeds the Appropriate Management Level (AML), as set by the Herd Management 

Area Plans. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-48

May 2007

Burros continuing to use public lands, even outside of a HA or HMA, as any part of their 

habitat remain protected under the Wild Horse and Burro Act. These burros will be 

removed by the BLM when requested, or when a regular removal is scheduled. 

Methods for burro removal include bait or water trapping, roping, helicopter drive 

trapping, and helicopter-assisted roping. The method will vary with the situation. 

Helicopter drive trapping is usually required for gathering larger numbers of wild burros. 

Bait trapping is normally used for private land removals or when smaller numbers are 

planned for removal. 

Wilderness Characteristics 

Administrative Actions 

 Sites and areas affected by human activities will be reclaimed when such locales or 

sites are no longer needed by authorized land uses. 

 At time of renewal of any existing ROWs, the BLM will discuss with the grant 

holder the possibility of relocating the ROW outside of lands managed to maintain 

wilderness characteristics. Remove facilities that are no longer used. 

 Existing and new operations for locatable mining will be regulated using the 43 CFR 

3809 regulations to prevent unnecessary and undue degradation of the lands. 

 AGFD’s use of motorized and mechanized equipment off designated routes is 

considered an administrative use and will be allowed in suitable locations (as agreed 

to by the BLM and AGFD) for such purposes including but not limited to: 

 Water supplementation. 

 Collar retrieval. 

 Capture and release of wildlife. 

 Maintenance, repair, and building or rebuilding of wildlife waters. 

 Discretionary surface-disturbing activities would be addressed as provided for in 

Management Actions. 

Standard Operating Procedures 

The BLM will review, through this land use planning process, lands within the planning 

area that may possess wilderness characteristics, but that are not currently designated 

WAs or WSAs. Consistent with the Secretary of the Interior letter to Senator Robert 

Bennett, dated April 11, 2003, the settlement in the case of Utah v. Norton, dated 

April 14, 2003, and IM No. 2003-275 – Change 1, Consideration of Wilderness 

Characteristics in Land Use Plans, dated October 23, 2003, the BLM has the authority to 

address wilderness characteristics and describe management prescriptions in the 

Approved RMP. In keeping with the public involvement process that is part of all land 

use planning efforts, the BLM is committed to considering public input regarding 

wilderness characteristics through the land use planning process. Where appropriate, the 

BLM may specify in the Approved RMP areas to be managed for maintenance or 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan B-49

May 2007

enhancement of their wilderness characteristics. However, also consistent with the 

documents cited above, the BLM will not establish new WSAs, manage any lands not 

already established as WSAs prior to April 2003 under the FLPMA Section 603 nonimpairment standard, or report such areas to Congress. Where lands having resource 

values meeting the relevance and importance criteria necessary to establish an ACEC 

coincide with the presence of wilderness characteristics, the special management 

associated with an ACEC, if designated, may also protect wilderness characteristics. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-1

May 2007

Appendix C 

Biological Resources 

The species listed in the following tables come from personal staff observations, 

information provided by partnering agencies, and texts listed in the reference section. 

Vegetation 

Table C-1: Vegetation Communities within LHFO Boundaries 

Vegetation

Community 

Acres LHFO 

Land

Plant Growth 

Form 

Dominant 

Species

Elevation

(Feet)

Climate Precipitation

(inches) 

Lower

Sonoran 

Desertscrub 

567,107.08 41.74% Shrubmicrophyllous Creosotebush 

(Larrea

tridentata)

White bursage 

(Ambrosia 

dumosa)

Ocotillo

(Fouquieria 

splendens)

Brittlebrush

(Encelia

farinose)

Fourwing

saltbrush

(Atriplex

canescens)

Blue palo verde 

(Parkinsonia 

florida)

Foothill palo 

verde

(Parkinsonia

microphylla.)

Saguaro

(Carnegiea 

gigantea)

Mesquite

(Prosopis sp.) 

Ironwood 

(Olneya tesota)

<3,000 Subtropical 2–9 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-2

May 2007

Vegetation

Community 

Acres LHFO 

Land

Plant Growth 

Form 

Dominant 

Species

Elevation

(Feet)

Climate Precipitation

(inches) 

Catclaw acacia 

(Acacia 

greggii)

Smoketree 

(Psorothamnus 

spinosus)

Big galleta 

grass 

(Pleuraphis 

rigida thurb)

Upper 

Sonoran 

Desertscrub 

621,834.72 45.8% Shrubmicrophyllous Blue palo verde 

(Parkinsonia 

florida)

Foothill palo 

verde

(Parkinsonia

microphylla.)

Ironwood 

(Olneya tesota)

Creosotebush 

(Larrea

tridentate)

White bursage 

(Ambrosia 

dumosa)

Ocotillo

(Fouquieria 

splendens)

Jojoba

(Simmondsia 

chinensis)

Cholla

(Opuntia spp.) 

Fish-hook 

pincushion 

(Mammillaria

grahamii)

Compass cactus 

(Ferrocactus 

cylindracens)

Saguaro

(Carnegiea 

gigantea)

984–

3,280 

Subtropical 3–10 

Mohave 

Desertscrub 

73,519.24 5.4% Shrub 

microphyllous 

Creosotebush 

(Larrea

tridentata)

Joshua tree 

(Yucca

brevifolia)

980–

4,000 

WarmTemperate 1–8 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-3

May 2007

Vegetation

Community 

Acres LHFO 

Land

Plant Growth 

Form 

Dominant 

Species

Elevation

(Feet)

Climate Precipitation

(inches) 

All-scale

atriplex

(Atriplex

plycarpa)

Brittlebush

(Encelia

farinosa)

Desert holly 

(Atripex

hymenelytra)

White

burrobrush 

(Hymenolea 

salsola)

Shadescale 

(Atriplex

confertifolia)

Blackbrush 

(Coleogyne 

ramosissima)

Engleman 

hedgehog 

(Echinocereus 

engelmannii)

Silver cholla 

(Opuntia 

echinocarpa)

Mojave 

pricklypear 

(Opuntia 

phaeacantha)

Beavertail

cactus (Opuntia 

basilaris)

Many-headed 

barrel cactus 

(Echinocactus 

polycephalus)

Big galleta 

grass 

(Pleuraphis 

rigida)

Numerous 

ephemeral 

forbs

Great Basin 

PinyonJuniper 

Woodland 

254.53 0.02% Tree-Conifer California 

juniper 

(Juniperus 

californica)

5,000–

5,100 

WarmTemperate 5–15 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-4

May 2007

Vegetation

Community 

Acres LHFO 

Land

Plant Growth 

Form 

Dominant 

Species

Elevation

(Feet)

Climate Precipitation

(inches) 

Singleleaf

pinyon pine 

(Pinus

monophylla)

Big sagebrush 

(Artemisia

tridentata)

Snakeweed 

(Gutierrezia

sarothrae)

Rabbitbush 

(Ericameria

spp.)

Winterfat 

(Ceratoides 

lanata)

Cliffrose

(Purshia 

stansburiana)

Apache plume 

(Fallugia

paradoxa)

Blue gramma 

(Bouteloua 

gracilis)

Galleta grass 

(Pleuraphis 

jamesii)

Indian rice 

grass 

(Achratherum 

hymenoidesi)

Western

wheatgrass 

(Agropyron

smithii)

Several 

muhleys 

(Muhlenbergia

sp.)

Dropseeds 

(Sporobolus

sp.)

Interior 

Chaparral 

35,139.24 2.48% Shrub–

sclerophyll

Shrub live oak 

(Quercus 

turbinella)

Skunkbush 

sumac 

(Aromatica 

3,280–

6,070 

WarmTemperate 5–15 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-5

May 2007

Vegetation

Community 

Acres LHFO 

Land

Plant Growth 

Form 

Dominant 

Species

Elevation

(Feet)

Climate Precipitation

(inches) 

vartrilobata)

Silktassel

(Garrya 

flavescens)

Desert

ceanothus 

(Ceanothus 

greggii)

Cliffrose

(Purshia 

stansburiana)

Arizona 

rosewood 

(Vauquelina

californica)

Sideoats 

gramma 

(Bouteloua 

curtipendula)

Hairy gramma 

(Bouteloua 

hirsute)

Plains

lovegrass 

(Eragrostis 

intermedia)

Wolftail 

(Lycurus 

setosus)

Single

threeawn 

(Aristida

schiedeana).

Riparian 5,253.11 0.4% Tree–

deciduous

Mesquite

(Prosopis sp.) 

Gooddings 

willow (Salix

gooddingii)

Netleaf

hackberry 

(Celtis

reticulata)

Cottonwood 

(Populus 

fremontii)

Arrow-weed 

(Pluchea 

sericea)

Quailbush 

Various Various Various 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-6

May 2007

Vegetation

Community 

Acres LHFO 

Land

Plant Growth 

Form 

Dominant 

Species

Elevation

(Feet)

Climate Precipitation

(inches) 

(Atriplex

lentiformis)

Saltcedar

(Tamarix sp.) 

Mesquite/

Ephemeral 

Wash 

Woodland 

43,443.69 3.2% TreedeciduousMesquite

(Prosopis sp.) 

Desert star vine 

(Brandegea 

bigelovii) 

Cat's claw 

acacia (Acacia 

greggii)

Blue palo verde 

(Parkinsonia 

florida),

Ironwood 

(Olneya tesota)

Saltcedar

(Tamarix sp.) 

Various Various Various 

Agriculture 1,765.84 0.13% 

Urban 1,872.77 0.13% 

Water 8,198.58 0.6% 

 1,358,389.1

4

100% 

Brown 1982.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-7

May 2007

Table C-2: Submerged and Aquatic Plants of Lake Havasu and Lower Colorado River

Type Scientific Name Common name Origin 

Submerged aquatic 

species

Ceratophyllum 

dermersum

Coon’s tail Native 

Chara sp. Muskgrass Native 

Potamogeton sp. Pondweed Native 

Najas marina Spiny naiad Native 

Myriophyllum sp. Watermilfoil Non-Native 

Emergent Typha sp. Cattail Native 

Hydrocotyle sp. Pennywort Native 

Juncus sp. Rush Native 

Scirpus olneyi Salt marsh 

sedge

Native

Rorippa sp. Watercress Native 

Ruppia sp. Widgeon grass Native 

Floating Lemna sp. Duckweed Native 

Minckly pers comm.; Blair pers comm., 2005. 

Table C-3: Plants Possibly Found in the LHFO Boundary

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Algae

CHARACEAE 

Green Algae 

Nitella hyaline Muskgrass 

Ferns and Fern Allies 

DRYOPTERIDACEAE

Wood Fern 

Woodsia oregano Oregon woodsia Perennial herb 

EQUISETACEAE 

Horsetail

Equisetum hyemale Common scouringrush 

Equisetum funstonii California horsetail 

PTERIDACEAE 

Brake

Adiantum capillusvenerisVenus hair fern, Maidenhair fern Perennial herb 

Cheilanthes covillei Coville’s lipfern Perennial herb 

Cheilanthes parryi Parry’s cloakfern Perennial herb 

Pallaea mucronata var.

californica

Birdsfoot fern Perennial 

Pentagramma 

triangularis 

Goldback fern Perennial herb 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-8

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Gymnosperms 

CUPRESSACEAE 

Cypress

Juniperus californica California juniper Tree 

PINACEAE 

Pine

Pinus monophylla Singleleaf pinyon pine Tree 

EPHEDRACEAE 

Ephedra 

Ephedra faciculata Mohave ephedra Shrub 

Ephedra funereal Death Valley ephedra Shrub 

Ephedra nevadensis Nevada Morman Tea Shrub 

Ephedra torreyana Torrey ephedra Shrub 

Angiosperms (Dicots) 

AZIOECEAE 

Carpetweed 

Sesuvium verrucosum Western sea purslane Perennial herb 

Trianthema 

portuacastrum 

Horse purslane Annual 

AMARANTHACEAE 

Amaranth

Amaranthus blitoides Prostrate pigweed Annual 

Amaranthus fimbriants Fringed amaranth Annual 

Amaranthus retroflexus Red root pigweed Annual 

Tidestromia lanuginose Espanta vaqueros Annual 

Tidestromia

oblongifolia 

Honeysweet Perennial herb 

APIACEAE

Carrot, Parsley 

Bowlesia incana Bowlesia, Pennywort Annual 

Cymopteris

purpurascens 

Widewing spring parsley Perennial herb 

Hydrocotyle verticillata Water (whorled) pennywort Perennial herb 

Lomatium

foeniculaceum 

Desert parsley Perennial herb 

Lomatium parryi Parrys lomatium Perennial herb 

Yabea microcarpa California hedge parsley Annual 

APOCYNACEAE

Dogbane 

Amsonia tomentosa Woolly amsonia Perennial herb 

Apocynum cannabinum Indian hemp Perennial herb 

ASCLEPIADACEAE

Milkweed

Asclepia erosa Desert milkweed Perennial herb 

Asclepia subulata Rush milkweed Shrub 

Asclepia albicans White-stemmed milkweed Perennial 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-9

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Asclepias subverticillata Whorled milkweed Perennial herb 

Cynanchum utahense Swallowwort Perennial herb 

Sarcostemma hirtellum Trailing milkweed Perennial vine 

Sarcostemma 

heterophyllum 

Climbing milkweed Perennial vine 

ASTERACEAE

Sunflower 

Acamptopappus 

sphaerocephalus 

Goldenhead Shrub 

Acourtia wrightii Wrights perezia Shrub 

Adenophyllum cooperi Coopers glandweed Perennial 

Adenophyllum 

porophylloides 

San Diego dyssodia Perennial herb 

Ambrosia acanthicarpa Sand bursage, Sandbur Annual 

Ambrosia ambrosiodes Ambrosia leaved burbrush Shrub 

Ambrosia dumosa White bursage Shrub 

Ambrosia eriocentra Woolly bursage Shrub 

Amphipappus fremontii Chaffbrush Shrub 

Anisocoma acaulis Scalebud Annual 

Artemisia carruthii Carruths wormwood Perennial herb 

Artemisia ludoviciana Western mugwort Perennial herb 

Aster eatonii Eaton aster Perennial herb 

Aster exilis Slender aster Annual 

Aster tephrodes Ash-colored aster Biennial 

Atrichoseris pltyphylla Gravel ghost, Parachute Plant Annual 

Baccharis brachyphylla Shortleaf seepwillow Shrub 

Baccharis emoryi Emory’s seepwillow Shrub 

Baccharis salicifolia Sticky seepwillow Shrub 

Baccharis sarothroides Broom baccharis Shrub 

Baccharis sergiloides Squaw waterweed, desert baccharis Shrub 

Baccharis vimenea Mulefat Shrub 

Baileya multiradiata Desert marigold Perennial herb 

Baileya pleniradiata Woolly desert marigold Annual 

Bebbia juncea Sweetbbush Shrub 

Brickellia arguta Spiny brickellbush Shrub 

Brickellia atractyloides Spiny brickellbush Shrub 

Brickellia califonica California brickellbush Shrub 

Brickellia desertorum Desert brickellbush Shrub 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-10

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Brickellia incana Woolly brickellbush Shrub 

Brickellia longifolia Willowleaf brickellbush Shrub 

Brickellia oblongifolia Mohave brickellbush Perennial herb 

Calycoseris parryi Yellow tackstem, Perrys tackstem Annual 

Calycoseris wrightii White tackstem Annual 

Chaenactis carphoclinia Pebble pincushion Annual 

Chaenactis fremontii Fremonts pincushion, Desert 

pincushion 

Annual 

Chaenactis macrantha Mojave pincushion Annual 

Chaenactis stevioides Esteves pincushion, Desert 

pincushion 

Annual 

Chloracantha spinosa Mexican devilweed Subshrub 

Chrysopsis villosa Golden aster Perennial herb 

Cirsium arizonicum Arizona thistle Biennial 

Cirsium mohavense Mojave thistle Biennial 

Cirsium neomexicanum New Mexico thistle Biennial 

Cirsium wheeleri Wheelers Thistle Perennial herb 

Conyza canadensis Horseweed Annual 

Conyza coulteri Coulters horseweed Annual 

Crepis intermedia Grays hawksbeard Perennial herb 

Dicoria canescens Dune dicoria, desert dicoria, Grays 

sandplant, bug seed 

Annual 

Eclipta prostrate Wormbane Annual 

Encelia farinose Brittlebush Shrub/Common 

Encelia frutescens Bush encelia, rayless encelia Shrub 

Encelia virginensis Virgin encelia Shrub 

Enceliopsis argophylla Sunray Perennial herb 

Ericameria cooperi Cooper’s goldenbrush Shrub 

Ericameria cuneata Wedgeleaf goldenbrush Shrub 

Ericameria laricifolia Turpentinebrush Shrub 

Ericameria linearifolia Mohave goldenbrush Shrub 

Ericameria nana Dwarf goldenbrush Shrub 

Ericameria nauseosus Rubber rabbitbrush Shrub 

Ericameria paniculatus Mohave rabbitbrush Shrub 

 Ericameria teretifolius Needleleaf rabbitbrush Shrub 

Erigeron concinnus Elegant fleabane Perennial herb 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-11

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Erigeron lobatus Lobeleaf fleabane Annual 

Eriophyllum lanosum White woolly daisy Annual 

Eriophyllum wallacei Woolly daisy, wallace daisy Annual 

Eupatorium herbaceum White thoroughwort Perennial herb 

Filago califonica Fluffweed Annual 

Filago depressa Little fluffweed Annual 

Geraea canescens Desert sunflower Annual 

Glyptopleura marginata Crustweed Annual 

Gnaphalium palustre Lowland everlasting Annual 

Gnaphalium 

stramineum 

Yellow everlasting Biennial 

Gnaphalium wrightii Wrights everlasting Perennial herb 

Gutierrezia 

microcephala 

Matchweed Shrub 

Gutierrezia sarothrae Snakeweed Shrub 

Helianthus annuus Common sunflower Annual 

Helianthus anomalus Sand sunflower Annual 

Heterotheca 

psammophila 

Camphorweed, Sand golden aster Annual/Biennial 

Hymenoclea salsola Cheesebush Shrub 

Hymenoxys richardsonii Colorado rubberplant Perennial herb 

Isocoma acradenia Alkali goldenbush Shrub 

Iva axillaries Poverty weed Perennial herb 

Lactuca tatarica Blue lettuce Perennial herb 

Layia glandulosa White layia Annual 

Machaeranthera arida Silver Lake daisy Annual 

Machaeranthera 

asteroids 

Emorys aster Perennial herb 

Machaeranthera 

canescens 

Thickleaf aster Biennial 

Machaeranthera 

pinnatifida 

Spiny goldenbush Perennial herb 

Malacothrix clevelandii Cleveland desert dandelion Annual 

Malacothrix coulteri Snakeshead Annual 

Malacothrix glabrata Desert dandelion Annual 

Malacothrix sonchoides Yellow saucers Annual 

Monoptilon bellidiforme Desert star Annual 

Monoptilon belioides Mohave Desert star Annual 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-12

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Palafoxia arida Spanish needle Annual 

Pectis papposa Chinchweed Annual 

Perityle congesta Compact rockdaisy Perennial herb 

Perityle emoryi Rockdaisy Annual 

Perityle megalocephala Largehead rockdaisy Perennial 

Peucephyllum schottii Pygmy cedar, desert fir Shrub 

Pleurocoronis pluriseta Arrowleaf Shrub 

Pluchea odorata Saltmarsh fleabane Shrub 

Pluchea sericea Arrowweed Shrub 

Porophyllum gracile Odora Subshrub 

Prenanthella exigua Prenanthella Annual 

Psathyrotes annua Mealy rosettes Annual 

Psathyrotes pilifera Piliferous turtleback Annual 

Psathyrotes 

ramosissima 

Turtleback Annual 

Psilostrophe cooperi Paperflower Shrub 

Rafinesquia californica California chicory Annual 

Rafinesquia 

neomexicana 

Desert chicory Annual 

Senecio flaccidus Groundsel Perennial herb 

Senecio mohavensis Mohave groundsel Annual 

Senecio multilobatus Vinta groundsel Perennial herb 

Solidago confines Southern goldenrod Perennial herb 

Sonchus asper Prickly sowthistle Annual 

Sonchus oleraceus Common sowthistle Annual 

Stephanomeria 

pauciflora 

Wire lettuce Perennial herb 

Stephanomeria thurberi Thurbers wire lettuce Perennial 

Stylocline intertexta Morefield neststraw Annual 

Stylocline micropoides Desert neststraw Annual 

Stylocline

psilocarphoides 

Pecks neststraw Annual 

Taraxacum officinale Dandelion Perennial herb 

Tetradymia canescens Horshbrush Shrub 

Tetradymia stenolepis Mojave horsebush Shrub 

Thymophylla 

pentachaeta 

Scale glandbush Low shrub 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-13

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Trichoptilium incisum Yellowheads Perennial herb 

Trixis californica Trixis Shrub 

Uropappus lindleyi Silver stars, silver puffs Annual 

Viguiera parishii Goldeneye Shrub 

Xanthium strumarium Cocklebur Annual 

Xylorhiza tortifolia Desert aster Shrub 

BIGNONIACEAE

Bignonia 

Chilopsis linearis Desert willow Shrub/Tree 

BORAGINACEAE

Forget-Me-Not 

Amsinckia eastwoodiae Tarweed fiddleneck Annual 

Amsinckia menziesii Ranchers fireweed Annual 

Amsinckia tessellate Rough fiddleneck Annual 

Cryptantha angustifolia Narrowleaf cryptantha Annual 

Cryptantha barbigera Bearded cryptantha Annual 

Cryptantha cinerea Bownut cryptantha Perennial herb 

Cryptantha

circumscissa 

Opening cryptantha Annual 

Cryptantha decipiens Beguiling cryptantha Annual 

Cryptantha dumetorum Greenes cryptantha Annual 

Cryptantha holoptera Winged cryptantha Annual 

Cryptantha maritime Guadalupe cryptantha, white-hared 

forget-me-not 

Annual 

Cryptantha micratha Redroot cryptantha Annual 

Cryptantha muricata Prickly cryptantha Annual 

Cryptantha nevadensis Nevada cryptantha Annual 

Cryptantha pterocarya Wingnut cryptantha Annual 

Cryptantha racemosa Baja cryptantha Annual 

Cryptantha recurvata Recurved cryptantha Annual 

Cryptantha utahensis Scented cryptantha Annual 

Cryptantha virginensis Virgin River cryptantha Biennial/Perennial 

herb

Heliotropium

convolvulaceum 

False morning glory Annual 

Heliotropium

curassavicum 

Helioptrope Perennial herb 

Lappula occidentalis Western stickseed Annual 

Pectocarya heterocarpa Unequal combseed Annual 

Pectocarya platycarpa Flattened combseed Annual 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-14

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Pectocarya recurvata Bent combseed Annual 

Pectocarya setosa Saucer combseed Annual 

Plagiobothrys 

arizonicus

Arizona popcornflower Annual 

Plagiobothrys jonesii Jones popcornflower Annual 

Plagiobothrys 

leptocladus

Hairy popcornflower Annual 

Tiquilia canescens Woody tiquilia Perennial 

Tiquilia latior Matted tiguilia Perennial 

Tiquilia palmeri Palmers tiquilia Perennial herb 

Tiquilia plicata Pleated tiquilia, Crinkle mats, 

Plicate codenia 

Perennial 

BRASSICACEAE

Mustard 

Arabis glaucovalula Mustard Perennial herb 

Arabis gracilipes Rockcress Perennial herb 

Arabis perennans Common rockcress Perennial herb 

Arabis pulchra Princess rockcress Perennial herb 

Brassica juncea Indian mustard Annual 

Brassica tournefortii Sahara mustard Annual 

Capsella bursa-pastoris Shephards purse Annual 

Caulanthus cooperi Coopers wild cabbage Annual 

Descurainia obtuse Desert tansymustard Annual 

Descurainia pinnata Pinnate tansymustard Annual 

Descurainia Sophia Flixweed Annual 

Dithyrea californica Spectaclepod Annual 

Draba cuneifolia Wedgeleaf Annual 

Erysimum capitatum Wallflower Perennial herb 

Erysimum repandum Spreading wallflower Annual 

Guillenia lasiophylla California mustard Annual 

Lepidium densiflorum Densecress Annual 

Lepidium dictyotum Alkali peppergrass Annual 

Lepidium fremontii Desert alyssum Shrub 

Lepidium lasiocarpum Peppergrass Annual 

Lepidium montanum Mountain pepperplant Perennial herb 

Lesquerella tenella Beadpod Annual 

Lobularia maritime Sweet alyssum Perennial herb 

Malcolmia Africana African malcolmia Annual 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-15

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Physaria newberryi Newberrys twinpod Perennial herb 

Rorippa nasturtiumaquaticum Watercress Perennial 

Sinapis arvensis Charlock Annual 

Sisymbrium altissimum Tumble mustard Annual 

Sisymbrium irio London rocket Annual 

Stanleya pinnata Princes plume Perennial 

Streptanthella 

longirostris

Longbeak twistflower Annual 

Thelypodium

integrifolium

Tall thelypody Biennial 

Thelypodium wrightii Wrights thelypody Annual 

Thlaspi arvense Pennycress, fanweed Annual/Biennial 

Thysanocarpus curvipes Lacepod, fringepod Annual 

BUDDLEJACEAE 

Buddleja

Buddleja utahensis Panamint butterflybush Shrub 

CACTACEAE

Cactus 

Echinocactus 

polycephalus 

Cottontop cactus Perennial 

Echinocereus 

engelmannii 

Hedgehog cactus Perennial 

Echinocereus 

fasciculatus 

Arizona hedgehog Perennial 

Ferocactus cylindraceus Barrel cactus Perennial 

Mammilaria grahamii Millers fishhook Perennial 

Mammilaria tetrancistra Fishhook cactus, pincushion cactus Perennial

Opuntia acanthocarpa Buckhorn cholla Perennial 

Opuntia basilaris Bakersfield cactus Perennial 

Opuntia bigelovii Teddybear cholla, jumpling cholla Perennial 

Opuntia chlorotica Pancake pricklypear Perennial 

Opuntia echinocarpa Silver cholla Perennial 

Opuntia erinacea Old man pricklypear, Mojave 

pricklypear 

Perennial 

Opuntia parishii Orc. Devil cholla, club cholla Perennial 

Opuntia polyacantha Central pricklypear, rufus-spine 

pricklypear 

Perennial 

Opuntia ramosissima Diamond cholla, pencil cholla Perennial 

Sclerocactus johnsonii Pigmy barrel cactus Perennial 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-16

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

CAMPANULACEAE 

Bellflower

Lobelia cardinalus Cardinal flower Perennial 

Nemacladus 

glanduliferus

Slender threadplant Annual 

Nemacladus sigmoideus Curved threadplant Annual 

CAPPARACEAE 

Caper

Wislizenia refracta Jackass clover Annual 

CAPRIFOLIACEAE 

Honeysuckle

 Subshrub 

CARYOPHYLLACEAE 

Pink

Achronychia cooperi Frostmat Annual 

Arenaria macradenia Shrubby sandwort, Desert 

sandwort

Subshrub 

Scopulophila rixfordii Rixfords rockwort Perennial 

Silene antirrhina Annual catchfly Annual 

Spergularia marina Salt sandspurrey Annual 

Stellearia nitens Shining chickweed Annual 

CELASTRACEAE 

Staff tree 

Mortonia utahensis Mortonia Shrub 

CHENOPODIACEAE

Goosefoot

Allenrolfea occidentalis Pickleweed 

Atriplex canescens Fourwing saltbush Shrub 

Atriplex confertifolia Shadscale Shrub 

Atriplex elegans Wheelscale Annual 

Atriplex hymenelytra Desert holly Shrub 

Atriplex lentiformis Quailbrush Shrub 

Atriplex linearis Narrow-leaved saltbush 

Atriplex semibaccata Australian saltbush Perennial 

Bassia hyssopifolia Bassi, Fourhorn smotherweed Annual 

Chenopodium album Lambs quarters, pigweed Annual 

Chenopodium 

berlandieri

Berlandieris pigweed, pitseed 

goosefoot 

Annual 

Chenopodium fremontii Fremonts goosefoot Annual 

Corispermum villosum Bugseed Annual 

Grayia spinosa Hopsage Shrub 

Kochia scoparia Summer cypress Annual 

Krascheninnikovia 

lanata 

Winterfat Shrub 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-17

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Suaeda moquinii Seepbush Iodine weed Perennial herb 

CONVOLVULACEAE 

Morning glory

Convolvulus arvensis Bindweed Perennial herb 

Cuscuta denticulate Desert dodder 

CRASSULACEAE 

Stonecrop 

Dudleya pulverulenta Arizona liveforever, Chalk 

liveforever 

CROSSOSOMATACEAE 

Crossosoma

Crossosoma bigelovii Greasewood Shrub 

Glossopetalon 

spinescens 

Nevada greasewood Shrub 

CUCURBITACEAE

Gourd 

Cucurbita palmate Coyote melon, palmate leaved 

gourd 

Perennial vine 

Marah fabaceus Manroot Perennial vine 

Brandegea begelovii Desert star vine Perennial vine 

CUSCUTACEAE 

Dodder

Cuscuta californica California dodder Annual 

vine/Parasitic

Cuscuta denticulate Desert dodder Annual/Parasitic 

Cuscuta pentagona Field dodder Annual 

vine/Parasitic

ELAEAGNACEAE 

Oleaster

Elaeagnus angustifolia Russian olive Tree 

EUPORBIACEAE

Spurge 

Chamaesyce

albomarginata 

Sandmat, rattlesnake weed Perennial herb 

Chamaesyce micromera Desert spurge Annual 

Chamaesyce ocellata Valley spurge Annual 

Chamaesyce parishii Parishs spurge Perennial herb 

Chamaesyce ploycarpa Smallseed sandmat Perennial herb 

Croton californicus Sand croton Shrub 

Ditaxis neomexicana New Mexico ditaxis Annual 

Euphorbia incise Mojave spurge Perennial herb 

Stillingia linearifolia Narrowleaf stillingia Perennial herb 

Stillingia spinulosa Spiny stillingia Perennial herb 

Tetracoccus hallii Halls tetracoccus Shrub 

FABACEAE

Legume

Acacia greggii Catclaw acacia Shrub 

Astragalus acutirostris Sharpkeeled milkvetch Annual 

Astragalus calycosus Scapose milkvetch Perennial herb 

Astragalus geyeri Threecorner milkvetch Annual 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-18

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Astragalus layneae Layne milkvetch Perennial herb 

Astragalus lentiginosus Freckled milkvetch Annual/Perennial 

Astragalus mokiacensis Mokiak milkvetch Perennial 

Astragalus newberryi Newberry milkvetch Perennial herb 

Astragalus nutallianus Smallflower milkvetch Perennial 

Astragalus praelongus Stinking milkvetch Perennial herb 

Astragalus preussii Desert milkvetch Perennial 

Astragalus sabulonum Gravel milkvetch Annual 

Astragalus tephroedes Ashen milkvetch Perennial herb 

Parkinsonia floridum Blue Paloverde Tree 

Parkinsonia

microphyllum

Foothills Paloverde Tree 

Dalea mollis Silk Dalea Annual 

Dalea mollissima Silky prairieclover Annual 

Dalea searlsiae Searls prairieclover Perennial herb 

Lotus humistratus Low trefoil Annual 

Lotus rigidus Bush trefoil, Deervetch Shrub 

Lotus salsuginosus Humble trefoil Annual 

Lotus strigosus Desert birdfoot trefoil Annual 

Lupinus arizonicus Arizona lupine Annual 

Lupinus concinnus Bajada lupine, Elegant lupine Annual 

Lupinus flavoculatus Yelloweye lupine Annual 

Lupinus shockleyi Desert lupine Annual 

Lupinus sparsiflorus Mojave lupine, Narrow leaf lupine Annual 

Marina parryi Parrys indigobush Perennial herb 

Medicago lupulina Black medick, Yellow trefoil Annual 

Medicago polymorpha California burclover Annual 

Medicago sativa Alfalfa Perennial herb 

Melilotus alba White sweetclover Annual 

Melilotus indicus Sourclover Annual 

Melilotus officinalis Yellow sweetclover Annual 

Olneya tesota Ironwood Tree 

Parkinsonia aculeate Mexican paloverde Tree 

Pediomelum castoreum Beaver dam breadroot Perennial herb 

Prosopis glandulosa Honey mesquite Tree 

Prosopis pubescens Screwbean mesquite Tree 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-19

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Psorothamnus fremontii Indigobush Shrub 

Psorothamnus spinosus Smoketree Tree 

Senna armata Spiny senna Shrub 

Senna covesii Coues cassia Subshrub 

Sesbania macrocarpa Colorado River hemp 

FAGACEAE 

Oak

Quercus turbinella Shrub live oak Shrub/Tree 

FOUQUIERIACEAE

Ocotillo

Fouquieria splendens Ocotillo Shrub 

GARRYACEAE

Silk Tassel 

Garrya flavescens Silk tassel Annual 

GENTIANACEAE 

Gentian 

Centaurium calycosum Centaury Annual 

Eustoma exaltatum Alkali chalice 

GERANIACEAE 

Geranium

Erodium cicutarium Filaree Annual 

Erodium texanum Crane’s bill Annual/biennial 

HYDROPHYLLACEAE 

Waterleaf

Emmenanthe

penduliflora 

Whispering bells Annual 

Eriodictyon

angustifolium 

Yerba santa Shrub 

Eucrypta 

chrysanthemifolia 

Common eucrypta Annual 

Eucrypta micrantha Desert eucrypta Annual 

Nama demissum Purplemat Annual 

Nama hispidum Hairy nama Annual 

Nama pusillum Small leaf nama Annual 

Nemophila menziesii Baby blue-eyes Annual 

Phacelia affinis Ally phacelia Annual 

Phacelia anelsonii Aven Nelsons phacelia Annual 

Phacelia cicutaria Caterpillar phacelia Annual 

Phacelia crenulata Fairy phacelia Annual 

Phacelia crenulata Wild heliotrope, Notchleaf 

phacelia

Annual 

Phacelia cryptantha Cryptanth phacelia Annual 

Phacelia distans Common phacelia Annual 

Phacelia fremontii Yellow throats, Fremonts phacelia Annual 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-20

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Phacelia

glechomaefolia 

Canyon phacelia Annual 

Phacelia ivesiana Ives phacelia Annual 

Phacelia lemmonii Lemmons phacelia Annual 

Phacelia neglecta Neglected phacelia Annual 

Phacelia palmeri Palmers phacelia Biennial 

Phacelia parishi Parish phacelia Annual 

Phacelia pedicellata Specter phacelia Annual 

Phacelia perityloides Panamint phacelia Perennial herb 

Phacelia pulchella Gooddings phacelia Annual 

Phacelia rotundifolia Roundleaf phacelia Annual 

Phacelia vallis-mortae Death Valley phacelia Annual 

Pholistoma auritum Desert fiestaflower Annual 

Pholistoma 

membranaceum 

White fiestaflower Annual 

Tricardia watsonii Three hearts Perennial herb 

KRAMERIACEAE 

Rhatany 

Krameria ercta Rhatany, Pima rhatany, Purple 

heather 

Shrub

Krameria grayi White rhatany Shrub 

LAMIACEAE

Mint

Hyptis emoryi Desert lavender Shrub 

Monardella linoides Monardella Perennial herb 

Salazaria mexicana Bladdersage, Paperbag plant Shrub 

Salvia coumbariae Chia Annual 

Salvia dorrii Desert sage Shrub 

Salvia mohavensis Mohave sage Shrub 

LENNOACEAE 

Lennoa

Pholisma arenarium Scaly-stemmed Sand Food 

Pholisma sonorae Sand Food 

LOASACEAE 

Loasa, Stickleaf 

Eucnide urens Rocknettle Subshrub 

Mentzelia affinia Yellow comet Annual 

Mentzelia albicaulis Whitestem blazingstar Annual 

Mentzelia integra Virgin stickleaf Perennial 

Mentzelia involucrate Whitebract stickleaf Annual 

Mentzelia jonesii Jones stickleaf Annual 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-21

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Mentzelia nitens Venus blazingstar Annual 

Mentzelia oreophila Darlingtons stickleaf Perennial herb 

Mentzelia pumila Wyoming stickleaf Biennial 

Mentzelia tricuspis Blazingstar Annual 

Mentzelia veatchiana Veatch stickleaf Annual 

Petalonyx parryi Parrys sandpaper plant Shrub 

Petalonyx thurberi Thurbers sandpaper plant Shrub 

LYTHRACEAE

Loosestrife 

Lythrum califonicum Common loosestrife Perennial 

herb/Subshrub 

Ammania coccinea Ammania 

MALVACEAE 

Mallow

Eremalche exilis White mallow Annual 

Eremalche rotundifolia Desert fivespot Annual 

Hibiscus denudatus Desert hibiscus Perennial herb 

Malvella leprosa Alkali mallow Perennial herb 

Sphaeralcea ambigua Desert mallow, Globemallow Perennial herb 

Sphaeralcea 

angustifolia 

Narrowleaf desert mallow Perennial herb 

Sphaeralcea emoryii Emorys globemallow Annual 

NYCTAGINACEAE 

Four o’Clock 

Abronia fragrans Frangrant sandverbena Perennial herb 

Abronia villosa Sand verbena Annual 

Allionia incarnate Windmills Annual 

Boerhavia coccinea Red/Scarlet spiderling Perennial herb 

Boerhavia intermedia Jones spiderling Annual 

Boerhavia triquestra Watsons spiderling Annual 

Boerhavia wrightii Wrights boerhaavia, Wright 

spiderling

Annual 

Mirabilis bigelovii Desert four o’clock Perennial herb 

Mirabilis multiflora Giant four o’clock Perennial herb 

Tripterocalyx

micranthus

Sandpuffs Annual 

OLEACEAE 

Olive

Forestiera pubescens Desert olive Shrub 

Menodora scabra Rough menodora Perennial herb 

Menodora spinescens Spiny menodora Shrub 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-22

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

ONAGRACEAE

Evening Primrose 

Camissonia boothii Booths primrose Annual 

Camissonia brevipes Sundrop, Suncup Annual 

Camissonia californica California primrose Annual 

Camissonia 

chamaenerioides 

Slenderpod camissonia Annual 

Camissonia claviformis Browneyed primrose Annual 

Camissonia exilis Meager camissonia Annual 

Camissonia multijuga Manylobe primrose Annual 

Camissonia pallida Pale camissonia Annual 

Camissonia refracta Narrow leaf primrose, Refract 

desert primrose, Decurved 

camissonia 

Annual 

Camissonia walkeri Walkers camissonia Annual 

Gaura coccinea Scarlet gaura, Wild honeysuckly Perennial herb 

Gaura gracilis Slender gaura Perennial herb 

Oenothera albicaulis Whitestem evening primrose Annual 

Oenothera caespitosa Fragrant evening primrose Perennial herb 

Oenothera cardiophylla Long-tubed primrose 

Oenothera californica Watsons evening primrose Perennial herb 

Oenothera cavernae Munzs evening primrose Perennial herb 

Oenothera deltoids Birdcage dune primrose Annual 

Oenothera pallida Pale evening primrose Annual/Perennial 

herb

Oenothera primiveris Spring evening primrose Annual 

OROBANCHACEAE 

Broomrape 

Orobanche cooperi Broomrape Perennial 

herb/Parasitic

 Orobanche ludoviciana Manyflower cancerroot Perennial 

herb/Parasitic

PAPAVERACEAE 

Poppy 

Arctomecon californica Las Vegas bearpoppy Perennial herb 

Argemone corymbosa San Rafael pricklypoppy Perennial 

Argemone munita Pricklypoppy Perennial herb 

Argemone platycera Pricklypoppy Perennial herb 

Eschscholzia californica California poppy Annual/Perennial 

Eschscholzia

glyptosperma 

Desert goldpoppy Annual 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-23

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Eschscholzia

minutiflora

Little goldpoppy Annual 

PHILADELPACEAE

Mock Orange 

Philadelphus lewisii Mock Orange 

PLANTAGINACEAE 

Plantain

Plantago major Common plantain Perennial herb 

Plantago ovata Forsskal Woolly plantain, Island plantain Annual 

Plantago patagonica Purshes plantain Annual 

Plantago insularis Mousetail plantain Annual 

PLUMBAGINACEAE

Leadwort 

Limonium californicum Western marsh rosemary, Sea 

lavender

Shrub

POLEMONIACEAE 

Phlox

Eriastrum diffusum Spreading woollystar Annual 

Eriastrum eremicum Mojave woollystar Annual 

Gilia cana Desert gilia Annual 

Gilia filiformis Threadstem gilia Annual 

Gilia hutchinsifolia Pale gilia Annual 

Gilia latifolia Broadleaf gilia Annual 

Gilia leptomeria Great basin gilia, Lobeleaf gilia Annual 

Gilia micromeria Sand gilia Annual 

Gilia ophthalmoides Eyelike gilia Annual 

Gilia scopulorum Rock gilia Annual 

Gilia sinuate Wavy gilia Annual 

Gilia setossissima Prickly gilia Annual 

Gilia stellata Star gilia Annual 

Gilia transmontana Transmontane gilia Annual 

Ipomopsis arizonica Arizona skyrocket Biennial 

Ipomopsis polycladon Spreading skyrocket Annual 

Langloisia setosissima Lilac sunbonnet Annual 

Langloisia setosissima Mojave langloisia, Bristly 

langloisia

Annual 

Leptodactylon pungens Granite phlox Shrub 

Linanthus arenicola Sand linanthus Annual 

Linanthus aureus Golden linanthus, Desert gold Annual 

Linanthus aureus White desert gold Annual 

Linanthus bigelovii Bigelows linanthus Annual 

Linanthus demissus Humble gilia, Low linanthus Annual 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-24

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Linanthus jonesii Jones linathus Annual 

Loeseliastrum schottii Schotts calico Annual 

POLYGALACEAE 

Milkwort

Polygala subspinosa Cushion milkwort, Spiny milkwort Subshrub 

POLYGONACEAE

Buckwheat

Chorizanthe brevicornu Brittle spineflower Annual 

Chorizanthe corrugate Wrinkled sunflower Annual 

Chorizanthe rigida Spiny herb Annual 

Eriogonum 

brachypodum 

Parrys buckwheat Annual 

Eriogonum cernuum Nodding buckwheat Annual 

Eriogonum deflexum Skeleton buckwheat Annual 

Eriogonum fasciculatum California buckwheat Shrub 

Eriogonum heermannii Heermanns buckwheat Shrub 

Eriogonum heermannii Limestone buckwheat Shrub 

Eriogonum inflatum Desert trumpet Perennial herb 

Eriogonum insigne Unique buckwheat Annual 

Eriogonum maculatum Spotted buckwheat Annual 

Eriogonum 

microthecum 

Slender buckwheat Subshrub 

Eriogonum nidularium Birdnest buckwheat Annual 

Eriogonum 

palmerianum 

Palmers buckwheat Annual 

Eriogonum plumatella Flattop buckwheat Perennial herb 

Eriogonum pusillum Yellow turban Annual 

Eriogonum reniforme Kidneyleaf buckwheat Annual 

Eriogonum saxatile Rock buckwheat Perennial herb 

Eriogonum thomasii Thomas buckwheat Annual 

Eriogonum trichopes Little trumpet Annual 

Eriogonum viscidulum Sticky buckwheat Annual 

Eriogonum wrightii Wrights buckwheat Shrub 

Oxytheca perfoliata Oxytheca, Saucerplant Annual 

Polygonum

hydropiperoides

Smartweed Annual 

Polygonum aviculare Knotweed, Chivalrygrass, 

Dishwatergrass 

Annual 

Polygonum

lapathifolium

Willowweed Annual 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-25

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Pterostegia 

drymarioides 

Woodland pterostegia Annual 

Rumex hymenosepalus Wild rhubarb Perennial herb 

Rumex violascens Mexican dock Annual/Biennial 

Rumex salicifolius Willow dock Annual/Biennial 

PORTULACACEAE 

Purslane

Calyptidium

monandrum 

Pussypaws Annual 

Claytonia perfoliata Miners lettuce Annual 

PRIMULACEAE 

Primrose

Androsace elongate Rock jasmine Annual 

Samolus parviflorus Water pimpernel Perennial herb 

RANUNCULACEAE 

Buttercup 

Anemone tuberose Desert windflower Perennial herb 

Delphinium parishii Parishs larkspur, Desert larkspur Tuberous perennial 

Delphinium scaposum Larkspur Tuberous perennial 

Myosurus cupulatus Arizona mousetail Annual 

RESEDACEAE

Mignonette 

Oligomeris linifolia Oligomeris Annual 

RHAMNACEAE 

Buckthorn

Ceanothus greggii Greggs ceanothus, Buckbrush Shrub 

Rhamnus ilicifolia Hollyleaf redberry Shrub 

Ziziphus obtusifolia Graythorn Shrub 

ROSACEAERoseHolodiscus 

microphyllus

Small leaf spray Shrub 

Prunus fasciculate Desert almond Shrub 

Purshia stansburiana Cliffrose Shrub 

Purshia tridentate Mohave antelopebush Shrub 

RUBIACEAE 

Madder, Coffee 

Galium aparine Goosegrass Annual 

Galium stellatum Star bedstraw, Crevice bedstraw Shrub 

RUTACEAE

Rue, Citrus 

Thamnosma montana Tupentine broom, Desert rue Shrub 

SALICACEAE

Willow family 

Populus fremontii Cottonwood Tree Tree 

Salix exigua Coyote willow, Sandbar willow Shrub/Tree 

Salix gooddingii Gooddings willow Tree 

SANTALACEAE 

Sandalwood 

Anemopsis californica Yerba mansa Perennial herb 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-26

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

URACEAE 

Lizardtail

SAXIFRAGACEAE 

Saxifrage 

SCROPHULARIACEAE

Snapdragon, Figwort 

Antirrhinum filipes Twining snapdragon Annual 

Castilleja angustifolia Desert paintbrush Perennial herb 

Castilleja chromora Paintbrush Annual 

Castilleja exerta Purple owl's clover Annual 

Castilleja minor ssp. 

spiralis

Paintbrush Annual 

Kekiella antirrhinoides Bush beartongue Shrub 

Maurandya

antirrhiniflora 

Violet twining snapdragon Perennial herb 

Mimulus bigelovii Desert monkeyflower, Bigelow 

monkeyflower 

Annual 

Mimulus cardinalis Crimson monkeyflower Perennial 

Mimulus guttatus Monkeyflower Perennial 

Mimulus parryi Parrys monkeyflower Annual 

Mimulus pilosus Downy monkeyflower Annual 

Mimulus rubellus Reddish monkeyflower Annual 

Mimulus suksdorfii Suksdorf’s monkeyflower Annual 

Mohavea breviflora Lesser Mohavea Annual 

Mohavea confertiflora Ghostflower Annual 

Orthocarpus 

purpurascens 

Common owl clover 

Penstemon caespitosusr Painted beardtongue Perennial herb 

Penstemon palmeri Palmers penstemon Perennial herb 

Penstemon

pseudospectabilis 

Penstemon Perennial herb 

SIMAROUBACEAE 

Quassia, Simarouba 

SOLANACEAE 

Nightshade 

Datura wrightii Sacred datura, jimsonweed Annual/Perennial 

Lycium andersonii Andersons wolfberry Shrub 

Lycium cooperi Coopers wolfberry Shrub 

Lycium pallidum Pale wolfberry Shrub 

Lycium parishii Parishs desert thorn Shrub 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-27

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Lycium torreyi Torreys desert thorn Shrub 

Nicotiana glauca Tree tobacco Tree 

Nicotiana obtusifolia Desert tobacco Perennial herb 

Petunia parviflora Streamside petunia Annual 

Physalis crassifolia Thickleaf groundcherry Perennial herb 

Physalis hederifolia Ivyleaf groundcherry Perennial herb 

Physalis lobata Lobed groundcherry Perennial 

Solanum elaeagnifolium Silver nightshade Perennial herb 

TAMARICACEAE 

Tamarisk 

Tamarix aphylla Athel Tree 

Tamarix ramosissima Saltcedar Shrub/Tree 

ULMACEAE 

Elm

URTICACEAE 

Nettle

Parietaria hespara Pellitory Annual 

Parietaria penslvanica Hammerwort Annual 

VERBENACEAE

Vervain

Aloysia wrightii Oreganillo Shrub 

Verbena bracteata Protrate vervain Annual/Perennial 

herb

Verbena gooddingii Gooddings vervain Perennial herb 

Lippia lanceolata Frog Fruit 

Lippia nodiflora Garden lippia 

VIOLACEAE 

Violet

Ocalis sp Wood sorrel 

VISCACEAE 

Mistletoe

Phoradendron 

californica

Desert mistletoe Perennial/Parasitic 

Phoradendrom 

juniperinum 

Juniper mistletoe Perennial/Parasitic 

VITACEAE 

Grape

Vitis arizonica Canyon grape Perennial vine 

ZYGOPHYLLACEAE 

Caltrop, Tree-of-Life 

Fagonia laevis Fagonia Perennial herb 

Kallstroemia californica Yellow kallstroemia Annual 

Larrea tridentate Creosotebush Shrub 

Tribulus terrestris Puncturevine, Goathead Annual 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-28

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Monocots 

ARECACEAE 

Palm

Phoenix dactylifera Date palm Tree 

Washingtonia filifera Desert fan palm, California fan 

palm 

Tree

CYPERACEAE 

Sedge

Carex obtusata Blunt sedge Perennial herb 

Carex occidentalis Western sedge Perennial 

Cladium californicum Sawgrass Perennial herb 

Cyperus esculentas Yellow nut Sedge 

Cyperus rotundus Purple nut sedge 

Cyperus laevigatus Umbrella sedge Perennial herb 

Cyperus odoratus Fragrant sedge Annual 

Eleocharis

macrostachya 

Spikerush Perennial 

Eleocharis

montevidensis 

Spikerush Perennial herb 

Eleocharis parishii Parishs spikerush Perennial herb 

Eleocharis rostellata Torreys spikerush Perennial herb 

Scirpus acutus Tule Perennial 

Scirpus americanus American bulrush Perennial herb 

Scirpus californicus California bulrush Perennial herb 

Scirpus maritimus Alkali bulrush Perennial 

Scirpus pungens Common threesquare Perennial 

Scirpus robustus Robust bulrush Perennial herb 

HYDROCHARITACEAE 

Waterweed

Elodea canadensis Common waterweed Perennial/Aquatic 

Najas marina Spiny naiad Annual/Aquatic 

JUNCACEAE 

Rush

Juncus acutus Spiny rush Perennial herb 

Juncus arcticus Wiregrass Perennial herb 

Juncus bufonius Toadrush Annual 

Juncus cooperi Coopers rush Perennial 

Juncus effuses Soft rush Perennial herb 

Juncus mexicanus Mexican rush Perennial herb 

Juncus nevadensis Nevada rush Perennial 

Juncus nodosus Knotted rush Perennial herb 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-29

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Juncus tenuis Path rush, Poverty rush Perennial herb 

Juncus torreyi Torreys rush Perennial herb 

Juncus xiphioides Irisleaf rush Perennial herb 

LILIACEAE 

Lily 

Allium bisceptrum Palmers onion Perennial herb 

Allium Parishii Parishii onion Perennial herb 

Allium macropetalum Perennial herb 

Androstephium 

breviflorum

Funnel lily Perennial herb 

Calochortus flexuosus Weakstem mariposa Perennial herb 

Calochortus kennedyi Desert marisposa Perennial herb 

Dichelostemma

capitatum 

Bluedicks Perennial herb 

Hesperocallis undulate Ajo lily, Desert lily Perennial herb 

Nolina bigelovii Beargrass Shrub 

Yucca angustissima Narrowleaf yucca Shrub 

Yucca brevifolia Joshua tree Tree 

Yucca schidigera Mohave yucca Shrub/Tree 

ORCHIDACEAE

Orchid

Epipactis gigantean Stream orchid Perennial herb 

POACEAE

Grass

Achnatherum aridum Mormon needlegrass Perennial 

Achnatherum 

coronatum 

Needlegrass Perennial 

Achnatherum 

hymenoides 

Ricegrass Perennial 

Achnatherum speciosum Desert needlegrass Perennial 

Agropyron 

trachycaulum 

Slender wheatgrass Perennial 

Andropogon gerardii Big bluestem Perennial 

Aristida adscensionis Sixweeks threeawn Annual 

Aristida arizonica Arizona threeawn Perennial herb 

Aristida purpurea Purple threeawn Perennial herb 

Bothriochloa barbinodis Cane bluestem Perennial 

Bouteloua aristidoides Needle grama Annual 

Bouteloua barbata Sixweeks grama Annual 

Bouteloua eriopoda Black grama Perennial 

Bouteloua trifida Red grama Perennial 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-30

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Bromus arizonicus Bromegrass Annual 

Bromus carinatus Mountain brome Perennial herb 

Bromus catharticus Rescuegrass Perennial herb 

Bromus inermis Smooth brome Perennial herb 

Bromus madritensis Red brome Annual 

Bromus tectorum Cheatgrass Annual 

Bromus trinii Chilean chess Annual 

Chloris virgata Fingergrass Annual 

Crypsis schoenoides Swampgrass Annual 

Cynodon dactylon Bermudagrass Perennial 

Desmazeria rigida Desmazeria Annual 

Digitaria sanguinalis Crabgrass Annual 

Distichlis spicata Saltgrass Perennial herb 

Echniochloa crus-galli Barnyard grass Annual 

Elymus multisetus Big squirreltail Perennial 

Elymus smithii Western wheatgrass Perennial 

Eragrostis lutescens Yellow lovegrass Annual 

Eragrostis pectinacea Tufted lovegrass Annual 

Erioneuron pulchellum Fluffgrass Perennial 

Hordeum jubatum Foxtail barley Perennial herb 

Hordeum marinum Mediterranean barley Annual 

Leptochloa fascicularis Bearded sprangletop Annual 

Leptochloa uninervia Mexican sprangletop Annual 

Lolium multiflorum Italian ryegrass Annual 

Lolium perenne Perennial ryegrass Perennial herb 

Muhlenbergia 

asperifolia

Alkali muhly Annual/Perennial 

Muhlenbergia 

microsperma 

Littleseed muhly Annual/Perennial 

Muhlenbergia porteri Bush muhly Perennial 

Muhlenbergia 

richardsonis 

Mat muhly Perennial 

Panicum capillare Witchgrass Annual 

Phragmites australis Common reed Perennial 

Pleuraphis rigida Big galleta grass Perennial 

Poa bigelovii Bluegrass Annual 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-31

May 2007

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Classification 

Poa fendleriana Mutton grass Perennial 

Setaria glauca Yellow bristlegrass Annual 

Sporobolus airoides Alkali sacaton Perennial 

Sporobolus cryptandrus Sand dropseed Perennial 

Sporobolus flexuosus Mesa dropseed Perennial 

Tridens muticus Slim tridens Perennial herb 

Vulpia microstachys Small fescue Annual 

Vulpia octoflora Sixweeks fescue Annual 

POTAMOGETONACEAE 

Pondweed 

Potamogeton crispus Crispateleaf pondweed Perennial/Aquatic 

Potamogeton latifolius Nevada pondweed Perennial/Aquatic 

Potamogeton pectinatus Fennel leaf pondweed Perennial/Aquatic 

Ruppia maritime Ditchgrass Perennial/Aquatic 

TYPHACEAE 

Cattail

Typha angustifolia Narrowleaf cattail Perennial 

Typha domingensis Southern cattail Perennial 

ZANNICHAELLIACEAE 

Horned pondweed 

Zannichellia palustris Horned pondweed Perennial/Aquatic 

Epple 1995; Blair pers comm. 

Wildlife Species 

Table C-4: Fish Species Found Within LHFO 

Lake

Havasu 

Lower

Colorado 

River

Bill Williams 

River

(Below Alamo 

Dam) Common Name Scientific Name Origin 

Yes Yes No Bonytail Chub Gila elgans Native

Yes Yes No Flannelmouth Sucker Catostomus latipinnis Native

Yes Yes No Razorback Sucker Xyrauchen texanus Native

Yes Yes Yes Black Crappie Pomoxis nigromacalatus Non-Native

Yes Yes Yes Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Non-Native

Yes Yes No Brown Bullhead Ictalurus nebulosis Non-Native

Yes Yes Yes Channel Catfish Ictalurus punctatus Non-Native

Yes Yes Yes Common Carp Cyprinus carpio Non-Native
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-32

May 2007

Lake

Havasu 

Lower

Colorado 

River

Bill Williams 

River

(Below Alamo 

Dam) Common Name Scientific Name Origin 

Yes Yes No Flathead Catfish Pylodictis olivaris Non-Native

Yes Yes Yes Golden Shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas Non-Native

Yes Yes Yes Goldfish Carassius auratus Non-Native

Yes Yes Yes Green Sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Non-Native

Yes Yes Yes Largemouth Bass Micropterus salmoides Non-Native

Yes Yes Yes Mosquitofish Gambusia affinis Non-Native

Yes Yes No Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Non-Native

No No Yes Red Shiner Cyprinella lutrensis Non-Native

Yes Yes Yes Redear Sunfish Lepomis microlophus Non-Native

Yes Yes No Redside Shiner Richardsonius balteatus Non-Native

Yes Yes No Smallmouth Bass Micropterus dolomieu Non-Native

Yes Yes No Striped Bass Morone saxatilis Non-Native

Yes Yes Yes Threadfin Shad Dorosoma petenense Non-Native

Yes Yes Yes Tilapia Tilapia spp. Non-Native

Yes Yes No Warmouth Lepomis gulosis Non-Native

Yes Yes No Yellow Bullhead Ictalurus natalis Non-Native

 Minckly pers comm.; Jacobson pers comm. 

Table C-5: Amphibians and Reptiles Potentially Found Within LHFO 

Order Family Name Common Name Scientific Name 

Testudines Testudinidae Sonoran Desert Tortoise Gopherus agassizii (Sonoran population)

 Kinosternidae Sonoran Mud Turtle Kinosternon sonoriense 

 Emydidae Red-eared Slider Pseudemys scripta 

 Trionychidae Spiny Softshell Trionyx spiniferus 

Squamata Teiidae Gila Spotted Whiptail Aspidoscelis flagellicaudus 

 Pai Striped Whiptail Aspidoscelis pai 

 Tiger Striped Whiptail Aspidoscelis tigris 

 Plateau Striped Whiptail Aspidoscelis velox 

 Zebra-tailed Lizard Callisaurus draconoides 

 Western Banded Gecko Coleonyx variegates 

 Greater Earless Lizard Cophosaurus texanus 

 Crotaphytidae Great Basin Collared Lizard Crotaphytus bicinctores 

 Crotaphytidae Western Collared Lizard Crotaphytus collaris 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-33

May 2007

Order Family Name Common Name Scientific Name 

 Iguanidae Desert Iguana Dipsosaurus dorsalis 

 Scincidae Arizona Skink Eumeces gilberti arizonensis 

 Great Plains Skink Eumeces obsoletus 

 Leopard Lizard Gambelia wislizenii 

 Helodermatidae Banded Gila Monster Heloderma suspectum cinctum 

 Common Lesser Earless Lizard Holbrookia maculate 

 Greater Short-horned Lizard Phrynosoma hernandesi 

 Desert Horned Lizard Phrynosoma platyrhinos 

 Regal Horned Lizard Phrynosoma solare 

 Iguanidae Chuckwalla Sauromalus ater 

 Clark’s Spiny Lizard Sceloporous clarkia 

 Desert Spiny Lizard Sceloporous magister 

 Plateau Lizard Sceloporous tristichus 

 Somoran Desert Fringe-toed Lizard Uma notata 

 Mohave Fringe-toed Lizard Uma scoparia 

 Long-tailed Brush Lizard Urosaurus graciosus 

 Ornate Tree Lizard Urosaurus ornatus 

 Side-blotched Lizard Uta stansburiana 

 Arizona Night Lizard Xantusia arizonae 

 Desert Night Lizard Xantusia vigilis 

 Glossy Snake Ariona elegans 

 Boidae Desert Rosy Boa Charina trivirgata gracia 

 Western Shovelnosed Snake Chionactis occipitalis 

 Western Diamondback Crotalus atrox 

 Speckled Rattlesnake Crotalus mitchellii 

 Black-tailed Rattlesnake Crotalus molossus 

 Sidewinder Rattlesnake Crotalus cerastes 

 Mojave Rattlesnake Crotalus scutulatus 

 Ring-necked Snake Diadophus punctatus 

 Night Snake Hypsiglena torquata 

 California Kingsnake Lampropeltis getulus 

 Arizona Mountain Kingsnake Lampropeltis pyromelana pyromelana 

 Western Blind Snake Leptotyphiops humilis 

 Coachwhip Masticophis flagellum 

 Striped Whipsnake Masticophis taeniatus 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-34

May 2007

Order Family Name Common Name Scientific Name 

 Spotted Leaf-nosed Snake Phyllorynchus decurtatus 

 Western Coral Snake Micruroides euryxanthus 

 Gopher Snake Pituophis melanoleucus 

 Long-nosed Snake Rhinocheilus lecontei 

 Western Patch-nosed Snake Salvadora hexalepis 

 Western Ground Snake Sonora semiannulata 

 Smith’s Black-headed Snake Tantilla hobartsmithi 

 Checkered Garter Snake Thamnophis marcianus 

 Western Lyre Snake Trimorphodon biscutatus 

Anura Bufonidae Sonoran Desert Toad Bufo alvarius 

 Great Plains Toad Bufo cognatus 

 Arizona Toad Bufo microscaphus 

 Red-spotted Toad Bufo punctatus 

 Woodhouse’s Toad Bufo woodhousei 

 Couch’s Spadefoot Toad Scaphiopus couchi 

 Colorado River Toad Bufo alvarius 

 Hylidae Canyon Treefrog Hyla arenicolor 

 Pacific Treefrog Hyla regilla 

 Arizona Treefrog Hyla wrightorum 

 Ranidae Lowland Leopard Frog Rana yavapaiensis 

 Bullfrog Rana catesbeiana 

Caudata Ambystomatidae Tiger Salamander Ambystoma tigrinum 

Table C-6: Mammals Found Within LHFO 

Order Family Name Common Name Scientific Name Residence 

Insectivora Soricidae Desert Shrew Notiosorex crawfordi permanent 

Chiroptera Phyllostomatidae California Leaf-nosed Bat Macrotus californicus permanent 

 Vespertilionidae Pallid Bat Antrozous pallidus permanent 

 Townsend’s Big-eared Bat Corynorhinus townsendii permanent 

 Big Brown Bat Eptesicus permanent 

 Hoary Bat Eptesicus fuscus migratory/winter 

 Western Yellow Bat Lasiurus cinereus permanent 

 Western Red Bat Lasiurus blossevellii migratory/winter 

 California Myotis Myotis californicus permanent 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-35

May 2007

Order Family Name Common Name Scientific Name Residence 

 Occult Little Brown Bat Myotis occultus 

(=lucifigus) 

permanent 

 Small-footed Myotis Myotis ciliolabrum 

(=leibii=subulatus) 

permanent 

migratory/winter 

 Fringed Myotis Myotis thysanoides permanent 

 Cave Myotis Myotis velifer permanent 

 Yuma Myotis Myotis yumanesis permanent 

 Western Pipistrelle Pipistrellus hesperus permanent 

 Spotted Bat Euderma maculatum 

 Allen’s Big-eared Bat Idionycteris (Plecotis) 

phylotis 

permanent 

migratory 

 Molossidae Western Matiff Bat Eumops perotis permanent 

 Pocketed Free-tailed Bat Nyctinmops

fermorosaccus 

permanent 

 Mexican Free-tail Bat Tadarida brasilliensis Permanent/ 

migratory 

 Big Free-tail Bat Nyctinomops macrotis migratory 

Lagomorpha Leporidae Desert Cottontail Sylvilagus auduboni permanent 

 Eastern Cottontail Sylvilagus floridanus permanent 

 Black-tailed Jackrabbit Lepus californicus permanent 

Rodentia Sciuridae Harris’s Antelope Ground 

Squirrel

Ammospermophilus 

harrisii 

permanent 

 White-tailed Antelope 

Ground Squirrel 

Ammospermophilus 

leucurus 

permanent 

 Round-tailed Ground 

Squirrel

Spermophilus tereticaudus permanent 

 Rock Squirrel Spermophilus varigatus permanent 

 Cliff Chipmunk Eutamias dorsalis permanent 

 Tassel-eared Squirrel Sciurus aberti permanent 

Rodentia Castoridae Beaver Castor Canadensis permanent 

 Cricetidae Cactus Mouse Permyscus eremicus permanent 

 Canyon Mouse Peromyscus crinitus permanent 

 Deer Mouse Peromyscus maniculatus permanent 

 White-footed Mouse Permoyscus leucopus permanent 

 Brush Mouse Permoyscus boylii permanent 

 Pinyon Mouse Peromyscus truei permanent 

 White-throated Wood Rat Neotoma albigula permanent 

 Desert Wood Rat Neotoma lepida permanent 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-36

May 2007

Order Family Name Common Name Scientific Name Residence 

 Stephen’s Wood Rat Neotoma stephensi permanent 

 Mexican Wood Rat 

 (3 isolated populations) 

Neotoma mexicans permanent 

 Southern Grasshopper 

Mouse

Onychomys torridus permanent 

 Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus permanent 

 Arizona Cotton Rat Sigmodon arizonae permanent 

 Hispid Cotton Rat Sigmodon hispidus permanent 

 Western Harvest Mouse Reithrodontomys

megalotis

permanent 

 Muridae House Mouse Mus musculus permanent 

 Heteromyidae Arizona Pocket Mouse Perognathus amplus permanent 

 Longtail Pocket Mouse Perognathus formosus permanent 

 Desert Pocket Mouse Chaetodipus penicillatus permanent 

 Rock Pocket Mouse Chaetodipus intermedius permanent 

 Bailey’s Pocket Mouse Perognathus baileyi permanent 

 Little Pocket Mouse Perognathus 

longimembris

permanent 

 Hispid Pocket Mouse Perognathus hispidus permanent 

 Spiny Pocket Mouse Chaetodipus californicus permanent 

 Merriam’s Kangaroo Rat Dipodomys merriami permanent 

 Desert Kangaroo Rat Dipodomys deserti permanent 

 Ord’s Kangaroo Rat Dipodomys ordii permanent 

 Chisel-toothed Kangaroo 

Rat

Dipodomys microps permanent 

 Geomyidae Botta’s Pocket Gopher Thomomys bottae permanent 

 Erethizontidae Porcupine Erethizon dorsatum permanent 

Carnivore Canidae Coyote Canis latrans permanent 

 Gray Fox Urocyon cinereoargenteus permanent 

 Kit Fox Vulpes macrotis permanent 

 Procyonidae Raccoon Procyon lotor permanent 

 Ringtail Bassariscus astutus permanent 

 Mustelidae Western Spotted Skunk Spilogale gracilis permanent 

 Striped Skunk Mephitis mephitis permanent 

 Hognosed Skunk Conepatus leuconotus permanent 

 Badger Taxidea taxus permanent 

 River Otter Lutra canadadensis permanent 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-37

May 2007

Order Family Name Common Name Scientific Name Residence 

 Felidae Mountain Lion Felis concolor (browni) permanent 

 Bobcat Felis rufus permanent 

Artiodactyla Tayassuidae Collared Peccary Tayassu tajacu permanent 

 Suidae Domestic Pig Sus scrofa permanent 

 Cervidae Mule Deer Odocoileus hemionus permanent 

 Elk Cervis elaphus permanent 

 Antilocapridae Pronghorn Antilocapra Americana extirpated

 Bovidae Bighorn Sheep Ovis Canadensis permanent 

Perysiodactyla Equidae Burro Equuas asinus permanent 

Adams 2003; Burt and Grossenheider 1980; National Audubon Society 1979; Blair pers comm. 

Table C-7: Birds within LHFO Boundary

Family Species Abundance Residency 

Nesting

Species

MTBA

Loons Pacific Loon Rare Winter yes 

 Common Loon Rare Winter yes 

 Red-throated Loon Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

Grebes Pied-Billed Grebe Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Horned Grebe Rare Winter yes 

 Eared Grebe Common/Abundant Year-round yes 

 Red-necked Grebe Accidental/Vagrant Year-round yes 

 Western Grebe Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Clark’s Grebe Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Least Grebe Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes yes 

Shearwaters/Petrels Black-vented Shearwater Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Black Strom Petrel Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Least Strom Petrel Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Boobies Blue-footed Booby Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Brown Booby Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Pelicans American White Pelican Uncommon Year-round yes 

 Brown Pelican Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Cormorants Double-crested Cormorant Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Olivaceous Cormorant Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Frigatebirds Magnificent Frigatebird Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Tropicbirds Red-billed Tropicbird Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-38

May 2007

Family Species Abundance Residency 

Nesting

Species

MTBA

Herons/Egrets 

/Bitterns

American Bittern Rare Winter yes yes 

 Least Bittern Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Great Egret Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Snowy Egret Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Cattle Egret Accidental/Vagrant Year-round yes yes 

 Reddish Egret Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Great Blue Heron Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Green Heron Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Black-crowned Night Heron Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Tri-colored Heron Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Little Blue Heron Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Ibises/Spoonbills White-faced Ibis Uncommon Year-round yes 

 White Ibis Accidental/Vagrant Spring yes 

 Roseate Spoonbill Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

Storks Wood Stork Rare Summer yes 

Swans/Geese 

/Ducks 

Brant Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Black Bellied Whistling Duck Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Fulvous Whistling Duck Rare Summer yes 

 Tundra Swan Rare Winter yes 

 White-fronted Goose Rare Winter yes 

 Snow Goose Uncommon Winter yes 

 Ross’ Goose Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Canada Goose Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Wood Duck Rare Winter yes 

 Green-wing Teal Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Blue-wing Teal Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Cinnamon Teal Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Mallard Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Northern Pintail Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Northern Shoveler Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Gadwall Common/Abundant Winter yes yes 

 American Wigeon Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Canvasback Rare Winter yes 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-39

May 2007

Family Species Abundance Residency 

Nesting

Species

MTBA

 Redhead Common/Abundant Winter yes yes 

 Ring-necked Duck Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Greater Scaup Rare Winter yes 

 Lesser Scaup Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Common Goldeneye Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Barrow’s Goldeneye Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Hooded Merganser Rare Winter yes 

 Common Merganser Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Red-breasted Merganser Rare Winter yes 

 Ruddy Duck Common/Abundant Winter yes yes 

 Black Scoter Accidental/Vagrant Year-round yes 

 Surf Scoter Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Long-tailed Duck Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Bufflehead Common/Abundant Winter yes 

Vultures California Condor Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Turkey Vulture Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Black Vulture Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Hawks/Eagles 

/Kites

Osprey Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 White-tailed Kite Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Bald Eagle Uncommon Winter yes 

 Golden Eagle Uncommon Year-round yes 

 Northern Harrier Uncommon Winter yes yes 

 Sharp-shinned Hawk Uncommon Winter yes 

 Cooper’s Hawk Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Common Black Hawk Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Swainson’s Hawk Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Zone-tailed Hawk Rare Summer yes 

 Red-tailed Hawk Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Ferruginous Hawk Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Rough-legged Hawk Rare Winter yes 

 Norther Goshawk Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Harris’ Hawk Accidental/Vagrant Year-round yes yes 

 Red Shouldered Hawk Accidental/Vagrant Year-round yes yes 

Falcons/Caracaras Crested Caracara Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-40

May 2007

Family Species Abundance Residency 

Nesting

Species

MTBA

 American Kestrel Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Merlin Uncommon Winter yes 

 Peregrine Falcon Rare Year-round yes yes 

 Aplomado Falcon Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Prairie Falcon Rare Year-round yes yes 

Pheasants/Quail Gambel’s Quail Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

Rails/Gallinules

/Coots

Black Rail Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Yuma Clapper Rail Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Virginia Rail Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Sora Uncommon Winter yes yes 

 Common Moorhen Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 American Coot Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

Oystercatchers American Oystercatcher Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Cranes Sandhill Crane Uncommon Winter yes 

Plovers Black-bellied Plover Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Snowy Plover Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Semipalmated Plover Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Killdeer Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Mountain Plover Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Wilson’s Plover Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Avocets/Stilts American Avocet Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Black-necked Stilt Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

Sandpipers/Allies Greater Yellowlegs Uncommon Year-round yes 

 Lesser Yellowlegs Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Solitary Sandpiper Uncommon Winter yes 

 Upland Sandpiper Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Willet Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Spotted Sandpiper Uncommon Winter yes 

 Whimbrel Accidental/Vagrant Spring yes 

 Long-bill Curlew Uncommon Winter yes 

 Marbled Godwit Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Red Knot Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Sanderling Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Western Sandpiper Uncommon Year-round yes 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-41

May 2007

Family Species Abundance Residency 

Nesting

Species

MTBA

 Least Sandpiper Common/Abundant Year-round yes 

 Baird’s Sandpiper Uncommon Summer yes 

 Pectoral Sandpiper Uncommon Summer yes 

 Dunlin Rare Winter yes 

 Short-billed Dowitcher Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Wandering Tattler Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Wilson's Snipe Rare Spring yes 

 Long-bill Dowitcher Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Wilson’s Phalarope Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Red Phalarope Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Red-necked Phalarope Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

Gulls/Terns

/Allies

Franklin’s Gull Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Bonaparte’s Gull Rare Winter yes 

 Ring-billed Gull Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 California Gull Uncommon Winter yes 

 Heerman’s Gull Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Herring Gull Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Glaucous-winged Gull Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Sabine’s Gull Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Caspian Tern Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Common Tern Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Forster’s Tern Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Least Tern Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Black Tern Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Royal Tern Accidental/Vagrant Year-round yes 

 Elegant Tern Accidental/Vagrant Year-round yes 

 Gull-billed Tern Accidental/Vagrant Spring yes 

 Parasitic Jaeger Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Black Skimmer Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Pigeons/Doves Rock Dove Common/Abundant Year-round yes 

 White-winged Dove Common/Abundant Summer yes yes 

 Mourning Dove Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Inca Dove Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Common Ground Dove Rare Year-round yes yes 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-42

May 2007

Family Species Abundance Residency 

Nesting

Species

MTBA

 Ruddy Ground Dove Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Band-tailed Pigeon Accidental/Vagrant Summer 

 Eurasian Collared Dove Accidental/Vagrant Year-round yes 

Cuckoos/Roadrunners Yellow-billed Cuckoo Rare Spring yes yes 

 Greater Roadrunner Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

Owls Barn Owl Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Western Screech Owl Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Great Horned Owl Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Elf Owl Uncommon Spring yes 

 Flammulated Owl Accidental/Vagrant Spring yes 

 Burrowing Owl Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Long-eared Owl Rare Winter yes 

 Short-eared Owl Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Northern Saw-Whet Owl Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

Nightjars Lesser Nighthawk Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Common Poorwill Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

Swifts White-throated Swift Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Vaux’s Swift Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

Hummingbirds Black-chinned Hummingbird Common/Abundant 

Year-round

yes yes 

 Anna’s Hummingbird Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Broad-tailed Hummingbird Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Calliope Hummingbird Accidental/Vagrant Spring-fall 

Transient

 yes 

 Costa’s Hummingbird Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Rufous Hummingbird Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Allen’s Hummingbird Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Broad-billed Hummingbird Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Kingfishers Belted Kingfisher Uncommon Winter yes 

Woodpeckers Lewis’ Woodpecker Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Gila Woodpecker Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Williamson’s Sapsucker Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Red-naped Sapsucker Uncommon Winter yes 

 Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Rare Winter yes 

 Ladder-backed Woodpecker Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-43

May 2007

Family Species Abundance Residency 

Nesting

Species

MTBA

 Gilded Flicker Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Northern Flicker Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Red-headed Woodpecker Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Acorn Woodpecker Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Tyrant flycatchers Western Wood-Pewee Common/Abundant Summer-winter yes 

 Greater Pewee Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Olive-sided Flycatcher Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Willow Flycatcher Uncommon Spring yes yes 

 Hammond’s Flycatcher Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Dusky Flycatcher Uncommon Migrant yes 

 Gray Flycatcher Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Pacific-slope Flycatcher Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Cordilleran Flycatcher Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Black Phoebe Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Say’s Phoebe Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Eastern Phoebe Accidental/Vagrant Spring yes 

 Vermillion Flycatcher Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Ash-throated Flycatcher Common/Abundant Spring yes yes 

 Brown-crested Flycatcher Rare Summer yes yes 

 Eastern Kingbird Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Western Kingbird Common/Abundant Spring yes yes 

 Cassin’s Kingbird Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Thick-billed Kingbird Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Tropical Kingbird Accidental/Vagrant Spring yes 

Larks Horned Lark Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

Swallows Purple Martin Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Tree Swallow Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Violet-Green Swallow Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 No. Rough-winged Swallow Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Bank Swallow Uncommon Transient/Migrant yes 

 Cliff Swallow Common/Abundant Summer yes yes 

 Barn Swallow Common/Abundant Transient/Migrant yes 

Jays/Crows

/Ravens

Western Scrub Jay Uncommon Year-round yes 

 Pinyon Jay Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-44

May 2007

Family Species Abundance Residency 

Nesting

Species

MTBA

 Stellar’s Jay Rare Winter yes 

 Clark’s Nutcracker Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 American Crow Uncommon Winter yes 

 Common Raven Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

Chickadees/Titmice 

/Bushtits/Verdins

Mountain Chickadee Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Bridled Titmouse Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Verdin Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Bushtit Rare Winter yes 

Nuthatches/Creepers Red-breasted Nuthatch Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 White-breasted Nuthatch Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Brown Creeper Rare Winter yes 

Wrens Cactus Wren Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Rock Wren Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Canyon Wren Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Bewick’s Wren Uncommon Year-round yes 

 House Wren Common/Abundant Spring yes 

 Winter Wren Rare Winter yes 

 Marsh Wren Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

Kinglets/Gnatcatchers Golden-crowned Kinglet Rare Winter yes 

 Ruby-crowned Kinglet Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Uncommon Spring yes yes 

 Black-tailed Gnatcatcher Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

Thrushes/Allies Western Bluebird Uncommon Winter yes 

 Mountain Bluebird Uncommon Winter yes 

 Townsend’s Solitaire Uncommon Spring yes 

 Swainson’s Thrush Uncommon Spring yes 

 Hermit Thrush Uncommon Spring yes 

 American Robin Uncommon Winter yes 

 Varied Thrush Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes

Mockingbirds/Thrashers 

/Allies

Northern Mockingbird Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Sage Thrasher Uncommon Spring yes 

 Bendire’s Thrasher Rare Winter yes yes 

 Curve-billed Thrasher Rare Year-round yes yes 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-45

May 2007

Family Species Abundance Residency 

Nesting

Species

MTBA

 Crissal Thrasher Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Le Conte’s Thrasher Uncommon Spring yes yes 

 Gray Catbird Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Brown Thrasher Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

Pipits American Pipit Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Sprague’s Pipit Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

Waxwings Cedar Waxwing Uncommon Winter yes 

Silky flycatchers Phainopepla Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

Shrikes Loggerhead Shrike Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

Starlings European Starling Common/Abundant Year-round yes 

Vireos Yellow-throated Vireo Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Bell’s Vireo Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Gray Vireo Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Cassin’s Vireo Common Winter yes 

 Blue-headed Vireo Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Plumbeous Vireo Uncommon Migrant yes 

 Warbling Vireo Common/Abundant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Hutton’s Vireo Rare Winter yes 

 Philadelphia Vireo Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Red-eyed Vireo Accidental/Vagrant Spring yes 

Wood Warblers Orange-crowned Warbler Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Nashville Warbler Uncommon Spring yes 

 Virginia’s Warbler Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Lucy’s Warbler Uncommon Spring yes yes 

 Yellow Warbler Uncommon Spring yes yes 

 Yellow-rumped Warbler Common/Abundant Fall-Spring yes 

 Black-throated Gray Warbler Uncommon Winter yes 

 Black-throated Blue Warbler Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Townsend’s Warbler Uncommon Spring yes 

 Hermit Warbler Uncommon Spring yes 

 Black-and-White Warbler Rare Winter yes 

 Palm Warbler Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Blackpoll Warbler Accidental/Vagrant Summer yes 

 Prothonotary Warbler Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Wilson’s Warbler Common/Abundant Transient/Migrant yes 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-46

May 2007

Family Species Abundance Residency 

Nesting

Species

MTBA

 MacGillivray’s Warbler Common/Abundant Spring yes 

 American Redstart Rare Winter yes 

 Painted Redstart Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Common Yellowthroat Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Northern Waterthrush Accidental/Vagrant Summer yes 

 Louisiana Waterthrush Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Yellow-breasted Chat Common/Abundant Spring yes yes 

 Northern Parula Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Ovenbird Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Golden-winged Warbler Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Blue-winged Warbler Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Worm-eating Warbler Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Hooded Warbler Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Tanagers Summer Tanager Uncommon Summer yes yes 

 Western Tanager Common/Abundant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Hepatic Tanager Uncommon Summer yes 

Cardinals/Grosbeaks 

/Allies

Northern Cardinal Uncommon Year-round yes 

 Pyrrhuloxia Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Common Winter yes 

 Black-headed Grosbeak Common/Abundant Spring yes yes 

 Blue Grosbeak Common/Abundant Spring yes yes 

 Lazuli Bunting Rare Summer yes 

 Indigo Bunting Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Varied Bunting Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Sparrows/Towhee 

/Allies

Rufous-crowned Sparrow Rare Year-round yes 

 White-throated Sparrown Rare Winter yes 

 Green-tailed Towhee Uncommon Winter yes 

 Spotted Towhee Uncommon Winter yes 

 Canyon Towhee Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Abert’s Towhee Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Chipping Sparrow Uncommon Year-round yes 

 Brewer’s Sparrow Uncommon Winter yes 

 Black-chinned Sparrow Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-47

May 2007

Family Species Abundance Residency 

Nesting

Species

MTBA

 Vesper Sparrow Uncommon Winter yes 

 Cassin’s Sparrow Uncommon Winter yes 

 Lark Sparrow Uncommon Year-round yes 

 Black-throated Sparrow Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Sage Sparrow Uncommon Winter yes 

 Lark Bunting Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Savannah Sparrow Uncommon Winter yes 

 Grasshopper Sparrow Accidental/Vagrant Winter yes 

 Fox Sparrow Rare Winter yes 

 Song Sparrow Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Lincoln’s Sparrow Uncommon Winter yes 

 Swamp Sparrow Uncommon Spring yes 

 Golden-crowned Sparrow Rare Winter yes 

 White-crowned Sparrow Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Dark-eyed Junco Uncommon Winter yes 

 Lapland Longspur Rare Winter yes 

 Chestnut-collared Longspur Rare Winter yes 

 McCown’s Longspur Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

Blackbirds/Orioles Red-winged Blackbird Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Western Meadowlark Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Yellow-headed Blackbird Uncommon Summer yes yes 

 Bobolink Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Brewer’s Blackbird Common/Abundant Winter yes 

 Rusty Blackbird Rare Winter yes 

 Great-tailed Grackle Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Brown-headed Cowbird Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Bronzed Cowbird Accidental/Vagrant Summer yes 

 Dickcissel Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Hooded Oriole Uncommon Spring yes yes 

 Bullock’s Oriole Uncommon Summer yes yes 

 Scott’s Oriole Accidental/Vagrant Summer yes yes 

Finches/Allies Red Crossbill Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 House Finch Common/Abundant Year-round yes yes 

 Purple Finch Rare Winter yes 

 Cassin’s Finch Rare Winter yes 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-48

May 2007

Family Species Abundance Residency 

Nesting

Species

MTBA

 Evening Grosbeak Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 Lazuli Bunting Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Painted Bunting Accidental/Vagrant Transient/Migrant yes 

 Pine Siskin Rare Winter yes 

 Lesser Goldfinch Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

 Lawrence’s Goldfinch Rare Transient/Migrant yes 

 American Goldfinch Uncommon Winter yes 

Old World Sparrows House Sparrow Uncommon Year-round yes yes 

Peterson 1990; Sibley 2003; Rosenberg et. al 1991; Blair pers comm. 

Invasive Species 

Table C-8: List of Federal Regulated and Restricted Invasive Species 

Common Name Scientific Name Within LHFO Boundary 

Terrestrial Plants 

Autumn olive Elaeagnus umbellata 

Chinese tallow Sapium sebiferum 

Downy brome Bromus tectorum yes

Garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata 

Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera japonica 

Japanese knotweed Polygonum cupidatum 

Kudzu Pueraria montana var. lobata

Leafy spurge Euphorbia esula 

Mile-a-minute weed Polygonum perfoliatum 

Multiflora rose Rosa multiflora 

Musk thistle Carduus nutans yes

Russian knapweed Acroptilon repens yes

Russian olive Elaeagnus angustifolia 

Saltcedar Tamarix spp. yes 

Scotch broom Cytisus scoparius 

Scotch thistle Onopordum acanthium yes

Spotted knapweed Centaurea maculosa yes

Tree-of-heaven Ailanthus altissima 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-49

May 2007

Common Name Scientific Name Within LHFO Boundary 

Yellow star thistle Centaurea solstitialis yes

Terrestrial Animals 

Africanized honeybee Apis mellifera scutellata yes

Asian long-horned beetle Anoplophora glabrispennis 

Asian tiger mosquito Aedes albopictus 

Brown tree snake Boiga irregularis 

Cane toad Bufo marinus 

Cactus moth Cactoblastis cactorum 

Emerald ash borer Agrilus planipennis 

European gypsy moth Lymantria dispar 

European starling Sturnus vulgaris yes

Formosan subterranean termite Coptotermes formosaurus 

Glassy-winged sharpshooter Homalodisca coagulate 

Hemlock woolly adelgid Adelges tsugae 

Pink hibiscus mealybug Maconellicoccus hirsutus 

Red imported fire ant Solenopsis invicta 

Russian wheat aphid Diuraphis noxia 

Wild Boar Sus scrofa yes

Aquatic and Wetland Plants 

Brazilian waterweed Egeria densa 

Caulerpa, Mediterranean clone Caulerpa taxifolia 

Common reed Phragmites australis yes

Eurasian water-milfoil Myriophyllum spicatum yes

Giant hogweed Heracleum mantegazzianum 

Giant-reed Arundo donax yes

Giant salvinia Salvinia molesta yes

Hydrilla Hydrilla verticillata 

Melaleuca Melaleuca quinqenervia 

Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria 

Water chestnut Trapa natans 

Water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes 

Aquatic and Wetland Animals 

Alewife Alosa pseudoharengus 

Asian swamp eel Monopterus albus 

Bullfrog Rana catesbeiana yes
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-50

May 2007

Common Name Scientific Name Within LHFO Boundary 

Eurasian ruffe Gymnocephalus cernuus 

European green crab Carcinus maenas 

Flathead catfish Pylodictus olivaris yes

Northern Snakehead Channa argus 

Nutria Myocastor coypus 

Round goby Negobius melanostomus 

Sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus 

Veined rapa whelk Rapana venosa 

Zebra mussel Dreissena polymorpha Yes

Microbes 

Exotic Newcastle Disease Paramyxovirus 

Fowlpox Avipoxvirus 

Plum Pox Potyviruses: Potyviridae 

Soybean Rust Phakopsora 

pachyrhizi/Phakopsora meibomiae 

Sudden Oak Death Phytophthora ramorum 

West Nile Virus Flavivirus

Whirling Disease Myxobolus cerebralis 

Table C-9: Arizona Regulated and Restricted Weeds 

Common name Scientific name State Designation Within LHFO Boundary 

Southern sandbur Cenchrus echinatus Regulated

Field sandbur Cendhrus incertus Regulated

Field bindweed Convolvulus arvensis Restricted

Burclover Medicago polymorpha Restricted

Common purslane Portulaea oleracea Restricted

Puncturevine Tribulus terrestris Restricted yes 

Russian knapweed Acroptilon repens Restricted yes 

Jointed goatgrass Aegilops cylindrica Restricted

Camelthorn Alhagi maurorum Restricted yes 

Globed-podded hoary cress 

(Whitetop)

Cardaria draba Restricted

Diffuse knapweed Centaurea diffusa Restricted yes 

Spotted knapweed Centaurea maculosa Restricted

Yellow starthistle Centaurea solstitialis Restricted yes 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-51

May 2007

Common name Scientific name State Designation Within LHFO Boundary 

Dodder Cuscuta spp. Restricted yes 

Floating water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes Restricted

Quackgrass Elymus repens Restricted

Halogeton Halogeton glomeratus Restricted yes 

Texas blueweed Helianthus cilaris Restricted

Three-lobed morning glory Ipomoea triloba Restricted

Dalmation toadflax Linaria dalmatica Restricted

Scotch thistle Onopordum 

acanthium 

Restricted yes 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan C-52

May 2007

Desert Tortoise Habitat 

The goals and criteria for the Three Categories of Desert Tortoise Habitat Areas are 

listed in the following table. The criteria are ranked by importance to the categorization 

process, with Criterion I being the most important. 

Table C-10: Goals and Criteria for Three Categories of Desert Tortoise Habitat Areas 

Items Category I 

Habitat Areas 

Category II 

Habitat Areas 

Category III 

Habitat Areas 

Category Goals Maintain stable, viable 

populations and protect 

existing tortoise habitat 

values; increase 

populations, where possible. 

Maintain stable, viable 

populations and halt further 

declines in tortoise habitat 

values. 

Limit tortoise habitat 

and population declines 

to the extent possible by 

mitigating impacts 

Criterion 1 Habitat Area essential to the 

maintenance of large viable 

populations.

Habitat Area may be 

essential to maintenance of 

viable populations. 

Habitat Area not 

essential to maintenance 

of viable populations 

Criterion 2 Conflicts resolvable. Most conflicts resolvable. Most conflicts not 

resolvable. 

Criterion 3 Medium to high density or 

low density contiguous with 

medium or high density. 

Medium to high density or 

low density contiguous with 

medium or high density. 

Low to medium density 

not contiguous with 

medium or high density. 

Criterion 4 Increasing, stable, or 

decreasing population. 

Stable or decreasing 

population. 

Stable or decreasing 

population. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan D-1

May 2007

Appendix D 

Water Resources: 

Springs/Wells/Reservoirs/Water Catchments 

The following list shows all known desert water sources and developments beyond those 

perennial waters of the Colorado or Bill Williams Rivers. The list also shows if the water 

source is developed for beneficial consumptive uses by wildlife, livestock, or other 

purposes of public benefit. 

Name Developed 

Arrastra Canyon (Mohave Mtn. #5) Yes

Arrastra Well No

Arrastra Well (772) Yes

Arrowweed Spring No

Aubrey Hills Catchment (892) Yes

Aubrey Hills Tunnel Yes

Betty Lou (845) Yes

Big Falls Dam Yes

Bill Williams Spring No

Blacksmith Canyon Catchment Yes

Blacksmith Canyon Spring Yes

Black Tank Yes

Bouse Hills (928) Yes

Box Spring No

Bristol Spring No

Buckskin Jump-off / Mesa #3 (918) Yes

Buckskin Mesa #4 (943) Yes

Buckskin Mtn. 1 (628) Yes

Buckskin Mtn. 2 (629) Yes

Buckskin Tunnel Yes

Bermuda Spring No

Burnt Spring No

Burro Canyon / Mohave Mtn. #2 (771) Yes

Burro Canyon / Mohave Mtn. #4 Yes

Burro Spring/Well No

California Catchment 1 Yes

California Catchment 2 Yes

C.A.P. Tank Yes

Catasaurus Catchment Yes

Cattail Cove (900) Yes

Cayuga Tank (807) Yes

Centennial Wash (I) (441) Yes

Centennial Wash (II) (442) Yes

Chino Spring No

Chris’s Hideout Well Yes
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan D-2

May 2007

Name Developed 

Cienega Springs Yes

Conley Reservoir Yes

Cottonwood Spring No

Crossman Peak (Mohave Mtn. #2) (739) Yes

Dripping Springs Yes

Dry Tank Yes

Earth Tank Yes

Flag Spring No

Goat Spring Yes

Gold Spring Yes

Granite Wash 1 (929) Yes

Granite Wash 2 (930) Yes

Granite Wash 3 Yes

Granite Wash 4 Yes

Granite Wash Big Horn Sheep Catchment Yes

Granite Wash Pothole Yes

Grapevine Canyon Spring No

Grapevine Springs No

Gravel Pit (913) Yes

Hancock Reservoir Yes

Hancock Stock Tank Yes

Harcuvar #1 (597) Yes

Harcuvar #11 Yes

Harcuvar #2 Yes

Harcuvar #3 Yes

Harcuvar #6 Yes

Harcuvar #9 Yes

Harcuvar Big Horn Sheep #6 Yes

Harcuvar Deer #2 Yes

Harcuvar Deer #3 Yes

Harcuvar Mtns. #1 Yes

Hargus Cabin Spring Yes

Harquar Tank (932) Yes

Havasu Spring No

Highway 95 – Red Cliff Yes

Horse Corral (Mohave Mtn. #1) (670) Yes

Ibex Peak I (958) Yes

Ibex Peak II Yes

Jackpot Spring No

Jasmine Yes

Jasmine Apron Yes

Jupiter Spring Yes

Lamb Spring (573) Yes

Leroy Yes

Lake Mine Yes

Little Black Mtn. #1 Yes

Little Black Mtn. #2 Yes

Little Black Mtn. #3 Yes

Little Buckskin Mtn. #1 (935) Yes
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan D-3

May 2007

Name Developed 

Little Buckskin Mtn. #2 Yes

Little Buckskin Mtn. #3 Yes

Little Buckskin Mtn. Mule Deer Catchment Yes

Lower West Side Reservoir Yes

Midway (970) Yes

Midway Spring No

Miller Reservoir Yes

Miller Well (1027) Yes

Miller Well Apron Yes

Mississippi Spring Yes

Mohave Mtn. #3 (abandoned) Yes

Mohave Springs Yes

Muse Reservoir Yes

N. Plomosa Yes

New Well Tank Yes

No Name Canyon (774) Yes

No Name Canyon (Mohave Mtn. #6) Yes

Onetto Spring No

Oro Tank Yes

Orosco Tank Yes

Osborne Tank Yes

Paloma Wash Catchment Yes

Phoenix Trust Reservoir Yes

Piedras Blancas (1032) Yes

Planet Peak Apron Yes

Planet Peak Tank Yes

Planet Peak Tunnel Yes

Plomosa Mtn. #2 (521) Yes

Portal Inlet (931) Yes

Ram Mtn. Apron Yes

Ram Mtn. Tanks Yes

Red Cliffs (996) Yes

Refuge Boundary Yes

Refuge Boundary (Mohave Mtn. #7) (777) Yes

Reily Yes

Roadside Tank Yes

Scott’s Well Yes

Screwbean Spring Yes

Secret Pass Spring No

Seep Spring No

Shancy Spring No

Short Spring No

Section 26 Tank Yes

Silver Creek Spring No

Skull Mtn. Yes

Smith Peak (957) Yes

Smith Peak Catchment Yes

Socorro Peak (934) Yes

Socorro Catchment Yes
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan D-4

May 2007

Name Developed 

South Needles Tank/Pothole (980) Yes

Spring & Improvement Yes

Standard Wash Catchment Yes

Standard Wash (892) Yes

Summit Spring No

Swansea No

Tank Pass (963) Yes

Tinajas dos Picos Yes

Tortoise Tank Yes

Tule Spring Yes

Tunnel Spring No

Upper West Side Reservoir Yes

Winchester Tank Reservoir Yes

Whiskey Spring No

This list is based on available data sources, including the Rangeland Improvement Project 

System and GIS data sources, and may not be complete.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan E-1

May 2007

Appendix E 

Cultural Resources 

Cultural Resources: Basic Goals, Objectives, 

Allocations, and Actions 

Goal 1: Preserve and protect significant cultural 

resources and ensure that they are available for 

appropriate uses by present and future generations.

Objectives

 Allocate sites to cultural resource use categories, in accordance with BLM 

Manual 8110, to achieve the corresponding desired future conditions. Use 

categories include scientific use, conservation for future use, traditional use, 

public use, experimental use, and discharged from management. 

 Implement physical protection measures at sites. 

 Retain significant resources in public ownership. 

 Acquire significant resources for protection and management under public 

ownership.

 Identify significant cultural landscapes and associated use allocations. 

 Preserve sites that represent the range of time periods, cultural traditions, and 

functional types within the planning area. 

 Consult with Indian tribes to identify places of traditional importance and access 

needs, and to evaluate and determine site use allocations and protection priorities. 

 Encourage and permit scientific research to include non-invasive archaeological 

methods and the documentation of oral histories and oral traditions. 

 Provide opportunities for cultural heritage tourism and associated partnerships. 

 Develop and maintain an active program of public education on the nature and 

values of cultural resources and the need to preserve them. Direct educational 

efforts toward a variety of age groups and audiences. Disseminate the results of 

scientific research to the public in an understandable format. 

 Involve local communities in cultural resource protection and public education 

projects.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan E-2

May 2007

Allocations and Management Actions 

 Identify priority areas for cultural resource management based on the relative 

importance and sensitivity of known and anticipated cultural properties. 

Management actions: these areas will be assigned a higher priority for inventory, 

scientific research, condition monitoring, and the implementation of protection 

measures and use restrictions. They will also receive relatively high priority for 

National Register nomination, retention in federal ownership, and acquisition of 

in-holdings or properties of high significance on adjacent lands. 

 Identify alternative sites and areas for varying intensities of public use. 

 Continue to maintain sites that have been developed for interpretive uses. 

 Work with the recreation program to incorporate sites allocated to public use into 

systems of recreational trails, routes, and Back Country Byways. 

 Conduct ethnohistoric studies of selected areas to identify places of traditional 

cultural importance, tribal concerns, tribal needs for access and natural resource 

use, and protective measures. 

Goal 2: Seek to reduce imminent threats and resolve 

potential conflicts, from natural or human-caused 

deterioration, or from other resource uses. 

Objectives

 Work with BLM staff and land use applicants to develop project designs that 

avoid adverse impacts to significant cultural resources. 

 Work with geologists to ensure that abandoned mine closures do not 

unnecessarily cause damage to cultural resources. 

 Identify and protect historic structures and other fire-sensitive sites in areas 

designated for fuels treatment programs. 

 Reduce the impacts of motorized and non-motorized recreational activities, 

including recreational prospecting, on archaeological sites. 

 Reduce the impacts of commercial recreational activities and events, while 

providing opportunities for public enjoyment and education. 

 In considering applications for leases under the Recreation & Public Purposes 

Act, identify and analyze NEPA alternatives that do not contain significant 

cultural resources. 

 Review proposed grazing permit renewals to evaluate areas of livestock 

congregation where grazing activities are causing damage to significant sites, and 

take action to protect the sites. 

 Maintain the visual integrity of cultural landscapes and settings of significant 

sites.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan E-3

May 2007

Allocations and Management Actions 

 Conduct cultural resources inventories to identify significant resources, imminent 

threats, and potential conflicts with other resource uses (see Goal 3). 

 Ensure that holders of special recreation permits monitor the condition of 

archaeological sites to which they are permitted to take visitors, and that they 

offer appropriate educational information about resource conservation. 

 Establish limitations, restrictions, or stipulations to ensure that commercial tour 

operators do not damage cultural resources. 

 Prohibit commercial tours to selected areas in order to protect cultural resources. 

Such areas may be allocated to a category of “conservation for future use.” 

 Prohibit geocaching activities on archaeological sites. 

 Limit vehicle traffic to designated routes or, if needed, close selected routes to 

vehicles or reroute to reduce physical damage or limit access to significant 

archaeological sites. 

 Restrict livestock grazing where this activity is causing significant damage to 

sites.

 In evaluating alternative locations for leases granted under the Recreation & 

Public Purposes Act, assign preference to areas that do not contain significant 

cultural resources, or to areas managed as open space with limited access. If 

leases are granted in areas that contain significant cultural resources, it is 

preferable to mitigate adverse effects through scientific data recovery rather than 

patent restrictions or reversionary clauses. 

 Establish a policy that prohibits scientific and public uses of sites from disturbing 

Native American human remains and associated objects. 

Goal 3: Identify priority geographic areas for new field 

inventory, based upon a probability for unrecorded 

significant resources. 

Objectives

 Conduct field inventories to identify significant cultural resources in order to 

determine threats and effective protection measures, and to allocate sites to 

appropriate uses. 

Allocations and Management Actions

 Define priority areas for field inventories. 

 Identify cultural landscapes and traditional cultural properties that may require 

protection or special management. 

 Coordinate with adjacent Field Offices on priority inventories. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan E-4

May 2007

 Harcuvar Mountains: The Harcuvar Mountains contain a variety of 

significant archaeological sites, including prehistoric camps, stone tool 

manufacturing sites, and petroglyphs. Unusual sites include rockshelters, 

pictographs, and occurrences of minerals and crystals. These sites have 

the potential to yield important information about prehistoric occupation 

of the area, particularly during the period between A.D. 700 and 1000. 

There may also be sites associated with transportation, commerce, and 

military activities during the 1800s. 

 Harquahala Mountains: This mountain range, a major zone of 

occupation by the historic Yavapai tribe, contains significant prehistoric 

sites including habitation camps, milling areas, and rock art. The 

significance of the cultural resources is consistent with a 

recommendation by wildlife biologists to establish an ACEC that 

includes the entire area of the range managed by PFO. 

Land Use Allocation for Cultural Resources 

Table E-1. Allocation of LHFO Cultural Sites

Approved RMP 

Conservation (28) 

Intaglio (3) 

Dough Boy Desert Unit 

Osborne Snake, etc Desert Unit 

Feathered Serpent Desert Unit 

Rock Art (10) 

Empire Colorado River Unit 

Arrastre Canyon Desert Unit 

Burro Canyon Desert Unit 

Hwy 60 Desert Unit 

AhVilla Colorado River Unit 

Harcuvar Pictograph sites Desert Unit 

Harquar Tank Desert Unit 

Mississippi Spr Bill Williams Unit 

Kegley Lynch Desert Unit 

Bison Desert Unit 

Habitation (13) 

Osborne Wash Desert Unit 

Mohave Mesa Desert Unit 

Black Tank Desert Unit 

Screwbean Desert Unit 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan E-5

May 2007

Table E-1. Allocation of LHFO Cultural Sites

Bowman’s Wash Colorado River Unit 

Beale’s Wagon Road Colorado River Unit 

M:9:16 (ASM) Bill Williams Unit 

Bluebird Colorado River Unit 

Colorado River Nature Center Colorado River Unit 

Bouse Well Desert Unit 

Owl Cliff’s shelter Desert Unit 

Centennial Wash Bill Williams Unit 

Mineral Wash Desert Unit 

Historic (2) 

Harquahala Mining Desert Unit 

Bonanza & Incline Desert Unit 

Traditional (7) 

Intaglio (5) 

Beale Slough Colorado River Unit 

Thunderbird Desert Unit 

Rattlesnake Desert Unit 

Topock Maze Colorado River Unit 

Park Moabi Colorado River Unit 

Petroglyph 

Stateline Glyph Colorado River Unit 

Complex 

Creation Site Area Colorado River Unit 

Public (8) 

Camp Bouse Desert Unit 

A&P RR Colorado River Unit 

Culling’s Well Desert Unit 

Hardy Toll Rd Colorado River Unit 

Schwanbeck’s Colorado River Unit 

Swansea Bill Williams Unit 

McGuffie Cabin Bill Williams Unit 

Hargus Cabin Desert Unit 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan E-6

May 2007

Special Cultural Resource Management Area 

Special Cultural Resource Management Areas contain cultural resources (archaeological 

sites, historic sites, or places of traditional cultural importance) that are particularly 

important for public use, scientific use, traditional use, or other uses as defined in BLM 

Manual 8110.4. Management prescriptions for these areas should reflect and support the 

primary values for which the areas are allocated. For example, management prescriptions 

for a Special Cultural Resource Management Area allocated primarily for public use 

should focus on developing and interpreting sites for public visitation, including heritage 

tourism. Management prescriptions for a special area allocated primarily for scientific 

use should focus on protecting sites for study, supporting field schools, and other 

research efforts. Management prescriptions for a special area allocated primarily for 

traditional use should seek to accommodate the traditional cultural practices of Indian 

tribes or other cultural groups that ascribe religious or other heritage values to the area.

Management prescriptions for a special area allocated primarily to protect scarce sites of 

singular importance should not be subjected to invasive studies or other uses that would 

threaten their present condition. Instead prescriptions should focus on conserving such 

sites for the future. 

Management prescriptions for a single Special Cultural Resource Management Area can 

focus on more than one type of use, just as a single cultural property can be allocated to 

more than one of the use categories described in Manual 8110.4. For example, a special 

area might contain a set of cultural properties that, linked together and interpreted as a 

group, would make a good auto tour route for heritage tourism. At the same time, the 

area might contain several cultural properties of unusual historic importance that should 

be segregated from land or resource uses that might impair their present condition or 

setting. While both kinds of properties should receive management emphasis, they can 

be subsumed within a single land use allocation with management prescriptions tailored 

to support public visitation of the sites along the auto tour route, and protection for the 

sites that warrant segregation. 

The primary purpose of this land use allocation is to differentiate some portions of a 

planning area from others in terms of cultural resource values. The allocation can denote 

priority for the expenditure of time and funds or the need for special protection to achieve 

management objectives. However, highlighting a geographic area for its special cultural 

resource values does not diminish the importance of cultural resources in other areas.

Cultural resources on lands not included within special areas still need to be managed for 

the values they contain and opportunities they afford. 

Definition of Use Categories 

SCIENTIFIC USE: This category applies to any cultural property determined to be 

available for consideration as the subject of scientific or historical study at the present 

time, using currently available research techniques. Study indicates methods that would 

result in the property’s physical alteration or destruction. This category applies almost 

entirely to prehistoric and historic archaeological properties, where this method of use is 

generally archaeological excavation, controlled surface collection, and/or controlled 

recordation (data recovery). Recommendation to allocate individual properties to this use 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan E-7

May 2007

must be based on documentation of the kinds of data the property is thought to contain 

and the data’s importance for pursuing specific research topics. 

CONSERVATION FOR FUTURE USE: This category is reserved for any unusual 

cultural resource that, because of scarcity, a research importance, cultural importance, 

architectural interest, or comparable reasons, is not currently appropriate for 

consideration as the subject of scientific or historical study that would result in its 

physical alteration. A cultural property or location included in this category is considered 

worthy of segregation from all other land or resource uses, including cultural resource 

uses, that would threaten the maintenance of the present condition or setting, as pertinent, 

and it will remain in this category until specific provisions are met in the future. A 

cultural resource will be separated and protected from other non-compatible land uses 

and preserved in place because a) that particular site type is scarce or unique, b) its 

information potential cannot be realized through available archaeological methods, or 

c) it represents an outstanding example of a particular site type. 

TRADITIONAL USE: This category is to be applied to any cultural resource that is 

perceived by a specified social and/or cultural group as having attributes that contribute 

to maintaining the heritage or existence of that group. This use category signifies that the 

cultural resource is to be managed in a way that takes those attributes into account, as 

applicable.

PUBLIC USE: A cultural property is eligible for consideration as an interpretive 

exhibit-in-place, a subject of supervised participation in scientific or historical study, a 

subject of unsupervised collecting under permit or related educational and recreational 

uses by members of the general public. 

EXPERIMENTAL USE: This category may be applied to a cultural property judged 

well-suited for controlled experimental study, to be conducted by BLM or others 

concerned with the techniques of managing cultural properties, which would result in the 

property’s alteration, possibly including loss of integrity and destruction of physical 

elements. Committing cultural properties or the data they contain to loss must be 

justified in terms of specific information that would be gained and how it would aid in the 

management of other cultural properties. Experimental study should aim toward 

understanding the kinds and rates of natural or

human-caused deterioration, testing the effectiveness of protection measures, or 

developing new research or interpretation methods and similar kinds of practical 

management information. 

DISCHARGED FROM MANAGEMENT: This category is assigned to cultural 

properties that have no remaining identifiable use. Most often these are prehistoric and 

historic archaeological properties, such as small surface scatters of artifacts or debris, 

whose limited research potential is effectively exhausted as soon as they have been 

documented. Also, more complex archaeological properties that have had their salient 

information collected and preserved through mitigation or research may be discharged 

from management, as should cultural properties destroyed by any natural event or human 

activity. Properties discharged from management remain in the inventory, but they are 

removed from further management attention and do not constrain other land uses. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan E-8

May 2007

Paleontological Resources 

Paleontology is the study of flora and fauna (vertebrate and invertebrate) from past 

geological eras. Paleontological resources are fossils, or recognizable remains of past 

life, which have been preserved through various processes. The most typical process 

involves deposition of the organism in sediment which has either preserved the form of 

the organic material through replacement of the organic material by sediment, or through 

preservation of the form of the organism by impression in sediment. In some dry 

climates, preservation of organic material may occur. 

Significant fossil sites on BLM-managed land in Lake Havasu Field Office include the 

Golden Shores Mammoth site, the Bouse Formation and the Chemehuevi Formation. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-1

May 2007

Appendix F 

Vegetation Treatments (Including Fire) 

Treatment Methods 

Several treatment methods and Standard Operating Procedures would be used in a 

vegetation treatment program. BLM policies and guidance for public land treatments 

would be followed in implementing all treatment methods. Many guidelines are provided 

in manual Section 1740, BLM Arizona’s Standards for Rangeland Health, Programmatic 

documents such as BLM’s Final Environmental Impact Statement, Vegetation Treatment 

on BLM Lands in Thirteen Western States (May 1991), and other general and specific 

program policy, procedures, and standards pertinent to implementation of renewable 

resource improvements. 

In Arizona, BLM manages designated Wilderness Areas, Wilderness Study Areas, and 

areas managed for wilderness characteristics that are identified in an approved land use 

plan. Guidelines and operating procedures for fire management activities in Wilderness 

Areas are provided in BLM Manual 8560, Management of Designated Wilderness Areas,

and in Wilderness Management Plans where completed for specific Wilderness Areas 

(Table 3.9). 

Fire management guidance for Wilderness Study Areas is provided in BLM Manual 

8550, Interim Management Policy and Guidelines for Lands under Wilderness Review.

Approved land use plans specify fire management procedures for areas identified in the 

land use plan to be managed for wilderness characteristics. 

The following manual, chemical, mechanical, biological and fire treatment methods 

would be used for all alternatives. 

Manual

Hand-operated power tools and hand tools are used in manual vegetation treatment to cut, 

clear, or prune herbaceous and woody species. In manual treatments, workers would cut 

plants above ground level; pull, grub, or dig out plant root systems to prevent subsequent 

sprouting and regrowth; scalp at ground level or remove competing plants around desired 

vegetation; or place mulch around desired vegetation to limit the growth of competing 

vegetation. Hand tools such as the handsaw, axe, shovel, rake, machete, grubbing hoe, 

mattock (combination of axe and grubbing hoe), brush hook, and hand clippers are used 

in manual treatments. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-2

May 2007

Axes, shovels, grubbing hoes, and mattocks can dig up and cut below the surface to 

remove the main root of plants such as prickly pear and mesquite that have roots that can 

quickly resprout in response to surface cutting or clearing. Workers also may use power 

tools such as chain saws and power brush saws. 

Mechanical

Mechanical methods of vegetation treatment employ several different types of equipment 

to suppress, inhibit, or control herbaceous and woody vegetation (Vallentine 1980). The 

goal of mechanical treatments is to kill or reduce the cover of undesirable vegetation and 

thus encourage the growth of desirable plants. BLM uses wheel tractors, crawler-type 

tractors, mowers, or specially designed vehicles with attached implements for mechanical 

vegetation treatments. The use of mechanical equipment to reduce fuel hazards will be 

conducted in accordance with BLM established procedures. Reseeding after a 

mechanical treatment has been applied is important to help insure that desirable plants 

become established on the site and not weedy species. The mechanical treatment and 

reseeding should occur at a time to best control the undesirable vegetation and encourage 

the establishment of desirable vegetation. The best mechanical method for treating 

undesired plants in a particular location depends on the following factors: 

1. Characteristics of the undesired species present such as plant density stem size, 

woodiness, brittleness, and resprouting ability. 

2. Need for seedbed preparation, revegetation, and improvement of water infiltration 

rates.

3. Topography and terrain. 

4. Soil characteristics such as type, depth, amount and size of rocks, erosion potential, 

and susceptibility to compaction. 

5. Climatic and seasonal conditions. 

6. Potential cost of improvement as compared to expected results. 

Bulldozing consists of a wheeled or crawler tractor with a heavy, hydraulically controlled 

blade. Vegetation is pushed over, uprooted, and then left in windrows or piles. 

Bulldozing is best adapted to removing scattered stands of large brush or trees. 

Several different kinds of blades are available, depending of the type of vegetation and 

goals of the project. The disadvantage of bulldozing is soil disturbance and damage to 

non-target plant species. 

Disk plowing in its various forms can be used for removing shallow-rooted herbaceous 

and woody plants. Disk plows should be used only where all of the vegetation is 

intended to be killed. Several different kinds of root plows are specific for certain types 

of vegetation. In addition to killing vegetation, disk plowing is effective in loosening the 

soil surface to prepare it for seeding and to improve the rate of water infiltration. The 

disadvantage of disk plowing is that it may be expensive and usually kills all plant 

species. Also, plowing is usually not practicable on steep slopes (greater than a 35% to 

45% slope) or rocky soil. Plant species that sprout from roots may survive. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-3

May 2007

Chaining and cabling is accomplished by dragging heavy anchor chains or steel cables 

hooked behind to tractors in a U-shape, half circle, or J-shaped manner. This method 

effective on rocky soils and steep slopes and is best used to control non-sprouting woody 

vegetation such as small trees and shrubs. However, desirable shrubs may be damaged in 

the process. Herbaceous vegetation is normally not injured by this control method. This 

control method is cost effective as large areas can be readily treated. The chains or 

cables also scarify the soil surface in anticipation of seeding desirable species. The 

disadvantage is that weedy herbaceous vegetation can survive this treatment. 

Various tractor attachments are used for mowing, beating, crushing, chopping, or 

shredding vegetation, depending on the nature of the plant stand and goals of the project. 

The advantage in using this type of equipment is that selective plants may be targeted to 

achieve specific goals. For example, mowing is effective in reducing plant height to a 

desirable condition, and it usually does not kill vegetation. Mowing is more effective on 

herbaceous than woody vegetation. On the other hand, a rolling cutter can kill woody 

non-sprouting vegetation by breaking stems at ground level but leave herbaceous 

vegetation intact. Mowing, beating, crushing, chopping, or shredding usually does not 

disturb soil. Rocky soil and steep slopes may limit this use of this equipment. 

Debris management after a mechanical control treatment application is critical in fuels 

reduction projects. Vegetation material that is left onsite will dry and may become more 

hazardous than before the treatment. Herbaceous material is usually not a problem 

because it will decompose relatively fast depending on soil moisture, ambient humidity, 

and temperature. Woody vegetation should be piled and burned under acceptable fire 

management practices. 

Biological

Biological methods of vegetation treatment could employ grazing by cattle, sheep, or 

goats, but would not include the use of invertebrates or microorganisms. BLM would use 

cattle, sheep, or goats only when grazing would have no effect on listed, proposed, or 

candidate species. The use of grazing as a biological control agent would be conducted 

in accordance with BLM procedures in the Use of Biological Control Agents of Pests on 

Public Lands (BLM 1990). Grazing by cattle, sheep, or goats would be used as 

biological control methods under all alternatives, although at the present these methods 

can control only a few plant species. 

Gradually, biological methods using cattle, sheep, or goats would avoid erosion hazard 

areas, areas of compactable soils, riparian areas susceptible to bank damage, and steep 

erodible slopes. 

Biological control using cattle, sheep, or goats would be applied to treatment areas for 

short periods. When considering the use of grazing animals as an effective biological 

control measure, several factors will be taken into consideration including the following: 

1. Target plant species present.

2. Size of the infestation of target plant species.

3. Other plant species present. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-4

May 2007

4. Stage of growth of both target and other plant species. 

5. Palatability of all plant species present. 

6. Selectivity of all plant species present by the grazing animal species that is being 

considered for use as a biological control agent. 

7. The availability of that grazing animal within the treatment site area. 

8. Type of management program that is logical and realistic for the specific treatment 

site.

These factors would be some of the options taken when developing the individual 

treatment for a specific site. 

Although discussed as biological agents, cattle, sheep, and goats are not truly biological 

agents but are domestic animals used to control only the top growth of certain noxious 

weeds. The following are some advantages of using domestic animals, mainly sheep or 

goats, for noxious weed control: 

1. They use weeds as a food source. 

2. Following a brief adjustment period, they sometimes consume as much as 50 percent 

of their daily diet of this species. 

3. Average daily gains of offspring grazing certain weed-infested pastures can 

sometimes be significantly higher than average daily gains of offspring grazing grass 

pastures.

4. Sheep or goats can be used in combination with herbicides. 

Some of the disadvantages of using domestic animals are as follows: 

1. They also use nontarget plants as food sources. 

2. The use of domestic animals, like sheep or goats, requires a herder or temporary 

fencing.

3. The animals may be killed by predators such as coyotes. 

4. Heavy grazing of some weed species, such as leafy spurge, tends to loosen the stools 

of the grazing animals. 

5. Most weed species are less palatable than desirable vegetation and would cause 

overgrazing.

6. They may accelerate movement of nonnative plants through seed ingestion and 

excretion.

7. Domestic livestock may transmit parasites and/or pathogens to resident native 

wildlife species. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-5

May 2007

Prescribed Burning

Prescribed burning is the planned application of fire to wildland fuels in their natural or 

modified state, under specific conditions of fuels, weather, and other variables to allow 

the fire to remain in a predetermined area and to achieve site-specific fire and resource 

management objectives. 

Management objectives of prescribed burning include the control of certain species; 

enhancement of growth, reproduction, or vigor of certain species; management of fuel 

loads; and maintenance of vegetation community types that best meet multiple-use 

management objectives. Treatments would be implemented in accordance with BLM 

procedures in Fire Planning (BLM 1987c), Prescribed Fire Management (BLM 1988b), 

and Fire Training and Qualifications (BLM 1987d). 

Prior to conducting a prescribed burn, a written plan must be prepared that takes into 

consideration existing conditions (e.g., amount of fuel, fuel moisture, temperatures, 

terrain, weather forecasts, and other factors) and identifies people responsible for 

overseeing the fire. 

Natural fire that is allowed to burn also needs to be carefully monitored to ensure that it 

does not threaten communities, other values to be protected, and ecosystems. This 

monitoring may require special expertise such as the fire use management teams that 

have been developed to support the overall fire management program. Planning and 

implementation for a specific prescribed fire project entails the following four phases: 

 Phase 1: Information/Assessment Phase includes identifying the area to be treated, 

inventory and assessment of site-specific conditions (e.g., live and dead vegetation 

densities, dead down woody fuels loadings, and soil types), analysis of historic and 

current fire management, and identification of resource objectives from RMP and 

NEPA analysis and compliance. 

 Phase 2: The Prescribed Fire Plan Development Phase includes developing the 

site-specific prescribed fire plan to BLM Standards, reviewing of the plan, and 

obtaining plan approval from local BLM field office administrators. 

 Phase 3: Implementation includes igniting the fire according to the plan’s prescribed 

parameters and preparing the prescribed fire boundary area to ensure that the fire 

remains within the prescribed boundaries. Site preparation may be in the form of fire 

line construction and improving roads and wildlife and stock trails by limbing trees 

and clearing debris. 

 Phase 4: Monitoring and Evaluation includes assessment and long-term monitoring 

of the fire treatment to ensure the prescribed fire has met the objectives of the 

approved prescribed fire plan. BLM fire monitoring policy is described in the BLM 

prescribed Fire Management Handbook, October 2003, Chapter 2 and Appendix 7. 

This policy applies to prescribed fire and wildland fire use. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-6

May 2007

Appropriate Management Response 

The appropriate management response concept represents a range of available 

management responses to wildland fires. Responses range from full fire suppression to 

managing fires for resource benefits (fire use). Management responses applied to a fire 

will be identified in the FMP and will be based on objectives derived from the land use 

allocations, relative risk to resources, the public and fire fighters, potential complexity, 

and the ability to defend management boundaries. Any wildland fire can be aggressively 

suppressed, and any fire that occurs in an area designated for fire use can be managed for 

resource benefits if it meets the prescribed criteria from an approved fire management 

plan.

Chemical

BLM would use EPA-approved herbicides in accordance with EPA’s Endangered 

Species Pesticide Program covered in BLM’s Vegetation Treatment on BLM Lands in 

Thirteen Western States FEIS (May 1991) and further limited to those approved for use 

by the Arizona Record of Decision (Page 3, ROD, July 1991). These herbicides are 

Atrazine; Bromacil; Bromacil + Diuron; Chlorsulfuron; Clopyralid; 2,4-D, Dicamba; 

Dicamba + 2,4-D; Diuron; Glyphosate; Glyphosate + 2,4-D; Hexazinone; Imazapyr; 

Mefluidide; Metsulfuron Methyl; Picloram; Picloram + 2,4-D; Simazine; Sulfometuron 

Methyl; Tebuthiuron; and Triclopyr. Treatments will follow Standard Operating 

Procedures) on pages 1-19 through 1-32 and project design features on pages 1-33 

through 1-37 of the FEIS. 

Additionally, the project design features buffer strips as described on page 10 of the 

ROD. Buffer strips would be used adjacent to dwellings, domestic water sources, 

agriculture land, streams, lakes, and ponds. A minimum buffer strip 100 feet wide will 

be provided for aerial application, 25 feet wide for vehicle application, and 10 feet wide 

for hand application. Any deviations must be in accordance with the label for the 

herbicide. Herbicides will be wiped on individual plants within 10 feet of water where 

application is critical. These buffer strips would also be used to protect listed, proposed, 

and candidate species. BLM will work closely with the FWS to ensure that herbicide 

applications do not affect listed or proposed threatened or endangered species on a 

project-level basis. If adverse effects are anticipated during informal consultation, then 

BLM will formally consult on these projects. If FWS develops herbicide guidance for 

particular species that improves protection beyond the current BLM design features, 

BLM will consider and incorporate that guidance as it consults with the FWS on a 

project-level basis. The chemicals can be applied by many different methods, and the 

selected technique depends on a number of variables: 

1. Treatment objective (removal or reduction). 

2. Accessibility, topography, and size of the treatment area. 

3. Characteristics of the target species and the desired vegetation. 

4. Location of sensitive areas in the immediate vicinity (potential environmental 

impacts). 

5. Anticipated costs and equipment limitations. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-7

May 2007

6. Meteorological and vegetative conditions of the treatment area at the time of 

treatment. 

Herbicide applications are scheduled and designed to minimize potential impacts on nontarget plants and animals while remaining consistent with the objective of the vegetation 

treatment program. The rates of application depend on the target species, presence and 

condition of non-target vegetation, soil type, depth to the water table, presence of other 

water sources, and the requirements of the label. 

In many circumstances, the herbicide chosen, time of treatment, and rate of application of 

the herbicide is different than the most ideal herbicide application for maximum control 

of the target plant species in order to minimize damage to the non-target plant species and 

to ensure minimum risk to human health and safety. 

The chemicals would be applied aerially with helicopters or fixed-wing aircraft or on the 

ground using vehicles or manual application devices. Helicopters are more expensive to 

use than fixed-wing aircraft, but they are more maneuverable and effective in areas with 

irregular terrain and in treating specific target vegetation in areas with many vegetation 

types. Manual applications are used only for treating small areas or those inaccessible by 

vehicle.

The typical and maximum application rates of each chemical would vary, depending on 

the program area being treated. 

Fire Suppression Actions

The following constraints to fire suppression actions are common to all alternatives: 

 Suppression tactics are utilized that limit damage or disturbance to the habitat and 

landscape. No heavy equipment (such as dozers) is used, unless approved by the 

Field Office Manager. 

 Use of fire retardants or chemicals adjacent to waterways will be accomplished in 

accordance to the Environmental Guidelines for Delivery of Retardant or Foam near 

Waterways (Interagency Standards for Fire and Aviation Operations pages 8–13). 

 All known cultural resources are protected from disturbance. 

 In Wilderness Areas, Wilderness Study Areas, and areas being managed for 

wilderness characteristics according to LUPs, when suppression actions are required, 

minimum impact suppression tactics (Interagency Standards for Fire and Aviation 

Operations, 2003) would be utilized and coordinated with Wilderness Area 

management objectives and guidelines. 

 The general and species-specific Conservation Measures from the Proposed Arizona 

Statewide Land Use Plan Amendment for Fire, Fuels, and Air Quality, March 2004 

are listed in this appendix and will be implemented to the extent possible to minimize 

adverse effects to federally listed, proposed, or candidate species occurring within the 

action area. 

 For fire suppression activities, a protocol for consultation has been developed as a 

part of the Biological Opinion (BO). This programmatic consultation contains 

conservation measures and prescriptions for use in fire suppression activities. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-8

May 2007

Emergency consultation should be needed in the future only if suppression actions 

fall outside of these prescriptions/measures. The BO should outline coordination 

needs for emergency response actions that may affect a listed/proposed species 

and/or critical habitat. 

The following protocol applies: 

BLM will contact the appropriate USFWS biologist as soon as practical once a wildfire 

starts and a determination is made that a federally protected species and/or its habitat 

could be affected by the fire and/or fire suppression activities. USFWS will work with 

BLM during the emergency response to apply the appropriate Conservation Measures. If 

Conservation Measures cannot be applied during the suppression activities, BLM would 

consult after the fact on any suppression actions that may have affected a federally 

protected species or its habitat. If Conservation Measures are adhered to, then BLM will 

report on the actions taken and effects to the species and its habitat following the fire, but 

no further consultation on that incident should be required. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-9

May 2007

Proposed Conservation Measures for Arizona BLM 

Statewide LUP Amendment and EA for Fire, 

Fuels, and Air Quality Management 

This section is organized by program area. Each of the decisions is coded to reflect the 

primary resource that is affected. These codes correspond to those presented in the 

Arizona Statewide Land Use Plan Amendment for Fire, Fuels, and Air Quality 

Management (AZLUP 2003). 

Wildland Fire Suppression (FS) 

Fuels Treatments (FT) 

Rehabilitation and Restoration (RR) 

Conservation Measures for Fire 

Management Activities in Riparian 

and Aquatic Habitats 

(RA)

Species Specific Conservation Measures 

Amphibians (AM) 

Birds

Cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl (FP) 

California brown pelican (BP) 

California Condor (CC) 

Northern aplomado falcon (AF) 

Southwestern willow flycatcher (WF) 

Yuma clapper rail (CR) 

Bald eagle (BE) 

Mexican spotted owl (SO) 

Yellow-billed cuckoo (YC) 

Fish (FI) 

Bonytail chub (BC) 

Desert pupfish (DP) 

Gila topminnow (GT) 

Razorback sucker (RS) 

Virgin River chub (VC) 

Woundfin (WM) 

Little Colorado spinedace (LS) 

Loach minnow (LM) 

Gila chub (GC) 

Flowering Plants PL) 

Huachuca Water Umbel (WU) 

Kearney’s Blue Star (KB) 

Mammals

Black-footed ferret (BF) 

Hualapai Mexican vole (HV) 

Jaguar (JA) 

Lesser long-nosed bat (LB) 

Mexican gray wolf (GW) 

Black-tailed prairie dog (PD) 

Reptiles
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-10 

May 2007

Desert tortoise (DT) 

New Mexico ridgenose rattlesnake (RN) 

1. Conservation Measures for Fire Management 

Activities 

1.1 Wildland Fire Suppression (FS) 

The following Conservation Measures will be implemented during fire suppression 

operations unless firefighter or public safety, or the protection of property, improvements, 

or natural resources, render them infeasible during a particular operation. Each 

Conservation Measure has been given an alphanumerical designation for organizational 

purposes (e.g., FS-1). Necessary modifications of the Conservation Measures or impacts 

to federally protected species and habitat during fire suppression operations will be 

documented by the Resource Advisor, and coordinated with the USFWS. 

FS-1 Protect known locations of habitat occupied by federally listed species.

Minimum Impact Suppression Tactics (MIST) will be followed in all areas with 

known federally protected species or habitat [Appendix U, Interagency

Standards for Fire and Aviation Operations 2003, or updates]. 

FS-2 Resource Advisors will be designated to coordinate natural resource concerns, 

including federally protected species. They will also serve as a field contact 

representative (FCR) responsible for coordination with the USFWS. Duties will 

include identifying protective measures endorsed by the Field Office Manager, 

and delivering these measures to the Incident Commander; surveying prospective 

campsites, aircraft landing and fueling sites; and performing other duties 

necessary to ensure adverse effects to federally protected species and their 

habitats are minimized. On-the-ground monitors will be designated and used 

when fire suppression activities occur within identified occupied or suitable 

habitat for federally protected species. 

FS-3 All personnel on the fire (firefighters and support personnel) will be briefed and 

educated by Resource Advisors or designated supervisors about listed species 

and the importance of minimizing impacts to individuals and their habitats. All 

personnel will be informed of the conservation measures designed to minimize or 

eliminate take of the species present. This information is best identified in the 

incident objectives. 

FS-4 Permanent road construction will not be permitted during fire suppression 

activities in habitat occupied by federally protected species. Construction of 

temporary roads is approved only if necessary for safety or the protection of 

property or resources, including federally protected species habitat. Temporary 

road construction should be coordinated with the USFWS, through the Resource 

Advisor.

FS-5 Crew camps, equipment staging areas, and aircraft landing and fueling areas 

should be located outside of listed species habitats, and preferably in locations 

that are disturbed. If camps must be located in listed species habitat, the 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-11 

May 2007

Resource Advisor will be consulted to ensure habitat damage and other effects to 

listed species are minimized and documented. The Resource Advisor should also 

consider the potential for indirect effects to listed species or their habitat from the 

siting of camps and staging areas (e.g., if an area is within the water flow pattern, 

there may be indirect effects to aquatic habitat or species located off-site). 

FS-6 All fire management protocols to protect federally protected species will be 

coordinated with local fire suppression agencies that conduct fire suppression on 

BLM-administered lands to ensure that the agency knows how to minimize 

impacts to federally protected species in the area. 

FS-7 The effectiveness of fire suppression activities and Conservation Measures for 

federally protected species should be evaluated after a fire, when practical, and 

the results shared with the USFWS, AZGFD, and/or CDFG. Revise future fire 

suppression plans and tactical applications as needed and as practical. 

1.2 Fuels Treatments (prescribed burning and other 

fuels management) (FT) 

The following Conservation Measures are mandatory when implementing wildland fire 

use, prescribed fires, and the proposed vegetation treatments (mechanical, chemical, 

biological):

FT-1 Biologists will be involved in the development of prescribed burn plans and 

vegetation treatment plans to minimize effects to federally protected species and 

their habitats within, adjacent to, and downstream from proposed project sites. 

Biologists will consider the protection of seasonal and spatial needs of federally 

protected species (e.g., avoiding or protecting important use areas or structures 

and maintaining adequate patches of key habitat components) during project 

planning and implementation. 

FT-2 MIST will be followed in all areas with known federally protected species or 

habitats.

FT-3 Pre-project surveys and clearances (biological evaluations/assessments) for 

federally protected species will be required for each project site before 

implementation. All applicable Conservation Measures will be applied to areas 

with unsurveyed suitable habitat for federally protected species, until a survey 

has been conducted by qualified personnel to clear the area for the treatment 

activity. 

FT-4 Use of motorized vehicles during prescribed burns or other fuels treatment 

activities in suitable or occupied habitat will be restricted, to the extent feasible, 

to existing roads, trails, washes, and temporary fuelbreaks or site-access routes. 

If off-road travel is deemed necessary, any cross-country travel paths will be 

surveyed prior to use and will be closed and rehabilitated after the prescribed 

burn or fuels treatment project is completed. 

FT-5 As part of the mandatory fire briefing held prior to prescribed burning, all 

personnel (firefighters and support personnel) will be briefed and educated by 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-12 

May 2007

Resource Advisors or designated supervisors about listed species and the 

importance of minimizing impacts to individuals and their habitats. All 

personnel will be informed of the Conservation Measures designed to minimize 

or eliminate take of the species present. 

1.3 Rehabilitation and Restoration (RR) 

RR-1 When rehabilitating important areas for federally listed species that have been 

damaged by fire or other fuels treatments, the biologist will give careful 

consideration to minimizing short-term and long-term impacts. Someone who is 

familiar with fire impacts and the needs of the affected species will contribute to 

rehabilitation plan development. Appropriate timing of rehabilitation and spatial 

needs of federally listed species will be addressed in rehabilitation plans. 

RR-2 Seed from regionally native or sterile non-native species of grasses and 

herbaceous vegetation will be used in areas where reseeding is necessary 

following ground disturbance to stabilize soils and prevent erosion by both wind 

and water. 

RR-3 Sediment traps or other erosion control methods will be used to reduce or 

eliminate influx of ash and sediment into aquatic systems. 

RR-4 Use of motorized vehicles during rehabilitation or restoration activities in 

suitable or occupied habitat will be restricted, to the extent feasible, to existing 

roads, trails, or washes, and to temporary access roads or fuelbreaks created to 

enable the fire suppression, prescribed burn, or fuels treatment activities to occur. 

If off-road travel is deemed necessary, any cross-country travel paths will be 

surveyed prior to use and will be closed and rehabilitated after rehabilitation or 

restoration activities are completed. 

RR-5 All temporary roads, vehicle tracks, skid trails, and off-road vehicle (ORV) trails 

resulting from fire suppression and the proposed fire management activities will 

be rehabilitated (water bars, etc.), and will be closed or made impassible for 

future use. 

RR-6 Burned area emergency rehabilitation (BAER) activities and long-term 

restoration activities should be monitored, and the results provided to the 

USFWS and AZGFD. Section 7 consultation for BAER activities will be 

conducted independently, if necessary. 

RR-7 (Recommended) Develop public education plans that discourage or restrict fires 

and fire-prone recreation uses during high fire-risk periods. Develop brochures, 

signs, and other interpretive materials to educate recreationists about the 

ecological role of fires, and the potential dangers of accidental fires. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-13 

May 2007

2. Conservation Measures For Fire Management 

Activities In Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (RA) 

2.1 Wildland Fire Suppression and Rehabilitation 

The following Conservation Measures will be implemented during fire suppression 

operations in riparian, wetland, or aquatic habitats, unless firefighter or public safety, or 

the protection of property, improvements, or natural resources, render them infeasible 

during a particular operation. Necessary modifications of the Conservation Measures or 

impacts to federally protected species and habitat during fire suppression operations will 

be documented by the Resource Advisor, and coordinated with the USFWS. The BLM’s 

1987 policy statement on riparian area management defines a riparian area as “an area of 

land directly influenced by permanent water. It has visible vegetation or physical 

characteristics reflective of permanent water influence. Lakeshores and streambanks are 

typical riparian areas. Excluded are such sites as ephemeral streams or washes that do 

not exhibit the presence of vegetation dependent upon free water in the soil.” 

RA-1 During wildfire suppression, apply MIST within riparian areas. Fire suppression 

actions in riparian areas should be prioritized to minimize damage to stands of 

native vegetation from wildfire or suppression operations. To the extent 

possible, retain large, downed woody materials and snags that are not a hazard to 

firefighters.

RA-2 Fire suppression and rehabilitation in riparian corridors will be coordinated with 

the Resource Advisor or qualified biologist approved by BLM. 

RA-3 Site-specific implementation plans that include project areas with federally 

protected aquatic or riparian-obligate species will specify fire management 

objectives and wildland fire suppression guidance, taking into account the special 

concerns related to these species. 

RA-4 In riparian areas, use natural barriers or openings in riparian vegetation where 

possible as the easiest, safest method to manage a riparian wildfire. Where 

possible and practical, use wet firebreaks in sandy overflow channels rather than 

constructing firelines by hand or with heavy equipment. 

RA-5 Construction or development of a crossing for motorized vehicles across a 

perennial stream will not be permitted, unless an established road already exists 

or where dry, intermittent sections occur. 

RA-6 Avoid the use of fire retardants or chemical foams in riparian habitats or within 

300 feet of aquatic habitats, particularly sites occupied by federally protected 

species. Apply operational guidelines as stated in the Interagency Standards for 

Fire and Fire Aviation Operations 2003 (or updates), “Environmental Guidelines 

for Delivery of Retardant or Foam Near Waterways,” Chapter 8 (pp. 8-13 

through 8-15). 

RA-7 Priority for placement of fire camps, fire staging areas, and aircraft landing or 

refueling sites will be outside riparian areas or river/stream corridors. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-14 

May 2007

RA-8 When using water from sources supporting federally protected species, care must 

be taken to ensure adverse impacts to these species are minimized or prevented. 

Unused water from fire abatement activities will not be dumped in sites occupied 

by federally protected aquatic species to avoid introducing non-native species, 

diseases, or parasites. 

RA-9 If water is drafted from a stock tank or other body of water for fire suppression, it 

will not be refilled with water from another tank, lakes, or other water sources 

that may support non-native fishes, bullfrogs, crayfish, or salamanders. 

RA-10 Use of containment systems for portable pumps to avoid fuel spills in riparian or 

aquatic systems will be required. 

RA-11 (Recommended) Develop and implement restoration plans for affected riparian 

or aquatic areas, including long-term monitoring, to document changes in 

conditions in the riparian zone and watershed that maintain flood regimes and 

reduce fire susceptibility. Monitor stream water quality and riparian ecosystem 

health to determine effects of wildfire and fire management activities.

Coordinate efforts and results with the USFWS, AZGFD, and/or CDFG. 

2.2 Fuels Treatments (prescribed fire; mechanical, 

chemical, and biological treatments) 

The following Conservation Measures are mandatory when implementing wildland fires 

use, prescribed fires, and the proposed vegetation treatments (mechanical, chemical, 

biological) within riparian, wetland, or aquatic habitats. 

RA-12 All Conservation Measures for wildland fire suppression (RA-1 to RA-11, 

Section 2.1) also apply to fuels treatment activities (prescribed fire; mechanical, 

chemical, and biological treatments) in riparian, wetland, and aquatic habitats. 

RA-13 Fire management treatments within or adjacent to riparian and aquatic habitats 

will be designed to provide long-term benefits to aquatic and riparian resources 

by reducing threats associated with dewatering and surface disturbance, or by 

improving the condition of the watershed and enhancing watershed function. 

RA-14 For priority fire/fuels management areas (e.g., WUIs) with federally protected 

species or designated critical habitat downstream, BLM biologists and other 

resource specialists, as appropriate, in coordination with USFWS, AZGFD, 

and/or CDFG will determine: 

A) The number of acres and the number of projects or phases of projects to 

occur within one watershed per year. 

B) An appropriately-sized buffer adjacent to perennial streams in order to 

minimize soil and ash from entering the stream. 

C) Where livestock grazing occurs in areas that have been burned, 

specialists will determine when grazing can be resumed. Such 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-15 

May 2007

deferments from grazing will only occur when necessary to protect 

streams from increased ash or sediment flow into streams.1

If agreement cannot be reached or treatment will not meet fuel reduction objectives, BLM 

will re-initiate consultation. 

3. Species Specific Conservation Measures 

In addition to the general Conservation Measures listed in Sections 1.0 and 2.0, the 

following species-specific Conservation Measures will be applied during wildfire 

suppression to the extent possible, and will be required during fuels treatment activities 

(wildland fire use, prescribed fire, vegetation treatments). Necessary modifications of the 

Conservation Measures or impacts to federally protected species and habitat during fire 

suppression operations will be documented by the Resource Advisor, and coordinated 

with the USFWS. 

3.1 Amphibians [Chiricahua leopard frog (FT); Relict 

leopard frog (FC)] 

AM-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0). 

AM-2 For fire management sites with habitat for the Chiricahua leopard frog, 

unsurveyed sites will be considered occupied unless surveyed prior to project 

implementation. 

AM-3 Install sediment traps, as determined by a Resource Advisor or qualified biologist 

approved by BLM, upstream of tanks and ponds occupied by Chiricahua leopard 

frogs in order to minimize the amount of ash and sediment entering the water. 

Consultation with a qualified biologist during the planning phase will aid in 

determining sediment trap installation requirements (see Conservation Measures 

FT-1 and FT-3). 

 

1

 The Interagency Burned Area Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Handbook, Exhibit 4-2,BLM 

supplemental guidance, page 5 of 9 (http://www.fws.gov/fire/rehab/index.htm) establishes the following policy for 

livestock exclusion following burns: 

Exclusion of livestock is critical for the recovery of burned vegetation or establishment and maintenance of new 

seedings and use of these areas should not be permitted until the vegetation recovers or is established. Both revegetated and, burned but not re-vegetated areas will be closed to livestock grazing for at least two growing 

seasons following the season in which the wildfire occurred to promote recovery of burned perennial plants 

and/or facilitate the establishment of seeded species. Livestock permittees must be informed of the closure 

early during the plan preparation process, and livestock closures will be made a condition or term on the grazing 

license or permit through the issuance of grazing decision (see 43 CFR 4160). Livestock closures for less than 

two growing seasons may be justified on a case-by-case basis based on sound resource data and experience. 

Livestock management following seedling establishment and/ or burned area recovery should maintain both 

non-native and/or native species to meet land use (including Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for 

Grazing Management) or activity plan objectives. 

Our authority to make these types of changes is in the regulations at 43 CFR 4110.3-3(b). 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-16 

May 2007

AM-4 All personnel performing fire management activities at any creek crossing will be 

informed of the potential presence of Chiricahua leopard frogs, their status, and 

the need to perform their duties to avoid impacts to the frog and its habitat. 

AM-5 Except as needed in emergency situations to abate immediate fire threat or loss of 

life or property, no water will be drafted for fire suppression from bodies of 

water known to be occupied by the Chiricahua leopard frog. 

3.2 Birds 

3.2.1 Cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl (FE, Proposed CH) 

FP-1 Treatment of riparian habitat, Sonoran desert/desertscrub, or mesquite-invaded 

grasslands under 4,000 feet in elevation that may support nesting cactus 

ferruginous pygmy owls will only occur during the non-nesting season of August 

1 to January 31, unless pre-project surveys indicate the area does not support 

pygmy-owls or mitigation plans approved by the USFWS have alleviated 

negative consequences. 

FP-2 Develop mitigation plans in coordination with the USFWS for fuels treatment 

projects (prescribed fire; vegetation treatments) that may adversely affect cactus 

ferruginous pygmy-owls or their habitat. Mitigation plans for prescribed fire 

shall limit to the extent practicable the possibility that fire would spread to 

riparian habitats. Mitigation plans will be approved by the USFWS. 

FP-3 (Recommended) To the extent possible, maintain habitat features necessary to 

support breeding populations of the pygmy-owl within their historic range and 

review ongoing fire management activities for effects on essential habitat 

features needed by cactus ferruginous pygmy-owls. Modify activities, where 

necessary, to sustain the overall suitability of the habitat for the owls. Priority 

will be given to activities in or near occupied or recently (w/in the last 10 years) 

occupied habitat. 

3.2.2 California brown pelican (FE) 

BP-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0). 

3.2.3 California Condor (FE; 10(j) species) 

The following Conservation Measures apply to BLM-administered lands within the 

designated 10(j) area for California condors: 

CC-1 All helicopter dip tanks will be covered when not in use. 

CC-2 Any presence of condors in the project area will be recorded and reported 

immediately to the Resource Advisor. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-17 

May 2007

CC-3 If condors arrive at any area of human activity associated with fire suppression or 

fuels treatment projects (wildland fire use, prescribed fire, vegetation treatments), 

the birds will be avoided. The assigned Resource Advisor or a qualified wildlife 

biologist approved by BLM will be notified, and only permitted personnel will 

haze the birds from the area. 

CC-4 All camp areas will be kept free from trash. 

CC-5 Aircraft use along the Vermilion Cliffs or sites where condors are attempting to 

breed or roost will be minimized. 

CC-6 The Resource Advisor will contact the Peregrine Fund daily 

(at 520-606-5155 or 520-380-4667) to check on locations of condors during fire 

suppression or fuels treatment activities involving aviation. This information 

will be communicated to the Incident Commander and aviation personnel. 

CC-7 If any fire retardant chemicals must be used in areas where condors are in the 

vicinity (see CC-6), the application area will be surveyed and any contaminated 

carcasses will be removed as soon as practical to prevent them from becoming 

condor food sources. 

CC-8 Aircraft will remain 400 meters from condors in the air or on the ground unless 

safety concerns override this restriction. If airborne condors approach aircraft, 

aircraft will give up airspace to the extent possible, as long as this action does not 

jeopardize safety. 

CC-9 Smoke from wildland fire use and prescribed fire projects will be managed to 

minimize negative effects to condor breeding. A potential wildland fire use 

event will not be initiated, or an existing event will be modified or terminated, to 

prevent or stop significant amounts of smoke, or smoke that will remain in place 

for an extended period of time, or chronic smoke events, from occurring in 

area(s) where condors are attempting to breed. 

CC-10 BLM will adhere to the air quality standards set by the Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality. 

3.2.4 Northern aplomado falcon (FE) 

AF-1 If aplomado falcons are reestablished or are discovered on public lands, and they 

nest in a fuels management project area, BLM will implement temporary closures 

to human access and project implementation (wildland fire use, prescribed 

burning, vegetation treatments) within 1⁄2 mile of nest sites during the breeding 

season. Wildland fire use and prescribed burning will be conducted in a manner 

to ensure nest sites are more than 1⁄2 mile from downwind smoke effects. 

3.2.5 Southwestern willow flycatcher (FE) 

WF-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0). 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-18 

May 2007

WF-2 Except where fires are active in occupied habitat, minimize unnecessary 

low-level helicopter flights during the breeding season (April 1-September 30). 

Approach bucket dip sites at a 90-degree direction to rivers to minimize flight 

time over the river corridor and occupied riparian habitats. Locate landing sites 

for helicopters at least 1⁄4 mile from occupied sites to avoid impacts to willow 

flycatchers and their habitat. 

WF-3 Minimize use of chainsaws or bulldozers to construct firelines through occupied 

or suitable habitat except where necessary to reduce the overall acreage of 

occupied habitat or other important habitat areas that would otherwise be burned. 

WF-4 Implement activities to reduce hazardous fuels or improve riparian habitats 

(prescribed burning or vegetation treatments) within occupied or unsurveyed 

suitable habitat for southwestern willow flycatchers only during the non-breeding 

season (October 1 to March 31). 

WF-5 Avoid developing access roads that would result in fragmentation or a reduction 

in habitat quality. Close and rehabilitate all roads that were necessary for project 

implementation (see RR-5). 

WF-6 Prescribed burning will only be allowed within 1⁄2 mile of occupied or 

unsurveyed suitable habitat when weather conditions allow smoke to disperse 

away from the habitat when birds may be present (breeding season of April 1 

through September 30). 

WF-7 Vegetation treatment projects adjacent to occupied or unsurveyed suitable habitat 

will only be conducted when willow flycatchers are not present (October 1 

through March 31). 

3.2.6 Yuma clapper rail (FE) 

CR-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0). 

CR-2 Any prescribed fire or vegetation treatment project in occupied or suitable marsh 

habitat would only occur between September 1 and March 15 to avoid the Yuma 

clapper rail breeding and molting seasons. 

CR-3 Mechanical removal of overstory habitat (Tamarisk) could occur as early as 

August 15, after the breeding season for Yuma clapper rails. 

CR-4 Herbicide application would not occur in Yuma clapper rail habitat and driftinhibiting agents would be used to assure that the herbicide does not enter 

adjacent marsh areas. 

3.2.7 Bald eagle (FT) 

BE-1 No human activity within 1⁄2 mile of known bald eagle nest sites between 

December 1 and June 30. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-19 

May 2007

BE-2 No tree cutting within 1⁄4 mile of known nest trees. 

BE-3 No human activity within 1⁄4 mile of known bald eagle winter roost areas between 

October 15 and April 15. 

BE-4 No tree cutting within the area immediately around winter roost sites as 

determined by BLM biologists. 

BE-5 No helicopter or aircraft activity or aerial retardant application within 1⁄2 mile of 

bald eagle nest sites between December 1 and June 30 or winter roost sites 

between October 15 and April 15. 

BE-6 Conduct prescribed burn activities outside of nesting season in a manner to 

ensure nest and winter roost sites are more than 1⁄2 mile from downwind smoke 

effects.

BE-7 Provide reasonable protective measures so fire prescription or fuels treatment 

will not consume dominant, large trees as identified by the Resource Advisor or 

qualified biologist approved by BLM within 1⁄2 mile of known nests and roosts of 

bald eagles Pre-treatment efforts should provide reasonable protection of 

identified nesting and roosting trees (see Conservation Measure FT-4). 

3.2.8 Mexican spotted owl (FT, CH) 

SO-1 BLM wildlife biologists will be involved early in the decision-making process 

for fuels management treatments (appropriately managed wildfires, prescribed 

fires, vegetation treatments) that are planned within suitable habitat or designated 

critical habitat for Mexican spotted owls (MSO). 

SO-2 Suitable habitat and designated critical habitat for MSO will be surveyed prior to 

implementing prescribed fire or vegetation treatment activities on BLMadministered lands to determine MSO presence and breeding status. These fire 

management activities will only be implemented within suitable or critical habitat 

if birds are not present. If a spotted owl is discovered during these surveys, BLM 

will notify the USFWS to reinitiate consultation and will determine any 

additional Conservation Measures necessary to minimize or eliminate impacts to 

the owl. 

SO-3 If a MSO is discovered during fire suppression or fuels treatment activities 

(wildland fire use, prescribed fire, vegetation treatments), the Resource Advisor 

or a qualified wildlife biologist will document the find and assess potential harm 

to the owl and advise the Incident Commander or project crew boss of methods 

to prevent harm. The information will include for each owl the location, date, 

and time of observation and the general condition of the owl. The Resource 

Advisor or biologist will contact the appropriate USFWS office, and BLM will 

reinitiate consultation for the fire suppression or project activities. 

SO-4 Within MSO critical habitat designated on BLM-administered lands: 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-20 

May 2007

A) To minimize negative effects on the primary constituent elements of 

critical habitat, appropriately managed wildlfires, and prescribed fires 

will be managed primarily as low-intensity fires, with only scattered 

high-intensity patches. The BLM’s objective will be to limit mortality of 

trees greater than 18 inches dbh to less than 5 percent, occasionally up to 

10 percent, within critical habitat. 

B) If fireline construction is necessary during fire suppression, appropriately 

managed wildfires, or prescribed fires, BLM will minimize the cutting of 

trees and snags larger than 18 inches dbh, and no trees or snags larger 

than 24 inches dbh will be cut unless absolutely necessary for safety 

reasons.

C) For mechanical vegetation treatments within critical habitat, BLM will 

minimize the cutting of trees and snags larger than 18 inches dbh, and no 

trees or snags larger than 24 inches dbh will be cut unless absolutely 

necessary for safety reasons. 

D) Critical habitat disturbed during fire suppression or fuels treatment 

activities, such as fire lines, crew camps, and staging areas, will be 

rehabilitated to prevent their use by vehicles or hikers. Fire line 

rehabilitation will include pulling soil, duff, litter, woody debris, and 

rocks back onto the line to bring it up to grade and to make it blend in 

with the surrounding area. Such rehabilitation will be inspected one year 

after the event to ensure effectiveness. 

SO-5 The following measures will be followed in suitable habitat (occupied or 

unoccupied) whenever consistent with objectives to reduce hazardous fuels: 

Emphasize a mix of size and age classes of trees. The mix should include large 

mature trees, vertical diversity, and other structural and floristic characteristics 

that typify natural forest conditions. 

SO-6 The effects of fire suppression and fuels treatment activities on MSO and their 

habitat, and the effectiveness of these Conservation Measures, will be assessed 

after each fire event or fuels treatment project by the Resource Advisor or local 

biologist to allow evaluation of these guidelines and to allow the USFWS to track 

the species environmental baseline. Prescriptions for appropriately managed 

wildfires, prescribed fires, and vegetation treatments will be adjusted, if 

necessary. 

3.2.9 Yellow-billed cuckoo (FC) 

YC-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0). 

3.3 Fish 

The following Conservation Measure will be implemented for all federally protected fish 

species that may be affected by the Proposed Action during fire suppression to the extent 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-21 

May 2007

possible, and are mandatory for wildland fire use, prescribed fire, and vegetation 

treatment activities: 

FI-1 BLM will cooperate with other agencies to develop emergency protocols to 

decrease the impacts of fire suppression and fuels treatment activities on 

federally listed fish species. Emergency protocols will include appropriate 

agency contacts, a list of facilities that can hold fish, sources of equipment 

needed (e.g., sampling gear, trucks) and how to address human health and safety 

issues.

In addition to implementing FI-1, the following species-specific Conservation Measures 

will also apply: 

3.3.1 Bonytail chub (FE, CH) 

BC-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0) to eliminate adverse effects from 

fire management activities to available spawning habitat along shorelines 

(i.e., occupied reaches and critical habitat). 

3.3.2 Desert pupfish (FE, CH) 

DP-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0) for occupied reaches and critical 

habitat.

DP-2 Conduct prescribed burns such that no more than one-half of the watershed of 

each desert pupfish site is burned in a two-year period (excluding buffers to the 

streams and/or spring habitats) and repeat treatments at greater than two-year 

intervals.

DP-3 Monitor, where practical, for fish kill immediately following the first runoff 

event after prescribed fires in watersheds containing desert pupfish. 

DP-4 When considering which creek crossings to use for fire management activities, 

avoid crossings that are known to be occupied by desert pupfish. 

3.3.3 Gila topminnow (FE) 

GT-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0). 

GT-2 Conduct prescribed burns such that no more than one-half of the watershed of 

each gila topminnow natural or reintroduction site is burned in a two-year period 

(excluding buffers to the streams and/or spring habitats) and repeat treatments at 

greater than two-year intervals. 

GT-3 Monitor for fish kill, where practical, immediately following the first runoff 

event after prescribed fires in the watersheds containing gila topminnows. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-22 

May 2007

GT-4 When considering which creek crossings to use for fire management activities, 

avoid crossings that are known to be occupied by Gila topminnow, when 

possible.

GT-5 Develop mitigation plans in coordination with the USFWS for each fuels 

management project (prescribed fire; vegetation treatments) that may adversely 

affect the gila topminnow. Mitigation plans for prescribed fire will limit to the 

extent practicable the possibility that fire would spread to riparian habitats. 

Mitigation plans will be approved by the USFWS. 

GT-6 (Recommended) Cooperate with the USFWS and AZGFD to identify sitespecific measures, such as prescribed fires in grassland vegetation types to 

improve watershed conditions (e.g., in the Cienega Creek watershed), to protect 

populations of gila topminnow from other resource program impacts. 

3.3.4 Razorback sucker (FE, CH) 

RS-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0) to minimize adverse effects from 

fire management activities to available spawning habitat along shorelines 

(i.e., occupied sites and critical habitat). 

RS-2 Project boundaries for fire management activities will avoid or protect sensitive 

habitats of the razorback sucker. 

3.3.5 Virgin River chub (FE, CH) 

VC-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0) for the stretch of the Virgin River 

within Arizona. 

3.3.6 Woundfin (FE, CH; Future 10(j) populations) 

WM-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0) for the stretch of the Virgin River 

within Arizona. 

3.3.7 Little Colorado spinedace (FT, CH) 

LS-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0) to minimize adverse effects from fire 

management activities on BLM-lands to occupied reaches and critical habitat on 

adjacent lands. 

3.3.8 Loach minnow (FT, CH); Spikedace (FT, CH) 

LM-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0) for occupied reaches and critical 

habitat.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-23 

May 2007

LM-2 All reasonable efforts shall be made to minimize disturbance within the wetted 

areas of Aravaipa Creek or tributary channels. 

LM-3 No heavy equipment will be used off-road during wildfire suppression and fuels 

treatment projects within the wetted areas of Aravaipa Creek. 

LM-4 All reasonable efforts will be made to ensure that no pollutants, retardants, or 

chemicals associated with wildfire suppression and fuels treatment projects or 

activities enter surface waters of reaches occupied by these two fish species. 

LM-5 Develop mitigation plans in coordination with the USFWS for each fuels 

management project (prescribed fire; vegetation treatments) that may adversely 

affect the loach minnow and spikedace. Mitigation plans for prescribed fire will 

limit to the extent practicable the possibility that fire would spread to riparian 

habitats. Mitigation plans will be approved by the USFWS. 

LM-6 (Recommended) Cooperate with the USFWS and AZGFD to identify sitespecific measures, such as prescribed fires in grassland vegetation types to 

improve watershed conditions (e.g., in the Aravaipa Creek watershed), to protect 

populations of loach minnow and spikedace from other resource program 

impacts. 

3.3.9 Gila chub (PE, Proposed CH) 

GC-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0) for occupied reaches and proposed 

critical habitat. 

GC-2 When considering which creek crossings to use for fire management activities, 

avoid crossings that are known to be occupied by Gila chub, when possible. 

GC-3 (Recommended) Cooperate with the USFWS and AZGFD to identify sitespecific measures, such as prescribed fires in grassland vegetation types to 

improve watershed conditions (e.g., in the Cienega Creek watershed), to protect 

populations of gila chub from other resource program impacts. 

3.4 Flowering Plants 

The following Conservation Measures for known locations and unsurveyed habitat of all 

federally protected plant species within the planning area will be implemented during fire 

suppression to the extent possible, and are mandatory for wildland fire use, prescribed 

fire and vegetation treatment activities: 

PL-1 Known locations and potential habitat for plant populations will be mapped to 

facilitate planning for wildland fire use, prescribed fires, and vegetation 

treatments, and to ensure protection of these populations during fire suppression. 

PL-2 BLM will coordinate with FWS to delineate buffer areas around plant 

populations prior to prescribed fire and vegetation treatment activities. BLM will 

coordinate with USFWS during any emergency response and wildland fire use 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-24 

May 2007

activities to ensure protection of plant populations from fire and fire suppression 

activities.

PL-3 During fire suppression, wildland fire use, and prescribed fire in habitat occupied 

by federally protected plant species, no staging of equipment or personnel will be 

permitted within 100 meters of identified individuals or populations, nor will offroad vehicles be allowed within the 100-meter buffer area, unless necessary for 

firefighter or public safety or the protection of property, improvements, or other 

resources (see FS-7). One of the primary threats to many of these plant species is 

trampling/crushing from personnel and vehicles. 

PL-4 No prescribed burning will be implemented within 100 meters of identified 

locations or unsurveyed suitable habitat for federally protected and sensitive 

plant populations unless specifically designed to maintain or improve the existing 

population. 

There are no additional species-specific conservation measures for the following 

federally protected plant species: Arizona Cliffrose (Purshia subintegra), Brady 

pincushion cactus (Pediocactus bradyi), Holmgren Milk Vetch (Astragalus

homgreniorum), Nichol Turk’s Head Cactus (Echinocactus horizonthalonius var. 

nicholii), Peebles Navajo Cactus (Pediocactus peeblesianus var. peeblesianus), Pima 

Pineapple Cactus (Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina), Jones Cycladenia (Cycladenia

humilis var. jonesii), Siler Pincushion Cactus (Pediocactus sileri), Acuña Cactus 

(Echinomastus erectocentrus var. acunensis), Fickeisen Plains Cactus (Pediocactus

peeblesianus var. fickeiseniae).

3.4.1 Huachuca Water Umbel (Lilaeopsis schaffneriana var. 

recurva ) [FE, CH] 

In addition to implementing PL-1 through PL-4, the following species-specific 

Conservation Measures will also apply: 

WU-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0). 

WU-2 (Recommended) The BLM should fund additional surveys for the water umbel 

on BLM lands, and support research on the ecology of the species. Surveys may 

support the use of prescribed fire in areas not occupied by the Huachuca Water 

Umbel. 

3.4.2 Kearney’s Blue Star (Amsonia kearneyana) [FE] 

In addition to implementing PL-1 through PL-4, the following species-specific 

Conservation Measures will also apply: 

KB-1 No mechanical or chemical vegetation manipulation will be authorized by BLM, 

and no planting or seeding of nonnative plants will occur in the Brown Canyon 

watershed within the Baboquivari allotment. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-25 

May 2007

KB-2 Planning and management for wildfire suppression in the watershed of Brown 

Canyon will be coordinated with the USFWS. 

3.5 Mammals 

3.5.1 Black-footed ferret (FE, 10(j) species) 

If black-footed ferrets are discovered or re-established on public lands, then the following 

Conservation Measures will apply: 

BF-1 No heavy equipment operation off of existing roads within 1⁄4 mile of prairie dog 

towns having documented occurrence of black-footed ferrets. 

BF-2 No aerial retardant application within 300 feet of prairie dog towns having 

documented occurrence of black-footed ferrets. 

BF-3 No surface disturbance of prairie dog towns having documented occurrence of 

black-footed ferrets. 

BF-4 In Apache and Navajo counties, prairie dog complexes suitable for black-footed 

ferrets within 1⁄4 mile of proposed project sites will either be surveyed prior to 

project implementation or will be protected using measures BF-1 through BF-3, 

as if ferrets were present. 

3.5.2 Hualapai Mexican vole (FE) 

HV-1 All treatment areas will be surveyed for Hualapai Mexican vole occupancy prior 

to fuels management treatments (prescribed fire, vegetation treatments) in order 

to determine project modifications and/or avoidance and protection of occupied 

areas. Until surveyed, all potential vole habitat is considered occupied. Areas 

not considered suitable (e.g., areas dominated by thick pine needles and duff) 

will also be surveyed prior to treatment to protect existing snag habitat for 

potential future use by Mexican spotted owls. 

HV-2 Fuels management treatments (prescribed fire or vegetation treatments), 

construction of fire breaks, and/or staging areas for fire suppression or fuels 

management treatments will not be located within a vole use area. Occupied vole 

sites within proposed burn areas will be protected by firebreaks, precision 

ignition of fire around such sites, or total avoidance of the area. Fire plans will 

incorporate site-specific features (e.g., rock outcroppings, game trails, etc.), fire 

behavior, and professional judgment to determine the most appropriate method to 

protect occupied vole habitat. Additionally, monitoring of fuel moisture and use 

of the appropriate minimum impact suppression tactics will be used to reach the 

desired objective at each site. 

HV-3 To minimize impacts to Hualapai Mexican voles during the breeding season, 

prescribed burns and vegetation treatments in occupied or potential vole habitat 

will be implemented only between September 1 and March 15. Treatment in 

chaparral habitat will occur during the latter part of this time frame, in winter 

and/or early spring. These prescribed fires will follow the summer monsoon 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-26 

May 2007

period to encourage additional herbaceous growth. Post-monsoon burns would 

help avoid the dry conditions that could result in extremely hot fires that reduce 

the recruitment of grasses and forbs. Areas not considered suitable for Hualapai 

Mexican voles (e.g., dominated by thick pine needles and duff) may be burned 

prior to September 1, if surveyed prior to treatment. 

HV-4 Provide a 75- to 100-foot, minimum, unburned vegetation buffer between fuels 

treatment sites and riparian and dry wash areas to decrease erosion into and 

sedimentation of the occupied or potentially occupied vole habitat. Within 

ponderosa pine treatment sites, use of dry washes as a fire line may be 

appropriate and result in less disturbance than construction of a cup trench above 

the wash. Under such circumstances, BLM will prepare the wash as a fire line by 

raking duff and removing by hand dead branches and other debris. 

HV-5 The terms and conditions from the Pine Lake Wildland/Urban Interface 

Biological Opinion (BLM Kingman Field Office; Consultation No. 2-21-01-F241) continue to apply to the Pine Lake project. 

3.5.3 Jaguar (FE) 

JA-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0) to eliminate adverse effects to 

jaguars that may occur in dense riparian habitats on BLM-administered lands. 

JA-2 Maintain dense, low vegetation in major riparian or xero-riparian corridors on 

BLM-administered lands in identified locations south of Interstate 10 and 

Highway 86. Locations will be identified in site-specific fire management plans. 

3.5.4 Lesser long-nosed bat (FE) 

LB-1 Instruct all crew bosses (wildfire suppression, wildland fire use, prescribed fire, 

and vegetation treatments) in the identification of agave and columnar cacti and 

the importance of their protection. 

LB-2 Prior to implementing any fuels treatment activities (prescribed fire, vegetation 

treatments), pre-project surveys will be conducted for paniculate agaves and 

saguaros that may be directly affected by fuels management activities. 

LB-3 Protect long-nosed bat forage plants -- saguaros and high concentrations of 

agaves -- from wildfire and fire suppression activities, and from modification by 

fuels treatment activities (prescribed fire, vegetation treatments), to the greatest 

extent possible. “Agave concentrations” are contiguous stands or concentrations 

of more than 20 plants per acre. Avoid driving over plants, piling slash on top of 

plants, and burning on or near plants. Staging areas for fire crews or helicopters 

will be located in disturbed sites, if possible. 

LB-4 No seeding/planting of nonnative plants will occur in any wildfire rehabilitation 

site or fuels treatment site with paniculate agaves or saguaros. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-27 

May 2007

LB-5 A mitigation plan will be developed by the Bureau in coordination with the 

USFWS for prescribed fires or fuels management projects (mechanical, 

chemical, biological treatments) within 0.5 mi of bat roosts or in areas that 

support paniculate agaves or saguaros. The mitigation plan will ensure that 

effects to bat roosts and forage plants are minimized and will include monitoring 

of effects to forage plants. The plan will be approved by the USFWS. 

LB-6 (Recommended) BLM personnel should examine concentrations of agaves 

(including shindagger – A. schottii) within each proposed fuels treatment area, 

and blackline or otherwise protect from treatments any significant concentrations 

of agaves that appear to be amidst fuel loads that could result in mortality greater 

than 20 percent (>50% for A. schottii). BLM personnel should use their best 

judgment, based on biological and fire expertise, to determine which significant 

agave stands are prone to mortality greater than 20 percent (>50% for A. schottii) 

(see Conservation Measures FT-1 and FT-3). 

LB-7 (Recommended) BLM should continue to support and cooperate in the 

investigations of agave relationships to livestock grazing, and of the effects of 

prescribed fire on paniculate agaves. 

3.5.5 Mexican gray wolf (FE; 10(j) species) 

If Mexican gray wolves are re-established on public lands, then the following 

Conservation Measures will apply: 

GW-1 No human disturbance associated with fire management activities will be within 

one mile of a den site from April1 to June 30. 

GW-2 No human disturbance associated with fire management activities will be within 

one mile of known rendezvous sites from April 1 to June 30. 

3.5.6 Ocelot (FE) 

No species-specific Conservation Measures developed. 

3.5.7 Sonoran pronghorn (FE) 

No species-specific Conservation Measures developed. 

3.5.8 Black-tailed prairie dog (FC) 

If black-tailed prairie dogs are re-established on public lands, then the following 

Conservation Measures will apply: 

PD-1 No heavy equipment operation off of existing roads within 1⁄4 mile of black-tailed 

prairie dog colonies. 

PD-2 No aerial retardant application within 1⁄4 mile of black-tailed prairie dog colonies. 

PD-3 No surface disturbance of black-tailed prairie dog colonies. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-28 

May 2007

3.6 Reptiles 

3.6.1 Desert tortoise, Mojave population (FT) 

DT-1 Take appropriate action to suppress all wildfires in desert tortoise habitat, based 

on preplanned analysis and consistent with land management objectives, 

including threats to life and property. Full suppression activities will be initiated 

within key desert tortoise habitat areas identified in site-specific Fire 

Management Plans. 

DT-2 Suppress all wildfires in desert tortoise habitat with minimum surface 

disturbance, in accordance with the guidelines in Duck et al. (1995) and the

1995 programmatic biological opinion on fire suppression on the Arizona Strip 

(2-21-95-F-379).

DT-3 Pre-position suppression forces in critical areas during periods of high fire 

dangers.

DT-4 As soon as practical, all personnel involved in wildfire suppression (firefighters 

and support personnel) will be briefed and educated about desert tortoises and the 

importance of protecting habitat and minimizing take, particularly due to vehicle 

use. Fire crews will be briefed on the desert tortoise in accordance with 

Appendix II of Duck et al. (1995). 

DT-5 If wildfire or suppression activities cannot avoid disturbing a tortoise, the 

Resource Advisor or monitor will relocate the tortoise, if safety permits. The 

tortoise will be moved into the closest suitable habitat within two miles of the 

collection site that will ensure the animal is reasonably safe from death, injury, or 

collection associated with the wildfire or suppression activities. The qualified 

biologist will be allowed some discretion to ensure that survival of each relocated 

tortoise is likely. If the extent or direction of movement of a fire makes sites 

within two miles of the collection site unsuitable or hazardous to the tortoise or 

biologists attempting to access the area, the tortoise may be held until a suitable 

site can be found or habitat is safe to access and not in immediate danger of 

burning. The Resource Advisor will contact the USFWS Arizona Ecological 

Services Field Office (AESFO) as soon as possible concerning disposition of any 

animals held for future release. Desert tortoises will not be placed on lands 

outside the administration of the federal government without the written 

permission of the landowner. Handling procedures for tortoises, including 

temporary holding facilities and procedures, will adhere to protocols outlined in 

Desert Tortoise Council (1994). 

DT-6 Upon locating a dead, injured, or sick desert tortoise, initial notification must be 

made to the appropriate USFWS Law Enforcement Office within three working 

days of its finding. Written notification must be made within five calendar days 

and include the date, time, and location of the animal, a photograph, and any 

other pertinent information. The notification will be sent to the Law 

Enforcement Office with a copy to the AESFO. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-29 

May 2007

DT-7 Care must be taken in handling sick or injured animals to ensure effective 

treatment and care, and in handling dead specimens to preserve biological 

material in the best possible state. If possible, the remains of intact desert 

tortoises will be placed with educational or research institutions holding 

appropriate state and federal permits. If such institutions are not available, the 

information noted above will be obtained and the carcass left in place. 

Arrangements regarding proper disposition of potential museum specimens will 

be made with the institution prior to implementing the action. Injured animals 

should be transported to a qualified veterinarian by an authorized biologist. 

Should any treated desert tortoise survive, the USFWS should be contacted 

regarding final disposition of the animal. 

DT-8 The Resource Advisor or monitor(s) will maintain a record of all desert tortoises 

encountered during fire suppression activities. This information will include for 

each desert tortoise: 1) locations and dates of observation; 2) general condition 

and health, including injuries and state of healing, and whether animals voided 

their bladders; 3) location moved from and to; and 4) diagnostic markings 

(i.e., identification numbers of marked lateral scutes). No notching of scutes or 

replacement of fluids with a syringe is authorized. 

DT-9 Prior to moving a vehicle, personnel will inspect under the vehicle for tortoises. 

If a tortoise is found under the vehicle, the tortoise will be allowed to move away 

from the vehicle on its own accord, if possible. Otherwise an individual will 

move the tortoise to a safe locality in accordance with FS-2 and DT-5. 

DT-10 Off-highway vehicle activity will be restricted to the minimum necessary to 

suppress wildfires. Vehicles will be parked as close to roads as possible, and 

vehicles will use wide spots in roads or disturbed areas to turn around. 

Whenever possible, a biologist or crewperson trained to recognize tortoises and 

their shelter sites will precede any vehicle traveling off-road to direct the driver 

around tortoises and tortoise burrows. Whenever possible, local fire-fighting 

units should provide direction and leadership during off-road travel because of 

their expertise and knowledge of area sensitivities. 

DT-11 Fire-related vehicles will drive slow enough to ensure that tortoises on roads can 

be identified and avoided. 

DT-12 Fire crews or rehabilitation crews will, to the extent possible, obliterate off-road 

vehicle tracks made during fire suppression in tortoise habitat, especially those of 

tracked vehicles, to reduce future use. 

DT-13 To the maximum extent practical, campsites, aircraft landing/fueling sites, and 

equipment staging areas will be located outside of desert tortoise habitat or in 

previously disturbed areas. If such facilities are located in desert tortoise habitat, 

100 percent of the site will be surveyed for desert tortoises by a qualified 

biologist approved by BLM, whenever feasible. Any tortoises found will be 

moved to a safe location in accordance with FS-2 and DT-5. All personnel 

located at these facilities will avoid disturbing active tortoise shelter sites. 

DT-14 Elevated predation by common ravens or other predators attributable to fire 

suppression activities will be reduced to the maximum extent possible. Work 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-30 

May 2007

areas, including campsites, landing/fueling sites, staging areas, etc. will be 

maintained in a sanitary condition at all times. Waste materials at those sites will 

be contained in a manner that will avoid attracting predators of desert tortoises. 

Waste materials will be disposed of at an appropriate waste disposal site. 

“Waste” means all discarded matter including, but not limited to, human waste, 

trash, garbage, refuse, oil drums, petroleum products, ashes, and equipment. 

DT-15 Backfiring operations are permitted where necessary in desert tortoise habitat. 

Burning out patches of identified habitat within or adjacent to burned areas is not 

permitted as a standard fire suppression measure unless necessary for firefighter 

or public safety or to protect property, improvements, or natural resources. 

DT-16 Use of foam or retardant is authorized within desert tortoise habitat. 

DT-17 Rehabilitation of vegetation in tortoise habitat will be considered, including 

seeding, planting of perennial species, etc. 

DT-18 Recovery of vegetation will be monitored, including establishing and monitoring 

paired plots, inside and outside burned areas in tortoise habitat. Recovery plans 

will be coordinated with the USFWS and AZGFD. 

DT-19 The effectiveness of wildfire suppression activities and desert tortoise 

Conservation Measures will be evaluated after a wildfire. Procedures will be 

revised as needed. 

3.6.2 New Mexico ridgenose rattlesnake (FT) 

RN-1 To the extent possible, minimize surface disturbing activities from fire 

suppression and fuels treatment activities within New Mexico ridgenose 

rattlesnake habitat on BLM-administered lands in the southern Peloncillo 

Mountains, particularly during active periods for snakes (July through October). 

RN-2 Prior to using wildland fire for resource benefit, cool season (November through 

March) prescribed fire or other fuel treatments should be used to reduce 

unnatural fuel loads within suitable habitat to avoid catastrophic fires and loss of 

canopy cover. 

RN-3 All fires that occur outside of prescriptions that will result in low intensity, low 

severity burns will be fully suppressed within or near suitable New Mexico ridgenose rattlesnake habitat. 

3.7 Conservation Agreement and Management Plan 

Species 

3.7.1 Flat-tailed horned lizard 

No species-specific Conservation Measures developed. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan F-31 

May 2007

3.7.2 Paradine (Kaibab) plains cactus 

Implement PL-1 and PL-2 to protect known locations during fire suppression to the 

extent possible and during the fuels treatment activities. 

3.7.3 Virgin spinedace 

Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in Riparian and 

Aquatic Habitats (Section 2.0) for the stretch of the Virgin River within Arizona. 

3.7.4 Desert tortoise, Sonoran population 

Implement the Conservations Measures for Desert Tortoise, Mojave population, as 

appropriate, for fire suppression and fuels treatment activities (prescribed fire, vegetation 

treatments), excluding requirements for notification to USFWS. 

Reference

Duck, T.A., T.C. Esque, and T.J. Hughes. 1995. Fighting wildfire in desert tortoise 

habitat: Considerations for land managers. Proc. Desert Tortoise Counc. Symp. 

1994:58-67. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan G-1

May 2007

Appendix G 

Legal Descriptions of Lands

Available for Disposal 

Disposals

Table G-1. Lands Available for Disposal 

 Legal Tract 

Gila & Salt River Meridian 

Acres Exchange Sale R&PP

Patent

1. T. 20 N., R. 22. W., Sec. 12, the public land east of AZ highway 

95; approximately 258 acres

258 X X X 

2. a

 T.20 N., R 21 W., Sec. 8, S2S2SE 40 X X X 

3. a

 T. 19 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 20, SW1/4SW1/4NW1/4NW1/4; 

W1/2SW1/4 

NW1/4; W1/2NE1/4SW1/4NW1/4; SE1/4NE1/4 SW1/4NW1/4; 

SE1/4SW1/4NW1/4; SW1/4SE1/4NW1/2; 

S1/2SE1/4SE1/4NW1/4; N1/2NW1/4NE1/4SW1/4; 

NE1/4NE1/4SW1/4; NE1/4SE1/4NE1/4SW1/4; 

NW1/4NW1/4SE1/4; NW1/4SW1/4NW1/4SE1/4 85 

X X X 

4. T. 19 N., R. 21 W., sec 28, N2NE, SWNW, W2SW. 200 X X X 

5. a

 T. 19 N., R. 21 W., sec 29, S2N2, NWNWSW, E2W2SW, 

E2SW, SE. 

450 X X X 

6. T. 19 N., R. 21 W., sec 33, W2W2. 160 X X X 

7. T. 18 N., R. 21 W., sec 4, lots, 3,4,S2NW,SW. 319.44 X X X 

8. T. 18 N., R. 21 W., sec 6, S2N2SWSE, S2SWSE, SESE 70 X X X 

9. T. 18 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 7, E2, N2NWNE, S2SWNE. 120 X X X 

10. a

 T. 18 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 7, SE1/4. 160 X X X 

11. a

 T. 18 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 8 W2 320 X X X 

12. a

 T. 18 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 17 W2 320 X X X 

13. a

 T. 18 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 18, E1/2 320 X X X 

14. a

 T. 18 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 20, E2 320 X X X 

15. a

 T. 18 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 29, NW, S2 480 X X X 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan G-2

May 2007

 Legal Tract 

Gila & Salt River Meridian 

Acres Exchange Sale R&PP

Patent

16. a T. 17 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 4, lot 4, SWNW, W2SW. 159.52 X X X 

17. T. 17 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 5, lots 1, 2, S2NE, SENW, E2SW, SE 439.04 X X X 

18. a

 T. 17 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 9 W2 320 X X X 

19. a

 T. 16 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 10, NE 160 X X X 

20. a

 T. 16 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 22, E2E2 160 X X X 

21. a

 T. 16 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 24, N2SW, SE 240 X X X 

22. a

 T. 16 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 25, S2N2, S2. 480 X X X 

23. T. 16 1/2N., R. 20 1/2W., sec 24, lots, 1-4, S2N2, S2. 671.24 X X X 

24. T. 16 1/2N, R. 20 W., sec 20, lots, 1, 2, S2NE 176.36 X X X 

25. T. 161/2N., R. 19 W., Sec. 36, the public land south of Interstate 

I-40; approximately 54 acres 

54.00 X X X 

26. T. 16 N., R. 21 W., Sec. 22, E2E2 160 X X X 

27. T. 16 N., R. 20.5 W., Sec. 10, lot 2 37.62 X X X 

28. T. 16 N., R. 20.5 W., Sec. 11, the public lands south of the 

railroad in the S2NW 

25.6 X X X 

29. T. 16 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 2, All the public land south of I-40; 

approximately 124 acres 

124 X X X 

30. T. 16 N., R. 19 W., sec 18, lots, 3,4, 7, 9, 11, 13, E2SW, SE. 396.28 X X X 

31. a

 T. 15 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 2, Lots 1-4, S2N2, S2. 637.2 X X X 

32. a

 T. 15 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 4, Lots 1-4, S2N2, S2. 637.68 X X X 

33. a

 T. 15 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 6, Lots 1-6, S2NE, SENW, E2SW, SE. 588.82 X X X 

34. a

 T. 15 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 8, All 640 X X X 

35. a

 T. 15 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 10. All 640 X X X 

36. T. 14 N., R. 20 W., Sec. 4, lots 1-4, S2NE,SENW, 

NENESW,W2NWSE, NWSWSE, E2SE. 

398.12 X 

37. T. 14 N., R. 20 W., sec 5, S2SESENE, NENESE, S2SESESE 20 X X X 

38. T. 14 N., R. 20 W., sec 8, NENENE, W2NWNWNW. 15 X X X 

39. T. 14 N., R. 20 W., sec 9, NESENE, E2SWSWNE, 

E2NWSENE

17.5 X 

40. T. 14 N., R. 20 W., Sec. 10, N2, E2NWSW, E2NESWSW, 

E2SW, SE. 

580 X 

41. T. 13 N., 20 W., Sec. 24, S2. 320 X 

42. T. 13 N., 19 W., Sec. 20, NWSE. 40 X 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan G-3

May 2007

 Legal Tract 

Gila & Salt River Meridian 

Acres Exchange Sale R&PP

Patent

43. T 13 N., 19 W., Sec 27, NW, N2SW 240 X 

44. T. 11 N., R. 13 W., Sec. 36, S2SE. 80 X 

45. T. 10 N., R. 19 W., 13, S2. 320 X X X 

46. T. 10 N., R. 19 W., 26, S2. 320 X X X 

47. T. 10 N., R. 19 W., sec 34, lot 7, 8, S2NESE, SESE. 93.18 X X X 

48. T. 10 N., R. 19 W., sec 35, NENW 40 X X X 

49. T. 10 N., R. 13 W., Sec. 1, lots 1-3, S2NE, SENW. 440.83 X 

50. T. 10 N., R. 13 W., Sec. 2, SWSW. 40 X 

51. T. 10 N., R. 13 W., Sec. 11, N2NW, NWNE. 120 X 

52. T. 10 N., R. 13 W., Sec. 12, NWNW. 40 X 

53. T. 10 N., R. 12 W., Sec. 6, lots, 3-6, 11-14, E2SW. 356.87 X 

54. a

 T. 8 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 11, E2, E2W2. 480 X X X 

55. a

 T. 8 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 12, W2. 320 X X X 

56. a

 T. 8 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 13, W2. 320 X X X 

57. a

 T. 8 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 14, E2, E2W2, SWSW 520 X X X 

58. T. 8 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 15, SESE. 40 X 

59. T. 8 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 21, lot 1, E2, NENW, S2NW, S2. 478.07 X 

60. T. 8 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 22, N2NE, N2N2NW, SWSW, SESE. 160 X 

61. a

 T. 8 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 23, All 640 X X X 

62. a

 T. 8 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 24, W2 320 X X X 

63. a

 T. 8 N., R. 19 W., sec 25, W2 320 X X X 

64. T. 8 N., R. 19 W., sec 25, E2 320 X X X 

65. a

 T. 8 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 26, All 640 X X X 

66. a

 T. 8 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 27, NWNW, E2SE 120 X 

67. T. 8 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 28, NENE. 40 X 

68. T. 8 N., R. 19 W., sec 35, NE, SESENW, S2. 490 X X X 

69. a

 T. 8 N., R. 19 W., sec 36, W2 320 X X X 

70. T. 8 N., R. 19 W., sec 36, E2 320 X X X 

71. a

 T. 7 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 3, lots 2-4, W2NE, S2NW, SW, W2SE. 479.89 X X X 

72. a

 T. 7 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 4, lots 1-4, S2N2, S2. 639.96 X X X 

73. a

 T. 7 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 9, All 640 X X X 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan G-4

May 2007

 Legal Tract 

Gila & Salt River Meridian 

Acres Exchange Sale R&PP

Patent

74. a T. 7 N., R. 19 W., Sec. 10, W2E2, W2 480 X X X 

75. T. 7 N., R. 19 W., sec 11, All 640 X X X 

76. T. 7 N., R. 19 W., sec 14, All 640 X X X 

77. a

 T. 7 N., R. 17 W., Sec. 23, E2 320 X X X 

78. a

 T. 7 N., R. 17 W., Sec. 26, N2NE, S2SE. 80 X X X 

79. a

 T. 7 N., R. 17 W., Sec. 36, T. 7 N., R. 17 W., All the public land 

southwest of AZ highway 72; Approx. 350 acres 

350 X X X 

80. T. 7 N., R. 16 W., sec 8, All 640 X 

81. T. 7 N., R. 16 W., sec 9, All 640 X 

82. T. 7 N., R. 15 W., sec 26, W2 320 X X X 

83. a

 T. 6 N., R. 16 W., Sec. 1, Lot 1 51.68 X X X 

84. T. 6 N., R. 15 W., Sec. 26, W2. 320 X X X 

85. T. 6 N., R. 13 W., sec 27, N2, SE 480 X X X 

86. T. 6 N., R. 12 W., sec 18, lots 1-4, NE, N2NW, NESW 554.24 X X X 

87. T. 6 N., R. 12 W., sec 24, All the public land north of highway 

US 60; approximately 423.48 acres 

423.48 X X X 

88. T. 6 N., R. 12 W., sec 26, All 640 X X X 

89. T. 6 N., R. 12 W., sec 27, E2NE, SE 240 X X X 

90. a

 T. 5 N., R. 16 W., Sec. 4, Lots 1, 2, S1/2NE1/4, S1/2; 478.67 X X X 

91. a

 T. 5 N., R. 16 W., Sec. 5, SE; 160 X X X 

92. a

 T. 5 N., R. 16 W., Sec. 9, NE, 160 X X X 

93. T. 5 N., R. 16 W., Sec. 9, W2 320 X X X 

94. a

 T. 5 N., R. 16 W., Sec. 10, NW1/4. 160 X X X 

95. T. 5 N., R. 16 W., sec 16, All 640 X X X 

96. T. 5 N., R. 16 W., sec 17, E2NE, SWNE, W2, SE. 600 X X X 

97. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 8, N2. 320 X X X 

98. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 9, N2. 320 X X X 

99. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 10, SW. 160 X X X 

100. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 15, S2 320 X X X 

101. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 16, All 640 X X X 

102. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 17, All 640 X X X 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan G-5

May 2007

 Legal Tract 

Gila & Salt River Meridian 

Acres Exchange Sale R&PP

Patent

103. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 18, lot 1, 2, NE, E2NW. 320.46 X X X 

104. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 20, N2. 320 X X X 

105. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 22, All 640 X X X 

106. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 23, All 640 X X X 

107. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 26, All 640 X X X 

108. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 27, All 640 X X X 

109. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 28, All 640 X X X 

110. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 31, lots 1-4, E2, E2W2. 640.6 X X X 

111. T. 5 N., R. 15 W., sec 34, E2 320 X X X 

112. T. 5 N., R. 14 W., sec 32, All 640 X X X 

113. T. 5 N., R. 13 W., sec 7, lots 1-4, 157.16 X X X 

114. T. 5 N., R. 13 W., sec 23, NENE 40 X X X 

115. a

 T. 5 N., R. 12 W., Sec. 6, Lot 1 40.04 X X X 

116. T. 4 N. R.16 W., Sec. 1, lots 3, 4, S2NW, SW. 301.49 X X X 

117. T. 4 N. R.16 W., Sec. 2, lots 1-4, S2N2, S2. 601.66 X X X 

118. T. 4 N. R.16 W., Sec. 11, W2 320 X X X 

119. a

 T. 4 N. R.16 W., Sec. 14, E2 320 X X X 

120. T. 4 N. R.16 W., Sec. 15, E2E2, W2, SWSE 520 X X X 

121. T. 4 N. R.16 W., Sec. 16, NE 160 X X X 

122. a

 T. 4 N., R. 16 W., Sec. 24, E1/2. 320 X X X 

123. T. 4 N. R.16 W., Sec. 25, All 640 X X X 

124. a

 T. 4 N., R. 15 W., Sec. 30, Lots 3, 4, E1/2SW1/4; 154.56 X X X 

125. a

 T. 4 N., R. 15 W., Sec. 31, All the public land north of Interstate 

10; approximately 499.9 acres 

499.9 X X X 

126. a

 T. 4 N., R. 15 W., Sec. 32, All the public land north of Interstate 

10; approximately 601.99 acres 

601.66 X X X 

127. T. 4 N., R. 14 W., Sec. 4, lots 3, 4, S2NW 149.19 X X X 

128. T. 4 N. R.14 W., Sec. 5, lots 1-4, S2NE, S2NW. 297.08 X X X 

129. T. 4 N. R.14 W., Sec. 6, lots 3, 4, 5. 100.51 X X X 

 Legal Description 

San Bernardino Meridian 

Acres Exchange Sale R&PP 

130. T. 10 N., R. 22 E., Sec. 35, Lots 1,2, S2NE, SE. 309.27 X X X 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan G-6

May 2007

 Legal Tract 

Gila & Salt River Meridian 

Acres Exchange Sale R&PP

Patent

131. T. 9 N., R22. E., Sec. 2, Lots 1, 2, S2NE, SE. 316.23 X X X 

132. T. 9 N., R22. E., Sec. 11, E2. 320 X X X 

133. T. 9 N., R22. E., Sec. 14, NE. 160 X X X 

134. T. 9 N., R22. E., Sec. 24, SENE, W2, NWSE, S2SE. 480 X X X 

135. T. 8 N., R. 23 E., sec 4, lots 3, 5, 6, 7, & 8, S1/2NW, SW, 

SWSE. 

418.29 X X X 

136. a

 T. 8 N., R. 23 E., Sec. 27, the public land situated north and east 

of Interstate Highway 40; approximately 460 acres 

460 X X X 

137. T. 4 1/2 N., R. 24 E., Sec. 36, portion of lot 1, lots 2-5, N2SW, 

NWSW 

317.88 X X X 

138. T. 4 N., R. 24 E., Sec. 1. 640 X X X 

139. T. 4 N., R. 24 E., Sec. 12. 640 X X X 

a

 Land identified for disposal that meets the requirements of the Baca bill. 
Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan H-1

May 2007

Appendix H 

Grazing

Special Ephemeral Rule 

Published in the Federal Register, Vol. 33, No. 238, Saturday, December 7, 1968 

(Livestock Grazing Ephemeral Range: Arizona, California, and Nevada).

In accordance with 43 CFR 4115.2-1 regarding special rules for grazing districts and 

pursuant to the receipt of recommendations of the State Directors for Arizona, California 

and Nevada and a factual showing of its necessity, a special rule for range designated as 

ephemeral is hereby approved. 

Ephemeral (annual) ranges lie within the general southwest desert region extending 

primarily into southern Arizona, southern California, and southern Nevada and include 

portions of the Mohave, Sonoran, and Chihuahuan deserts. The region is characterized 

by desert type vegetation some of which may be classed as ephemeral only. Ephemeral 

range does not consistently produce forage, but periodically provides annual vegetation 

suitable for livestock grazing. In years of abundant moisture and other favorable climatic 

conditions a large amount of forage may be produced. Favorable years are highly 

unpredictable and the season is usually short lived. Ephemeral areas fall generally below 

the 3,200-foot contour and below the 8-inch precipitation isoline. A minor percentage of 

the total plant composition is made up of desirable perennial forage plants and potential 

to improve range condition and produce a dependable supply of forage by applying 

intensive management practices is lacking. 

Because of the unique characteristics of ephemeral range the following special rule shall 

apply as follows: 

 Applicable allotments or uses shall be formally designated by the District Manager as 

ephemeral range. 

 An annual application by qualified licensees or permittees is not required unless 

grazing use is desired. On a year-to-year basis whenever forage exists or climatic 

conditions indicate the probability of an ephemeral forage crop, livestock grazing 

may be authorized upon application pursuant to any management requirements for 

the allotment. 

 Use of base property (water base) during nonforage years is not feasible or 

economical and no use of base properties is required except during these periods 

when ephemeral forage is available and livestock grazing occurs. 
Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan H-2

May 2007

Therefore:

 An annual application per 43 CFR 4115.2-1(c)(9), is not required unless grazing use 

is described. 

 Grazing capacity per 43CFR 4115.2-1(c)(3) may be based on a reasonable potential 

for forage. 

 Substantial use of grazing privileges per 43 CFR 4115(c)(10) is not required. 

 A year round operation per 43 CFR 4115.2(c)(1) is not required. 

 Substantial use of base property per 43 CFR 4115.2-1(c)(7) is not required. 

This special rule shall immediately apply to the Phoenix, Safford, and Arizona Strip 

Districts in Arizona, the Bakersfield District in California, and the Las Vegas District in 

Nevada upon recommendation for adoption in that District by the respective District 

Advisory Board and concurrence by the State Director. 

Criteria for Allotment Categorization 

Table H-1. Criteria for Allotment Categorization 

Criteria for Allotment Categories

Categorization Maintain Improve Custodial 

Resource Conditions Meets Standard No Meeting Standard Not Applied 

Resource Potential and 

Production

High Potential 

At Potential 

High/Med Potential 

Not at Potential 

Low Potential 

At Potential 

Conflicts and/or 

Controversy 

Some High Conflicts and 

Controversy 

None

Opportunities for positive 

economic return on public 

investment 

Good Good Poor 

Present Management 

Situation

Current

Management is 

Satisfactory

Current Management 

is Non-Satisfactory 

Management 

is not a factor 

The assignment of all grazing allotments into a selective management category was made 

following established BLM program guidance. The three management categories are 

“Maintain,” “Improve,” and “Custodial.” Respective objectives are: 

 Maintain current resource conditions. 

 Improve current resource conditions. 

 Manage existing resource values custodially. 
Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan H-3

May 2007

The five standard criteria used by BLM in categorizing allotments are listed below. 

1. Range condition. 

2. Resource potential. 

3. Resource use conflicts or controversy. 

4. Opportunity for positive economic return on public investments. 

5. Present management situation. 

Allotments in the Improve Category exhibit vegetative and watershed conditions not 

meeting objectives and standards; potential resource production is high to moderate but 

production is below potential; use conflicts exist; and anticipated benefits from 

management changes would justify expenditure of public funds. Allotments in the 

Maintain Category exhibit vegetative and watershed conditions meeting objectives and 

standards; resource production is high and rangelands are producing near their potential; 

no critical use conflicts exist; existing management is maintaining objectives and 

standards, but some range developments could augment current management. Allotments 

in the Custodial Category exhibit vegetative and watershed conditions which may or may 

not meet objectives and standards; resource production potential is very low; few if any 

resource conflicts; and virtually no potential to respond to management changes. 

Allotment categorization is used to establish priorities for distributing available funds and 

personnel during plan implementation to achieve cost-effective improvement of 

rangeland resources. Allotments may be moved from one category to another, as new 

information becomes available, resource conditions change, or management activities are 

implemented. Changes must be consistent with the category criteria, be supported by a 

document analysis showing the basis for the change, and must take an interdisciplinary 

approach and include public involvement. 

Table H-2. Grazing Allotments 

(see Map 19 in the Approved RMP)

No. Allotment Name Approved RMP 

 Available Unavailable 

00001 Alamo Crossing 19,508 0 

03006 Babcock 22,649 0 

00025 Crossman Peak 108,599 0 

03034 Ganado 86,800 0 

03038 Hancock 36,113 0 

03040 Harcuvar 80,737 0 

00045 Havasu Heights S 0 27,042 

03048 Lamberson 24,710 0 

03050 Leidig 33,582 0 
Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan H-4

May 2007

Table H-2. Grazing Allotments 

(see Map 19 in the Approved RMP)

No. Allotment Name Approved RMP 

 Available Unavailable 

03051 Loma Linda 32,951 0 

03093 Muse 106,488 14,712 

03059 Nine Mile 109,239 480 

03061 Orosco 15,761 0 

03067 Planet 186,045 0 

03069 Primrose 97,298 0 

03073 Salome 10,008 0 

03070 Wagner 24,321 0 

 Other FO Admin 213,731 1,697 

TOTALS 1,208,540 43,931 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan I-1

May 2007

Appendix I 

Recreation

BLM’s Priorities for Recreation and Visitors 

Services – Goals and Objectives 

 Improve Access to Appropriate Recreational Opportunities on the Department of the 

Interior (DOI) Managed or Partnered Lands and Waters. 

 Ensure a Quality Experience and Enjoyment of Natural and Cultural Resources on DOI 

managed or Partnered Lands and Waters. 

 Provide for and Receive Fair Value in Recreation. 

Special Recreation Permit Stipulations 

Stipulations may be generated for activity-specific permits through the NEPA process 

leading up to a specific Special Recreation Permit (SRP). Below are examples of 

standard stipulations that may be applied to Permit. 

Cultural Stipulations 

1. Permittee shall comply with all state and federal laws relating to prehistoric or historic 

archaeological sites or artifacts. Actions other than those explicitly approved by the 

Bureau of Land Management which result in impacts upon archaeological resources, 

shall be subject to the judicial proceedings of the Archaeological Resources Protection 

Act of 1979, as amended, and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. 

As property of the United States, no person may, without authorization, excavate, 

remove, damage, or otherwise alter or deface any historic or prehistoric site, artifact, or 

object of antiquity located on public lands. 

 Surface collection of artifacts (either historic or prehistoric) or fossils, by permittee or 

tour participants on or near any designated route is prohibited. The definition of an 

artifact is anything that has been made, used or modified by a human and is generally 

50 years old or older. Permittee is required to inform all participants that collecting 

artifacts, theft, or vandalism of any cultural property is a violation of the abovementioned federal and/or state laws. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan I-2

May 2007

Recreation Stipulations 

1. By virtue of the permit, permittee is allowed to use public routes across public land while 

conducting a commercial recreation activity, consisting of a poker run type OHV public 

event.

2. All permitted designated routes remain open for public use; the permittee has no 

exclusive use of any public route. 

3. All vehicle use is limited to the designated routes. 

4. Permittee and all participants are prohibited from stopping at, or entering any and all 

known and unknown abandoned mine features. 

5. All vehicle use will be conducted in a safe manner, reckless driving and/or excessive 

speed is a permit violation and is prohibited. 

6. No overnight or camping use is associated with this permit. 

7. The permittee is expected to be familiar with and to practice “Leave No Trace” and 

“Tread Lightly” land use ethics principles. 

8. All trash and litter, as a result of the tour will be disposed of in a proper manner. 

9. Violation of one or more of the listed stipulations is grounds to deny any future permit 

applications.

Wildlife, Desert Tortoise and Protected Plant 

Stipulations 

1. Desert Tortoise. Care shall be taken not to disturb or destroy tortoises or their burrows. 

Handling, collecting, damaging, or destroying desert tortoises are prohibited by Arizona 

State Law. During all activity special care should be given to watch for and avoid any 

desert tortoise that may be present on a route or roadway. 

2. Handling of Desert Tortoise. If a tortoise is endangered by any activity that activity shall 

cease until either the tortoise moves out of harm's way of its own accord, or until an 

authorized biologist is able to remove the tortoise to safety. Tortoises shall be handled 

only by a BLM authorized Wildlife Biologist, and shall be moved solely for the purpose 

of preventing death or injury. The authorized biologist shall be responsible for taking 

appropriate measures to ensure any desert tortoise relocated from the project site is not 

exposed to temperature extremes, which could be harmful to the animal. 

3. Inspection under Vehicles. If a vehicle is left for any occasion the driver shall inspect 

underneath any parked vehicles immediately prior to moving. If a desert tortoise is 

beneath the vehicle, the authorized biologist shall move the tortoise from harm's way. 

Otherwise, the vehicle shall not be moved until the desert tortoise has left of its own 

accord.

4. Native Plants. State protected plant species (all cacti) shall not be disturbed, damaged,

or destroyed without prior authorization from the BLM. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan I-3

May 2007

5. Migratory Birds. All migratory birds shall be observed from a distance. Any injured 

wildlife shall be reported to the Arizona Game & Fish Department (AZGFD) at 

(928) 342-0091. 

Paintball Activities on Public Land 

The following stipulations guiding paintball activities on public land include the 

following:

 Require SRPs for paintball activities with more than 15 participants, unless otherwise 

specified in special management areas. 

 Require nontoxic, biodegradable, and water-soluble paintball capsules. 

 Allow temporary obstacles or structures to be used but require them to be removed at 

the end of the visit to the public lands. 

 Allow no mechanized or motorized cross-country travel to set up or remove 

structures.

 Prohibit the use of natural features, such as boulders and vegetation, as paintball 

targets.

 Require participants to pick up and remove from the area all items related to paintball 

activities, including capsules and any other trash. 

Recreation Criteria

Vending on Public Lands 

The following criteria would be applied to determine vending locations, with LHFO 

planning for those parties seeking permission to vend necessary and appropriate services 

or products: 

 No vending would occur in any location that could impact threatened or endangered 

species, or negatively impact the natural resources. 

 No vending would occur within limits or zone of authority, governed by any political 

entity (city, state, county), that otherwise refuses to approve vending therein. 

 No vending would occur in a location which provided unfair or undue competition to 

legitimately permitted vendors of similar products or services located on land in the 

supporting communities. 

 All vendors would have a BLM-assigned location. Vending operations would be 

subject to sign restrictions stipulated by BLM. 

 Vendors would have to remain in their assigned location during vending operations. 

 A self-contained restroom would be required. 

The following criteria, if applicable, would be applied to determine to whom permits 

would be issued and how they would be administered: 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan I-4

May 2007

 No vendor could operate for a period longer than stipulated in the permit, and the 

vendor would have to remove all materials at the end of each operation period.

Operating periods would be consistent with traditional operating periods for the area 

the vendor is authorized to use. 

 Permits would be issued on the basis of cost recovery of BLM expenses incurred, in 

the granting and administration of the permit, to ensure fair value is received. 

 Permit applicants would have to secure and conform with all other necessary permits 

and requirements stipulated by all other involved political entities, including, but not 

limited to, a permit from the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) 

with the necessary spill collection and containment plan. 

 If it is determined to be necessary to protect resources or to ensure compliance with 

appropriate recreation opportunity spectrum classes identified for the area, 

exclusivity may be determined to be a reasonable and fair way to limit the number of 

permits available and therefore limit the impact on the natural resource. 

 No permit may be subleased, transferred, or sold. Permits must be surrendered 

without compensation to BLM if the permittee is not able to be the primary person 

conducting or managing vending activities. No permittee has any right to renewal at 

the end of the permit term, preferential or otherwise. 

 If the permittee violates any BLM rules or requirements related to the vending 

operation, or in the interests of the public health, safety, and welfare, the permit may 

be revoked with 30 days’ written notice to the permittee without compensation of any 

kind.

The following additional criteria would be applied to determine vending locations on the 

water for those parties seeking permission to vend necessary and appropriate services or 

products:

 Vending would occur in locations where business activities can be conducted safely. 

 No vending could occur within the Safety Zone of Bureau of Reclamation facilities. 

 Approved vending locations could be set forth in a limited vending zone established 

by BLM, in conformance with these criteria and/or any other land use plan or 

allocation system developed by BLM and other agencies or political entities 

participating in the public administration and protection of Lake Havasu. 

The following additional criteria would be applied if applicable to determine to whom 

permits would be issued for on-the-water vending and how they would be administered: 

 Permit applicants would be required to secure appropriate licensing for all watercraft 

in use by their vending operation from the state department of motor vehicles. 

 All watercraft in use would have to be U.S. Coast Guard-approved. 

 A self-contained restroom would be required. 

 The vendor would be required at the end of each annual operational period to remove 

the craft used from Lake Havasu. 

 Additional stipulations based upon approved national policy may also be required. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan I-5

May 2007

Additional Competitive Use Race Courses 

Additional competitive-use OHV course(s) would be established to meet the increasing 

public need if the following criteria are met: 

 Basis of a demonstrated need as shown by public request and local community 

support.

 On existing and/or designated routes. 

 Public lands adjacent (within 2 miles) to or encompassed by Parker 400 course are 

excluded from an additional course. 

 Course would be outside areas listed for VRM Classes I, II and/or special designated 

areas such as but not limited to Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), 

riparian wetlands, and cultural sites. 

 Course would be outside Category I and II desert tortoise habitat and Wildlife Habitat 

Areas (WHAs). 

 Compatibility with other ongoing resource uses. 

 NEPA process would determine number of events and season of use on any proposed 

new courses. 

Long Term Visitor Areas (LTVAs) 

BLM would establish an LTVA and/or new camping area if the following criteria can be 

met:

 Basis of a demonstrated need as shown by existing dispersed camping use. 

 Within approximately 10 miles of local community and with that community’s 

support.

 Where natural terrain accommodates a minimum of 40 acres and would be no more 

than 640 acres. Adjacent land would be closed to dispersed 14-day camping. 

 LTVA/camping area(s) would be required to be compatible with other potential and 

ongoing resource uses. 

 Site would have to be in Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class III or IV areas. 

 Site would be outside of Category I and II desert tortoise habitat and any WHA. 

 Site would not be within areas having riparian vegetation and/or eligible cultural 

sites.

Prescribed Recreation Settings and the Recreation 

Opportunity Spectrum

BLM’s goal of providing a satisfying leisure experience to visitors can be measured by 

participating in preferred activities in favorable environmental settings. Opportunities for 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan I-6

May 2007

achieving satisfying experiences depend on natural elements such as vegetation, 

landscape and scenery, and conditions controlled by land management agencies, such as 

developed sites, roads, and regulations. The goal of recreation managers is to provide the 

opportunities to obtain such experiences by managing the natural setting and the activities 

within. The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) is a planning tool that provides a 

framework to inventory or assess existing recreation opportunities/conditions. 

Reclassification of lands from what was inventoried occurred in response to alternative 

management goals. The plan allocates prescribed recreation settings that BLM will 

manage as the Desired Future Outcome for a specific location (see Map 20 in the 

Approved RMP). Because of water activities on Lake Havasu, the prescribed recreation 

settings combine terminology incorporated from both ROS and the Water Recreation 

Opportunity Spectrum (WROS). 

The prescribed recreation settings have two key essentials, recreation factors and 

recreation settings or classes. 

Recreation Factors 

Seven elements provide the basis to monitor and delineate whether the prescribed 

recreational settings are being met. These factors describe the overall environment in 

which an activity occurs, and address how that environment influences the types of 

activities. For each person, the recreational experience depends on the setting and 

individual differences based on background, education, sex, age, and place of residence. 

Access

Includes the mode of travel used within the area and influences both the level and type of 

recreational use an area receives. 

Remoteness

Concerns the extent to which individuals perceive themselves removed from human 

activity. Vegetation or topographic variation can increase this sense of remoteness. 

Lack of remoteness is important for some recreational experiences. 

Naturalness 

Concerns the varying degrees of human modification of the environment, often described 

in terms of scenic quality influenced by the degree of change to the natural landscape. 

Site Management 

Refers to the level of site development. Lack of site modifications can facilitate feelings 

of self-reliance and naturalness, while highly developed facilities can enhance comfort 

and increase the opportunity to meet and interact with others. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan I-7

May 2007

Visitor Management 

This includes both regulation and control of visitors as well as providing visitors with 

information and services. A continuum of visitor management can be described, ranging 

from subtle techniques, such as site design, to strict rules and regulations. In some 

recreational settings controls are expected and appropriate; in others, on-site controls 

detract from the desired experience. 

Social Encounters 

This involves the number and type of others met in the recreation area. Also measures 

the extent to which an area provides experiences for solitude or social interaction. 

Visitor Impacts 

The affects to natural resources such as soil, vegetation, air, water, and wildlife (even low 

levels of use) can produce measurable ecological impacts, and these impacts can 

influence the visitor’s experience. 

Recreation Settings/Classes 

Based on the seven elements described above, six recreation settings/classes have been 

developed and are described in the table below. The setting/classes range from natural, 

low-use areas (resource-dependent recreational opportunities) to highly developed, 

intensive-use areas (facility/vehicle-dependent recreational opportunities). Each 

setting/class is defined in terms of three main components: the environmental setting, the 

potential activities, and the desired experience(s). 

Table I-1. Recreation Settings/Classes 

Opportunity 

class

Desired Experiences Environmental Setting Potential Activities 

Primitive

(P)

Opportunity for isolation from 

the sights and sounds of 

humans to feel a part of the 

natural environment.

Challenge, adventure, risk, and 

self-reliance are important. 

The remote area is managed to be 

essentially free from evidence of 

human restrictions and controls. 

Only facilities essential for resource 

protection are used. 

Eco-adventure travel, nonmotorized recreation, such as 

backpacking, equestrian use, 

hiking, climbing, rafting or 

canoeing, enjoyment of 

scenery or natural features, 

nature study, and photography. 

Semiprimitive

(SP) 

Opportunity for high degree of 

interaction with the natural 

environment, moderate 

challenge and risk, use of 

outdoor skills. 

Concentration of users is very low. 

On-site controls and restrictions may 

be present but are subtle. Facilities 

are provided only for the protection 

of resources value and the safety of 

users. Includes primitive trails for 

all type of users. 

All activities listed previously 

plus remote camping, 

mountain biking, hunting, and 

fishing. Motorized vehicles 

observed infrequently. 

Motorized transportation used 

mostly to access nonmotorized recreation 

opportunities. 

Rural Opportunity to relieve stress 

and to get away from built 

Concentration of users is low, but 

often there is evidence of other area 

Plus: disperse camping or from 

vehicles (car/boat camping) 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan I-8

May 2007

Opportunity 

class

Desired Experiences Environmental Setting Potential Activities 

Natural 

(RN) 

environment is important, 

while prospect of using 

motorized equipment to 

explore natural environment is 

valued. 

users present. Moderate level of 

management presence. Facilities are 

provided to help to manage use and 

limit contacts. 

and auto touring includes offhighway vehicle use, fourwheel drive, dune buggy, dirt 

bike, and boating. 

Rural 

Developed 

(RD) 

About equal opportunities for 

association with other users 

and for isolation from sights 

and sounds of people. 

Opportunities for both 

motorized and non -motorized 

recreation are present. 

Concentration of users is low to 

moderate with some facilities 

provided for moderate user 

convenience and comfort. On-site 

controls and restrictions offer a 

sense of safety and security. 

Plus: Dispersed camping or 

using developed campsites 

with larger recreational 

vehicles, RV or trailers, water 

skiing, interpretive use. 

Suburban 

(S)

Watching and meeting other 

visitors is expected and 

desired. Range of recreation 

experiences is sought from 

relaxation to physical exertion 

and from contemplation to 

thrills and challenges. 

Substantially modified natural 

environment. Resource 

modification and use and practices 

are obvious. Concentration of users 

is often moderate to high. 

Developed sites, roads, and trails are 

designed for moderate to high use. 

Plus: competitive games, 

spectator sports, bicycling, 

jogging, and developed resorts. 

Urban 

(U) 

Recreational activities with 

other individuals and groups 

are customary. Key part of the 

experience is socializing with 

family and friends. The 

natural environment and the 

use of outdoor skills secondary 

or unimportant. 

Highly modified surroundings, 

although the background may have 

natural elements. Facilities 

developed for the convenience of a 

large number of people. Controls 

and restrictions are obvious and 

numerous. Often attractive to short 

time visitors, and may serve as 

staging area for travels to non-urban 

settings.

Plus: guided or facilitated 

recreational activities such as 

tour boat sightseeing, on site 

rental of recreational 

equipment. 

Benefits-Based Management 

Please see BLM Instruction Memorandum No. 2006-060 for internal guidance in this 

management approach, as well as Information Bulletin No. 2004 072 and The BLM 

Priorities for Recreation and Visitor Services (Bureau of Land Management 2004).

A benefits-based management approach focuses on the impacts or effects of a 

recreational activity rather than on the activity itself. It is common for park and 

recreation providers to concentrate only on the provision of activity opportunities. It is 

also easy to look back at the successful classes and programs of a previous year and to 

simply replicate that success as a de facto policy decision for future years. Facilities, 

staff abilities, and resource constraints also often determine what opportunities are 

offered. These decision-making processes focus on the provision of recreation activities 

and on the number of people who participate in them. 

Benefits-based management is different. Rather than concentrating on the mechanics of 

providing the recreation opportunity, it explicitly defines the outcome of the experience. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan I-9

May 2007

In effect it shifts emphasis from the supply side to the demand side of recreation. But it 

goes beyond simple exhibited demand for park and recreation opportunities in that it 

looks at the needs of the people rather than just what they demand. That is to say, our 

customers’ specific recreational wants are shaped by their awareness of the possibilities 

and the known outcomes of these options. But this knowledge may be limited. They 

might also temper their demands by their own realistic appraisal of the day-to-day 

constraints on their lives. But our clients do know their own needs. They can identify 

the problems and pressures in their lives, for which they would like some antidote. It is 

our job as professionals to find the activity and setting that provides them that antidote. 

This is the heart of the benefits-based management approach. 

The shift from an activity-based management approach to a benefits-based approach has 

been echoed in the attention of research. Initial efforts were focused on counting the 

number of people and the number of activities, settings, and resources they would require 

and consume. As attention moved more to an experience-based approach, it was the 

quality of the experience rather than the quantity that was important. Under the 

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum planning framework, managers would concentrate on 

the provision of physical, social, and managerial conditions optimal for a particular type 

of recreational experience. A benefits-based approach goes a step further and looks at 

not just the psychological and experiential outcomes of the experience but also the flow 

of benefits to individuals, groups, communities and society in general (Borrie and 

Roggenbuck 1994). 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan J-1

May 2007

Appendix J 

Parker Dam 

Parker Dam spans the Colorado River between the states of Arizona and California 

17 miles northeast of the town of Parker, Arizona. The dam was constructed between 

1934 and 1938 by the Department of Interior’s United States Bureau of Reclamation. 

The construction of Parker Dam formed a reservoir, Lake Havasu, which is about 

45 miles long and covers 29,390 acres. Lake Havasu may store as much as a total of 

619,400 acre-feet of water, of which 28,600 acre-feet is dead storage to the maximum 

elevation of 650 feet. Parker Dam is the last dam on the Colorado River that has a 

significant storage capacity and is managed to release water for downstream requirements 

below Parker. Therefore, water releases downstream must be scheduled carefully to meet 

the requirements for irrigation and similar uses without waste. Releases are within the 

limits of flood control requirements for river regulation. These releases of water may 

cause minor fluctuations in the available storage. 

Two other main purposes that Parker Dam achieves under normal lake fluctuations are to 

provide separate forebays from which water can be diverted by the Metropolitan Water 

District (MWD) and the Central Arizona Project (CAP). The water diverted by the 

MWD’s Whitset Pumping Plant lifts water into the Colorado River Aqueduct and is 

eventually delivered to the Southern California area. The Whitset Pumping Plant is 

located 2 miles upstream from Parker Dam on the California side of Lake Havasu. The 

CAP’s Mark Wilmer Pumping Plant is located 2 miles upstream from Parker Dam on the 

Arizona side of Lake Havasu. The water diverted by the Mark Wilmer pumping plant is 

lifted into the Hayden-Rhodes Aqueduct. The CAP began pumping water from Lake 

Havasu into the Hayden-Rhodes Aqueduct in 1985. It has a capacity for delivery to 

water users in central and southern Arizona. 

Parker Dam is one of the deepest dams in the world: 73% of its structural height of 

320 feet is below the original riverbed. About 85 feet of the dam is visible. The dam’s 

superstructure rises another 62 feet above the roadway across the top of the dam. Parker 

Powerplant is located on the California side of the Colorado River immediately below the 

dam. It houses four hydroelectric generating units, each of which may produce 

30,000 kilowatts of hydroelectric power. Four 22-foot-diameter penstocks carry as much 

as 5,500 cubic feet per second (cfs) each to feed the generating units. Fifty percent of the 

plant’s power output is reserved for MWD’s use to pump water along the Colorado River 

Aqueduct to the Pacific Coast. The Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) sells 

the power to the open marketplace. WAPA is a Department of Energy agency. Under an 

agreement between the Bureau of Reclamation and MWD, the latter agency financed 

essentially the entire cost of constructing Parker Dam. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan K-1

May 2007

Appendix K 

Special Designations 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 

The objective of an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) designation is to 

identify areas to protect and to prevent irreparable damage to important historic, cultural, 

and scenic values; fish or wildlife resources; other natural systems or processes; or to 

protect human life and safety from natural hazards. The ACEC designation indicates to 

the public that there are significant resources requiring special consideration within or on 

these public lands. 

Bullhead Bajada Natural and Cultural 

The ACEC encompasses portions of the Beale’s Wagon Road (See Map 28 in the 

Approved RMP). Lt. Edward F. Beale, a naval officer in the service of the U.S. Army 

Topographical Corps, was ordered by the War Department to build a government-funded 

wagon road across the 35th Parallel. His secondary orders were to test the feasibility of 

the use of camels as pack animals in the Southwestern desert. Beale surveyed the wagon 

road in 1857 during the “Great Camel Experiment.” He followed existing prehistoric 

trails and associated sites. The wagon road was constructed between 1857 and 1859. 

The site complex is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and is of 

regional, if not national, importance. 

The wagon road followed one of the strands of the Mojave Trail, a prehistoric trail 

system used by the Mojave people to access lands and resources between the Black 

Mountains and the Colorado River. The Mojave Trail continued west of the river into 

California and was used in travels to the coast on trading expeditions. Additional 

significant associated archaeological sites are located within the ACEC. 

This area also contains some of the best tortoise habitat in the Black Mountains.

Research by McLuckie et al (1999) and Glenn et al. (1990) indicates that desert tortoise 

in the southern Black Mountains are genetically grouped with the federally threatened 

Mojavean population west and north of the Colorado River. The western and eastern 

bajadas of Black Mountains, including the ACEC, provide habitat to the largest and most 

contiguous known population of desert tortoise in the entire Black Mountain ecosystem. 

The highest densities seem to occur in the bajadas versus the more protected and less 

developed steep and rock slopes. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan K-2

May 2007

Current development is having tremendous impacts on desert tortoise habitat in the 

southern Black Mountains. Particularly vulnerable are the western bajadas adjacent to 

Bullhead City and Ft. Mojave. 

Beale Slough Riparian and Cultural 

Lands surrounding Beale Slough (a finger of open water with associated marsh lands) in 

California comprise the proposed ACEC (See Map 28 in the Approved RMP). Important 

riparian habitat and significant cultural resources are located within the boundaries. 

Included within the boundaries are significant prehistoric sites eligible for inclusion on 

the NRHP and important riparian and native fish habitat. Interagency cooperation has 

recreated wildlife habitat for numerous species. 

Crossman Peak Scenic 

Akoke-humi, the Mojave name for Crossman Peak, has been identified as a significant 

place of traditional cultural importance and is included in oral traditions concerning 

creation of the Colorado River. In the 1987 YUMA RMP, much of this same area behind 

Lake Havasu City was recognized for special management by BLM allocating it as a 

Natural Scenic Area. 

The ACEC will protect this natural scenic backdrop along with additional acreage to 

protect the cultural and other resource concerns (see Map 28 in the Approved RMP). 

Public land in this general area contains sacred mountain and sites eligible for inclusion 

on the NRHP including petroglyph sites. It also encompasses important wildlife habitat 

including Category II desert tortoise habitat, and sensitive bighorn sheep habitat. A large 

tract of public land in the southeast end of the ACEC exhibits a high degree of 

naturalness with little human modification of the landscape and opportunities for solitude 

and unconfined recreation. 

Swansea Historic District 

The ACEC encompasses the historic Swansea Townsite, which contains ruins of 

numerous structures and mining features, including associated shafts, adits, roads, 

railroad, and the Swansea pump station (see Map 28 in the Approved RMP). The historic 

archaeological district has been determined eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. 

Prospected in the 1880s, the copper mining town was established in 1908. The next 

50 years saw a series of booms and busts. The mine became inactive in the early 1960s. 

The recreational use of the town never stopped. 

The Swansea mining camp is located in La Paz County, approximately 35 miles southeast 

of Parker, Arizona. Physiographically, the area lies in what is referred to as the Basin 

and Range province. The biological environment of the site is typical of the northern 

portion of the Sonoran Desert ecosystem, containing saguaro, cholla, creosote, ocotillo, 

palo verde, and mesquite. 

The camp is situated in a northeast-southwest trending valley bordered by the Rawhide 

Mountains to the north and the Buckskin Mountains to the south, and lies just south of 

the Bill Williams River. The mine and camp area rests on low undulating alluvial flats 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan K-3

May 2007

dissected by washes. Material remains consist of the foundations and other structural 

remains of mine shafts, the processing plant, the mine haulage system, water and power 

conveyance systems, domestic and commercial buildings, tent foundations, wooden 

building ruins, two cemeteries, the Arizona and Swansea Railroad grade, depot, weigh 

scale, and repair buildings. Sheet refuse from mining and domestic uses, such as 

machine parts, slag, tin cans, bottles, and building materials, covers broad areas of the 

site. Topographically and visually, the site is dominated by Clara Peak, just to the south 

and east. 

Three Rivers Riparian 

The ACEC (see Map 28 in the Approved RMP) will protect riparian resources, scenic 

values, and threatened and endangered species habitat, specifically bald eagle aeries. 

This riparian habitat is extremely valuable for available year-round water, diversity of 

vegetation and crucial habitat for bird, fish, other wildlife, and insect populations. The 

riparian habitat provides both wintering and breeding habitat for the southwestern willow 

flycatcher, bald eagle, and peregrine falcons. The extensive riparian habitat with native 

cottonwood and willow trees provides outstanding scenic qualities with the free-flowing 

river, surrounding mountains, and cliff features offering solitude and water-based 

recreation opportunities. 

Back Country Byways 

BLM’s 8375 – Byways Handbook lists four components to BLM’s byway program: 

 BLM Scenic Byways – scenic corridors along major secondary and primary 

highways. 

 BLM Back Country Byways – corridors along back country routes that have high 

scenic, historic, archaeological, or other public interest values. 

 All-American Roads – roads that travel through corridors offering such a stunning 

variety of interesting destinations that travelers from around the nation and world will 

seek them out. 

 National Scenic Byways – described as roads that state and local officials consider so 

outstanding that they merit recognition at the national level. 

Parker Dam Road 

The byway was the 61st designated National Back Country Byway in the Nation. The 

Parker Dam Road is a paved road maintained by San Bernardino County, California, 

traveling along the California side of the Colorado River. The byway theme interprets 

the Colorado River as the “thread of life” connecting people, wildlife, and vegetation in 

the river canyon as well as the communities of Parker Dam, California, and Parker, 

Arizona. The byway connects the many developed recreation facilities, both commercial 

resorts and BLM campground and day use. The byway is used by recreational visitors to 

access 11 BLM-developed recreation sites and 11 concessions (see Map 27 in the 

Approved RMP). There are six developed wayside exhibits for the byway. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan K-4

May 2007

Parker – Bouse Swansea 

This potential byway incorporates three county maintained roads: 13.16 miles of the 

paved Shea Road, 10.10 miles of the all-weather gravel Swansea Mine Road, and 

18 miles of the all-weather gravel Swansea Road. Past the intersection of Swansea Mine 

and Swansea roads, the last 7 miles take the traveler into the Swansea Townsite. While 

this section of road is maintained by the county, the terrain encourages the use of highclearance vehicles. Besides the townsite, this potential byway offers views of the 

Gibraltar Mountain and East Cactus Plain Wilderness Areas, remnants of ranching 

activities, the old Swansea railroad grade, the Central Arizona Project (CAP), and 

prehistoric sites. A kiosk has been installed on Shea Road and a bulletin board appears 

on Swansea Road near the CAP, and another kiosk has been installed at Swansea 

Townsite.

Plomosa

This potential byway is a paved county road that connects areas around Quartzite and 

Bouse, Arizona, a distance of about 18 miles. The potential byway offers views of the 

dramatic Plomosa Mountains and Sonoran Desert. The Bouse Fisherman intaglio is 

another reason the route is popular with winter visitors. There is a kiosk at the west end 

of the route near SR 95. The potential byway would be cooperatively managed by Lake 

Havasu Field Office and the Yuma Field Office. 

Wild and Scenic Rivers

This appendix includes all management actions listed in the final Arizona Statewide Wild 

and Scenic Rivers Legislative Environmental Impact Statement and Study Report/Record 

of Decision (Bureau of Land Management 1994). Wild and Scenic River designation 

would require certain management actions be initiated in accordance with the Bureau of 

Land Management Wild and Scenic River Manual (MS 8351, August 19, 1952). The 

following would occur as a result of designation. In the event that wild and scenic river 

management actions overlap ongoing management actions, the more stringent would be 

applied.

 Construction of new roads, trails, or other provisions for overland motorized travel 

would be prohibited in wild segments 1 and 3 (4,164 acres). 

 Water quality would be monitored in order to meet federal criteria or federally 

approved state standards in the entire study area, according to the Wild and Scenic 

Rivers Act. 

 Patents would be restricted to the mineral estate on 486 acres of the study not in 

wilderness.

 Instream flow would be monitored to establish the minimum flow necessary to 

protect the outstandingly remarkable values. 

 New right-of-way would be discouraged on 486 acres of the study area not in 

wilderness.
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan K-5

May 2007

 The construction of dams, levees, hydropower facilities or major types of diversions 

would be prohibited on up to 15.9 riparian miles. 

These actions were current and ongoing management actions from the KRMP, the 

YRMP, and the Bill Williams Riparian Management Area Plan. Congressional 

designation of the river segments would require writing a management plan within 

3 years of official designation and the management actions listed below could be updated 

at that time. 

1. The riparian zone would be recommended for withdrawal from mineral entry on 

486 acres of the Three Rivers Riparian ACEC in Segment 2. 

2. Mineral leasing with no surface occupancy would be allowed in the riparian zone on 

486 acres of the Three Rivers Riparian ACEC in Segment 2. 

3. BLM approval for plans of operations would be required for all mineral exploration 

and development activities above the level of casual use outside the riparian zone on 

486 acres of the Three Rivers Riparian ACEC in Segment 2. 

4. Mineral material disposal would be prohibited in the riparian zone on 486 acres of 

the Three Rivers Riparian Area of ACEC in Segment 2. 

5. New mining claims and mineral leases would not be allowed in the riparian zone in 

Segment 2. 

6. New major right-of-way would be confined to existing corridors on 486 acres in 

Segment 2. 

7. BLM would acquire 524 acres of private land and 703 acres of state land on a 

willing-seller/willing-buyer or exchange basis in the Bill Williams River study area. 

8. Road development would be prohibited on 486 acres within 0.5 mile of bald eagle 

nests.

9. Motorized travel is prohibited in the wilderness portions of Segment 1 and 

Segment 3. 

10. OHV use in riparian zones would be limited to designated roads and trails on 

486 acres of Segment 2 (Scenic). 

11. Campground development would be restricted to areas outside the riparian zone and 

the 100-year floodplain on 486 acres in Segment 2. 

12. The area within 0.5 mile of a falcon nest would be closed to any surface disturbance 

or intensive recreational activities (e.g., group camping) during the breeding season 

from March 1 to June 15 on 486 acres in Segment 2. 

13. The portions of the study area in wilderness areas (4,164 acres) would be managed as 

a VRM Class I area. Management activities would be limited to those that preserve 

the characteristic landscape. 

14. The non-wilderness portions of the study area (486 acres) would be managed as a 

VRM Class II area. Management activities would be limited to those that would 

repeat the basic line form, color, and texture found in the predominant natural 

features of the characteristic landscape. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan K-6

May 2007

15. Helicopter flights above the 486 acres in Segment 2 would be prohibited within 

0.5 mile of active bald eagle nests during the breeding season. 

16. Except for salvage operations, the removal of native plants would be prohibited on 

486 acres in Segment 2. 

17. A systematic program would be developed for removal of saltcedar on as much as 

500 acres in Segment 2. 

18. As many as 200 cottonwood and willow poles would be planted on as much as 

100 acres in Segment 3. 

19. A cultural resource specialist would review proposals for activities that could result 

in increased use or surface disturbance. 

20. If sites were evaluated as eligible for listing in the NRHP, they would be avoided by 

the proposed activity. 

21. If avoidance were not possible, impacts would be mitigated through a data recovery 

program developed in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer. 

22. Protection measures (e.g., fencing or periodic patrolling) would be developed for 

selected cultural resources that have either great significance or a history of 

vandalism. 

23. As many as five new upland water sources for use by livestock would be developed 

to improve riparian areas. 

24. In accordance with the Bill Williams Riparian Management Area Plan, as much as 

5 miles of fences, including enclosures, would be constructed to improve riparian 

areas.

25. Livestock would be removed when utilization exceeds 70% of cottonwood and 

willow seedlings and/or utilization of key herbaceous species exceeds 50%. 

26. The wild burro population would be monitored and excess numbers would be 

removed. 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan L-1

May 2007

Appendix L 

Travel Management 

AZ Route Inventories 

Since 2000, BLM, four Arizona National Forests, and the Arizona State Land 

Department have cooperatively inventoried OHV routes throughout the state. 

Approximately 19,000 miles (14,500 BLM) have been inventoried for the land use 

planning efforts of the three respective agencies. A common data dictionary, approved 

by all agencies, is used to record each route along with important attributes (e.g., 

observed uses, route width/surface, camping areas, and major maintenance concerns). 

LHFO started inventorying routes in September 1990 as part of preparation for the Parker 

Strip Special Recreation Management Area Plan. The LHFO was the first Field Office to 

print an Arizona Access Guide (map) for a significant part of its management area in 

1998. Three of the five LHFO Access Guides were completed by 2002. These guides 

were completed only after a route inventory of the area was completed using BLM staff 

or contractors. The Lake Havasu Field Office Travel Management Units or Inventory 

Maps are based on the Access Guide format, and each guide would be updated when the 

Travel Management Network Plan is completed. 

LHFO Inventory 

Lake Havasu Field Office completed its route inventory in 2004 and updated with 

additional routes identified through the DRMP/DEIS 2006 comment process. The 

Approved RMP has one 11×17 map representing the existing route inventory and an 

index for the travel management units or route inventory maps (see Maps 30 and 32 in 

the Approved RMP). Six travel management units/route inventory maps are printed at 

the 62.5K scale and are on the CD included with this Approved RMP: Bullhead, Lake 

Havasu, Cactus Plain, Alamo, Bouse, and Wenden. 

Route Evaluation 

AZ BLM has adapted the Route Evaluation Tree, designed by a California contractor 

(first used in the West Mohave Plan), for designating routes and developing its travel 

management networks. The Tree applies a standard analytical method to existing routes 

to determine whether they would be retained, closed, or rerouted. Commercial, 

recreation, and resource data are compiled for each route for this process. Most of 

BLM’s roads and trails are user defined. The Tree process would allow each Field Office 

to eventually develop sustainable travel networks. Adjoining Forests and Arizona State 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan L-2

May 2007

Lands are evaluating the Tree method to determine if they would apply it to their 

respective land units. 

Proposed Route Evaluation Criteria

When using the Evaluation Tree BLM would analyze following detailed variables or 

criteria for each route and there by determine the value of said route in open, limited, or 

closed status. Additional criteria may be added through working with the public and 

BLM staff to complete the Travel Management Plan. The criteria would be noted in a 

database for each route. All routes would be analyzed during the route evaluation 

process, which would consider all uses and resources within the area. No use or resource 

would automatically predetermine a route decision. 

COMMERCIAL, ADMINISTRATIVE, PRIVATE PROPERTY (CAPP) Issues:

• Administrative Uses, such as:

Aggregate Borrow Pit 

Compliance/Enforcement Monitoring 

Fire Suppression 

Monitoring Site 

Other

Predator Control 

Resource Treatment 

Training Area/Facility (e.g., Search and Rescue) 

Weather Station 

Weed Abatement 

Wildlife Agency Facility 

Wildlife Agency Monitoring 

Wildlife Catchments 

Wildlife Water / Guzzler 

• Commercial Ranching Facility, such as:

Allotment Boundary Fence Line 

Base Waters 

Cattleguard

Corral

Fence Line (not allotment boundary) 

Gate

Other

Pipeline

Ranch HQ 

Ranch Shack 

Salt Lick 

Spring Development 

Springs

Tank, Trough 

Trailing Route 

Water Catchments 

Well

Windmill 

Military Facility 

Mining
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan L-3

May 2007

• Officially Recognized in Federal Planning Document and Maintained 

• Connectivity

Published in guidebook or on maps.

• Private Property 

• Tourism

• Utilities, such as 

Communication Site 

Electrical Transmission / Powerline 

Gas Pipeline 

Irrigation Canal 

Other 

Telephone

Water Pipeline 

Wind Energy 

Similarly, under the Special Resources section, some categories may be broken down into greater detail 

while others may not. This is a short example. 

RESOURCE ISSUES:

• Known Cultural Site / Area / Polygon 

• Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) 

• T&E Species, Special Status Species, Sensitive Species, such as: 

Bighorn Sheep 

Desert Tortoise 

Ironwood

[Apply specifics for Planning Area wildlife and plants] 

• Within WHA 

• Within identified Wildlife Movement Corridor 

• Wilderness characteristics of an area. 

• Within SRMA

• Within Wilderness or Wilderness Study Area 

• Within potential Wild & Scenic River Area. 

• Sensitive Habitat

Riparian Habitat 

Soils

Water

Air

PUBLIC USES ISSUES

• 4x4 (Standard Stock 4x4) 

• Astronomy / Night Sky Concerns 

• ATV Use 

• Birding

• Boating/Access

• Camping – 

Developed

Primitive/Dispersed 

Primitive/Extended Stay 

Vehicle Based 

• Commercial Recreation Permit 

• Cultural/Historical Sightseeing 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan L-4

May 2007

• Dog Trials 

• Dual Sport Touring 

• Equestrian

• ERMA

• Fishing

• Geocaching

• Golf Carts (Modified) 

• Hiking

• Hill-Climbing 

• Hunting

• Long Term Visitor Area (LTVA) 

• Motorcycle Trials 

• Motorcycle Use 

• Mountain Biking 

• Mountain, Rock Climbing 

• OHV

• Parking Area 

• Permitted Equestrian 

• Permitted Motorcycle / ATV 

• Permitted Mountain Bike 

• Public Safety 

• Public Use Site Access / Interpretative Panel 

• River and Stream Access / Put In-Out 

• Rockhounding

• Shooting

• Special Recreation Permit 

• Staging Area(s) 

• SUV Touring 

• Technical 4 WD 

• Technical, Site Specific (Extreme/Rock Crawling Within a Specified Area, Not a Trail) 

• Technical, Trail (Extreme/Rock Crawling Within Trails) 

• Trailheads

• Train Spotting 

• Vistas, Sightseeing, Photography 

• Wilderness Access 

• Wildlife Watching 

• Other
Close

01

Limit 

05

Mitigate/

Open

05

Mitigate/

Limit 

09

Route Evaluation Decision Tree© Main Features Include: 

1. Logical, standardized, balanced, and repeatable approach to route designation. 2. Systematic questions to assess compliance with a variety of pertinent statutory requirements 

including:

x Valid existing rights and other vested rights or permitted uses. x Degree of impact or degradation (including permanent impairment) to specially protected 

resources, such as species protected by the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) and cultural, historic, and scientific objects protected by the Historic Preservation and Antiquities

Acts (e.g., Monument Proclamations, Section 106) and wilderness values as protected by the Wilderness Act. 

x Implementation of the Federal Land Policy & Management Act (FLPMA) and its charge to 

balance the public’s need/desire for access to federal lands with resource protection through

a philosophy of management for “multiple use.” Such consideration includes recognizing the value of providing a range of recreational opportunities and treating those opportunities in accordance with FLPMA as a resource worthy of protection. 

3. Systematic consideration of access opportunities and resource protection needs on both a 

narrowly focused route-by-route assessment, as well as a broad-based cumulative assessment of the total network’s effect. 

4. Systematic consideration of mitigation and/or limited designation as a means by which to 

ameliorate resource impacts. Designation options include a range from open to closed and a number of intermediate actions as a means by which to balance access needs and resource protection. 

5. Systematic recording of data allowing for future retrieval and review/updating of decision 

information as needed (i.e., “decision pathways” are numerically coded). 

6. Systematic ability to assess a route’s final recommended designation status based upon the 

management goals of each individual alternative. 

How does the Decision Tree© Work? 

1. The region or management area in which the route is located is thoroughly evaluated. Resource protection, recreation, and commercial 

access concerns pertinent to route designation are identified. The patterns of these identified uses and concerns, as well as their trends, are also noted. Other related issues such as law enforcement, route maintenance, and user conflicts are further identified. 

2. The desired future condition and management goals of each proposed alternative are identified and reviewed. 3. Each route is systematically numbered. This both allows for tracking the designation process and enables the public to make comment on 

specific routes. 

4. Each route is then systematically assessed by sequentially answering the questions in the Decision Tree. This is done for each alternative. 

Specifically, the questions are assessed and answered in the context of the regional concerns identified in Step #1 and the management goals identified in Step #2 for each of the alternatives. 

5. The determination of the final designation for each route under each alternative is dictated by addressing the management goals for that 

alternative. 

6. The specific answers to each question for each route are recorded by the final coded answer. 

7.Detailed information that may have been critical to the answer of any question(s) or in the determination of the final outcome is recorded as 

part or the individual route designation decision record.

Close 0MitigatLimit 0MitigatOpen 0
A. Is the route:

A right-of-way via valid existing right, Officially recognized or maintained, 

A regional route that serves more than

one sub-region, 

A principal means of connectivity 

within a sub-region? 

B. Will the continued use of this route impact state or federally listed species, or other special status species or their occupied habitat or cultural or other sensitive resources including Monument objects or values? 

D. Can the impacts to the above sensitive resources be mitigated or avoided? 

F. Will the continued use of this route impact state or federally listed species, or other special status species or their occupied habitat or cultural or other sensitive resources including Monument objects or values?

E. Would route closure or some other form of mitigation address cumulative effects on various other resources not specifically identified above as sensitive or specially protected? 

H. Can the impacts to the above sensitive resources be mitigated or avoided?

I. Would route closure or some other form of mitigation a

various other resources not specifically identified above 

Y N

Y N Y N 

Y N Y N Y N Y N 

L. Does this route contribute to recreational opportunities, route network connectivity, public safety, or other public use access opportunities enumerated in FLPMA? 

X. Can the commercial, private-property, and public uses of this route be adequately met by another route(s) (within this route’s zone of influence) that minimizesimpacts to the sensitive resources identified above or that minimizes cumulative effects on various other resources?

Y. Can the commercial or private-property uses of this route be adequately met by another route that minimizes impacts to thesensitive resources identified above or that minimizes cumulative effects on various other resources?

Y N

Y N

Close

01

Limit 

01

Mitigate/ 

Limit 

01

Limit 

02

Close

02

Mitigate/ 

Open

01

Mitigate/ 

Limit 

02

Close

19

Limit 

16

Mitigate/ 

Limit 

11

Limit 

17

Close

20

Mitigate/ 

Limit 

12

Y

N

N. Does this route contribute to recreational opportunities, route network connectivity, public safety, or other public use access opportunities enumerated in FLPMA? 

BB. Can the commercial,private-property, and public uses of this route be adequately met by another route (within this route’s zone of influence) that minimizescumulative effects on various resources not specifically identified above as sensitive or specially protected?

Y N

CC. Can the commercial or private-property uses of this route be adequately met by another route that minimizes cumulative effects on various resources not specifically identified above as sensitive or specially protected?

Y N

Close

05

Limit 

05

Mitigate/ 

Limit 

03

Limit 

06

Close

06

Mitigate/ 

Open

02

Mitigate/ 

Limit 

04

Close

23

Limit 

20

Mitigate/ 

Limit 

13

Limit 

21

Close

24

Mitigate/ 

Limit 

14

Y

N

M. Does this route contribute to recreational opportunities, route network connectivity, public safety, or other public use access opportunities enumerated in FLPMA? 

Z. Can the commercial, private-property, and public uses of this route be adequately met by another route (within this route’s zone of influence) that minimizesimpacts to the sensitive resources identified above or that minimizes cumulative effects on various other resources?

Limit 

03

Close

03

Y N

AA. Can the commercial or private-property uses of this route be adequately met by another route that minimizes impacts to thesensitive resources identified above or that minimizes cumulative effects on various other resources?

Y

N

Y N

Close

04

Limit 

04

Limit 

18

Close

21

Close

22

Limit 

19

O. Does this route contribute to recreational opportunities, route network connectivity, public safety, or other public use access opportunities enumerated in FLPMA? 

Y N

Limit 

06

P. Does this route contribute to recreational opportunities, route network connectivity, public safety, or other public use access opportunities enumerated in FLPMA?

DD. Can the commercial,private-property, and public uses of this route be adequately met by another route(s) (within this route’s zone of influence) that minimizesimpacts to the sensitive resources identified above or that minimizes cumulative effects on various other resources?

Y N

EE. Can the commercial or private-property uses of this route be adequately met by another route that minimizes impacts to thesensitive resources identified above or that minimizes cumulative effects on various other resources?

Y N

Close

07

Limit 

07

Mitigate/ 

Limit 

05

Limit 

08

Close

08

Mitigate/ 

Open

03

Mitigate/ 

Limit 

06

Close

25

Limit 

22

Mitigate/ 

Limit 

15

Limit

23

Close

26

Mitigate/

Limit 

16

Y

N

Q. Does this route contribute to recreational opportunities, route network connectivity, public safety, or other public use access opportunities enumerated in FLPMA?

FF. Can the commercial, private-property, and public uses of this route be adequately met by another route (within this route’s zone of influence) that minimizesimpacts to the sensitive resources identified above or that minimizes cumulative effects on various other resources?

Limit

09

Close

09

Y N

GG. Can the commercial or private-property uses of this route be adequately met by another route that minimizes impacts to thesensitive resources identified above or that minimizes cumulative effects on various other resources?

Y

N

Y N

Close

10

Limit

10

Limit

24

Close

27

Close

28

Limit

25

R. Does this route contribute to recreational opportunities, route network connectivity, public safety, or other public use access opportunities enumerated in FLPMA?

HH. Can the commercial,private-property, and public uses of this route be adequately met by another route (within this route’s zone of influence) that minimizescumulative effects on various resources not specifically identified above as sensitive or specially protected?

Y N

II. Can the commercial orprivate-property uses of this route be adequately met by another route that minimizes cumulative effects on various resources not specifically identified above as sensitive or specially protected?

Y N

Close

11

Limit

11

Mitigate/

Limit 

07

Limit

12

Close

12

Mitigate/

Open

04

Mitigate/

Limit 

08

Close

29

Limit

26

Mitigate/

Limit 

17

Limit

27

Close

30

Mitigate/

Limit 

18

Y

N

Scoopnepupuopen

Li

2

Route Decision Tree © ARS, Inc. 2002 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan L-7

May 2007

Off-Highway Vehicle Mitigation - 

Examples

Nature of the conflict with routes and use of routes 

Conflict –is underlined, under each identified issue: Resource, Social, NLCS

Typical mitigation measures—are specified best practices that respond to identified 

conflict

-Typical mitigation is in order of possible implementation, not all measures may be used and not all may be 

listed.

-Mitigation actions taken should be triggered as a result of monitoring and reaching identified thresholds. 

-Monitoring should be done before, during and after mitigation measures are implemented to identify trends. 

Resource issues: 

The physical location of a route is degrading riparian condition 

1. Relocate the route to avoid the area 

2. Harden or raise the route above water level if route is necessary and unable to be relocated 

3. Close the route if no suitable mitigation is possible and make a plan for reclamation 

Human use associated with a route is degrading riparian condition

 1. Place information signs to request positive behavior (ie use only when dry etc) 

2. Harden and/or raise the route above water level or place barriers to keep vehicle and people on routes 

3. Relocate the route to allow riparian condition to improve 

4. Close the route if no suitable mitigation is possible and make a plan for reclamation 

Human use associated with a route is degrading desired plant communities

 1. Place signs to encourage vehicles and people to stay on routes 

2. Conduct public outreach regarding noxious weeds and conserving vegetation 

3. Fence the area or place barriers to manage people 

4. Develop a program to improve desired plant community 

5. Close the route and make a plan for reclamation 

Human use associated with a route is degrading water quality 

1. Review the situation to determine the source of degradation and monitor to determine severity 

2. Place water control measures on the route 

3. Take reasonable measure to further harden/stabilize the route 

4. Reroute the route 

5. Close the route if no suitable mitigation is possible 

Human use on a route is determined to degrade a particular habitat 

1. Request certain behavior from route users through signs and other information 

2. Place limitations of use on the route (time/season of use, type of use, number of users, behavioral 

requirements)

3. Reroute the route 

4. Replace habitat to offset problems caused by human use, some methods could be: 

a. Augment food/water sources 

b. Place barriers along route to protect specific habitat features 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan L-8

May 2007

c. Relocate or expand reproduction sites to be away from the route 

5. Close route if no suitable mitigation is possible, make plan for reclamation 

Human use associated with a route is determined to degrade a Special Status Species' habitat

1. Review management plans for the species and follow recommendations 

Design mitigation plans to address: 

1) Temporary conditions 

2) Seasonal conditions 

3) Year round conditions 

2. Develop specific mitigation measures based on the site if species management plan is insufficient 

3. Close route if no suitable mitigation is possible, make a plan for reclamation 

Human use associated with a route is determined to degrade Sonoran Desert Tortoise habitat 

1. Physically relocate habitat disturbances and/or schedule permitted activities to occur during dormant 

periods 

(Maintaining No-Net Loss habitat policy) 

2. Engineer Tortoise fences and underpasses for Tortoise benefit 

3. Acquire replacement habitat lands and funding for tortoise benefiting activities 

4. Close unauthorized routes and make a plan for reclamation 

Human use associated with a route is determined to degrade a Threatened and Endangered Species (T&E 

species)

 1. Initiate consultation with Fish and Wildlife Service 

2. Review recovery plan, implement mitigations as defined in plan 

3. Close route if no suitable mitigation is possible, make a plan for reclamation 

Dust caused on or near a route violates county, state or federal regulations

 1. Determine a short term solution 

a. Monitor situation and determine severity of the problem 

b. Close the route or area temporarily to stop dust generation 

c. Stabilize the route using a county approved method 

d. Place signs requesting a certain behavior (ie no wheel spin, reduce speed) 

2. Determine a long term solution 

a. Change formal maintenance interval on route consistent with use level 

b. Develop a localized outreach program 

c. Implement new technology as part of an area wide plan 

d. Close route if suitable dust control is not possible, make plan for reclamation 

Human use associated with a route is causing unnatural erosion rates

 1. Review the route to determine cause and monitor to determine severity 

2. Place water control measures on the route 

3. Take reasonable measure to further harden or stabilize the route 

4. Reroute the route 

5. Close the route if no suitable mitigation is possible 

Social Issues: 

Speed differential causes conflict between recreationists and/or local residents 

1. Place signs to raise awareness of lawful uses of the area. 

2. Monitor situation on the ground and request law enforcement support if necessary 

3. Conduct public outreach in an attempt change behavior 

4. Review terrain and improve sight distances if possible 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan L-9

May 2007

5. Redesign traffic flow by separating uses or limit by type or time of use 

Sound level causes conflict between recreationists and/or local residents 

1. Place signs to raise awareness of sound issues 

2. Monitor situation on the ground and request law enforcement support if necessary 

3. Conduct public outreach in an attempt change behavior 

4. Implement "Quiet Time" of use restrictions 

5. Reroute traffic to minimize conflict 

6. Place sound reducing barriers if applicable 

7. Close route if no suitable mitigation is possible 

A route causes unacceptable changes to the desired Recreation Opportunity Spectrum(ROS) setting (ex. 

unplanned OHV play areas, large party sites, dump sites, resource theft)

 1. Investigate the cause and implement signage and law enforcement as necessary 

2. Design mitigation plans to address: 

1. Short term conditions 

a. Implement new signing and public outreach to explain desired setting 

b. Implement temporary use restrictions(ex. No overnight camping) 

c. Issue emergency closure order, address conditions during closure 

2. Long term conditions 

a. Implement better signing and mapping protocols for this area 

b. If no suitable mitigation is possible, amend RMP to close the area 

3. Close areas near the route contributing to the unacceptable changes such as unplanned 

OHV play areas, large party sites, dumping sites, resource theft etc 

A proposed route is out of compliance with the Visual Resource Management(VRM) classification of

the area

 1. Evaluate the potential for and implement a method to make the route less noticeable such as 

landscaping. 

2. If no suitable mitigation is possible, construction would not be allowed 

A route causes unacceptable impacts to cultural or archeological resources

 1. Stabilize the resource and begin data recovery 

2. Fence one or both sides of the route to keep vehicles from pulling off the route onto a site 

3. Interpret the resource to gain public support for protection 

4. Work with AZ Site Stewards program for monitoring, increase law enforcement presence 

5. Reroute the route to avoid further disturbance of the site 

6. Close the route if no mitigation is possible, make a plan for reclamation 

Human use on a route causes unacceptable impacts to a designated wilderness (ex. vehicle trespass) 

1. Improve signage along wilderness boundary 

2. Implement short sections of fence in problem areas 

3. Use technology to gather information for more detailed action 

4. Use volunteers and law enforcement to improve compliance along boundaries 

5. Place time of use limits on the route to encourage lawful use (ie daytime use only) 

6. Close the route if no mitigation is possible 

Human use on a route outside wilderness causesunacceptable impacts to a designated wilderness (ex. 

vehicle trespass)

1. Improve signage along wilderness boundary 

2. Secure funding and resources to rehabilitate areas attracting trespass 

3. Implement short sections of fence in problem areas 

4. Use technology such as remote cameras and infrared counters to gather data for more detailed action 

5. Engage volunteers and law enforcement to improve compliance along boundaries 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan L-10

May 2007

6. Place time of use limits on the route to encourage lawful use (ie special event use only) 

7. Close the route if no mitigation is possible, make a plan for reclamation 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan M-1

May 2007

Appendix M 

Little Harquahala Herd Area 

Manageability Analysis 

Based on the last census, no wild burros remain in the Little Harquahala Herd Area (HA).

Management of the area would never be possible due to the amount of private lands 

within and adjacent to the HA. The Little Harquahala Herd Area is located directly south 

of Wenden, Arizona, on the south side of U.S. Highway 60. It is 65,893 acres in size and 

is composed of 51,961 acres of public land (79%), 11,767 acres of private land (18%), 

and 2,165 acres of Arizona state lands (3%). (See Maps 34 and 35 in the Approved 

RMP.)

The area was first identified as a herd area in the Draft Lower Gila North Grazing 

Environmental Impact Statement (1982), based on inventories conducted in 1976 and 

1980 utilizing the Lincoln Index method. The area was designated as an HA in the Final

Lower Gila North Grazing Environmental Impact Statement in September 1982. 

The Arizona Game and Fish Department (AZGFD) and the Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM) jointly conducted surveys in 1999 using the Simultaneous Double-Count method. 

Analysis of that data indicates that no burros remain in the area. Burros within this herd 

area are dependent on forage and water produced on the privately owned agricultural 

fields located in the middle of the herd area. 

No natural permanent water sources are present on public land within the HA. Other 

waters on public land in the area are those developed for livestock (one well, troughs, and 

earthen tanks). These waters are operational only during periods of active livestock use 

and therefore are not a dependable source of water throughout the year. Earthen tanks are 

generally accessible but contain water only during periods of plentiful precipitation. 

Even without the limiting factors of private farmlands and lack of water, forage in the 

area would not support a herd larger than 50 burros. Although existing research 

regarding minimum population size varies, it is generally accepted that a population of 

fewer than 50 animals is not sufficient to maintain a genetically viable and healthy 

population over the long term. 

Considering all factors, including limited water sources, sparse forageable vegetation 

resulting in the necessity of the animals to forage on privately owned farm lands, and the 

small number of animals, it is recommended that the Little Harquahala HA not be 

designated as a Herd Management Area (HMA). 
Appendix N 

Lake Havasu Field Office 

Resource Management Plan Priorities 
Within

Collect & analyze information Determine bighorn sheep lambing use and areas High

Survey and monitor and map Sonortan DT 

populations and categorized habitat. High

Health of the Land Assessments

(prioritize by landscape) High High

AML inventory for clean water in tributaries

-Bill Williams River (includes KFO) High

Acquire completed soil survey for LaPaz 

and Mohave counties Med

Complete plans Travel management Plan Inventory to close and 

rehab trouble routes High

Develop terrestrial SRMA and ACEC 

management plans High

Manage resources & facilities Maintain wildlife waters in coordination with 

AZGFD Low

Develop all weather road surface on 

Partners Point Road High Med

Develop, apply, and enforce health of land 

standards for recreation sites and 

consessions.

High High

Manage uses Arizona native plant laws High Required

Develop and apply Best Management Practices 

to all easements and right of ways

-wildlife

-soil stability

Med

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness Monitor OHV open areas for soil and veg 

stability High

Monitor upland water suplies and secure 

rights/permits under proper authority High High

Monitor authorized ground disturbing activites 

for achievment of resource objectives High

Crossman Peak ACEC - monitor the special 

plant community Med

Monitor threatened Mohave DT populations High Required

Partnership/Community Relations Participate in Natural Resource 

Conservation Districts. Low

Sponsor or participate in interagency 

watershed advisory group to advise 

communities with development issues along 

the Colorado River corridor.

High

Collect & analyze information Inventory wetland and riparian habitat High

Create PFC High

Inventory and monitor all natural seeps and 

springs within FO High

Inventory and map special status plant 

assemblages Med

Analyze wake affects along the shoreline Med

Restore Needles, CRNC and Beal Slough Reveg 

Site Med

Acquire and update MSCP riparian 

database as ongoing tool of 

riparian/wetland community evolution

High

Complete plans Update riparian function determination on all 

LHFO resources High

Manage resources & facilities Maintenance of revegetation sites - Monkeyhead High

Fuels reduction projects at reveg sites High

Heron Island Med

Develop DPC for concessions and aquatic 

oriented BLM Recreation sites High

Plant and nurture shade trees in conjunction with 

boat in camp sites, Med

Manage uses Complete and implement interdisciplinary 

Lake Havasu SRMA High

Provide direct services

Strategic Outcome

Achieve Desired Landscape and 

Watershed Conditions

Upland Conditions

Magnitude

Restore & Maintain 

Riparian/Wetland

Conditions

Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Workload: Achieving Desired Natural Resource Conditions

Priority Strategies to Accomplish OutcomesPlan Outcome Projects to Implement Strategies

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-1

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Monitor effectiveness Set-up and conduct survey and monitoring 

plots within reveg sites - Monkeyhead High

Monitor wildlife movement and usage within 

washes High

Monitor SWIFL according to BO for Alamo 

HMA High required

Monitor all riparian wetland treatments for 

resource objective achievement High

Partnership/Community Relations Reveg sites with ACOE mitigation funds Med

maintain coop in BWR steering group High

Maintain LH Fisheries Partnership to assure 

health of aquatic biota High

FWS for Volunteer & Havasu Springs @ Heron 

Island Med

Coordinate with MSCP riparian interests High

Collect & analyze information

Perform bathymetry study of Lake Havasu 

bottom to include assessment of bio-mobile 

contaminants.

High

Refine understanding and extent of metals 

contamination in BWR High

In coop with ADEQ, develop projects to reduce 

mercury concentrations from BWR. High

Complete plans Develop interagency water quality monitoring 

program for Colorado River High

Maintain and monitor Lake Havasu fish habitat 

improvements. High

Cooperate with COE, USCG, AzSLD, LHC, 

AzSP and others in determining water 

quality impacts to Colorado River from 

expanding water born recreation access 

development

Med

Manage resources & facilities Assess and determine long term fish habitat 

imporvement affects to water quality Med

Manage uses Develop coordinated creel survey for LH anglers High

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness Monitor clean water compliance on BLM 

authorized facilities in coop with State Agencies High Required

Partnership/Community Relations Develop coordinated, interagency LH water 

quality monitoring High

Collect & analyze information Monitor air quality impacts from special 

recreation permits on water and land High

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities Monitor air quality associated with high use 

BLM facilities on land and water High

Manage uses

Develop, install, and maintain a climate and 

atmospheric deposition monitoring station in a 

secure location in LHFO

High

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information Maintain VRM inventory. Med

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses Public Land Clean ups Med

Public Land Clean ups - Urban Areas High

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness Monitor through project level anaylsis Med

Partnership/Community Relations

City of Lake Havasu, Keep Havasu Beatiful, 

Mohave County and others

-education

High

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses TMPs High

route signage High

appropriate level of route maintenance High

Maintain existing facilities - kiosks High

restore routes where appropriate and necessary High

Acquire inholdings from willing sellers Med

Vegetative treatments Med

Provide direct services Allow grazing High

Visual Resources

Air Quality

Wilderness Characteristics 

Water Quality

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-2

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Monitor effectiveness Monitor route trespass High

Monitor existing leases High

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information Marsh Bird Survey Protocols-FWS high

Analyse fish habitat health and conditions in 

relation to recreational use high

Monitor special status fish -MOU high required

SWIFL Monitoring for habitat quality and fuels 

reduction projects, Three Rivers ACEC high required

MSCP species monitoring high required

Identify and protect key habitats of T&E fish in 

Lake Havasu high required

Monitor habitat suitability for T&E species 

associated with Colorado River and BWR. high required

Complete plans Participate in recovery for BTC and RZBK high required

BAEA recovery efforts high required

Complete design, and management plan for 

native species backwater projects on BLM. Med

Manage resources & facilities Assist in the management of the fish refugia 

including CRNC - MOU high

Manage uses

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness Monitor effectiveness of T&E reintroductions 

(fish) - BO High Required

Monitor current BTC critical habitat High Required

Fully engage LHFIP Partners to monitor survival 

success and species habitat preference of T&E 

fish stocking in LH

High

Partnership/Community Relations Public outreach and education for anglers for 

awareness of T&E High

Assign full time BLM liason for CRD in MSCP 

Steering Committee High

Stimulate angler participation and conservation Low

Collect & analyze information Analyze usage of BUOW, Sonoran DT, Kit fox 

in Bullhead Bajada ACEC High

Fringe-toed lizard and pholisma survey and 

monitoring - Cacturs Plains and scattered sand 

dune areas

High

Analyze affects to wildlife from OHV usage High

Collect baseline information of aquatic 

ecosystem response to recreational use High

Survey and map raptor nesting locations 

including BAEA and PEFA medium

Analyze affects to shoreline usage High

Monitor fish populations -MOU High required

Monitor and survey for breeding birds medium

Monitor bat populations and movement medium

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities Maintain public fishing access developments High

Maintenance of Partners Point Fisheries Facility High

Maintain artificial fish habitat - MOU High Required

Maintain wildlife waters in coordination with 

AZGFD Medium

Maintain gates and fences that protect wildlife 

resources High

Manage uses

Work with AZGFD, CDFG and other agencies 

in monitoring wildlife populations on BLM 

lands

High

Provide direct services Constuct public fishing access

MOU High Required

Monitor effectiveness Monitor bat populations - Whipple Wash ACEC High

Monitor current artificial aquatic habitat High

Monitor wildlife water usage and condition of 

development High

Monitor movement and populations across 

wildlife corridors High

Partnership/Community Relations

Wildlife

Special Status Species

Achieve Desired Biological 

Communities

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-3

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Collect & analyze information Determine and map the extent of noxious weed 

infestation within the field office High

Determine and map the extent of invasive weed 

infestation within the field office High

Complete plans Identify weed prevention & eradication efforts High

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses Ensure the use of sheep free forage High

Encourage the use of native vegetation plantings High

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness

Partnership/Community Relations Cooperate with all interests to educate and 

control noxious terrestrial and aquatic weeds High

Public outreach to educate on avoidance 

measures High

Collect & analyze information Define Lake Havasu bathymetry and high 

sediment contributors High

Complete plans Identify areas of high salts, selenium, and metals 

within Colorado River and tributaries Med

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness

Partnership/Community Relations

Within

Collect & analyze information Identification of TCPs and other sensitive areas 

working with local tribes. High low

Section 110 Surveys. Required

Identify Traditional Names working with tribes Medium

Identify gathering areas (plant, minerals, and 

other materials) with tribes Medium

Oral History Low

Evaluate sites identified for the NHRP Medium

Inventory Paleo Resources Medium

Complete plans Develop site specific plans to manage Bullhead 

Bajada SCRMA in consultation with tribes. Low (ACEC)

Develop site specific plans to manage TopcockNeedles SCRMA in consultation with tribes. Low (ACEC)

Develop site specific plans to manage Black 

Peak SCRMA in consultation with tribes. Medium

Develop site specific plans to manage Harcuvar 

Mountain East SCRMA in consultation with 

tribes.

Medium

Develop site specific plans to manage Hacuvar 

Mountain West SCRMA. Medium

Develop site specific plans to manage Swansea 

SCRMA. Low (ACEC)

Develop an Interpretive Plan for sites and areas 

working closely with tribes. Medium

Manage resources & facilities Restore/mitigate damaged sites in consultation 

with tribes. High medium

Stablize Swansea Townsite High low

Stablize and restore historic, prehistoric 

properties, and paleo resources. High low

Nominate NRHP sites (consult and coordinate 

with tribes) Medium low

Manage uses

Work with tribes to manage appropriate uses for 

sites identified for tradiional uses. Road 

closures, signage in sensitive areas e.g.

High

medium

Control access to cultural sites.

High

high

Unique Geological Features

(Resoivor bottoms)

Invasive Species Conditions

Area Wide Landscape

Workload: Achieving Desired Heritage Resource Conditions

Strategic Outcome Plan Outcome Strategies to Accomplish Outcomes Projects to Implement Strategies Priority Magnitude

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-4

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Manage scientific research for cultural and paleo 

values. Low

Issue field work authorizations Medium

Process ARPA permits Medium

Process ARPA violations High low

Provide direct services Recruit and train volunteers and site stewards on 

site specific projects. Medium

Outreach to public with educational programs, 

brochures, and website. Medium

Monitor effectiveness Monitor sensitive cultural and paleo resources. High low

Partnership/Community Relations Consultation/coordination/outreach with tribes. High medium

Scope interest for Friends Groups Low

Maintain Friends of Swansea Medium

Develop educational and interpretive materials 

with tribes. Medium

Develop Heritage Tourism Program Medium

Utilize AZ site steward program and cultural 

volunteer program to increase capacity. Medium

Collect & analyze information Conduct 110 survey Required

Identify Traditional Names working with tribes Medium

Identify gathering areas (plant, minerals, and 

other materials) with tribes Medium

Oral History Low

Identify historic and prehistoric trail systems in 

consultation with tribes Medium

Identify sacred sites/traditional use areas High low

Evaluate sites identified for the NHRP Medium

Complete plans

Develop site specific plans to manage Bullhead 

Bajada Natural and Cultural ACEC in 

consultation with tribes.

High 1

high

Develop site specific plans to manage Beale 

Slough Riparian and Cultural ACEC in 

consultation with tribes.

High 2

high

Develop site specific plans to manage Crossman 

Peak Scenic ACEC in consultation with tribes. High 3

medium

Develop site specific plans to manage Swansea 

Historic District ACEC. Medium low

Develop site specific plans to manage Three 

Rivers Riparian ACEC. low medium

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses High

Provide direct services Recruit and train volunteers and site stewards on 

site specific projects. Medium

Outreach to public with educational programs, 

brochures, and website. Medium

Monitor effectiveness High

Partnership/Community Relations Scope interest for Friends Groups Low

Maintain Friends of Swansea Medium

Develop educational and interpretive materials 

with tribes. Medium

Develop Heritage Tourism Program Medium

Utilize AZ site steward program and cultural 

volunteer program to increase capacity. Medium

Collect & analyze information Evaluate Site for elegible listing in NRHP

Inventory natural resources 

Complete plans Upon designation, plan required(3 yrs)

Manage resources & facilities Install upto 5 miles of fences to improve riparian 

areas

Removal of saltcedar on as much as 500 acres

Cottonwood and willow poles would be planted 

on as much as 100 acre

Manage uses Complete Route Designation (TMP)

Rehibilitate closed routes

Withdrawal from mineral entry on 486 acres of 

the Three Rivers Riparian ACEC1 in Segment 2 

Riparian Zone

Acquire 524 acres of private land and 703 acres 

of state land.

Remove Livestock when utilization exceed 

limits set in RMP& Wild Scenic River EIS

Manage & Protect 

Cultural/Paleontological

Resources

Area Specific (ACECs)

Wild & Scenic Rivers

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-5

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Develop up to five upland waters sources for use 

by livestock to improve riparian area

Seaonal Close areas with 1/2 mile of falcon nest 

during breeding season March 1 to June 15 on 

486 acres

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness Outstanding remarkable values and river 

conditions

Wild burro population and remove execess 

numbers.

Monitor Water Levels/Flow conditions annually.

Partnership/Community Relations Bill Williams Committee (USGS, USFWS, 

CORPS, AZGFD, other)

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans Nomination Package for Plomosa

Nomination Package for Parker Swansea Bouse

Manage resources & facilities Update and Replace Interpretive Kiosk for 

Parker Dam

Maintain Parking /Access for Parker Dam

Establish Kiosk Locations for Plomosa

Establish Kiosk Locations for Parker Swansea 

Bouse

Manage uses

Provide direct services Publish Brochures for Parker Dam

Create Interp/education material for Plomosa

Create Interp/education material for Parker 

Swansea Bouse

Monitor effectiveness Traffic Counters/Informal Surveys for Parker 

Dam

Traffic Counters/Informal Surveys for Plomosa

Traffic Counters/Informal Surveys for Parker 

Swansea Bouse

Partnership/Community Relations Parker Strip Concessions Ass. City of Parker, 

BOR for Parker Dam

Bouse, YFO, AZG&F, LaPaz County for 

Plomosa

Bouse, Parker, LaPaz County, Friends of 

Swansea for Parker Swansea Bouse

Collect & analyze information Inventory natural and cultural resources

Complete plans Harcuvar Wilderness

Rawhide/Swansea

Work with NFO for Whipple, Chem.Dead mtns.

Manage resources & facilities Maintain Trailhead/vehicle Barriers/parking

Mainain Boundaries (signing) every .25 mile on 

Roads

Maintain Wildlife catchments

Aquire Private Lands in Wilderness Areas

Manage uses Establish Trails (for safety and resource 

protection) maintence and primative campsites

Provide direct services Wilderness Education materials/maps

Monitor effectiveness Anunually Monitor each Wilderness for 

Condition

Partnership/Community Relations AZ Wilderness Col., Sierra Club, Wilderness 

Soc.

Collect & analyze information Soil survey (KRMP) Medium

Ecological site inventory (KRMP) Medium

Reassess ephemeral perennial classifications Medium

BLM inventory /utilization & trend data Medium

Insure sufficient waters for wild horses (KRMP) Medium

Complete plans Rangeland trend & utilization studies (KRMP) Medium

Allotment management plans (KRMP) Medium

Manage resources & facilities Adjust stocking rate based on monitoring Medium

Provide forage on sustained yield basis. Medium

Maintain color diverse population (LGNMFP) Medium

Emergency/nuisance removals High (safety) low

Manage uses Adjust stocking rate based on monitoring Medium

Provide forage on sustained yield basis. Medium

Maintain color diverse population (LGNMFP) Medium

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness Achieve proper use of forage resources Medium

Manage & Protect Heritage 

Resources

National Scenic & Historic 

Trails

Wildness and Wilderness 

Study Areas (WSAs)

Wild Horse & Burros

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-6

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Monitor habitat Medium

Evaluate data to assess current AML number Medium

Partnership/Community Relations Allocate forage based on analysis/public input Medium

Coordinate w/AZGFD Medium

Within

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses Process Applications (Low Probability High low

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness I & E & PV High low

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses Process Applications (Low Probability high low

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness Compliance Inspections high low

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses Process and issue ROWs high medium

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness Conduct compliance inspections high low

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans Locate and Plan community pit(s) low high

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses Issue Permits/contracts High medium

Resolve Mineral Trespass high medium

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness I & E & PV High low

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information Jones Red Hills Validity Exam Medium High

Chastain Site Validity Exam High High

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities Process Mineral Withdrawl for Bullhead Bajada 

ACEC

Process Mineral Withdrawl for Swansea ACEC

Process Mineral Withdrawl for Three Rivers 

ACEC

Process Mineral Withdrawl for Incline Railway

Manage uses Process mining notices, plans of operation, 

occupancy requests High medium

Resolve Occupancy Trespass High Low

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness I & E High low

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses Process Applications (Low Probability Low Mini

Workload: Addressing Anticipated Energy & Mineral Demands

Strategic Outcome Plan Outcome Strategies to Accomplish Outcomes Projects to Implement Strategies Priority Magnitude

Addressing Anticipated Demands 

for Energy

Oil & Gas

Coal

Renewables

Right of Ways (ROWs)

Addressing Anticipated Demands 

for Minerals

Saleable

Locatable

Leasables (not O & G)

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-7

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness I & E & PV Low Mini

Partnership/Community Relations

Within

Collect & analyze information Soil survey (KRMP) Medium

Ecological site inventory (KRMP) Medium

Reassess ephemeral perennial classifications Medium

BLM inventory /utilization & trend data Medium

Complete plans Rangeland trend & utilization studies (KRMP) Medium

Allotment management plans (KRMP) Medium

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses Adjust stocking rate based on monitoring Medium

Provide forage on sustained yield basis. Medium

Maintain color diverse population (LGNMFP) Medium

Emergency/nuisance removals High (safety)

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness Achieve proper use of forage resources Medium

Monitor habitat Medium

Evaluate data to assess current AML number Medium

Partnership/Community Relations Allocate forage based on analysis/public input Medium

Coordinate w/AZGFD Medium

Collect & analyze information Soil survey (KRMP) Medium

Ecological site inventory (KRMP) Medium

Assess grazing capacity Medium

BLM inventory /utilization & trend data Medium

Complete plans Evaluate compliance w/AZ Land Health 

Standards

High(LHFO/

RMP)

Rangeland trend & utilization studies (KRMP) Medium

Allotment management plans (KRMP) Medium

Reassess ephemeral perennial classifications Medium

Manage resources & facilities Adjust stocking rate based on monitoring Medium

Provide forage on sustained yield basis. Medium

Manage uses

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness Achieve proper use of forage resources Medium

Evaluate data to assess current AML number Medium

Partnership/Community Relations Allocate forage based on analysis/public input Medium

Coordinate w/AZGFD Medium

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness

Partnership/Community Relations

Workload: Addressing Anticipated Forest & Forage Demands

Strategic Outcome Plan Outcome Strategies to Accomplish Outcomes Projects to Implement Strategies Priority Magnitude

Addressing Anticipated Demands for 

Forage

Enhance Management of 

Livestock

Restore & Conserve 

Rangelands

Addressing Anticipated Demands for 

Forest Products

Commercial sales

Vegetative sales

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-8

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Within

Collect & analyze information Collect RMIS Use Data 

-Traffic Counter Data High

Complete plans

CMA/Recreation Area Management 

Plan

-Nature trails (BHC Heritage Trail 

System)

-Interp Plan

High High

Manage resources & facilities Maintain existing facilities - post & 

cable, restroom, signage Med

Continue Reveg efforts Low

Manage uses LE Enforcement of OHV Restrictions High

Supplemental Rules High

Provide direct services Continue Interpretive Signage & Kiosk 

Information Med

Monitor effectiveness

Maintain ROS/VRM/WROS Settings 

based on management goals for desired 

conditions

High

Partnership/Community Relations AGFD & BHC Partnership 

Interpretation/wetlands High High

Develop cirriculum for local schools Low

Collect & analyze information

Conduct Customer Surveys (5 yr 

rotation)

-boating survey

-visitor demand/preferences

High

Shoreline Erosion Survey

-water fluctuation

-recreational impacts

High

Soil Compaction Study Med

Complete plans

Recreation Area Management Plan

-Shoreline trails

-Desired Plant Communites/Health of 

Land Standards

High

Manage resources & facilities

Continue managing 87 shoreline fee 

sites, 6 public fishing sites, boat ramp,

& 2 concession sites, 3 adminstrative 

work sites

High

Continue maintaining 87 shoreline fee 

sites, 6 public fishing sites, boat ramp,

& 3 adminstrative work sites

High

Construct Shoreline Amenities High

Construct Partners Point Road & 

Seawall High

Develop & maintain additional public 

fishing site at Black Rock Cove High Required

Manage uses

Issue SRP's

-vending

-activities impact lake bottom and 

shoreline

High

Visitor contacts & Compliance

-regulations

-fees

-water-borne contact station

High

Supplemental Rules High

Rehab recreation use damage, maintain 

and place new visitor controls (signs, 

barriers) as needed to manage 

recreation, based on monitoring

High

Provide direct services Increase Interpretive Signage & Kiosk InformHigh

Workload: Addressing Anticipated Recreation Demands

Strategic Outcome Plan Outcome Strategies to Accomplish Outcomes Projects to Implement Strategies Priority Magnitude

Colorado River Nature 

Center (SRMA)

Lake Havasu (SRMA)

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-9

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Increase visitor contact by permanent 

employees for continuity

-park rangers

-LE

-Mainatenance

High

Monitor effectiveness

Maintain ROS/VRM/WROS Settings 

based on management goals for desired 

conditions

High

Monitor visitor use for intensity and 

resource impacts High

Partnership/Community Relations

Develop multi-agency water 

safety/Environ. Ed center at Contact 

Point

High

Continue development of Tri-State 

Waterway Partnership

-coordinated strategy

-integrated lake management plan

High

Coordinate personal 

memorial/monument program with other

jurisdictions (adopt-a-tree, adopt-a-cove, 

etc.)

Med

Continue LHFIM Partnership High

Coordinate jurisdictional activities 

related to management of vendor 

program (seamless)

High

Develop parterships

-Friends Group High

Collect & analyze information Collect RMIS Use Data 

-Traffic Counter Data High

Complete plans

Update Recreation Area Management 

Plan

-Shoreline trails

Med

Manage resources & facilities

Continue maintaining 3 

campground/day use fee sites, 

Rockhouse Visitor Center and boat 

ramp, 2 OHV Open Areas, 4 day use 

sites (non fee) & Backcountry By-way, 

1 adminstrative work site

High

Continue managing 3 campground/day 

use fee sites, Rock House Visitor Center 

and boat ramp, 2 OHV Open Areas, 4 

day use sites (non fee), Backcountry Byway, 10 concession facilities & 1 

adminstrative work site

High

Manage uses Supplemental Rules High

Visitor contacts & Compliance

-regulations

-fees High

Issue SRP's

-vending High

Provide direct services Continue Interpretive Signage & Kiosk InformHigh

Increase visitor contact by permanent 

employees for continuity

-park rangers

-LE

-Maintenance

High

Monitor effectiveness

Maintain ROS/VRM/WROS Settings 

based on management goals for desired 

conditions

High

Monitor visitor use for intensity and 

resource impacts High

Partnership/Community Relations

Coordinate with San Bernardino County 

Sheriff Department for water safety 

center

High

CA State Park OHMVR Grants High

Backcountry By-Way Partnership with 

BOR/CRIT/BLM/MWD Low

Parker Strip (SRMA)

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-10

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Volunteer Site Host Program High

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses

Issue SRP's

-vending

-guided trail 

Med

Encourage Tread Lightly/Leave No 

Trace Uses High

LE Enforcement

-OHV

-Recreational Shooting

-Dispersed Camping

High

Provide direct services Maintain signage/informational kiosks Low

Monitor effectiveness Monitor visitor use for intensity and 

resource impacts Low

Maintain ROS/VRM Settings based on 

management goals for desired 

conditions

Med

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information Collect RMIS Use Data 

-Traffic Counter Data High

Complete plans

Develop Recreation Area Management 

Plan

-Urban Interface trails

-motorized/non-motorized trails

-infrastructure for open OHV area (post 

cable, signing, route designation)

High

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses Supplemental Rules High

Visitor contacts & Compliance

-regulations High

Issue SRP's

-vending High

Provide direct services Increase Interpretive Signage & Kiosk 

Information High

Increase visitor contact by permanent 

employees for continuity

-park rangers

-LE

High

Monitor effectiveness

Maintain ROS/VRM Settings based on 

management goals for desired 

conditions

High

Monitor visitor use for intensity and 

resource impacts High

Partnership/Community Relations Coordinate with City of Lake Havasu 

and Mohave County High

Volunteer Site Host Program Med

Collect & analyze information Collect RMIS Use Data 

-Traffic Counter Data High

Complete plans Update Gibraltar Mountain IDP Plan 

(2001) Med

Complete RAMP Shea Road/Osborne 

Wash Open OHVArea High

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses Supplemental Rules High

Visitor contacts & Compliance

-regulations Med

Develop standard amenity fee sites Med

Issue SRP's

-vending

-commercial/competitive events & 

activities

Med

Provide direct services Increase Interpretive Signage & Kiosk InformMed

Provide Experience Appropriate 

for Zone

LHFO ERMA

Havasu Urban (SRMA)

Gibraltar (SRMA)

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-11

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Increase visitor contact by permanent 

employees for continuity

-park rangers

-LE

Med

Monitor effectiveness

Maintain ROS/VRM Settings based on 

management goals for desired 

conditions

High

Monitor visitor use for intensity and 

resource impacts High

Partnership/Community Relations Coordinate with La Paz County & 

AZGFD High

Volunteer Program - Open OHV Areas Low

Collect & analyze information Collect RMIS Use Data 

-Traffic Counter Data High

Complete plans Complete RAMP High

Manage resources & facilities Develop Fee Campsites Med

Maintain day use/overnight camping 

facilities High

Manage uses Supplemental Rules High

Visitor contacts & Compliance

-regulations

-fees

Med

Issue SRP's

-interpretive touring Low

Provide direct services Increase Interpretive Signage & Kiosk InformHigh

Increase visitor contact by permanent 

employees for continuity

-park rangers

-LE

High

Monitor effectiveness

Maintain ROS/VRM Settings based on 

management goals for desired 

conditions

High

Monitor visitor use for intensity and 

resource impacts High

Partnership/Community Relations Coordinate with La Paz County & Site 

Steward (SHPO) Program High

Volunteer Program Med

Develop curriculum for local schools Low

Collect & analyze information Collect RMIS Use Data 

-Traffic Counter Data Med

Complete plans Update La Posa IDP Plan (1997) Med

Develop RAMP - Bouse/Brenda Area

-Dispersed Camping (Bouse Plain) Low

Develop Backcounty By-way Plan Low

Manage resources & facilities Designate Routes High

Manage uses Supplemental Rules High

Visitor contacts & Compliance

-regulations Med

Issue SRP's

-commercial/competitive events & 

activities

High

Provide direct services

Increase Interpretive Signage & Kiosk 

Information

-increased use

-BCB

Med

Increase visitor contact by permanent 

employees for continuity

-park rangers

-LE

Med

Monitor effectiveness

Maintain ROS/VRM Settings based on 

management goals for desired 

conditions

High

Monitor visitor use for intensity and 

resource impacts High

Swansea (SRMA)

Plamosa (SRMA)

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-12

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Partnership/Community Relations Coordinate with La Paz County & 

AZGFD High

Coordinate with La Paz County, local 

communities & AZGFD for BCB Low

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness

Partnership/Community Relations

Within

Collect & analyze information See Complete Plans

See Complete Plans

Complete plans TMP by Travel Management Unit high high

Bullhead high high

Scope Critera Issues high high

GIS Additional Criteria Data high high

Evaluate Routes high high

Publish Alternatives On WEB high high

Designate Routes high high

Bouse high high

Scope Critera Issues high high

GIS Additional Criteria Data high high

Evaluate Routes high high

Publish Alternatives On WEB high high

Designate Routes high high

Alamo high high

Scope Critera Issues high high

GIS Additional Criteria Data high high

Evaluate Routes high high

Publish Alternatives On WEB high high

Designate Routes high high

Havaus high high

Scope Critera Issues high high

GIS Additional Criteria Data high high

Evaluate Routes high high

Publish Alternatives On WEB high high

Designate Routes high high

Cactus Plain high high

Scope Critera Issues high high

GIS Additional Criteria Data high high

Evaluate Routes high high

Publish Alternatives On WEB high high

Designate Routes high high

Wenden high high

Scope Critera Issues high high

GIS Additional Criteria Data high high

Evaluate Routes high high

Publish Alternatives On WEB high high

Designate Routes high high

Manage resources & facilities Install entry Point Kiosks high medium

Aquire Legal Access (Easements) medium medium

Enhance Understanding and 

Awareness

On-site

Off-site

Workload: Addressing Anticipated Direct Community Services

Strategic Outcome Plan Outcome Strategies to Accomplish Outcomes Projects to Implement Strategies Priority Magnitude

Travel Management

Manage Travel

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-13

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Establish Trailheads and Parking Access low

Manage uses Sign Designated Routes high high

Rehibilate Closed and or tresspass 

Routes high high

route enhancement/maintenance medium

Provide direct services Publish Access Maps high low

Monitor effectiveness Monitoring Teams/ law enforcement 

/resources medium

Partnership/Community Relations Work with Cooperating Agencies medium

Establish Grants from AZState Parks & 

CA Green Sticker high medium

Set up volunteer teams to help Sign and 

rehibiltiate medium medium

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans Complete Plan Amendment 

-Laz Paz Co. Wastewater Treatment Plant high 1 high

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses Process R&PP Patents

Bouse Community Park medium 4 low

Process R&PP Patents

LHC Landfill high 3 high

Process R&PP Patents

MCC to LHC high 2 high

Process R&PP Patents

Laz Paz Co. Wastewater Treatment Plant High 1 high

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses Process Direct Sale

Sec 12 BHC

high when 

arises medium

Renew 5 R&PP Leases 

La Paz Co. Transfer Stations

high - 

annually low

Process R&PP Leases

SARA Park Transfer high medium

Process R&PP Leases

LHC Park (Armory Site) high medium

Process R&PP Leases

Mohave Co.Kiwanis high low

Process LUP high - 

ongoing medium

Process and issue ROWs high medium

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness Conduct compliance inspections high low

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses Crossman Peak Com Site high medium

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information

Complete plans

Manage resources & facilities

Manage uses

Provide direct services

Monitor effectiveness

Partnership/Community Relations

Collect & analyze information Fuel Moisture Monitoring low

Fuel Loading Monitoring medium

Authorize Use

Resolve Unauthorized Use

Provide for Public Safety 

and Security

Manage Facilities

Enhance Land Use

Adjust Land Tenure

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-14

May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office Resource Management Plan Priorities

Fire History (occurance, severity, size, 

duration, etc.) low

Evaluate Fire Hazards in Colorado and 

Bill Williams Rivers high

Complete plans Lake Havasu/Yuma Fire Management 

Plan (FY09) high

Lake Havasu/Yuma Fire Management 

Plan (FY12) high

Manage resources & facilities Yearly projects are identified in 

NFPORS high

Manage uses

Provide direct services La Paz County CWPP (Community 

Wildland Prevention Plan) East medium

La Paz County CWPP (Community 

Wildland Prevention Plan) West medium

Implement Fire Restrictions (as needed) medium to 

high

Monitor effectiveness Monitor outcomes of fuel treatments low

Monitor Compliance with Fire 

Restrictions low

Partnership/Community Relations Public Contact/outreach presentations low

Develop and provide outreach materials 

to the public low

Protect Lives and Property

Manage Fire on the Wild & 

Urban Interface

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-15

May 2007
LHFO PRIORITIES BY FY On-Going FY 07 FY08 FY09 FY10

BEYOND

FY10

1. BULLHEAD CITY/MOHAVE VALLEY LANDSCAPE UNIT

X

X

X

X

X X

X X

X

X

2. LAKE HAVASU/PARKER STRIP LANDSCAPE UNIT

X X

X X

X

X

X

X

LAKE HAVASU SRMA/AUBREY HILLS/CONTACT POINT X

X

X

 WATER QUALITY MONITORING INITIATIVE X

X

X

X

3. BILL WILLIAMS/SWANSEA LANDSCAPE UNIT

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

STANDARD WASH SRMA (FY07 BPS-$19K)

BILL WILLIAMS COORDINATION

LAND DISPOSALS 

 R&PP- Alamo

HEALTH OF THE LAND SURVEYS

SWANSEA ACEC/SCRMA/SRMA

 Planning

3 RIVERS ACEC

WILDERNESS AREAS

LAND DISPOSALS 

 R&PP

 SALES (2)

TMP

 Coordinated Lake/River Management Plan

FISHERIES PROGRAM

 MCSP

 FACILITY MAINTENANCE

TMP

SECTION 10/MSCP/SRMA

BEALE SLOUGH SCRMA (TOPOCK/NEEDLES)

BULLHEAD BAJADA ACEC/SCRMA

NEEDLES REVEG

SECTION 12

LAND DISPOSAL – BHC AREA

Lake Havasu Field Office

RMP IMPLEMENTATION & BUDGET STRATEGY

LAND DISPOSAL – NEEDLES AREA

TMP

CROSSMAN PEAK ACEC/HAVASU URBAN SRMA

PARKER STRIP SRMA 

FEE SITE/CONCESSION MGMT.

ROCK HOUSE VISITOR CENTER

 Cultural/Bio Clearances 

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-17 May 2007
LHFO PRIORITIES BY FY On-Going FY 07 FY08 FY09 FY10

BEYOND

FY10

Lake Havasu Field Office

RMP IMPLEMENTATION & BUDGET STRATEGY

4. LA PAZ COUNTY LANDSCAPE UNIT

X (FY11/12)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Rangeland Health (every 5 years) Prior to 2010

X X

XXX X

X

X

X

Monitoring included in priorities above

Coordinate w/other entities

Activity Level Plans

Cultural Resource Monitoring

Carrying/Visitor Capacity Study

Recreation Monitoring (every 5 years) Prior to 2010

Biologic Opinion Compliance

Species Specific Survey and Habitat Monitoring:

Endangered Species Monitoring 

MONITORING

Riparian allotments

Abandoned Mine Lands Inventory (ADEQ)

Air Quality and Climate

Open Areas 

Wilderness Monitoring

Coordinated Lake\River Management Plan

Non-allotment lands

Abandoned Mine Lands Inventory

EAST CACTUS PLAINS – SAND DUNES

LAND SALES

OTHER LAND DISPOSALS - LA PAZ COUNTY R&PP

Waste Water Treatment Plant/La Paz County R&PP

PLAMOSA SRMA

HARCUVAR WEST/ EAST SCRMA

WILDERNESS AREAS

 Harcuvar

GIBALTAR SRMA

OSBORNE WASH OHV AREA 

 Cultural/Bio Clearances

TMP

BLACK PEAK SCRMA

Lake Havasu Field Office

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan N-18 May 2007
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan O-1

May 2007

Appendix O 

Plan Maintenance Roster 

Lake Havasu Field Office RMP

Approved 2007 

Maintenance Roster 

Plan decision requiring maintenance: 

Plan code and page number: 

Reason(s) for maintenance: 

Revised plan decision:

Signatures and Date: 

______________________________

Initiator 

 ______________________________ 

Planning and Environmental Coordinator (Review) 

_______________________________

Field Manager (Approval) 

 
Lake Havasu Field Office 

Record of Decision/Resource Management Plan P-1

May 2007

Appendix P 

Plan Monitoring Roster 

Lake Havasu Field Office RMP

Approved 2007 

Monitoring Roster 

Portion of Plan Monitored: 

Date(s):

Results:

Is any modification needed to adjust the plan? 

If so, please explain. 

Signatures and Date: 

______________________________

Initiator 

 ______________________________ 

Planning and Environmental Coordinator (Review) 

_______________________________

Field Manager (Approval) 

U.S. GPO: 2007 — 660-091 / 16011 Region No. 8