United States Department of the Interior 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

Alturas Field Office 

708 West 12th Street 

Alturas, CA 96101 

Phone: (530) 233-4666 

Fax: (530) 233-5696 

www.ca.blm.gov/alturas 

In Reply Refer to: April 1, 2008 

 CA-310 1610 

Dear Interested Party: 

I am pleased to announce that, after several years of collaborative effort, the Alturas Resource 

Management Plan (RMP) is complete. This document will provide guidance for the management of 

503,045 acres of lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in northeast California. 

The staff of the Alturas Field Office of the BLM has prepared the attached Record of Decision (ROD) and 

RMP in accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 and the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969. The ROD links final land use plan decisions to the analysis presented 

in the Proposed RMP/Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). Minor changes and points of 

clarification are described in the ROD, in response to staff review and issues raised in the public protest 

process. 

The ROD serves as the final decision for Land Use Planning Decisions described in the Proposed RMP. 

The public had an opportunity to protest these decisions after the publication of the Proposed Alturas 

RMP/FEIS in June 2007. Two protests were received. Resolutions to the protests did not result in the 

necessity for more analysis or repeat publication of the Alturas Proposed RMP/ Final EIS, or for 

additional public review and protest. 

The ROD also describes a set of Implementation Level Decisions. Those decisions will authorize the 

issuance of a travel route network. An appeal opportunity for these decisions is being provided at this 

time. The process is described in the ROD and the appeal period will close 30 days from the date the 

Notice of Availability of the ROD/RMP appears in the Federal Register. This date will also be 

announced via local news releases. Please review the ROD carefully for a more detailed discussion of the 

appeal process. 

Additional hard copies and CD-ROM versions of the RMP/ROD may be obtained at the address above. 

The document is available on the internet at http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/fo/alturas.html. 

We appreciate your help in this planning effort and look forward to your continued participation as the 

plan is implemented. For additional information or clarification regarding the attached document or the 

planning process, please contact Jeff Fontana at (530) 257-5332 or Sue Noggles (530) 252-5345, or by 

e-mail at rnoggles@ca.blm.gov. 

Sincerely, 

Tim Burke 

Field Manager 

Alturas Field Office 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Decision 

The decision is hereby made to adopt the Alturas Resource Management Plan (RMP) as 

the land use plan for the public lands and resources managed by the Alturas Field Office. 

The Alturas RMP was developed under regulations implementing the Federal Land 

Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976. An environmental impact statement 

(EIS) was prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 

1969 to consider this decision. The Alturas RMP adopted here is nearly identical to the 

Alturas Proposed RMP presented for public review and protest on June 15, 2007. 

Introduction 

The Alturas Field Office includes approximately 503,045 BLM-managed surface acres in 

northeastern California. The geographic area includes BLM-administered lands within 

the counties of Modoc, Lassen, Shasta, and Siskiyou, California. The BLM’s mission is to 

sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the public lands it manages for the use 

and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Alturas RMP was developed in 

coordination with the Eagle Lake and Surprise Field Office RMPs to provide a consistent 

framework for managing public lands and resource uses in northeast California and 

northwest Nevada. 

The Alturas RMP was prepared using the BLM’s planning regulations and guidance 

issued under the FLPMA. An EIS is also included in this document to meet the 

requirements of NEPA, the Council on Environmental Quality’s regulations for 

implementing NEPA (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1500-1508), and 

requirements of the BLM’s NEPA Handbook, H-1790-1. 

The Alturas RMP includes two levels of decisions in accordance with the NEPA and BLM 

regulations. These are land use planning decisions and implementation 

decisions. Land use planning decisions were protestable during the June 15 2007 – 

July 16, 2007 protest period in accordance with BLM regulations 43 CFR 1610.5-2. Two 

protest letters were received. There are also implementation decisions made in the RMP 

(see below). These decisions may be appealed in accordance with the Department of the 

Interior regulations at 43 CFR 4 and 43 CFR 2450. 

Alternatives Considered 

MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED IN THE RMP 

The underlying goal of developing alternatives was to explore the range of use options, 

protection options, and management tools that will achieve a balance between protection 

of the planning area’s natural character, and a variety of resource uses and management 

issues. Alternatives must: meet the project purpose and need; be viable and reasonable; 

provide a mix of resource protection, management use, and development; be responsive 

to issues identified in scoping; and meet the established planning criteria, federal laws 

and regulations, and BLM planning policy. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 1 
 

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Five alternatives were developed for detailed analysis. The “No Action Alternative” was a 

continuation of current management, and was developed from existing planning 

decisions, policies, and guidance. Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 were developed with input 

from BLM internal and public scoping, public workshops, and collaborative work among 

the BLM interdisciplinary planning teams. 

Of the management alternatives, Alternative 2 represented less intense management 

and/or use, emphasizing a greater utilization of natural processes wherever possible, and 

minimizing human impacts. This would result in lower levels of active involvement in 

resource restoration and management, as well as limited recreation use. In the middle of 

the spectrum, Alternative 3 provided a greater diversity of uses and approaches to 

management, with a broad mix of tools that would allow for moderate levels of use. 

Alternative 1 took a more active approach, allowing more intense management and/or 

use while still maintaining and enhancing resource conditions. It included the widest 

application of management tools and actions, and provided the highest level of 

recreation use. The Preferred Alternative and Proposed RMP were developed using 

decisions from each of the management alternatives. See the Management 

Considerations section for more detail. 

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERABLE ALTERNATIVE 

Federal regulations (40CFR 1505.02(b)) require that an agency identify the 

“environmentally preferable” alternative(s) in the Record of Decision (ROD) for an EIS. 

The environmentally preferable alternative is the alternative that would result in the 

greatest beneficial impacts to the identified aspects of the environment. Compared to 

the other alternatives analyzed in the Alturas RMP, Alternative 2 and the Preferred 

Alternative best meet the national environmental goals identified above. 

Alternative 2 provides the highest level of protection of natural and cultural resources, 

however it does not allow for a wide range of beneficial uses of the environment. The 

Preferred Alternative would enhance the ability of the BLM to achieve the purpose and 

need of the RMP, as outlined in Chapter 1 of the document, as well as meet desired 

future conditions, goals and objectives of specific resources as outlined in Chapter 2. 

The No Action Alternative, as well as Alternatives 1 and 3, do not contain sufficient 

management emphasis designed to protect native plant communities and restore 

degraded sagebrush steppe habitats, when compared to the Preferred Alternative. 

Portions of the field office area that are currently in a degraded condition can only be 

improved successfully with the scope of active restoration efforts that are provided for 

within the Preferred Alternative. 

The Preferred Alternative would result in overall minor to moderate adverse impacts to 

resources, and these impacts would continue to be mitigated. Proposed management 

actions would result in moderate to major beneficial impacts to native vegetation 

communities and wildlife habitat from restoration efforts, and the removal of invasive 

juniper. Improvements to riparian areas, water bodies, and other special habitats would 

improve soil and water resources, and wildlife habitat. The designation of seven areas of 

critical environmental concern (ACEC), three wild and scenic river (WSR) segments, and 

an increased emphasis on cultural resource protection and management would have 

beneficial impacts to these important and unique resources. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2 
 

 

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Management Considerations/Decision Rationale 

The approved management actions defining the Alturas RMP were selected by the BLM, 

with input from Tribes, State and county governments, other federal agencies, the 

Northeast California Resource Advisory Council (RAC), interested organizations, and the 

public. The BLM considers the Approved Alturas RMP as the best approach to meeting 

the purpose and need of this project, addressing the planning issues, and providing the 

optimal combination of flexibility and balance in managing both resources and uses of 

the lands in the planning area. Factors considered during this selection process include: 

environmental impacts; issues raised throughout the planning process; specific 

environmental values, resources, and resource uses; conflict resolution; public input; 

and laws and regulations. 

The Approved Alturas RMP draws from the alternatives analyzed in the Draft 

RMP/Draft EIS and is nearly identical to the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. The FLPMA 

requires that the BLM manage the public lands according to land use plans (43 U.S.C. 

1702; 43 U.S.C. 1732) in a manner that will protect the quality of scientific, scenic, 

historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, and 

archeological values; that, where appropriate, will preserve and protect certain public 

lands in the natural condition; that will provide food and habitat for fish and wildlife and 

domestic animals; that will provide for outdoor recreation and human occupancy and 

use (43 U.S.C. 1701); and that will regulate the use, occupancy, and development of 

public lands (43 U.S.C. 1732). The Approved Alturas RMP is the land use plan that 

provides the framework to accomplish these mandates. Through implementation of the 

RMP and other actions that may become necessary, the BLM will prevent unnecessary or 

undue degradation of the lands it manages. 

Changing Land Use Plan Decisions 

Land use plan decisions can be changed through a plan amendment. Plan amendments 

change one or more of the terms, conditions or decisions of an approved plan including 

resource restrictions. Plan amendments are often prompted by the need to consider a 

proposal or application for a land use that does not conform to the RMP, or to respond to 

new or intensified interest in uses on public land. 

When an applicant requests that the BLM amend the land use plan to allow an otherwise 

nonconforming proposal, BLM regulations (43 CFR 1600) and CEQ regulations (40 CFR 

1500) guide preparation of plan amendments. The plan amendment process involves 

and encourages meaningful public participation. This process begins with the 

publication of a Notice of Intent to amend a land use plan in the Federal Register and 

local newspapers. 

Changes Made To the Approved RMP 

This Record of Decision adopts the Alturas Proposed RMP/Final EIS (May 2007) as the 

Approved Alturas RMP, with a few minor clarifications to the decision, as listed below. 

No substantive changes have been made to the land use plan decisions. Based on 

changed circumstances and protests the BLM received on the Proposed RMP/Final EIS, 

the following modifications were made to the Approved RMP: 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 3 
 

RECORD OF DECISION 

1.	 The Approved RMP adopts management guidance from and tiers to the impacts 

analysis section of the Final Programmatic EIS on Wind Energy Development on 

BLM Administered Lands in the Western United States (Wind Energy PEIS), BLM, 

2005, and subsequent amendments. The BLM will follow guidance from BLM 

Instruction Memorandum No. 2006-216, and subsequent BLM policy, in processing 

right-of-way applications for wind energy projects. In order to reduce adverse 

impacts to wildlife and habitat the BLM will implement best management practices 

for wind energy projects in accordance with the Wind Energy PEIS. 

Due to the changing energy goals at the national level and particularly here in 

California, renewable energy production on BLM public lands is growing in 

importance. While renewable energy such as geothermal and wind are already 

established uses in some parts of the State, new geothermal and wind proposals as 

well as new solar proposals are emerging new public land uses in other parts of 

California. 

Placement of these facilities depends on a number of factors that cannot always be 

anticipated in the BLM’s land use plans such as economics, relationship to the State’s 

energy grid, project design, current technology and potential resource impacts. 

However, BLM land use plans can always be amended through the public process to 

accommodate such uses when necessary. In addition to renewable energy, other 

unforeseen public needs and demands often arise outside of the planning cycle and 

plans are amended according to the process outlined in Changing Land Use Plan 

Decisions. 

2.	 The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), has recently been removed from the 

federal list of threatened and endangered (T&E) species. At the time of the 

BLM’s request to initiate formal consultation on T&E species with U. S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (USFWS) for the Draft and Proposed Alturas RMP/EIS, the bald 

eagle was federally listed as threatened. On June 28, 2007, the Secretary of the 

Interior announced that the bald eagle was being removed from the federal list of 

T&E species. The final rule delisting the bald eagle was published on July 9, 

2007, and became effective on August 8, 2007 (USFWS, 2007). After delisting, 

bald eagles will continue to be protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle 

Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. 

 The USFWS has encouraged the BLM to continue managing bald eagles as stated 

in the Biological Assessment (BLM 2007a), which implements management 

actions from the Preferred Alternative in the Alturas PRMP/FEIS (Biological 

Opinion on the Proposed Resource Management Plan for the Alturas Field Office, 

Alturas, California, USFWS, 2007). The BLM has agreed to manage bald eagles 

as requested by USFWS, and according to management actions within the Alturas 

PRMP/FEIS (Sec. 2.24.2.4, p. 2-121). However, the BLM will no longer consider 

the bald eagle a “threatened” species under the Endangered Species Act. 

3.	 In 2007 the California State Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO), in coordination 

with the California BLM, and the Nevada SHPO, revised the State Protocol 

Agreement regarding cultural resources. The revised protocol suspends the 

requirement that all unevaluated cultural resources will be allocated to “use 

categories”, as described in Section 2.2.3.2 (p. 2-8) of the Alturas PRMP/FEIS. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 4 
 Allowable Uses Management Actions

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

The Approved RMP has been changed by deleting the following
 
 


paragraph:
 
 


“Known and newly identified archaeological sites would be evaluated and placed 

in one of six use categories (as specified in Department of Interior Information 

Bulletin [DOI IB] No. 2002-101). Categories and management actions are as 

follows (in Table 2.2-1).” 

The Approved RMP now states: 

“The BLM may allocate evaluated archaeological sites to one of six uses as 

outlined in USDI-IB No. 2002-101 “Cultural Resource Considerations in 

Resource Management Plans”, and Table 2.2-1 below.” 

4.	 The Approved RMP adopts the visual resources management (VRM) classes listed for 

all lands in the Proposed RMP, Chapter 2.20 Visual Resources Management, as the 

official VRM Management Classes. 

5.	 The Draft Sage Steppe Ecosystem Restoration Strategy (Modoc National Forest, 

Alturas BLM, and Modoc County) was completed and published in August 2007. The 

Approved RMP will incorporate recommendations contained in this document, once 

it is final, to manage for the improved health of plant communities, and to reduce the 

encroachment of western juniper. 

6.	 The Approved RMP adopts and tiers to the Final Programmatic Environmental 

Impact Statement and Programmatic Environmental Report, Vegetation Treatments 

using Herbicides on BLM Lands in 17 Western States, BLM, September 2007; and 

the Environmental Assessment, Integrated Weed Management Program and 

Record of Decision, BLM, Alturas, Eagle Lake, and Surprise Field Offices, EA 

# CA320-07-14, CA350-07-07, CA370-07-04, June 2007. 

7.	 The BLM will designate energy corridors, perform environmental reviews required to 

complete corridor designation, and incorporate designated corridors into relevant 

agency land use plans, as defined in the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact 

Statement, Designation of Energy Corridors on Federal Lands in the 11 Western 

States, Department of Energy, BLM, USDA Forest Service, Department of Defense, 

and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, October 2007, and subsequent amendments. 

Approved RMP Executive Summary 

The Alturas RMP provides a detailed description of management actions for 24 resource 

subjects. The desired future condition, goals, objectives, and management actions for 

each major resource and use are discussed in detail in Chapter 2 of the 

Proposed/Approved RMP. The highlights of management actions for each resource 

subject are listed below. Please note that this Executive Summary is designed to provide 

only an overview of some of the proposed management actions within the Alturas RMP. 

The table below contains an abbreviated version of the management actions for each 

subject, and is not a complete listing of all management actions within the RMP. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 5 
 

RECORD OF DECISION 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Air Quality 

• Manage prescribed fire on 75 to 10,000 acres/year, and wildland fire use to reduce impacts on 

air quality. 

Cultural and Paleontological Resources 

• Cultural Resource Management Plans (CRMPs) will be developed for Rocky Prairie/South 

Graves, Tule Mountain, Likely Tablelands/Yankee Jim Ranch, and Beaver Creek, and the three 

interpretive sites. 

•	 Designate one archaeological area of critical environmental concern (ACEC): Likely Tablelands/ 

Yankee Jim/Fitzhugh Creek (1,400 acres). 

•	 Nominate Yankee Jim Ranch to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). 

•	 Develop 3 cultural resource interpretive sites: Descent into Goose Lake, Bayley Reservoir, and 

Coyote Ridge. 

•	 Exclosure fences (2,750 total acres) would be used (in consultation with permittees and tribes) to 

protect important cultural sites from damage by off-highway vehicles (OHVs) and livestock. 

Energy & Minerals 

•	 Manage 445,997 acres as ‘Open’ to mineral leasing under standard terms and conditions. 

•	 Manage 470,052 acres as ‘Open’ to locatable mineral development. 

•	 Manage 435,385 acres as ‘Open’ to saleable mineral development (i.e., mineral material pit 

establishment & decorative rock collecting). 

•	 Manage 435,385 acres as ‘Open’ to renewable energy development. 

•	 Adopt management guidance for wind energy development from the Final Programmatic EIS on 

Wind Energy Development on BLM Administered Lands in the Western United States (Wind 

Energy PEIS), 2005, and subsequent amendments. Environmental analyses for wind energy 

development will tier to the impacts analysis section of the Wind Energy PEIS. 

•	 Implement best management practices for wind energy projects in accordance with the Wind 

Energy PEIS in order to reduce adverse impacts to wildlife and habitat. 

Fire Management 

•	 The NorCal Fire Management Plan identifies aggressive, full suppression as the appropriate 

management response (AMR) under conditions of severe fire intensity, especially in the wildland 

urban interface. However, exceptions may be made where resource objectives could be safely 

achieved. 

•	 Under conditions of low fire intensity, a less aggressive AMR (typically containment) would be 

implemented, according to resource management objectives for the area. 

•	 Manage wildland fires using AMR according to the following guidelines: 

o	 Full range of AMR options on 486,047 acres 

o	 Wildland fire use on 16,998 acres 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 6 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Forestry Resources 

•	 Manage 13,800 acres of commercial and low-site forests for multiple-use objectives using 

appropriate methods of silviculture. 

•	 Manage 40% of commercial timberlands as late-succession forests and maintain a substantial 

area of late-succession forests on low-site forestlands. 

•	 Timber harvesting would not be allowed in commercial forestland on Mount Dome to preserve a 

bald eagle roosting area. 

•	 Implement fuel reduction and stand improvement using prescribed fire on 13,800 acres. 

•	 Implement timber production and mechanical harvest of commercial and low-site forestlands on 

12,000 acres. 

•	 Implement reforestation of 8,000 acres. 

•	 Authorize 10 miles of new permanent roads and 50 miles of temporary roads for timber 

management and harvesting activities. 

Fuels Management 

•	 Implement fuels treatments using prescribed fire, mechanical, chemical and biological methods 

to reduce hazardous fuel accumulation, provide fuel breaks, and create defensible space around 

at-risk communities according to the following schedule: 

o Prescribed fire: 7510,000 acres/year 
 


o Mechanical treatment: 7510,000 acres/year 
 


o	 Biological treatment: 01,250 acres/year 
 


o	 Chemical treatment: 502,000 acres/year 
 


•	 Create fuel breaks and defensible space around the wildland urban interface and communities. 

Fuels treatments would be prioritized on degraded forest and rangeland (especially where 

encroached by western juniper), important wildlife habitats, and important archaeological or 

historic sites. 

Lands and Realty 

•	 The 2002 Alturas Land Tenure Adjustment Plan (LTAP) would be the basis for future land 

tenure adjustments (but modified to include conservation easement projects and the Madeline 

retention/acquisition area). 

•	 A priority list of land tenure adjustments would be developed from the LTAP and this RMP. 

•	 Public access would be secured to BLM-administered lands, resources, and facilities—including 

road construction around private lands where access is desirable and easement acquisition isn’t 

feasible. 

•	 All areas of critical environmental concern (ACECs), research natural areas (RNAs), and wild 

and scenic river (WSR) segments (a total of 32,993 acres) would be recommended for 

withdrawal from mineral entry. 

Rights-of-Way 

•	 Continue authorization of current rights-of-way (ROWs) and communication sites. Any new 

development would be restricted to existing corridors and sites wherever feasible. 

•	 Identify lands potentially available for telecommunications sites and utility ROWs on 435,385 

acres. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 7 
RECORD OF DECISION 

Rights-of-Way (continued) 

•	 New utility corridors, pipelines or electrical transmission lines, or communication sites would not 

be permitted in any designated ACEC, in wilderness study areas (WSAs), or in the (proposed) 

Lower Pit River WSR corridor (excluded areas total 67,660 acres). 

•	 Utility corridors would not exceed 500 feet in width. 

•	 Additional utility corridors may be designated as future needs dictate, subject to on-site 

environmental reviews and clearances, in accordance with the BLM Draft Programmatic 

Environmental Impact Statement, Designation of Energy Corridors on Federal Lands in the 11 

Western States, September 2007, and subsequent amendments. 

Livestock Grazing 

•	 Maintain 145 grazing allotments for livestock use with 454,649 acres available to grazing. 

•	 Initial active animal unit month (AUM) levels would be set at 54,881 AUMs. This level could be 

adjusted based on land health considerations. Additional AUMs may be available in the future 

as vegetation treatments are accelerated under the Sage Steppe Ecosystem Restoration 

Strategy (Modoc National Forest, Alturas BLM, and Modoc County, Draft, August 2007). 

•	 Grazing practices will be modified to achieve compliance on allotments failing to meet land 

health standards. 

•	 Decisions to resume livestock grazing on areas that have been mechanically treated or burned 

by wild or prescribed fire would be based on assessment of monitoring data. Generally, grazing 

would not resume for a minimum of two growing seasons. Mechanically treated areas may be 

assessed for potential resumption of livestock grazing following one growing season of rest. 

•	 Maintain the long-term health and productivity of rangelands when dealing with drought through 

implementation of the BLM Drought Management Policy for the Alturas and Surprise Field 

Offices. 

•	 Establish forage reserves in cooperation with other federal, state, and private entities. 

•	 Implement rangeland improvements to benefit wildlife and watersheds, in addition to livestock. 

•	 Livestock salting would not be allowed within 1⁄4 mile of springs, meadows, NRHP-quality 

archaeological sites, streams, and aspen areas. Location of salting stations would be 

determined by the BLM in consultation with livestock permittees. 

Recreation and Visitor Services 

•	 Manage lands not designated as special recreation management areas (SRMAs), WSAs, or 

ACECs as extensive recreation areas. 

•	 Designate the Infernal Caverns/Rocky Prairie SRMA and the Pit River SRMA to improve visitor 

services. 

•	 Limit camping to 14 consecutive days at a single location and 28 days annually, and prohibit 

camping within 200 feet of creeks, springs, rivers, lakes and reservoirs unless posted otherwise. 

•	 Issue special recreation permits to meet demand while ensuring protection of natural and 

cultural resources and operating within reasonable public safety parameters. 

•	 Acquire from Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) segments of the Pit River (13 total 

miles) that support significant coldwater and warmwater fisheries. Also acquire a 5-mile stretch 

of Hat Creek (also from PG&E) to preserve world-class trout fishing. 

•	 Designate Pit River (i.e. a 16-mile stretch in the Pit River SRMA) for non-motorized boating. 

Designate Delta Lake, Moon Lake, Nelson Corral and Bayley Reservoirs in the Infernal 

Caverns/Rocky Prairie SRMA for limited motorized boating. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 8 
 

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Recreation and Visitor Services (continued) 

•	 Develop 7 to 9 improved parking areas in recreational sites for improved visitor services. 

•	 Apply recreation opportunity spectrum classes to all lands in order to provide a diversity of 

recreational experiences: 

o	 ‘Primitive’ 55,594 acres 
 


o	 ‘Semi-Primitive, Non-Motorized’ 63,472 acres 
 


o	 ‘Semi-Primitive Motorized’ 273,539 acres 
 


o	 ‘Roaded Natural’ 110,440 acres 
 


Soil Resources 

• Implement measures to achieve recovery of 10,154 acres of degraded upland soils. 

• Ensure that management activities do not result in a net loss of soil productivity or productive 

potential. 

• Minimize management activities within perennial and intermittent drainages where watershed 

function would be adversely affected. 

• Employ bio-engineering projects to improve soil condition and achieve ‘Proper Functioning 

Condition’ on 200 acres of degraded soils. 

• Apply sediment intrusion buffer zones of 50 feet around sensitive resources, as indicated. 

• Prevent damage to high shrink-swell soils by limiting compacting activities (livestock grazing and 

OHVs) to periods when soils are sufficiently dried to resist compaction. 

• Treat invasive plants and noxious weeds (or modify management) on sites where soil function 

and integrity are compromised. 

Special Designations: 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) 

• Designate seven ACECs (30,493 total acres): 

o Ash Valley—1,322 acres 

o Timbered Crater—17,896 acres 

o Emigrant Trails—1,750 acres 

o Mountain Peaks—3,500 acres 

o Old-Growth Juniper—3,115 acres 

o Mount Dome—1,510 acres 

o Likely Tablelands/Yankee Jim/Fitzhugh Creek—1,400 acres 

• Manage the Baker Cypress Natural Area (1,448 acres) as part of the Timbered Crater ACEC. 

• Livestock grazing would be managed according to permit stipulations, allotment management 

plans, and ACEC management plans. 

• Noxious weeds would be aggressively controlled in ACECs. 

• ACECs would be ‘Closed’ or restricted to no surface occupancy restrictions for leasable energy 

development; ACECs would be ‘Closed’ to locatable and salable mineral development. Where 

ACECs overlap WSAs, further constraints on mineral activities apply under the Interim 

Management Policy for Lands under Wilderness Review, 1995 (Wilderness IMP). 

• All ACECs would be ROW exclusion zones. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 9 
 

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) (continued) 

• ACECs would be managed under visual resource management (VRM) Class II criteria, or Class I 

criteria where subject to regulations for WSAs. 

Special Designations: National Historic Trails 

•	 Protect and maintain approximately 29 miles of national historic emigrant trails. 

•	 Develop a “Historic Sites Scenic Byway” with off-site interpretive locations. 

•	 Develop recreation development packages for 7 or 8 sites of historic significance. 

•	 Designate the Emigrant Trails ACEC to protect and intensively manage 1,750 acres of historic 

trail remnants and associated historical artifacts. 

Special Designations: Scenic Byways 

•	 Designate and manage the following proposed scenic byways: 

o U.S. Highway 395 - Alturas to Reno 	 190 miles 

o State Highway 139 - Canby to Susanville 	 90 miles 

o State Highway 299 - Adin to Redding 	 110 miles 

o State Highway 139/Canby to U.S. Highway 395/Nevada state line 170 miles 

o Total 	 560 miles 

•	 Continue work to add additional segments and interpretive locations to the Emigrant Trails 

Scenic Byway (U.S. Highway 395 and State Highways 299 and 139). 

•	 Cooperate with the Northern California Resource Center for interpretive planning and 

development on the Applegate and Lassen National Historic Emigrant Trails, and at the Descent 

into Goose Lake. Develop a 0.25-mile interpretive walking trail, and a 1-mile hiking trail. 

•	 Designate the Clark’s Valley Road Driving Route for 21 miles. 

Special Designations: Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSR) 

•	 Recommend 13 miles of Upper Pit River as suitable for WSR designation, with a ‘Wild’ 

classification. 

•	 Recommend 3 miles of Lower Horse Creek Canyon as suitable for WSR designation, with a 

‘Wild’ classification. 

•	 Recommend 2.5 miles of Lower Pit River Canyon as suitable for WSR designation, with a 

‘Scenic’ classification. 

Special Designations: Wilderness Study Areas (WSA) 

•	 Four WSAs and one instant study area (ISA) would continue to be governed by the BLM Interim 

Management Policy (IMP) for Lands under Wilderness Review (July 1995) until such time as 

Congress makes a determination regarding wilderness designation. These include: 

o Pit River Canyon WSA 	 10,984 acres 

o Lava WSA	 10,770 acres 

o Timbered Crater WSA and Baker Cypress ISA 17,896 acres 

o Tule Mountain WSA 	 16,998 acres 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 10 
 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Travel Management 

•	 Off-highway vehicle (OHV) travel would be ‘Limited to Existing Roads and Trails’ year-round, 

except where further restrictions are specifically assigned (e.g., ‘Open,’ ‘Closed,’ ‘Seasonally 

Closed,’ or ‘Limited to Designated Routes’). 

•	 Where travel on an existing road is creating sufficient adverse impacts, the road may be closed 

(on a temporary or permanent basis) through plan maintenance. 

•	 Travel restrictions on the Nelson Corral Reservoir Road would be ‘Limited to Existing Roads and 

Trails’ year-round. 

•	 The Cinder Cone OHV Management Area (80 acres) would be ‘Open’ to year-round OHV travel. 

However, organized off-highway vehicle events would only be permitted in this location or on 

designated routes in other specially approved locations. 

•	 Assign OHV use area designations: 

o	 ‘Open’ 80 acres 

o	 ‘Limited to Existing or Designated Routes’ 498,140 acres 

o	 ‘Closed’ 4,825 acres 

•	 Manage three areas, and certain routes, specifically for recreational driving: 

o	 Cinder Cone OHV Management Area (near Cassel), 

o	 Fall River Trail (near Fall River Mills), and 
 


o	 Barnes Grade/Crowder Flat OHV Management Area (near Alturas). 
 


•	 Construct approximately 66 miles of new motorized and non-motorized trails, including the 40­

mile stretch of the abandoned Modoc Line rail bed. 

•	 Vehicular travel would conform to the Northeast California Resource Advisory Council 

Recommended Off-Highway-Vehicle Management Guidelines, 2000 (Appendix C). 

•	 Motorized boating would be unrestricted on West Valley Reservoir. 

•	 On Delta Lake and the Nelson Corral Reservoir (in the Infernal Caverns/Rocky Prairie SRMA), 

only electric trolling motors and non-motorized use would be allowed. 

•	 Propulsion on Bayley Reservoir would be limited to small outboards (i.e., 4-cycle engines 

[phased in by 2012], electric trolling motors, or non-motorized craft). 

•	 A special recreation permit would be required for commercial sport-fishing and whitewater 

rafting in the lower Pit River Canyon area. 

•	 There would be no restrictions on motorized snow travel to the Nelson Corral high-country or the 

Dead Horse Loop area. 

•	 Implement annual road maintenance, using a priority system, on 28 miles of routes. 

Vegetation 

•	 Employ natural disturbance processes—particularly prescribed fire and wildland fire use—as the 

preferred method of restoring shrub communities, along with thinning (using mechanical and 

manual methods) to stimulate seeding and sprouting. 

•	 Designate Timbered Crater, Mount Dome, Mountain Peaks, and Old-Growth Juniper ACECs 

(26,021 total acres) also as research natural areas to protect unique plant species and 

communities. 

•	 Incorporate recommendations developed in the Draft and Final Sage Steppe Ecosystem 

Restoration Strategy, Modoc National Forest, Alturas BLM, and Modoc County (Draft, 2007) to 

manage juniper encroachment. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 11 
 

 

 

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Vegetation (continued) 

•	 Prioritize restoration treatment methods for removal of invasive juniper in shrub–steppe 

communities: 

o Prescribed fire/ Wildland fire use 75–10,000 acres 

o Manual 50–5,000 acres 

o Biological 75–2,000 acres 

o Chemical 50–2,000 acres 

o Mechanical 75–10,000 acres 

o Seeding 50–10,000 acres 

•	 Construct 10 miles of permanent roads and 50 miles of temporary roads to facilitate juniper 

reduction and forestry treatments. 

•	 Protect 38,000 acres of old-growth western juniper from timber harvesting and firewood cutting. 

•	 Incorporate guidelines from the Sage-Grouse Conservation Strategy to restore sage-grouse 

habitat in Wyoming and mountain big sagebrush ecosystems. 

•	 Implement management actions to create healthy, multi-aged stands of bitterbrush, on up to 500 

acres per year. 

•	 Exclude livestock from aspen stands using: Permanent fencing - 200 acres 

 Temporary fencing - 300 acres 

•	 Locate livestock salting sites 1⁄4 mile from aspen stands to discourage damage by livestock. 

•	 Rejuvenate or maintain stands of curlleaf mountain mahogany through selected treatments on up 

to 1,000 acres per year. 

•	 Rejuvenate or maintain oak woodlands with abundant saplings and in mixed age classes through 

selected treatments on up to 5,000 acres per year. 

Riparian/Wetland Associations 

•	 Assess riparian areas for 'Proper Functioning Condition’, existing, or potential natural community, 

and ecological site description. 

•	 Implement measures to make progress toward ‘Proper Functioning Condition’ on 15 miles of 

streams, 22 acres of springs, and 46 acres of wetlands. 

•	 Protect riparian areas from grazing using exclosure fencing (up to 500 acres) and alternative 

water sources. 

•	 Use bio-engineering projects, such as planting riparian vegetation for streambank stabilization. 

•	 Locate livestock salting sites 1⁄4 mile from riparian areas to discourage damage by livestock. 

•	 Re-route roads through Little Buck Meadows and Big Buck Meadows; rehabilitate existing roads 

with native herbaceous vegetation. 

Noxious Weeds & Invasive Species 

•	 Implement integrated weed management (IWM) procedures on BLM lands. Review project 

proposals to determine necessary IWM actions and coordinate treatment with local agencies. 

•	 Conduct periodic inventory of noxious weeds to detect new infestations and monitor the condition 

of existing infestations. The highest priority for noxious weed inventory would be critical wildlife 

habitat, at-risk plant communities, high-use areas, and recreation sites. 

•	 Monitor treated sites to determine treatment effectiveness and impacts on non-target vegetation. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 12 
 

 

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Noxious Weeds & Invasive Species (continued) 

•	 Educate the public regarding noxious weed infestation and introduce practical measures to 

minimize infestations through public awareness and cooperation. 

•	 Hay, straw, and mulch used for any purpose must be certified noxious weed free. 

Special Status Plants 

•	 Manage habitats for special status plants so that BLM actions do not contribute to the need to 

‘list’ these species (as threatened or endangered) under federal law. 

•	 Reduce or eliminate adverse impacts on special status plants (and their habitats) during grounddisturbing activities. 

•	 Acquire lands (from willing sellers) that support unprotected populations of special status plants. 

•	 Protect ‘special interest’ plants (and their habitats) to prevent them from becoming special status 

plants. 

•	 Off-highway vehicles would be ‘Limited to Designated Routes’ in the Ash Valley ACEC/RNA and 

the Westside Grazing Allotment to protect special status plants. 

Visual Resources 

•	 Manage wilderness study areas as VRM Class I. 

•	 Assign VRM Class designations to BLM-administered lands and manage according to class 

requirements in order to protect scenic quality: 

o VRM Class I 56,648 acres 

o VRM Class II 157,177 acres 

o VRM Class III 104,006 acres 

o VRM Class IV 185,214 acres 

•	 Areas of critical environmental concern (ACECs), wild and scenic river segments (WSRs), 

historic trails, or other special designations would be managed as VRM Class II, unless the area 

is managed as VRM Class I under other management guidance. 

•	 All developments, land alterations, and vegetation manipulations would be designed to minimize 

visual impacts. All projects would be designed to maximize scenic quality while minimizing scenic 

intrusions. 

Water Resources 

•	 Establish ‘Proper Functioning Condition’ on 15 miles of streams, 22 acres of springs, and 46 

acres of wetlands. Achieve state water quality standards and the needs of beneficial users on 17 

miles of streams. 

•	 Implement bioengineering practices on 25 miles of perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral 

streams to improve streambank stabilization. 

•	 Implement restorative measures to improve water quality and make significant progress toward 

achieving state standards. Emphasize natural recovery processes, livestock exclosures, planting 

of woody riparian vegetation, and construction of in-stream structures. 

•	 Maintain existing and develop 75 new water sources to improve livestock distribution and extend 

seasonal availability for wildlife. 

•	 Consider withdrawal of state-appropriated water rights on waters that are not “waters of the 

state”. Assert riparian rights on all perennial and important intermittent streams. 

•	 Coordinate projects that involve inter-basin transfer of water with local and regional governments. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 13 
RECORD OF DECISION 

Wild Horses 

•	 Continue to protect and manage wild horses within the Red Rock Lakes herd management area 

(HMA) at the established appropriate management level (AML) of 16 to 25 horses. Horses 

would be periodically removed to maintain the AML. 

•	 Cooperate with the US Forest Service in periodic removal, adoption, and holding of animals from 

the Devil’s Garden Wild Horse Territory to keep horse numbers within the AML for the Emigrant 

HMA. 

Wildlife and Fisheries 

Federally Listed Species 

Bald Eagle (Note: see Changes Made to the Approved RMP) 

•	 Conduct nesting and population surveys and implement seasonal protective measures and buffer 

zones for permitted activities. 

•	 Develop habitat management plans for the Conrad Ranch and Timbered Crater nesting areas, as 

well as the Juniper Creek roosting site. 

•	 Manage suitable forest habitat to retain potential nest trees. 

Northern Spotted Owl 

•	 Northern spotted owl and its habitat (where and when found) will be managed per existing terms 

and conditions contained in plan and program-level biological opinions. 

Modoc, Shortnose, and Lost River Suckers, and Shasta Crayfish 

•	 These species and their habitats (where and when found) will be managed according to existing 

recovery plans and the terms and conditions of plan and program-level biological opinion. 

Yellow-Billed Cuckoo and Oregon Spotted Frog 

•	 These species have not been found in the management area. However, the AFO will contribute 

to appropriate survey efforts and – if a population of either species is discovered – would develop 

conservation and action plans. 

State- and BLM-Listed Sensitive Species 

•	 Cooperate with partners to obtain information on occurrence, abundance and distribution. 

Develop a geographic information system database to document and track information. 

•	 Use seasonal protective measures and buffer zones for permitted activities in critical habitats for 

these species. 

•	 Restore critical habitats of state-listed and BLM sensitive species in degraded sagebrush 

associations. 

Ungulates 

•	 Focus management on priority habitat areas for mule deer and black-tailed deer on 128,000 

acres to maintain and improve ecological conditions. 

•	 Prioritize management areas for improvements to pronghorn habitat by maintaining healthy low 

sagebrush habitat. Focus management on priority habitat areas (60,145 acres) and identified 

high quality habitat (130,000 acres). 

•	 Construct exclosures and fences to protect important ungulate habitats: aspen, bitterbrush, oaks, 

mahogany, riparian areas, and springs, on up to 1,000 acres. 

•	 Control invasive juniper and noxious weeds to improve or reestablish native habitats. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 14 
 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Ungulates (continued) 

•	 Use seeding, planting, and other vegetation treatments to improve terrestrial and aquatic 

habitats. 

•	 Assign OHV designations to protect wintering ungulates. Assign seasonal road closures to 

protect wintering ungulates on the following areas: 

o Likely Tablelands 

o Barnes Grade 

o Day Bench 

•	 If Rocky Mountain elk become established in the management area, coordinate with state wildlife 

agencies and other stakeholders, including livestock owners, to develop and implement a 

management plan. 

•	 Coordinate with California Department of Fish and Game in the development of a management 

plan prior to reintroduction of California bighorn sheep. 

•	 Provide artificial water sources (e.g., guzzlers) in areas with high wildlife potential, especially 

where natural sources are depleted or limited. 

Sagebrush Ecosystems and Sagebrush-Obligate/Associated Species 

•	 Implement juniper reduction to enhance sagebrush ecosystems; focus on providing diversity in 

shrub age class and composition and healthy understory vegetation. 

•	 Restore natural disturbance processes (such as fire) by implementing fuels treatments, including 

prescribed fire and thinning projects, in accordance with Conservation Strategies for Sagegrouse, etc. 

•	 Avoid practices that convert sagebrush habitats to non-native grassland or agricultural land. 

Sage-Grouse 

•	 Implement locally developed strategies found in Conservation Strategies for Sage-Grouse and 

Sagebrush Ecosystems within the Buffalo-Skedaddle, Likely Tablelands/Rocky Prairie and 

Devil’s Garden/Clear Lake Population Management Units. Utilize translocation to augment low 

populations in conjunction with habitat management projects. 

Burrowing Owl 

•	 Inventory and map suitable habitat. Develop a conservation strategy to protect identified nesting 

burrows and other seasonal habitats. 

Pygmy Rabbit 

•	 Inventory and map suitable habitat and determine species abundance. Develop a conservation 

strategy to protect occupied habitat. 

Other Sagebrush-Obligate and Associated Species 

•	 Survey to determine use of sagebrush habitats by sagebrush-obligate and associated species. 

Determine demographic trends and habitat utilization for these species for utilization in medium 

and large-scale area, regional, and national strategies for managing sagebrush-obligate species. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 15 
 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Other Native Wildlife Species 

•	 Coordinate reintroductions, augmentations, and translocations of native species with state 

wildlife agencies. 

•	 Create brush piles and water sources for upland game birds and small mammals in important 

habitats where cover or water is depleted or unreliable. 

•	 Maintain waterfowl nesting islands on 12 reservoirs and create additional islands on 26 

reservoirs. Construct island or reservoir fences on 31 reservoirs. 

•	 Current meadow and riparian habitat enhancement projects will continue, and an additional 500 

acres of riparian habitat will be fenced. Permanent fencing will protect 200 acres of high-risk 

aspen and 300 additional acres will be protected with temporary fencing. 

Native and Non-Native Fish and Other Aquatic Species 

•	 Restore proper functioning condition to springs and streams by installing and maintaining riparian 

fencing, maintaining or improving minimum pool depths, augmenting clean spawning gravels, 

and stabilizing stream banks. 

•	 Coordinate with state agencies when implementing management actions--especially proposed 

stocking of fish. 

•	 Implement habitat improvements for warm-water fish at the following reservoirs: Iverson, Lower 

Roberts, Coyote, Romero, Little Juniper, Knox Gulch, Popcorn #1, Antelope, West Valley and 

Moon Reservoirs. 

Non-Native Terrestrial Species 

•	 Manage to reduce or eliminate populations of non-native or invasive species that are impacting 

native species and/or habitats in a manner consistent with state and federal policies, procedures, 

and regulations. 

Protest and Appeal 

The Alturas Proposed RMP decisions were available for protest to the BLM Director for a 

30 day period, between June 15, 2007, and July 16, 2007, in accordance with 43 CFR 

1610.5-2. Two protests were received. Resolutions to the protests did not result in the 

necessity for more analysis or repeat publication of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS for 

additional public review and protest. 

The decisions designating routes of travel for motorized vehicles are implementation 

decisions and are appealable under 43 CFR Part 4. The appeal procedures are 

summarized below. These travel management decisions, as described in Chapter 2.16 

Travel Management of the RMP, are effective upon issuance of this Record of Decision, 

unless a stay of the decision is granted. 

Public notice was provided for the land use plan in accordance with 43 CFR 8342.3(b) 

through publication of a Notice of Availability (NOA) in the Federal Register for the 

Alturas Proposed RMP/FEIS (Volume 72, Number 115, June 15, 2007) and for the 

Alturas Record of Decision and Approved RMP. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 16 
 

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

APPEAL PROCEDURES 

Any party adversely affected by the proposed travel route designations as identified in 

Chapter 2.16 Travel Management of the RMP, may appeal within 30 days of receipt of 

this decision in accordance with the provisions of 43 CFR Part 4.4. The publication of 

the NOA of this ROD and Approved RMP will be considered the date the decision is 

received. The appeal should state the specific route(s), as identified in Chapter 2.16 

Travel Management, on which the decision is being appealed. The appeal must be filed 

with the Alturas Field Manager, at the following address: 

Bureau of Land Management 

Alturas Field Office 

708 West 12th Street 

Alturas, CA 96101 

You may include a statement of reasons when the notice of appeal is filed, or you may file 

the statement of reasons within 30 days after filing the appeal. A copy of the appeal, 

statement of reasons, and all other supporting documents must also be sent to the 

Solicitor, U.S. Department of the Interior, 2800 Cottage Way, Suite E-1712, Sacramento, 

CA, 95825. 

If the statement of reasons is filed separately, it must be sent to the Interior Board of 

Land Appeals, Office of Hearings and Appeals, 801 N. Quincy Street, Suite 300, 

Arlington, VA 22203. It is suggested that any appeal be sent certified mail, return receipt 

requested. 

REQUEST FOR STAY 

If you wish to request a stay of the decision pending the outcome of the appeal, the 

motion for stay must be filed in the office of the authorized officer at the time the appeal 

is filed and must show sufficient justification based on the following standards under 43 

CFR 4.21: 

1. The relative harm to the parties if the stay is granted or denied. 

2. The likelihood of the appellant’s success on the merits. 

3. The likelihood of immediate and irreparable harm if the stay is not granted. 

4. Whether the public interest favors granting the stay. 

Mitigation and Monitoring 

The BLM has incorporated design features into proposed management actions that will 

avoid or reduce adverse impacts to resources. Design features include standard 

operating procedures and best management practices. For many resources, the 

environmental analysis has indicated that significant adverse impacts would not occur, 

or that their magnitude would be negligible. The BLM will employ all practicable means 

to avoid or minimize environmental harm while still meeting the goals, purpose and 

need requirements of the Alturas RMP. In addition, all implementation level projects 

will undergo a site specific environmental analysis. Mitigation measures will be 

incorporated as necessary to reduce adverse impacts identified in the environmental 

analysis. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 17 
 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

This ROD approves monitoring programs that aid in managing and protecting the 

resources and uses of the planning area. The BLM will monitor biological resources in 

order to evaluate if desired outcomes (goals and objectives) as described in the RMP are 

being met as management actions are implemented. The Alturas RMP Monitoring Plan 

is included in the ROD under Appendix A. 

Public Involvement and Cooperating Agencies 

SCOPING AND ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOPS 

The BLM officially initiated the planning process for the Draft Alturas RMP with 

publication of a Notice of Intent in the Federal Register on July 22, 2003 (Volume 68, 

Number 140). Issues related to resource management in the Alturas planning area were 

assembled during the scoping process consisting of public scoping meetings, field tours, 

socioeconomic workshops, and interactions with federal, state, tribal, and county 

collaborators. The BLM hosted six public scoping meetings in August and September 

2003, with a total of 205 people attending these meetings. Four meetings were held 

within the planning area. Two others were held in Redding, California, and Reno, 

Nevada, to ensure that the BLM heard the concerns of user groups residing outside the 

planning area. The BLM also conducted a scoping meeting in the field in August 2003. 

A community workshop was conducted to discuss economics and social values in 

December 2003. 

The scoping process generated 15 key issues to be addressed in the Alturas RMP. These 

issues were used to develop alternatives and are addressed in other sections of the 

resource management plan (for example, effects on local economies). 

DRAFT RMP/DRAFT EIS AND PROPOSED RMP/FINAL EIS 

The public comment period for the Alturas Draft RMP/Draft EIS opened with 

publication of the NOA in the Federal Register on April 28, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 

82). This NOA announced the publication of the Draft RMP/DEIS, and also solicited 

public comments and participation. The BLM distributed approximately 250 copies of 

the Draft Alturas RMP/DEIS. The public had 90 days (until July 27, 2006) to submit 

comments on the Draft RMP/DEIS. To facilitate this process, the BLM held seven public 

comment meetings. 

The public comment period generated approximately 4,997 submissions of one (nearly 

identical) form letter, and 33 additional unique comment letters from individuals and 

groups. The number of comments that the BLM analyzed and responded to was 

approximately 402. These comments and the BLM’s responses to them are summarized 

in Appendix R of the PRMP/FEIS. Based on the comments and feedback received, the 

BLM prepared the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. The BLM made several edits and 

clarifications regarding management decisions in the Proposed RMP. In addition, five 

substantive changes were made to management decisions: 

1.	 Retain the Red Rock Wild Horse Herd Management Area as it currently exists. 

2.	 Change of recreational boating restrictions - Nelson Corral Reservoir and Delta 

Lake: electric trolling or nonmotorized; Moon Lake: 2 & 4 cycle outboard. Bayley 

Reservoir: small 4 cycle outboard (implemented in 2012). 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 18 
 

RECORD OF DECISION 

3.	 Removal of snowmobile restrictions within 8,000 acres of Nelson Corral routes, 

December 1- March 15th. 

4.	 Expansion of maximum width of utility corridors to 500 feet. 

5.	 Designation of the potential California-Nevada (east-west) utility corridor as a 

right-of-way corridor, as defined in the Draft Programmatic Environmental 

Impact Statement, Designation of Energy Corridors on Federal Lands in the 11 

Western States, Department of Energy, BLM, USDA Forest Service, Department 

of Defense, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, October 2007, and subsequent 

amendments. 

Public notice was provided for the Alturas Proposed RMP/FEIS through publication of a 

Notice of Availability (NOA) in the Federal Register (Volume 72, Number 115, June 15, 

2007). The NOA also described public protest procedures. The BLM distributed 

approximately 300 paper copies and CDs of the Alturas Proposed RMP/Final EIS to 

interested parties and made the document available on the web, at BLM offices, and at 

the Alturas public library. 

TRIBAL CONSULTATION 

The Alturas Field Office interacts with three federally recognized tribes. Consultation 

with tribes regarding the Alturas RMP began in July, 2003. On July 24, 2003, certified 

letters were sent to tribal offices containing a packet of information about RMPs and the 

BLM planning process. The tribes were also formally invited to attend a scoping meeting 

set up especially to address their concerns and involvement with the Alturas RMP. 

Several consultation meetings were held during which the tribes provided input into plan 

development. 

Tribal consultation continued during the alternative formulation process in 2004 to 

2005. The Draft Alturas RMP/DEIS was made available for public review in April of 

2006, and copies of the document were sent to the tribes along with a letter informing 

the tribes to provide their written comments to the BLM by September 27, 2006. Each 

of the tribes provided extensive comments on the Draft RMP/DEIS either in letters or 

during consultation meetings. 

A briefing was held on the Alturas Draft RMP/DEIS with the California State Historical 

Preservation Officer (SHPO) on April 5, 2006. Planning and process procedures were 

discussed in addition to discussions about outreach and coordination efforts of the 

Alturas Field Office. Each of the tribes was also consulted with on the Proposed 

RMP/Final EIS. 

COUNTY, STATE, AND FEDERAL PARTICIPATION 

During the planning process Modoc, Lassen, Shasta, and Siskiyou Counties requested 

specific information regarding certain aspects of the Alturas RMP of interest to them, 

such as land tenure, special designations, recreation management, access, and energy 

development. In each instance, the Alturas Field Manager and representatives from the 

Alturas BLM staff met personally and or talked by telephone with local county officials 

and discussed their issues and how the RMP would address their concerns. 

The following state agencies have been provided with information and have participated 

in the RMP process: California SHPO, California Department of Fish and Game, and 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 19 
 

 

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

California Department of Water Resources. The Alturas Proposed RMP was submitted 

to the California Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse, for review by 

appropriate agencies. The Alturas Field Manager received a notification of consistency 

with the State of California for the RMP on September 17, 2007. 

The BLM initiated formal consultation on the Proposed RMP by submitting a Biological 

Assessment to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), as described below. 

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT (ESA) CONSULTATION 

The BLM has determined that two federally listed threatened wildlife species, the bald 

eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) 

are of concern in the Alturas planning area. In addition, four federally listed endangered 

wildlife species, Modoc sucker (Catostomus microps), shortnose sucker (Chasmistes 

brevirostris), Lost River sucker (Deltistes luxatus), and Shasta crayfish (Pacifastacus 

fortis) occur in the AFO planning area. Two federal candidate species, yellow-billed 

cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) and Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa) also occur. 

Two plant species, Slender Orcutt grass (Orcuttia tenuis) a federally listed threatened 

species, and Soldier Meadow cinquefoil (Potentilla basaltica) a federally listed candidate 

species, occur in the planning area. 

Pursuant to Section 7 of the ESA, the BLM initiated formal consultation on the effects of 

the Proposed RMP by submitting a Biological Assessment to the USFWS on these ten 

species. The USFWS issued a Biological Opinion for the Alturas Proposed RMP on May 

3, 2007, which concurs with the BLM’s effects analysis. 

At the time of the BLM’s request to initiate formal consultation, the bald eagle was 

federally listed as threatened. For additional information, see Changes Made to the 

Approved RMP. 

NORTHEAST CALIFORNIA RESOURCE ADVISORY COUNCIL (RAC) 

The Northeast California RAC members were kept involved with the planning process 

through briefings provided during their regular council meetings, and through 

workshops designed to gather and disseminate key information and data. 

ADVERTISEMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 

News media press releases were issued or posted to notify the public of the project, to 

announce public meetings and workshops, to request public comments, and to provide 

contact information. Press releases were sent to local and major northern California and 

Nevada newspapers, radio stations and TV stations, and meeting announcements were 

published in several local and regional newspapers. These include the Lassen County 

Times, Susanville; the Reno Gazette Journal, Reno; the Modoc County Record, Alturas; 

Mountain Echo, Fall River Mills; Inter Mountain News, Burney; Butte Valley Star, 

Dorris; Herald and News, Klamath Falls; and the Modoc Independent News, Cedarville. 

Announcements were also broadcast by the news department at Sierra Radio Network, 

Susanville, which airs news on two regional radio stations. All announcements were 

posted on the BLM’s news release website, and carried in the BLM’s News.bytes 

electronic newsletter, which circulates to more than 30,000 readers inside and outside of 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 20 
 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

the BLM. News articles were printed in at least two local newspapers on RMP 

development at different points in the planning process. 

PROJECT WEBSITE 

An informational website, http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/fo/alturas.html has been 

available to the public throughout the planning process. It provides background 

information on the Alturas Field Office, and downloadable versions of documents, 

including the Proposed RMP/Final EIS and Record of Decision. 

PLANNING UPDATE MAILERS 

The BLM produced four special Planning Update mailers to announce public scoping 

and alternative development meetings, and to announce the publication of the Draft 

RMP/DEIS. These were sent via direct mail to the Alturas mailing list and were also 

distributed at public meetings. The Planning Updates included background information 

on the Alturas Field Office’s lands, a description and timeline for the upcoming planning 

process, dates and locations of the public scoping meetings, and contact information for 

getting public comments to the BLM. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 21 
 

RECORD OF DECISION 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 22 
RECORD OF DECISION 

APPENDIX A 
 
 

ALTURAS FIELD 
 
 

OFFICE 
 
 

MONITORING PLAN
 
 


ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-1 
 

 

Alturas Approved RMP – Monitoring Plan 

Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology 

Cultural and Preserve and protect significant cultural A representative sample of significant cultural sites will be monitorePaleontological and paleontological resources and three years (1-3 years), and a mitigation plan based on the results Resources ensure that they are available for 

appropriate uses by present and future generations in accordance with existing laws, regulations, and Executive orders. Reduce imminent threats to cultural resources from natural or human caused deterioration or potential conflicts with other resource uses by identifying priority geographic areas for future inventory of cultural resources. Increase the public's knowledge of, appreciation for and sensitivity to cultural resources, Native American issues, and paleontological resources. Through consultation with Tribes, provide for Native American use of culturally significant resources and properties. Nominate as traditional cultural properties those areas that qualify. 

be developed if necessary. Selected archaeological sites within Emig

Crater, Mountain Peaks, Old Growth Juniper, Mount Dome, Likely TaJim/Fitzhugh Creek and Ash Valley ACECs, will be carefully monitorevandalism, recreation, OHV, fire suppression, and livestock impactssubject to monitoring as outlined above are: Juniper Creek, Tule MoLakes, Crooks Canyon, Dill Field and Rocky Prairie. A minimum of thresource area will be monitored every year. If the monitoring prograimpacts to cultural sites in any of these areas, emergency closures 

or other uses will be imposed. Cultural resources will be protected through the use of patrols and lduring heavy public use periods to protect resources from vandalism

patrols will be used year-round to reduce or prevent pothunting. Maperiodically inspected to document any damage and identify future 

Avoidance or mitigation of specimens will be the standard when thedisturbances within areas of known paleontological deposits. Managdeveloped for significant properties requiring protection or stabilizatAssistance to institutions doing research or collection of specimens wMonitoring and recording of specimen locations will continue. The BLM will continue to conduct inventories for compliance with Seto find and document cultural properties that qualify for the Nationainclude the continued evaluation of grazing allotments per agreemeunder the Rangeland Amendment. These surveys will be directed todata indicates a possible need for active resource management to psuch as Category 1 allotments. A minimum of 500 acres not related compliance will be surveyed for cultural resources every year. The Bscientifically or historically valuable sites through land exchanges, wdetermined to be in the pubic interest. Cultural resources will continue to be inventoried and evaluated as planning to achieve the objective of protecting significant properties proposed federally funded or authorized actions. This inventory and 

application of the National Register criteria to cultural properties an

State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), Tribal Governments, and Historic Preservation, as appropriate per current regulations, policy, 

Protocol Agreement. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-2 
 

 

Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology 

Fire Document management response to Document instances of use of heavy equipment for fire suppression Management wildland fires. RNAs, and whether such equipment was restricted to existing roads 

Office Manager assigns a Resource Advisor to the fire who documenimpacts to resources. Resource Advisor supervises and documents photographs) rehabilitation of suppression activities (i.e. dozer linesareas, etc). 

Fire Rehabilitation and Stabilization 

Burned areas would be stabilized and rehabilitated to minimize threats to life and property and to mitigate the adverse effects of wildland fires on soils, vegetation, and waterways. 

Monitoring is required on all Emergency Stabilization and RehabilitaMonitoring and evaluation to determine the effectiveness of ES&R trfunded for up to three years following containment of a wildfire. The contain provisions for monitoring and evaluation of treatments and 

criteria for measuring a successful treatment or activity), techniquecollecting, archiving, and disseminating results. The monitoring plastated and measurable goals and objectives. Photographs are stron

monitoring sites. Monitoring methods may include photo points, density, cover, gap iplots, ocular estimates, and soil erosion within each eco-region and 

elements of a defensible monitoring program applicable to ES&R anemergency response (BAER) projects that most of these manuals haobjectives, stratification, control areas, random sampling, data qualanalysis. 

Provide appropriate levels of rest or Livestock are to be excluded from burned areas until monitoring res

deferment from grazing after a wildfire writing, show emergency stabilization and rehabilitation objectives h

to meet emergency stabilization and Objectives must be clearly defined in the Emergency Stabilization a

burned area rehabilitation goals and Rehabilitation Plan. objectives. 

Forestry Enhance and maintain the health and 

resilience of forests and woodlands and reduce their vulnerability to wildfires. 

Stand composition, productivity, and structure will be documented athe Forvis database. Record accomplishments for providing wood products in the Timber 

System database and MIS reporting. 

Fuels Fuel treatments would prioritize Measure density of fuel loads (biomass) before and after treatment, Management wildland/urban interface areas of communities situated in the midst of 

juniper-invaded sagebrush-steppe. Projects would also be designed to enhance important wildlife habitats and protect cultural resources. 

Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) Stereo Photo Series for Quantiother fuel load density methods. Fire effects studies using current fire monitoring protocols will be coburns. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-3 
 

 

Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology 

Livestock Grazing 

Allotments will be managed in compliance with standards set forth in the Approved Northeastern California and Northwestern Nevada Standards and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing. 

Use the rangeland health assessment process prescribed in the mosInterpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health, Rangeland Health Stanand BLM Manual 4180 and Handbook H-4180-1 guiding implementahealth standards. 

Assess resource conditions on all Assess Rangeland Health (qualitative) on Category 1 allotments, wipriority (Category 1) allotments, team, every 10 years or at the time of permit renewal or permit trafollowed by lower category allotments. moving toward or away from meeting standards as part of meeting Allotment management plans would be Actual Use: Animal Unit Month (AUM) numbers reported 15 days aft

developed based upon analysis of authorized grazing use on those allotments that qualify for actual us

Rangeland Health Assessments, all consumed by livestock would be reported based on number of livesmonitoring data and current grazing use. Numbers would potentially be reduced when allotmentmanagement objectives and/or progressing towards meeting standards due to livestock grazing. concerns. Photo points: Taken at repeatable locations showing changes over t

Climate monitoring: Compiling precipitation and temperature informweather stations throughout the field office. 

Vegetation – Native Plant Communities 

Determine changes in health, diversity, and productivity of native plant communities. 

Measure trends in vegetative production, structure, and compositionwatershed function, and integrity of biotic community. Use the rangassessment process prescribed in the most current versions of InterRangeland Health, Rangeland Health Standards and Guidelines, and Handbook H-4180-1 guiding implementation of the rangeland health 

Conduct periodic measurements of plant composition, vigor, and prthe amount and distribution of plant cover and litter. Monitoring of e

vegetation would consist of identifying ecological sites, determining determining soil types, vegetation mapping, baseline inventory, and 

basic information. Procedures used (and frequency of use) would be Technical References 1734-7, 4400-5, Sampling Vegetation AttributTR-1734-4, Herrick, J.E., et al, 2005, Monitoring Manual for Grassla

Savanna Ecosystems, or Measuring and Monitoring Plant PopulationWilloughby, 1998. 

Rehabilitate or restore shrub and Conduct periodic measurements of plant composition, vigor, and prshrub/grassland communities that are measurement of the amount and distribution of plant cover and littenot meeting desired future condition or woody utilization, actual use, and climatic conditions to determindue to invasion by western juniper, established tools in meeting objectives. other decadent woody species, and exotic annual grasses or noxious Fire effects studies using current fire monitoring protocols will be coweeds/undesirable species. burns. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-4 
 

 

Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology 

Vegetation – Native Plant Communities (continued) 

Assess the distribution and density of rare plant communities, including quaking aspen, curlleaf mountain mahogany, Oregon white oak, and blue oak stands. Achieve mixed age-classes. 

Monitor for seedling establishment, seedling and sapling survival, an

herbaceous plant diversity. Monitor for effectiveness of treatments i

communities that receive restoration treatments or conifer removal. 

methods should be used (e.g., Sampling Vegetation Attributes Tech

1734-4, or Herrick, J.E., et al, 2005, Monitoring Manual for GrasslanSavanna Ecosystems). 

Rehabilitate native juniper woodlands to maintain a mixed age class with a cover of no more than 25%. 

Establish canopy cover transects. 

Special Status Plants 

Known occurrences/populations of special status plants will be monitored to determine the health of the plants and associated plant communities. BLM will continue to survey for the presence of additional occurrences/ populations of special status plants. 

Long-term monitoring would be conducted using permanent vegetataccording to the method chosen. Visual reconnaissance would be usinformation on the habitats of special status plants. Individual speciapopulations and habitats would be monitored annually or bi-annually species field survey form filled out. Effective monitoring methods shSampling Vegetation Attributes Technical Reference TR-1734-4 and Monitoring Plant Populations, Elzinga, Salzar, & Willoughby, 1998. Establish a long-term monitoring plot for Soldier Meadows cinquefoi

a federal candidate species, in the Ash Valley ACEC/RNA. 

Continue monitoring the “Green Place” Conduct monitoring jointly with Lassen National Forest for all vernal vernal pool which is critical habitat for Shasta County. Work on a revision of the Orcuttia tenuis Species Maslender orcutt grass, Orcuttia tenuis the Lassen and Modoc National Forests. 

(federally listed as threatened). 

Noxious Weeds Document changes in presence and Implement adaptive management monitoring for noxious weed and and Invasive abundance of noxious weeds and other species treatments/control. Conduct annual monitoring for new noxiSpecies undesirable invasive plants, particularly in areas where ground disturbances 

have occurred. 

concentrating in areas where ground disturbing activities have occurpublic or agency personnel have reported sightings. Visit known nox

are identified for treatment, and evaluate for effectiveness of controfor both invasiveness and impacts. Monitor for new satellite populatbeyond existing noxious weed infestations/populations. Visit known 

treatment on a rotational basis over three years. For all known sites discovered sites, locate with a global positioning system (GPS) unit, and determine the need for future treatment. Survey all burned areaprescribed) over 20 acres for noxious weeds for three years followin

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-5 
 

 

Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology 

Vegetation – Improve, restore, and/or maintain Conduct Proper Functioning Condition (PFC) Assessment per TR 173Riparian/ Wetlands 

riparian vegetation, especially in terms of habitat diversity and hydrologic function to achieve healthy and 

(assessment for streams) and TR 1737-11 and TR 1737-16 (assessmlakes/wetlands) to assess the functionality of riparian and wetland aConcurrent with assessment of PFC, determine existing or potential 

abundantly productive riparian areas and wetlands. all riparian and wetland sites, according to guidelines specified in Rip

Management, Greenline-Riparian-Wetland Monitoring, Technical RefAn ecological site inventory would also be conducted for riparian-wein Riparian Area Management, Procedures for Ecological Site InventoReference to Riparian-Wetland Sites, (Steve Leonard, et al; BLM Tec7, 1992.) Measure the amount and distribution of plants across a channel crosriparian transects; document visual changes over time on the conditcorridor using photo points. 

Recreation and Support a broad range of appropriate Conduct monitoring on a bi-weekly basis at developed recreation sitVisitor Services and sustainable recreational 

opportunities and minimize potential conflicts between user groups. Ensure that recreational facilities and recreational activities do not degrade ecosystems, natural and cultural resources, or scenic values. 

trailheads, improved day use areas, etc.). Conduct periodic patrols ouse areas where recreation use is concentrated. Include patrols to csigning, and visitor use; ensure visitor compliance with rules and reg

baseline data and observation points to determine current impacts f

and develop studies to help determine appropriate levels and patterand the influences of other resource uses. Focus field monitoring on visitation levels, compliance with rules, re

stipulations for specific sites, dispersed uses, and prescribed standaPermits issued to commercial guides for hunting and fishing services compliance of permit stipulations and post-use requirements. Use vicounters, surveillance at developed recreation sites, documentation photo documentation of the changes in resource conditions over timMonitoring may also include collection of data from visitor commentinformation request calls or emails. Use monitoring data to manage plans and projects to reduce visitor impacts, and to provide approprtransportation system design. Annually, drive, ride, or hike each scenic byway, backcountry bywayroutes and vista points. Monitor unauthorized uses, conditions, trendto scenic values. Record results or changes and establish a file for mbyway. Monitor impacts of proposed projects to scenic resources along scenpoints. Mange to meet VRM objectives established in this RMP for puscenic travel routes and as viewed from those vista points. Utilize thprevent visual intrusions to highways, vistas, and recreation sites. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-6 
 

 

Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology 

Special Designate ACECs where the “relevance Each ACEC will have a management plan prepared for the ACEC thaDesignations – and importance” criteria are met, and monitoring component. Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) 

implement management actions to protect recognized values. Identify and protect all sites and resources that meet the relevance and 

Each of the seven ACECs or ACEC/RNAs will be monitored for the vaestablished at a minimum of once per year. This includes 29,171 acrACECs and 1322 acres of the previously designated Ash Valley ACECPeriodically monitor the impacts of management actions on resource 

importance criteria. Where necessary, wildlife populations, and the health of RNA plant community cells. Thtake immediate steps to prevent such techniques as photo points, line intercept transects, ocular survirreparable damage to resources and and value points. Plant population monitoring techniques will be estanatural systems. Promote safety and completion of the management plan for each ACEC/RNA. protect human life where natural hazards exist. Evaluate and consider designation for all areas that meet ACEC requirements. Formulate and implement management plans for designated ACECs. 

A representative sample of significant cultural sites will be monitored three years, and a mitigation plan will be developed based on the reif necessary. Specific archaeological sites within Emigrant Trails, TimPeaks, Old Growth Juniper, Mt. Dome, Likely Tablelands/Yankee JimAsh Valley ACECs will be monitored annually for vandalism, recreatiosuppression, and livestock impacts. Methods will include photos, line If the monitoring program reveals significant impacts to cultural siteor limitations to OHV or other uses will be imposed. Collate existing base information and develop additional baseline invcommunities following “Research Natural Areas: Baseline Monitoring (USDA-FS, 1984). Periodically monitor the impacts of management 

values, including the health of RNA plant community cells. Monitorinfollow methods outlined under Vegetation – Native Plant Communiti

Plants, and Technical References 1734-7, 4400-5, Sampling VegetaTechnical Reference TR-1734-4, Herrick, J.E., et al, 2005, Monitoring Shrubland, and Savanna Ecosystems, or Measuring and Monitoring PElzinga, Salzar, & Willoughby, 1998. This will be done using such tecpoints, line intercept transects, ocular surveillance, study plots, and 

Special Provide or enhance history-based Monitor site specific locations with trail traces at three locations at a Designations – recreational opportunities related to year: Descent into Goose Lake, Pit River-Round Barn, and Lower KlaHistoric trails historic trails, where appropriate. Ensure that history-related facilities and intermittent monitoring on other locations, and establish permanent 

significant trail locations. Include signing, utilize periodic patrols an

increased visitation will not threaten trail traces at established vulnerable locations and associated featur

other resources. emigrant trails or trail resources are not compromised by visitor use

Protect historically important settings, projects as well as on-the-ground projects for compliance to mainta

including the physical traces and visual Monitor, record, and document with photos any erosion, OHV impac

integrity of historic trail sites. from visitor use or project work. Assure that the VRM objectives for 

Provide a range of recreational opportunities that encourage visitors to 

the trail are met. Immediately halt impacting agents and rectify damassociated resources. 

learn about and experience emigrant trails, military patrol routes, and trailrelated historical sites. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-7 
 

 

Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology 

Special Manage three waterways and Conduct monitoring, including periodic patrols to check boundaries, Designations – associated uplands, so as not to impair to ensure that outstandingly remarkable values are not compromiseWild and Scenic their suitability for WSR designation. If designated, ensure that future three WSR segments. Inspect planned projects as well as on-the-gro

compliance to maintain WSR integrity. Monitor the upper and lower 

Rivers (WSR) planning, projects, and management 

actions maintain the free-flowing character and outstandingly remarkable values of these WSRs. Provide reasonable public access and encourage low-impact recreation. Ensure hazard information is available to the public. 

WSR at a minimum of once per year, document with photos at permon-stream boundaries. Every other year inspect random segments o

WSR for compliance to maintain WSR integrity. 

Special Manage four WSAs so as not to impair Follow direction within the existing policy for WSAs (USDI-BLM 1995Designations – their suitability for wilderness of WSAs during the months the area is accessible by the public, or mWilderness designation. necessary because of potential use activities or other resource confl

surveillance, on-the-ground surveillance, visitor contact, permit com

Study Areas other methods as appropriate. (WSA) Travel Manage motor vehicle use to protect Conduct monitoring, including periodic patrols to check boundaries, Management natural and cultural resources, minimize user conflicts, and maintain 

public safety. Provide adequate motorized public access, and ensure that area and route designations sufficiently protect nonmotorized areas and non-motorized recreation, while accommodating motorized activities in suitable locations on appropriate routes. Identify and map undocumented routes in areas that were not included in the 2004 route inventory, including areas not normally accessed by motor vehicles. Modify the travel route system on 902 miles of routes, where needed to improve access or protect resources. 

with travel designation requirements that all motor vehicles remain designated roads and trails unless otherwise authorized, and meetinfor OHVs as established by BLM’s Northeast CA Resource Advisory CPeriodically check that developed roads are available to all communiplanned to access public land where use is deemed appropriate, as wresources from unwarranted impacts. Establish photo points on thredetermine OHV impacts to soils, water quality, and ecosystems: DelHogback Allotment, and the Westside Allotment. Additional areas foand surveillance include: the Day Bench area, Modoc Gulch, and Brube monitored in the spring and fall for compliance through the vario

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-8 
 

 

Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology 

Travel Management (continued) 

Support community-based efforts to promote rural tourism and benefit local economies by creating a high-quality, non-motorized trail network. 

Conduct periodic inspections at Cinder Cone, Barnes Grade/CrowderTrail OHV management areas. Establish photo point transects (minimon OHV impacted areas, as well as non-impacted locations to determand levels. Hike or ride non-motorized trails to monitor trail conditions to determ

needs, and to assess types and amounts of visitor use on trails. Evanatural resources through visual inspections, photo at problem areacutting, etc). Use trail traffic counters where appropriate to determInvolve volunteers to assist in trail monitoring where appropriate an

Ensure that recreational quality and Conduct monitoring, including periodic patrols to check boundaries, 

access are maintained for whitewater use; to ensure visitor compliance with rules and regulations. Ensure 

and recreational boating, fishing, motor requirements for boating are met and adhered to on Nelson Chunting, wildlife viewing and other reservoirs, Moon and Delta Lakes, once yearly on each water body. 

suitable activities. Periodically check that the maintained and primitive roads meet the 

the RMP to ensure water quality, hunting, wildlife habitat, recreationquality fisheries are maintained and available to communities and us

resource values are not compromised. 

Water Resources 

Improve hydrologic function and/or water quality in areas not meeting state standards. 

Use the rangeland health assessment process, particularly Standardto Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health, Rangeland Health StGuidelines, and BLM Manual 4180 and Handbook H-4180-1. Water quality monitoring would be conducted at the established watstations on a priority basis using the following indicators that were cstandards contained in the Northeastern California and Northwestern Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Managementtemperature, nutrients, fecal coliform, turbidity, sediment, dissolved channel condition. The protocol is outlined in the USDI - BLM NationCollection of Water Quality Data and the Susanville District Bioregion

Quality Inventory Statement of Work. Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be developed and implemenrestore the quality and beneficial uses of water at the project level. and evaluated on implementation and effectiveness as part of the pr

Determine in-stream flow requirements necessary to support healthy aquatic and riparian habitats. Acquire and maintain water rights needed to protect federal investments by ensuring an adequate and reliable water supply for BLM programs. 

Conduct Proper Functioning Condition Assessment TR 1737-9 and TR 1737-11 and TR 1737-16 to assess the functionality of riparian and Additional stream Habitat Condition Surveys and macro-invertebrate conducted as needed to assess functionality of streams for fish and resources. Completion of the Water Source Inventory and maintenance of watewould provide needed information to assert federal water rights, espReserves to protect federal investments and to ensure a reliable wat

uses of public lands. 

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-9 
 

 

Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology 

Wild Horses The Red Rock Herd Management Area 

(HMA) will be maintained in a stable, ecologically healthy condition with respect to soils, vegetation, wildlife, and other resources with wild horses at the AML. 

On a periodic basis, evaluate every herd management area using thStandards and Guidelines”. Field data collection includes using the rriparian functional assessment process, as prescribed in the most cuInterpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health, Rangeland Health Stanand BLM Manual 4180 and Handbook H-4180-1. Conduct periodic evevery 10 years, or when changes in resource conditions are apparen

Herd population monitoring and distribution data collection would oc

census would be completed at 3-year intervals. 

Wildlife and Fisheries 

Habitats of federally listed (endangered, threatened, or candidate), state-listed and BLM sensitive wildlife will be protected, restored, and maintained so that species populations increase in size and stability, and occupy available habitats. Naturally occurring habitats for all wildlife species native to the planning area will be managed in such a way that food, water, thermal and escape cover, and reproductive territory is readily available and in satisfactory condition to meet the year-round (or seasonal) requirements of native terrestrial wildlife. 

Monitor BLM actions to ensure they are consistent with the Special SManagement Policy, BLM Manual 6840, and to ensure they are consobjectives and guidelines outlined in the RMP. In conjunction with other federal, state, or private agencies, continupopulations in the planning area. Do this for individual species such eagles, sage-grouse, deer, and pronghorn; and groups of species ashabitats such as sagebrush-steppe, juniper, and mixed conifer foresPeriodically determine the adequacy of existing data (i.e. species, ha

supporting management decisions. Periodically assess the effectiveness of a sampling of different vegetdisturbance actions to determine effectiveness of management decis

Aquatic ecosystems (and associated riparian and wetland habitats) will be restored, enhanced, and protected from degradation, so that native (and desirable non-native) fish and other aquatic species will thrive. 

Monitor riparian habitat condition on an allotment basis during allotmduring rangeland health assessments as part of determining properl

ALTURAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-10 
UNITED STATES
 



DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

Po

Burea

Alturas Field Office 

708 W. 12th St. 

Alturas, CA 96101 


 
 
 


OFFICIAL BUSINESS 

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE $300