United States Department of the Interior

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

Arizona Strip Field Office 

345 East Riverside Drive 

St. George, Utah 84790 

www.az.blm.gov 

In Reply Refer To: 

AZ-100: 1610 

 February 2008 

Dear Reader: 

I am pleased to announce that after five years of hard work and collaborative effort, the 

revision of the Arizona Strip Field Office Resource Management Plan (RMP) is 

complete. This document provides guidance for the management of 1,679,896 acres of 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM)-administered lands in northern Arizona. These 

lands are within the Arizona Strip District, in Mohave and Coconino counties, Arizona. 

The attached Record of Decision (ROD) and RMP have been prepared in accordance 

with the Federal Land Policy Management Act and the National Environmental Policy 

Act. The ROD/RMP was sent to members of the public who requested a copy and to 

pertinent local, State, Federal, and Tribal governments. The ROD finalizes the proposed 

decisions presented in the Arizona Strip Proposed Plan/Final Environmental Impact 

Statement (FEIS) that was released on March 2, 2007 and subject to a 30-day protest 

period that ended on April 2, 2007. Seven protest letters were received and reviewed by 

the BLM Assistant Director for Renewable Resources and Planning in Washington, D.C. 

After careful consideration of all points raised in the protest letters, the Assistant Director 

concluded that the planning team and responsible decision makers followed all applicable 

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

Proposed Plan in the FEIS. Minor adjustments or points of clarification incorporated into 

the RMP in response to issues raised during the protest process and final BLM review are 

discussed in the ROD under the sections entitled Modifications and Clarifications. The 

protest review did not result in any significant changes to the RMP. 

This ROD serves as the final decision for the land use planning decisions described in the 

attached RMP. Now that the ROD is signed, we look forward to your assistance and 

participation as we implement the decisions contained in this RMP. 

Route designations for the Ferry Swale area that were described and mapped as part of 

the travel management decisions are included in the ROD/RMP. Route designations are 

implementation level decisions. Therefore, an appeal opportunity under the Department 

of Interior’s appeal regulations at 43 CFR Part 4 is being provided at this time for the 

route designations proposed within the RMP. 

Copies of the ROD and RMP can be obtained on the web at 

https://www.blm.gov/az/LUP/strip/strip_plan.htm. Additional printed or CD copies may 

be obtained at the address above or requested by email at Arizona_Strip@blm.gov or by 

telephone at (435) 688-3200. 
We greatly appreciate all who contributed to the completion of this RMP, including other 

Federal agencies, Tribal governments, State and local governments. This includes the ten 

Cooperating Agencies that worked with us over the years (Mohave and Coconino 

counties in Arizona, Washington and Kane counties in Utah, the Kaibab Paiute Tribe, the 

towns of Fredonia and Colorado City, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Arizona 

Department of Transportation, and the Federal Highway Administration). We also 

appreciate the extensive public involvement during this time by groups, organizations, 

and individuals. Public input informed and improved the planning documents and we 

hope you will continue to work with us as we implement the decisions in this RMP. If 

you need information or have questions, please contact us at (435) 688-3200. 

 Sincerely, 

 Lorraine M. Christian 

 Arizona Strip Field Manager 

 

 

 
 

ARIZONA STRIP FIELD OFFICE 

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 

RECORD OF DECISION 

2008 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

ARIZONA STRIP FIELD OFFICE RECORD OF DECISION .............................................. 1 

INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 

PROTEST REVIEW RESULTS ................................................................................................ 1 

THE DECISION ......................................................................................................................... 2 

OVERVIEW OF THE ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................. 3 

Alternative A: No Action ........................................................................................................ 3 

Alternative B ........................................................................................................................... 4 

Alternative C ........................................................................................................................... 4 

Alternative D ........................................................................................................................... 4 

Alternative E: Proposed Plan .................................................................................................. 4 

Environmentally Preferable Alternative ............................................................................. 5 

LAND USE PLAN DECISIONS, IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS, AND 

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS ............................................................................................ 6 

Land Use Plan decisions ......................................................................................................... 7 

Desired Future Conditions .................................................................................................. 7 

Special Designations ........................................................................................................... 7 

Land Use Allocations (Allowable Uses) ............................................................................. 7 

Management Actions .......................................................................................................... 7

Implementation Decisions ...................................................................................................... 8 

Appeal Procedures for Implementation Decisions ............................................................. 9 

Administrative Actions ......................................................................................................... 10 

MODIFICATIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS ....................................................................... 11 

Modifications ........................................................................................................................ 11 

Route Designations ........................................................................................................... 12 

Clarifications ......................................................................................................................... 12 

MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS FOR SELECTING THE APPROVED RMP .......... 13 

Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................................. 13 

Plan Monitoring .................................................................................................................... 14 

Implementation Monitoring .............................................................................................. 14 

Effectiveness Monitoring .................................................................................................. 14 

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN ................................. 15 

CONSISTENCY REVIEW ...................................................................................................... 15 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ...................................................................................................... 16 

TO OBTAIN A COPY OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN ............................... 17 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 1 

ARIZONA STRIP FIELD OFFICE 

RECORD OF DECISION 

INTRODUCTION 

The Arizona Strip District of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) prepared this Record of 

Decision (ROD) on the Proposed Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact 

Statement (Proposed Plan/FEIS) for the Arizona Strip Field Office (FO), which was published in 

January 2007. While the Proposed Plan/FEIS also addressed management of Grand CanyonParashant National Monument (both BLM and NPS-administered lands) and Vermilion Cliffs 

National Monument (administered by the Arizona Strip FO), this ROD applies only to those 

decisions for management of the Arizona Strip FO, as presented in the attached Approved 

Resource Management Plan (RMP). 

The Arizona Strip FO is located in northern Coconino and Mohave counties, Arizona, north of 

Grand Canyon National Park and contains 1,679,896 acres of BLM-administered lands, 170,165 

acres of Arizona State Trust lands, and 130,962 acres of private land. The decisions in the 

Approved RMP only apply to the 1,679,896 acres of BLM-administered lands within the 

Arizona Strip FO. 

The Approved RMP was described as Alternative E in the Proposed Plan/FEIS. This ROD 

provides a summary of protests received and clarifications made in response to protests, a brief 

summary of the decisions made and other alternatives considered (including a description of the 

environmentally preferable alternative), management considerations and rationale for the 

decisions, and an overview of public involvement in the planning process. 

PROTEST REVIEW RESULTS 

The BLM received seven protest letters during the 30-day protest period provided for the 

proposed land use plan decisions in the Proposed Plan/FEIS in accordance with 43 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 1610.5-2. The seven protesting parties are listed below: 

1. Kade B. Ballard 

2. Jarolyn and Collin Stout 

3. The National Trust for Historic Preservation 

4. Carolyn B. Shelley 

5. Dr. William I. Boarman

6. Peter Bungart, Circa Cultural Consulting 

7. The Arizona Wilderness Coalition, Center for Biological Diversity, Grand Canyon 

Wildlands Council, Sierra Club-Grand Canyon Chapter, and Wilderness Society 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 2 

Some protesting parties voiced their concern over the protection of resources in the Arizona Strip 

FO. Some concerns were very general, while other concerns were over specific resources, 

including areas with wilderness characteristics and cultural resources. Some protesting parties 

voiced their concern about the impacts of a particular resource use on specific resources, such as 

the impacts of backcountry airstrips on soundscapes/natural quiet or the impacts of livestock 

grazing on cultural and biological resources (i.e., desert tortoise, riparian areas, forest areas, and 

bighorn sheep). Other protesting parties were concerned about the impacts on resource uses and 

wanted to see the lands managed without impairment of the area's productivity. Finally, a 

number of protesting parties voiced their concern over the data and/or the analysis techniques 

used in the FEIS, making the following observations or suggestions: 

• There is the need to take a hard look at direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts for 

wilderness characteristics and cultural resources. 

• Baseline measurements of natural quiet/soundscapes are necessary for the impact 

analysis.

• The information used to analyze the impacts of backcountry airstrips on natural resources 

is inadequate. 

• Baseline information used to analyze the impacts on cultural resources is inadequate. 

• Comments from experts on the Draft EIS were not adequately responded to in the FEIS. 

The BLM Director addressed all protests without making significant changes to the Proposed 

Plan though minor adjustments, corrections, and clarifications, as identified in the Modifications 

and Clarifications section below. 

THE DECISION 

The decision of the BLM is to approve the attached document as the Approved RMP for 

management of the public lands in the Arizona Strip FO (see the Approved RMP). The 

Approved RMP replaces relevant decisions in the Arizona Strip RMP (BLM 1992) as amended. 

The Approved RMP was prepared under the authorities of the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976 in accordance with BLM planning regulations (43 CFR Part 

1600) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. The Approved RMP is 

nearly identical to the Proposed Plan (Alternative E) presented in the Proposed Plan/FEIS. 

Management decisions and guidance for public lands within the Arizona Strip FO are presented 

in the Approved RMP attached to this ROD. All decisions covered by the ROD are either land 

use planning decisions that were protestable under the land use planning regulations (43 CFR 

Part 1610), or implementation decisions that are now appealable under the regulations listed 

below. 

The Approved RMP emphasizes protection and restoration of the natural and cultural resources 

while still providing for resource use and enjoyment. Where appropriate, it proposes a 

combination of management actions including allowing natural processes to continue, applying 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 3 

more hands-on treatment methods, and protecting the remote settings that currently exist in the 

Arizona Strip FO. All decisions in the Approved RMP meet the significance and mission 

statements of the Arizona Strip FO found in Chapter 1 of the Approved RMP. The key 

components of the Approved RMP (Alternative E) are as follows: 

• The Approved RMP responds to public comments to protect resources while still 

allowing use, especially near the communities. 

• The Approved RMP provides the best means to accommodate the widest range of public 

and agency concerns over resources and resource uses. 

OVERVIEW OF THE ALTERNATIVES 

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

Draft Plan/EIS (2005). The alternatives were developed to address major planning issues 

identified through public scoping and to provide management direction for resource programs. 

Each alternative is comprised of a set of decisions representing a distinct concept for land 

management using a variety of land use planning decision types including desired future 

conditions, special designations, land use allocations, and management actions. These land use 

plan decisions provide management direction at a broad scale and guide future actions to govern 

the protection and use of the resources on BLM-administered lands on the Arizona Strip FO. 

ALTERNATIVE A: NO ACTION 

Alternative A is the No Action Alternative required by NEPA that represented continued 

management provided by the Arizona Strip RMP (BLM 1992), as funding allowed. Alternative 

A served as a baseline for comparison with the other alternatives. 

Under the Arizona Strip RMP (BLM 1992), public lands were partitioned into Guidance Areas to 

protect resources and provide guidance for managing them. Guidance Areas were differentiated 

by special resource concerns, sensitivities, or characteristics, as identified below: 

• Guidance Area A -These lands contained a wide variety of resources and values that 

required continued multiple-use management. Most of these lands did not contain 

unusual characteristics and were not subject to unusual demands requiring special 

management attention. 

• Guidance Area B - These lands were identified by the public and the BLM as having 

unique resource values and special management needs including important scenic values, 

exceptional natural features, and fragile physical features. Reclamation would be very 

difficult after disturbances, which may lead to permanent scars on the landscape. With 

few exceptions, Area B lands were more remote than those in Area A. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 4 

ALTERNATIVE B 

Alternative B placed an emphasis on minimal human use/influence, and proposed the fewest 

miles of open roads and trails. It focused on natural processes and other unobtrusive methods for 

ecosystem restoration, resource management, and scientific research; more protection and 

enhancement of remoteness and dispersed recreation; unstructured recreation opportunities; and 

the least amount of motorized recreation opportunities. 

ALTERNATIVE C 

Alternative C represented an attempt to balance resource protection and human use/influence. It 

proposed a moderate amount of open roads and trails; a mix of natural processes and “hands-on” 

techniques for ecosystem restoration, resource management, and scientific research; and a mix of 

motorized, non-motorized, dispersed, and structured recreation opportunities. 

ALTERNATIVE D 

Alternative D placed an emphasis on maximum appropriate human use/influence and the widest 

array of visitor experiences and opportunities. It included the most miles of open roads and trails 

(with the exception of Alternative A), and focused on “hands-on” techniques for ecosystem 

restoration, resource management, and scientific research. As such, it offered fewer remote 

settings and the most motorized and structured recreation opportunities compared to the other 

alternatives. 

ALTERNATIVE E: PROPOSED PLAN 

The BLM revised Alternative E (the Preferred Alternative) in the Arizona Strip Draft Plan/EIS 

by incorporating comments received during the 90-day public comment period, thus creating the 

Proposed Plan in the Proposed Plan/FEIS. Through modifications and clarifications in response 

to the protests received, the Proposed Plan is now the Approved RMP, which is attached to this 

ROD. In the most comprehensive manner, the Approved RMP is designed to respond to each of 

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

determined that the decisions presented under Alternative E (the Proposed Plan) provide an 

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

of sensitive resources. 

Alternative E, now the Approved RMP with the clarifications and modifications as described 

below, emphasizes minimal human influence and use in the more remote sections of the Arizona 

Strip FO and more human use/influence in the areas adjacent to local communities or in areas 

presently receiving such use/influence. It attempts to balance human use/influence with resource 

protection. Where appropriate, it will use a combination of management actions including 

allowing natural processes to continue, applying more hands-on treatment methods, and 

protecting the remote settings that currently exist in the Arizona Strip FO. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 5 

Environmentally Preferable Alternative 

Alternative E, the Approved RMP, is considered by the BLM to be the environmentally 

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 environmentally preferable alternative as the alternative that will promote 

the national environmental policy as expressed in Section 101 of NEPA. The six broad policy 

goals for all Federal plans, programs, and policies are listed below: 

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. 

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

recycling of depletable resources. 

In comparison with the other alternatives analyzed, Alternative E best meets the above NEPA 

goals for the future management of the Arizona Strip FO. It provides a high level of protection 

of natural and cultural resources, while providing for a wide range of beneficial uses of the 

environment. The No Action Alternative, Alternative A, would have allowed visitor use to 

increase to undesirable levels, thereby causing potential adverse impacts on the visitor 

experience and resource conditions. Alternative A also did not identify additional lands to be 

managed to maintain wilderness characteristics. For these reasons, the No Action Alternative is 

not preferable from an environmental perspective. 

Alternative B represented the alternative with the most “hands off” management. It has the 

fewest miles of access and designated routes, most acres of lands managed to maintain 

wilderness characteristics, and the least aggressive forms of treatment for noxious and invasive 

species. Although this alternative is the most “natural” management alternative, it does not 

provide for proactive visitor or resource management. Consequently, Alternative B was not 

selected as the environmentally preferable alternative because it does not achieve a balance 

between visitor use/access and protection of resources, nor does it involve restoration of natural 

processes and conditions. 

Alternative C represented a better balance of visitor use and resource conditions, but did not 

recognize the unique nature of the Arizona Strip FO in terms of its accessibility and 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 6 

opportunities to provide a range of appropriate recreational experiences to visitors. This 

alternative does not attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without 

degradation. 

Alternative D represented the alternative with the most “hands-on” management, maximum 

human use/influence, the most recreation opportunities, and the fewest acres managed to 

maintain wilderness characteristics. This alternative proposed extensive proactive restoration of 

species, which meant fewer acres restored via natural means, which would lead to more 

significant alterations to the primitive landscape. Alternative D provided a high range of visitor 

access and recreation opportunities, but fewer opportunities for primitive and remote 

experiences. For these reasons, this alternative did not achieve the balance between resource 

protection and resource use that permitted enhancement of resource conditions and visitor 

experience. 

Alternative E (the Proposed Plan and now the Approved RMP) takes the best components of 

each of the four alternatives described above to ensure protection of resources and values while 

providing a wide range of beneficial uses. This alternative acknowledges that the more isolated 

areas would be managed to preserve their remoteness and maintain wilderness characteristics. 

At the same time, it provides appropriate access to areas of high use and along major travel 

corridors to ensure that a range of appropriate outdoor recreation is available. Overall, 

Alternative E best meets the requirements of Section 101 of NEPA and was thus selected as the 

environmentally preferable alternative by the BLM. 

LAND USE PLAN DECISIONS, IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS, AND 

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS 

 

The Approved RMP provides overall direction for management of all resources on BLMadministered land. Many land use plan decisions are implemented or become effective upon 

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

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

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

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

land management actions and subsequent site-specific implementation decisions. When 

presented to the public as proposed decisions, land use plan decisions can be protested to the 

BLM Director; however, they are not appealable to Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA). 

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

planning, as funding becomes available, will require further environmental analysis. Some 

implementation decisions (e.g., route designations) are finalized with this ROD and thus require 

no further environmental analysis. Administrative actions are not land use planning or 

implementation decisions, but are a key component of the overall RMP because they describe the 

BLM’s day-to-day actions to help meet desired future conditions. The BLM will continue to 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 7 

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

descriptions of the types of decisions are presented below. 

LAND USE PLAN DECISIONS 

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. Desired future conditions include legal 

mandates, numerous regulatory responsibilities, national policy, BLM state director guidance, 

and other resource or social needs. Land use plans are designed to most effectively meet these 

desired future conditions through land use allocations, special designations, or management 

actions. 

Special Designations 

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

wilderness areas, wild and scenic rivers, or national historic or scenic trails (see the Approved 

RMP). 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, such as 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 (see the Approved RMP). 

Land Use Allocations (Allowable Uses) 

Allowable, restricted, or prohibited use on public lands identify lands where uses are allowed 

(land use allocations), including any restrictions needed to meet goals and objectives. Areas may 

be identified to exclude specific uses in order to protect resource values. Land use allocations 

have geographic boundaries and are represented by polygons on the maps in Chapter 2 of the 

Approved RMP. It is common for specific resource or use allocations to overlap with other 

resource or use allocations. 

Management Actions 

Management actions include stipulations, guidelines, best management practices, and design 

features that help guide day-to-day activities on public lands to meet desired future conditions. 

Management actions are categorized as actions to achieve desired outcomes, including actions to 

maintain, restore, or improve land health. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 8 

IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS 

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

location that take action to implement land use plan decisions. Implementation decisions 

generally constitute the BLM’s final approval allowing on-the-ground actions to proceed and 

require appropriate site-specific planning and NEPA analysis. Such decisions may be 

incorporated into implementation plans (activity or project plans) or may exist as stand-alone 

decisions. 

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

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

remedies, particularly appeals to the IBLA (under 43 CFR 4.410). Where implementation 

decisions are made as part of the land use planning process, they are still subject to the appeals 

process or other administrative review as prescribed by the specific resource program regulations 

after the BLM resolves the protests to land use plan decisions and makes a decision to adopt the 

RMP. For example, the designation of a specific route is an implementation level decision, 

rather than a land use plan decision. Consequently, individual route designations are subject to a 

separate appeals process that is described below. 

Route designations (i.e., routes designated as open) in the Approved RMP are limited to the 

Ferry Swale area because it was the only area in the Arizona Strip FO that underwent a complete 

route inventory and designation process. This is due to its location (i.e., between Vermilion 

Cliffs National Monument and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area) and the fact that Ferry 

Swale was in the same sub-region as the Vermilion Cliffs National Monument. The remainder 

of the routes in the Arizona Strip FO will be inventoried and designated within the next 5 years 

following signature of this ROD and involve a public review process and NEPA analysis. The 

route designations in the Ferry Swale area are finalized with this ROD and may be appealed at 

this time. 

Except for the Ferry Swale route designations, the other implementation decisions identified in 

Chapter 2 of the Approved RMP will all require site-specific planning and further NEPA 

analysis before they are implemented. These implementation decisions are not appealable at this 

time, but will be appealable at the time they are finalized. 

In making the route designation decisions, the BLM adhered to IM 2007-030 regarding 

compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), which requires 

the BLM to consider the potential for area, road, and trail designations to affect historic 

properties (sites eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places). These 

potential adverse effects could result from designating new routes or opening new areas to OHV 

use; OHV use shifting, concentrating, or expanding travel onto other existing routes or into areas 

likely to have historic properties; and the potential for cumulative effects. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 9 

As described above, only the Ferry Swale area has routes designated as a result of this ROD. No 

new routes are designated open in the Ferry Swale Area. No open OHV areas are being 

designated in Ferry Swale. The remaining potential impacts to historic properties in Ferry Swale 

are direct impacts, indirect impacts, and cumulative effects from the use of existing routes in the 

designated road system, including impacts resulting from concentration of use created by the 

designated route system or continued impacts to specific historic sites by designating specific 

routes. 

In order to determine the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts to historic properties in Ferry 

Swale, Arizona Strip District archaeologists and managers used all Class I (existing information) 

and Class III (intensive survey) cultural resource information available for the area. They 

examined U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps to determine if any historic 

properties in the Ferry Swale area would be impacted by use of designated routes. No impacts to 

historic properties or high potential areas were identified that would result from continued 

vehicular use on designated routes or shifting of use due to route designation. Ongoing 

inventories to comply with Sections 106 and 110 of the NHPA will continue in the area and will 

assist in determining impacts as well as locating, documenting, and evaluating historic properties 

in the Ferry Swale area. 

Before this ROD was signed, the 976 acres contained within the two new OHV open areas (one 

in the St. George basin and one southeast of Fredonia) were inventoried at a Class III level for 

cultural resources to comply with IM 2007-030. A constructed historic dirt road segment (used 

before the current highway alignment in the area sometime before 1939) was found and 

documented. It crosses the southern portion of the Fredonia open OHV area and may qualify for 

listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). It is currently heavily used as an 

OHV connector route, and such use would not affect its eligibility for the NRHP. No other 

historic properties were located as a result of the inventory of these two open OHV areas. 

Appeal Procedures for Implementation Decisions 

Any party adversely affected by an implementation decision may appeal within 30 days of 

receipt of this decision in accordance with the provisions of 43 CFR Part 4.4. The appeal must 

include a statement of reasons or file a separate statement of reasons within 30 days of filing the 

appeal. The appeal must state if a stay of the decision is being requested in accordance with 43 

CFR 4.21 and must be filed with the Arizona Strip Field Manager at the following address: 

Arizona Strip Field Office 

345 East Riverside Drive 

St. George, UT 84790 

A copy of the appeal, statement of reasons, and all other supporting documents shall be sent to 

the Regional Solicitor at the following address: 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 10 

Lawrence J. Jensen, Regional Solicitor 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

6201 Federal Building 

125 South State Street 

Salt Lake City, Utah 84138-1180 

If the statement of reasons is filed separately, it must be sent to the following address: 

Interior Board of Land Appeals 

Office of Hearings and Appeals 

4015 Wilson Boulevard 

Arlington, VA 22203 

It is suggested that any appeal be sent certified mail, return receipt requested. 

 Request for Stay 

Any party wishing to file a request for stay pending the outcome of an appeal of one or more 

implementation decisions must show sufficient justification based on the following standards 

under 43 CFR 4.21: 

• The relative harm to the party if the stay is granted or denied 

• The likelihood of the appellant’s success on the merits of the stay 

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

• Whether the public interest favors granting the stay 

As noted above, the request for stay must be filed with the Arizona Strip Field Manager at the 

address listed above. 

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS 

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

addressed in EIS- or Environmental Assessment (EA)-level documents, such activities are not 

management decisions at either the land use plan or implementation level. Administrative 

actions are day-to-day activities conducted by the BLM, often required by FLPMA, but do not 

require NEPA analysis or a written decision by a responsible official to be accomplished. 

Examples of administrative actions include mapping, surveying, inventorying, monitoring, and 

scientific research and studies. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 11 

MODIFICATIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS 

Modifications and clarifications were made to the Approved RMP based on the review and 

resolution of the protest letters, as well as from internal review by the BLM. The agreed upon 

clarifications or modifications to the decisions are provided below. 

MODIFICATIONS 

While responding to protests, the BLM noted errors in GIS acreage calculations and 

categorization of stipulations in the FEIS Table 2.13, page 2-164. The Fluid Mineral Leasing 

Categories map in the FEIS (Map 2.9) accurately depicted the location of areas with special 

terms and conditions and seasonal restrictions or no surface occupancy or disturbance 

(Categories 2 and 3), but the GIS acreage calculations for these two categories in FEIS Table 

2.13 did not correspond. In the FEIS Table 2.13, desert tortoise ACECs were categorized as 

areas with special terms and conditions (Category 2) rather than no surface occupancy or other 

surface disturbance (Category 3). In addition, the Virgin River Scenic Withdrawal Area should 

have been no surface occupancy or other surface disturbance (Category 3) instead of special 

terms and conditions (Category 2). The corrected acreage calculations for these categories can 

be found in the Minerals decisions in the attached Approved RMP. Correcting these acreage 

calculation errors resulted in 51,385 additional acres categorized as no surface occupancy or 

disturbance (Category 3) and a corresponding acreage reduction for areas with special terms and 

conditions and seasonal restrictions (Category 2; see Minerals decisions in attached Approved 

RMP). 

Two errors for Locatable Minerals in FEIS Table 2.13 were also corrected in the Minerals 

decisions in the attached Approved RMP. A portion of the Grand Canyon Game Preserve was 

miscategorized as re-conveyed Stock Raising Homestead Act lands rather than withdrawn lands 

when digitized into GIS, and a Bureau of Reclamation withdrawal was missed when tabulating 

the acreage figures. Correcting these errors increases the acreage withdrawn from mineral entry 

by 17,871 acres to 118,743 acres and decreases the acres open with a plan of operation to 

182,699 acres. 

In addition, the reference to mountain bikes on "existing routes" (FEIS, p. 2-172) has been 

changed in the Approved RMP to assure that the Recreation and Visitor Services desired future 

conditions properly aligns with the Travel Management direction. The desired future condition 

now reads (changes shown in strikeout): 

In Backways and Specialized TMAs, recreation opportunities associated with 

somewhat remote settings, such as exploring backcountry roads and trails, vehicle 

camping, hunting, sightseeing, mountain biking, recreation aviation, and 

picnicking will be maintained/enhanced as well as mountain biking opportunities 

on existing routes, provided they will be compatible with the protection and 

enhancement of sensitive resource values, where appropriate. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 12 

Route Designations 

In compliance with IM 2007-030, no route designation changes were necessary to protect 

cultural resources in the Ferry Swale area of the Arizona Strip FO. No high potential areas were 

identified for intensive inventory to comply with IM 2007-030 (see previous discussion on pages 

10 and 11). 

CLARIFICATIONS 

As the result of protests and continued internal review, the BLM made clarifications in the 

Approved RMP and one clarification on the Summary of Impacts Table from the Proposed 

Plan/FEIS, which is noted in the following paragraph. 

In the Recreation Section of the Proposed Plan/FEIS, the Summary of Impacts Table did not 

accurately convey the content of the Chapter 4 impact analysis. That analysis for Alternatives C 

and E stated, “The impacts to settings and opportunities would be the same as those described 

under Alternative B, but the degree of impact to both motorized and non-motorized recreation 

would be significantly less” (FEIS page 4-299). The summary table failed to “downsize” the 

potential impacts for Alternatives C and D from “major” to “minor to moderate.” 

Monitoring strategies (including indicators, protocols, and frequency) to address impacts to 

natural and cultural resources can be found in Chapter 3 of the attached Approved RMP. 

The ROD/Approved RMP also contains more information on how the agency complied with IM 

2007-030 in the Ferry Swale area of the Arizona Strip FO in making route designation decisions 

regarding cultural resources (see previous discussion on pages 10 and 11 of this ROD). The 

remainder of the Arizona Strip FO will undergo route designations within the next 3-5 years of 

the issuance of this ROD. A separate NEPA document will analyze impacts from route 

designation on the remainder of the Arizona Strip FO. Public involvement will be crucial for 

successful implementation of travel management in the FO. 

The wild and scenic river suitability of the 22-mile BLM-administered portion of Kanab Creek, 

between the Kaibab Paiute Indian Reservation and the Kaibab National Forest boundary in 

Snake Gulch, was re-evaluated in 1993 as a result of a protest on the 1992 Arizona Strip RMP. 

The entire 22-mile segment was found to meet the free-flowing river criteria but the six values 

evaluated (geologic, cultural/historic, scenic, special status species/wildlife, recreation, and 

riparian) were not deemed outstandingly remarkable within the regional context (BLM 1993). 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 13 

MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS FOR SELECTING THE 

APPROVED RMP 

The alternatives described in the Draft Plan/EIS, in addition to the public comments and input 

provided throughout this planning process, were considered in preparing the Proposed Plan. The 

Proposed Plan depicted a combination of decisions from the five alternatives considered in the 

Draft Plan/EIS, with emphasis on the Preferred Alternative (Alternative E). 

This same approach for managing the Arizona Strip FO was chosen as the Approved RMP 

because: 

a. It most effectively accomplishes the overall objectives of protecting resources and values 

and facilitates appropriate research. 

b. It best addresses the diverse community and stakeholder concerns in a fair and equitable 

manner. 

c. It provides the most workable framework for future management of the area. 

Among the attributes that led to this determination are provisions for protecting resources 

(archaeological, historic, paleontological, geological, and biological), including special features 

such as special status species and riparian areas, and while providing for visitor use in a manner 

consistent with protecting resources and values. 

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

while adhering to FLPMA’s mandate for multiple use management and sustained yield of 

renewable resources. The Approved RMP is very similar to the Proposed Plan, containing only 

minor revisions and clarifications stemming from protests and internal review. 

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 Arizona Strip FO. The Arizona Standards for 

Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing Administration (BLM 1996) will be used as the 

base standards to assess the health of BLM-administered lands in the Arizona Strip FO. Best 

management practices will be used where 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. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 14 

PLAN MONITORING 

As the Approved RMP is implemented, the BLM expects that new information gathered from 

field inventories and assessments, research, other agency studies, and other sources will update 

baseline data or support new management techniques and scientific principles. To the extent that 

such new information or actions address issues covered in the Approved RMP, the BLM will 

integrate the data through a process called plan maintenance or updating. This process includes 

the use of monitoring, which is the repeated measurement of activities and conditions over time 

with the implied purpose to use this information to adjust management, if necessary, to achieve 

or maintain resource objectives. BLM planning regulations (43 CFR Part 1610.4-9) call for 

monitoring RMPs 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)). 

Plan implementation also includes the use of an adaptive management strategy. As part of this 

process, the BLM will review management actions and the Approved RMP periodically to 

determine whether the objectives set forth in this and other applicable planning documents are 

being met. Where they are not being met, the BLM will consider appropriate adjustments. 

Where the BLM considers taking or approving actions that would alter or not conform to overall 

direction of the Approved RMP, the BLM will prepare a plan amendment and environmental 

analysis in making its determinations and in seeking public comment. 

There are two types of monitoring (implementation and effectiveness), which are described 

below. 

Implementation Monitoring 

Implementation monitoring, known by some agencies as compliance monitoring, is the most 

basic type of monitoring and simply determines whether planned activities have been 

implemented in the manner prescribed by the Approved RMP. As such, implementation 

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 implementation will be evaluated and reported at a 5-year interval from 

the date of approval of the RMP. Aspects of effectiveness monitoring would also be addressed 

in the evaluation. 

Effectiveness Monitoring 

Effectiveness monitoring determines if the implementation of activities has achieved the desired 

future conditions (i.e., goals and objectives) set forth in the Approved RMP. Effectiveness 

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

objective?" Answering this question requires knowledge of the objectives established in the 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 15 

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

technical specialists to address specific questions and avoid collection of unnecessary data. 

Success is measured against the benchmark of achieving the goals and objectives (i.e., desired 

future conditions) established by the Approved RMP, which may include regulated standards for 

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

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

generally be reported to the field manager on an annual basis. These reports will include trends 

and conclusions, when appropriate, and be incorporated into the 5-year evaluation reports. 

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

document are being met and whether applying the land use plan direction is effective (see 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 

RMP as long as assumptions and impacts disclosed in the analysis remain valid and broad-scale 

goals and objectives are not changed (see the Approved RMP). Where the BLM considers 

taking or approving actions that will alter or not conform to overall direction of the RMP, the 

BLM will prepare a plan amendment or revision and environmental analysis of appropriate 

scope. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 

Implementation of the Approved RMP will begin with publication of its Notice of Availability 

(NOA) in the Federal Register. Some decisions in the Approved RMP require immediate action 

and will be implemented upon publication of the ROD and Approved RMP. Other decisions will 

be implemented over a period of years. The rate of implementation is tied, in part, to BLM’s 

budgeting process. Implementation of the Approved RMP will occur in accordance with the 

implementation and adaptive management framework described in Chapter 3 of the attached 

Approved RMP. 

CONSISTENCY REVIEW 

The Arizona Governor’s Office did not identify any inconsistencies between the Proposed 

Plan/FEIS and state or local plans, policies, and programs following the 60-day Governor's 

Consistency Review of the Proposed Plan/Final EIS, which was initiated in January 2007 in 

accordance with planning regulations at 43 CFR Part 1610.3- 2(e). 

Consistency of the Proposed Plan with other local, state, tribal, and federal plans and policies 

was also considered during the planning process. The Approved RMP is consistent with plans 

and policies of the BLM, other federal agencies, and state 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. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 16 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 

The planning process was initiated when the BLM published the Notice of Intent (NOI) to 

prepare an EIS on the RMP for the Arizona Strip FO in the Federal Register on April 24, 2002. 

The BLM hosted a series of public open houses in 2002 and 2003 to solicit public comment on 

the scoping issues and preliminary alternatives for the Draft Plan/EIS. The NOA of the Draft 

Plan/EIS was published on November 16, 2005. Another series of open house meetings were 

held to solicit public comment on the Draft Plan/EIS in January of 2006. The NOA for the 

Proposed Plan/FEIS was published on March 2, 2007, which opened the 30-day public protest 

period. 

Before the NOI was published in 2002, a series of Community Based Partnership and 

Stewardship courses were held in northern Arizona and southern Utah in which the public 

provided early information and communication regarding the RMP planning area. 

The BLM is committed to providing opportunities for meaningful public participation in the 

planning process. Throughout the preparation of the Approved RMP, the BLM maintained an 

extensive public participation process aimed at providing frequent opportunities for interaction 

with the public through a variety of media. The general public, representatives of Indian Tribes, 

organizations, public interest groups, and federal, state, and local government agencies were 

invited to participate throughout the planning process. This participation included review of: 

proposed planning criteria, issues, preliminary alternatives, the Draft Plan/EIS, and the Proposed 

Plan/FEIS. These groups and individuals were kept informed through public meetings; planning 

bulletins; web information; Federal Register notices; and distribution of preliminary alternatives, 

the Draft Plan/EIS, and the Proposed Plan/FEIS. The BLM responded to comment letters on the 

Draft Plan/EIS and considered public comment when preparing the Proposed Plan/FEIS. The 

BLM also considered protests on the Proposed Plan when developing the Approved RMP and 

this ROD. 

Ten agencies, tribes, and communities requested Cooperating Agency status and assisted with 

the Arizona Strip planning effort, and included Coconino and Mohave counties, Arizona; Kane 

and Washington counties, Utah; the towns of Fredonia and Colorado City, Arizona; the Kaibab 

Paiute Tribe; Arizona Department of Transportation; Arizona Game and Fish Department; and 

the Federal Highway Administration. 

The Arizona Strip District Office also maintained a national mailing list of approximately 10,500 

individuals, agencies, interest groups, and tribes who expressed interest in the planning process. 

The BLM mailed planning bulletins to those on the mailing list or notified those on the email list 

that the information was available on the Arizona BLM website in order to keep the public 

informed of project status and to solicit reviews and information. Public meetings were 

announced at least 15 days prior to the event in local news media and on the website. The BLM 

participated in numerous meetings with cooperating agencies, other federal agencies, Indian 

tribes, state and local governments, and interested individuals and groups. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Record of Decision 

 

 17 

TO OBTAIN A COPY OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 

Copies of the ROD and the Arizona Strip FO RMP are available on the Arizona Strip District 

website at www.blm.gov/az, or can be obtained by requesting a copy by telephone at (435) 688-

3200 or by email at Arizona_Strip@blm.gov. A copy can also be obtained in person at the 

following address: 

BLM Arizona Strip District Office 

345 East Riverside Drive 

St. George, Utah 84790 

U.S. Department of Interior

Bureau of Land Management

ARIZONA STRIP FIELD OFFICE

RECORD OF DECISION

APPROVED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN

COOPERATING AGENCIES:

Arizona Department of Transportation

Arizona Game and Fish Department

Coconino County, Arizona

Federal Highways Administration

Kaibab Paiute Tribe

Kane County, Utah

Mohave County, Arizona

Town of Colorado City, Arizona

Town of Fredonia, Arizona

Washington County, Utah

February 2008
Arizona Strip Field Office Table of Contents

Approved Resource Management Plan

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Dear Reader Letter

RECORD OF DECISION

APPROVED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE AND NEED ............................................................................................................. 1-1

PLANNING AREA AND MAP................................................................................................ 1-2

ISSUES ADDRESSED............................................................................................................... 1-4

ISSUES USED TO DEVELOP ALTERNATIVES .............................................................. 1-4

ISSUES ADDRESSED IN OTHER PARTS OF THE FEIS ................................................ 1-7

ISSUES CONSIDERED BUT NOT FURTHER ANALYZED............................................ 1-8

PLANNING CRITERIA/LEGISLATIVE CONSTRAINTS................................................. 1-9

PLANNING PROCESS........................................................................................................... 1-11

RELATIONSHIP TO BLM POLICIES, PLANS, AND PROGRAMS.............................. 1-12

COLLABORATION............................................................................................................ 1-14

ADMINISTRATION OF GRAZING WITHIN GLEN CANYON NRA........................... 1-17

RELATED PLANS .................................................................................................................. 1-18

OVERALL VISION................................................................................................................. 1-19

SIGNIFICANCE AND MISSION STATEMENTS............................................................ 1-19

CHAPTER 2: THE PLAN

INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 2-1

MANAGEMENT UNITS .......................................................................................................... 2-1

COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT UNIT.............................................................................. 2-1

CORRIDORS MANAGEMENT UNIT ................................................................................ 2-3

BACK ROADS MANAGEMENT UNIT ............................................................................. 2-3

OUTBACK MANAGEMENT UNIT.................................................................................... 2-4

MANAGEMENT DECISIONS ................................................................................................ 2-4

LAND USE PLAN DECISIONS........................................................................................... 2-5

IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS...................................................................................... 2-6

DECISION TABLES................................................................................................................. 2-6

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS .......................................................................................... 2-129

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND INTERRELATIONSHIPS................................ 2-138

REQUIREMENTS FOR FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ........................ 2-138

INTERRELATIONSHIPS................................................................................................. 2-138

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT................................................................................................... 2-140
Arizona Strip Field Office Table of Contents

Approved Resource Management Plan

ii

CHAPTER 3: IMPLEMENTATION

IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE ........................................................................................ 3-1

MONITORING.......................................................................................................................... 3-1

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................... 3-11

LIST OF TABLES

CHAPTER 2: THE PLAN

Table 2.1. Air, Water, Soils (Watershed: WS)..........................................................................2-8

Table 2.2. Geology and Paleontology (GL)............................................................................2-10

Table 2.3. Vegetation and Fire and Fuels Management (VM, FM, RP).................................2-12

Table 2.4. Wildlife and Fisheries (WF) ..................................................................................2-28

Table 2.5. Special Status Species (TE) ...................................................................................2-38

Table 2.6. Cultural Resources (CL) ........................................................................................2-61

Table 2.7. Visual Resources (VR) ..........................................................................................2-63

Table 2.8. Soundscapes (SN) ..................................................................................................2-67

Table 2.9. Wilderness Characteristics (WC)...........................................................................2-67

Table 2.10. Lands and Realty (LR)...........................................................................................2-70

Table 2.11. Livestock Grazing (GM)........................................................................................2-75

Table 2.12. Minerals Management (MI)...................................................................................2-78

Table 2.13. Recreation & Visitor Services/Interpretation & Environmental Education (RR)..2-85

Table 2.14. Travel Management (TM)....................................................................................2-104

Table 2.15. Special Designations (AC, WM, HT, WR)..........................................................2-115

Table 2.16. Public Health and Safety (HM)............................................................................2-128

Table 2.17. Scientific Research (SR)......................................................................................2-128

CHAPTER 3: IMPLEMENTATION

Table 3.1: Preliminary Monitoring Strategies...........................................................................3-2
Arizona Strip Field Office Table of Contents

Approved Resource Management Plan

iii

LIST OF MAPS

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Map 1.1. Arizona Strip FO Location Map ................................................................................1-3

CHAPTER 2: THE PLAN

Map 2.1. Management Units..................................................................................................... 2-2

Map 2.2. Ecological Zones...................................................................................................... 2-26

Map 2.3. Wildland Fire Use Allocations................................................................................. 2-27

Map 2.4. Wildlife Habitat Areas............................................................................................. 2-37

Map 2.5. Vegetation Habitat Areas......................................................................................... 2-60

Map 2.6. Visual Resource Management ................................................................................. 2-66

Map 2.7. Wilderness Characteristics....................................................................................... 2-69

Map 2.8. Land Ownership and Adjustments........................................................................... 2-74

Map 2.9. Grazing Allotments.................................................................................................. 2-77

Map 2.10. Fluid Mineral Leasing Categories............................................................................ 2-80

Map 2.11. Locatable Mineral Land Classifications .................................................................. 2-81

Map 2.12. Salable Mineral Land Classifications ...................................................................... 2-82

Map 2.13. Special Recreation Management Areas................................................................... 2-99

Map 2.14. Recreation Management Zones.............................................................................. 2-100

Map 2.15. Recreation Settings (Physical)............................................................................... 2-101

Map 2.16. Recreation Settings (Social)................................................................................... 2-102

Map 2.17. Recreation Settings (Administrative)..................................................................... 2-103

Map 2.18. Travel Management Areas..................................................................................... 2-111

Map 2.19. Off-Highway Vehicle Designations....................................................................... 2-112

Map 2.20. Route Designations by Sub-Regions ..................................................................... 2-113

Map 2.21. Designated Transportation System Route Network............................................... 2-114

Map 2.22. Suitable Wild and Scenic River (Virgin River)..................................................... 2-126

Map 2.23. Areas of Critical Environmental Concern.............................................................. 2-127
Arizona Strip Field Office Table of Contents

Approved Resource Management Plan

iv

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Consultation: Portions of the Biological 

Opinion.................................................................................................................A-1

Appendix B: Arizona Standards and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management and 

Rangeland Health Implementation Status............................................................ B-1

Appendix C: Livestock Grazing Allotment Management Status.............................................. C-1

Appendix D: Livestock Grazing Allotment Acres and Animal Unit Months (AUMs) by Land 

Status....................................................................................................................D-1

Appendix E: Vegetation Treatment Tools and Methods............................................................E-1

Appendix F: Conservation Measures for Special Status Species...............................................F-1

Appendix G: Arizona Strip Field Office Oil and Gas Lease Stipulations.................................G-1

Appendix H: Area of Critical Environmental Concern Summary Table: Values, Relevance, 

and Importance Criteria........................................................................................H-1

Appendix I: Visual Resource Management Classes and Objectives for Classes.......................I-1

Appendix J: Lands Identified for Disposal................................................................................ J-1

Appendix K: Reclamation Stipulations .....................................................................................K-1

Appendix L: Minerals and Associated Land Classifications .....................................................L-1

Appendix M: Arizona Strip Mineral Material Sites.................................................................. M-1

Appendix N: Recreation Management Areas............................................................................N-1

Appendix O: Travel Management Areas (TMA), Transportation Plan Contents, and Appropriate 

Route Construction and Maintenance Standards by TMA ..................................O-1

Appendix P: List of Preparers....................................................................................................P-1

Glossary ............................................................................................................. End of Document

References Cited................................................................................................ End of Document

Index................................................................................................................... End of Document

Abbreviations and Acronyms .......................................................................... End of Document
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE AND NEED

The Arizona Strip District of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages public lands in 

the northern portions of Coconino and Mohave counties, Arizona, north and west of the 

Colorado River. On January 11, 2000, President William J. Clinton issued Presidential 

Proclamation 7265, which established Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument (Parashant). 

On November 9, 2000, Presidential Proclamation 7374 established Vermilion Cliffs National 

Monument (Vermilion). As dictated by the presidential proclamations, these two Monuments 

are to be managed under individual management plans. This leaves BLM-administered lands in 

the Arizona Strip District not within either of the Monuments, referred to as the Arizona Strip 

Field Office (FO), that also requires separate management direction, which is provided in this 

Approved Resource Management Plan (RMP). 

The designation of Parashant and Vermilion as National Monuments dictated the need for a 

revised management plan for the remaining 1.68 million acres of non-monument public lands 

administered by the Arizona Strip FO. This is because access to the Monuments, for the most 

part, lies across Arizona Strip FO lands, and some of the uses that were formerly allowed and 

permitted on Monuments lands, such as fuelwood and Christmas tree cutting or mineral materials 

permits (for sand and gravel or landscaping rock removal), can now occur only on Arizona Strip 

FO lands. As a result, this RMP, the Arizona Strip FO Approved RMP (Approved RMP), has 

been prepared by the Arizona Strip District of the BLM and revises the Arizona Strip District 

RMP (BLM 1992, as amended). It is necessary to guide management actions for the Arizona 

Strip FO by providing a set of decisions outlining management and creating a framework for 

future planning and decision making. 

Under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976, the BLM is directed to 

manage public lands on the basis of multiple use and "in a manner that will protect the quality of 

scenic, historic, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resources, and 

archaeological values." The term "multiple use" refers to the "harmonious and coordinated 

management of the various resources without permanent impairment of the productivity of the 

land and the quality of the environment." Multiple use involves managing an area for various 

benefits, recognizing that the establishment of land use priorities and exclusive uses in certain 

areas is necessary to ensure that multiple uses can occur harmoniously across a particular 

landscape.

Along with FLPMA, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 and other 

mandates provide the direction for the preparation of an RMP for the Arizona Strip FO. As 

mentioned above, the purpose of this Approved RMP is to provide both a set of decisions 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 2

outlining management direction and to create a framework for future planning and decision 

making. Its scope is necessarily broad since it is a general framework document that will guide 

the overall management of activities within the Arizona Strip FO. As in the case of any RMP, it 

is expected that there will be a future need for subsequent and more detailed planning, which will 

focus on specific geographic areas or management issues. Further NEPA documents will be 

written to analyze and implement decisions that are not fully addressed in this Approved RMP. 

In each subsequent activity plan and NEPA document, the BLM will include a description of the 

desired future conditions of the land, resources involved, analysis of potential impacts, and an 

explanation regarding how the proposed activities, as well as reasonable alternatives, would 

contribute to attaining those conditions. 

PLANNING AREA AND MAP

The Arizona Strip FO encompasses roughly 1.98 million acres located between the two 

Monuments in both Coconino and Mohave Counties: 1,679,896 acres of BLM-administered

lands, 170,165 acres of Arizona State Trust lands, and 130,962 acres of private lands (see Map 

1.1). The Arizona Strip FO also contains 41 acres of U.S. Forest Service (USFS) lands that 

make up the Tanglefoot Work Area east of Fredonia, Arizona. The communities of Fredonia, 

Littlefield, Beaver Dam, Scenic, Desert Springs, Arvada, Cane Beds, Colorado City, and 

Centennial, Arizona, are located on enclaves of private lands within the Arizona Strip FO, with 

the larger communities of St. George, Washington, Big Water, Hurricane, and Kanab, Utah and 

Mesquite, Nevada directly across state lines. Since it includes several communities within the 

Arizona Strip FO that are linked via U.S. 89A, Arizona 389, and Interstate 15, and large portions 

of the area are easily accessible via a number of unpaved county roads, the Arizona Strip FO 

receives the most human use when compared to the two Monuments. In addition to recreation 

and ranching, the Arizona Strip FO also provides for the mining of uranium, gypsum, sand and 

gravel, picture stone, and flagstone.

In 1984, Congress designated 80,629 acres of BLM lands within the Arizona Strip FO as 

wilderness. These wilderness areas include Cottonwood Point, Beaver Dam Mountains, the 

northern unit of the Paiute, and a portion of Kanab Creek. Another 3,652 acres of the Beaver 

Dam Mountains Wilderness exists directly across the state line in Utah. Most of Kanab Creek 

Wilderness is administered by the USFS. The southern half of Paiute Wilderness is in Parashant. 

The Canaan Mountain Wilderness Study Area (WSA) adjoins the Cottonwood Point Wilderness 

to the north in Utah. Most of Grand Canyon National Park that is contiguous to the Arizona 

Strip FO is proposed for wilderness designation, while some portions of the St. George FO of the 

BLM are also recommended as suitable for wilderness designation.
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 3

Map 1.1. Arizona Strip FO Location Map
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 4

ISSUES ADDRESSED

Publication in the Federal Register of the Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare a 

RMP/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Arizona Strip FO on April 24, 2002, 

initiated a 90-day public scoping and comment period. Following this, the BLM published a 

newsletter and held 11 open houses in 2002 to encourage public input on the future management 

of the Arizona Strip FO. Ten cooperating agencies and a dozen other Federal and state agencies 

provided information and input into development of the RMP/EIS. From all this input, the BLM 

developed four conceptual alternatives that were presented to the public via newsletters and five 

open houses. These preliminary alternative public meetings were held in 2003. A 90-day public 

comment period on the Draft Plan/EIS was initiated on December 16, 2005 followed by release 

of the Proposed Plan/Final EIS (FEIS) on March 2, 2007. Information from these meetings, the 

cooperating agencies and interested state and Federal agencies, and the public was then used to 

develop this Approved RMP.

ISSUES USED TO DEVELOP ALTERNATIVES

One of the most important outcomes of the scoping process was the identification of significant 

issues that were addressed in the Approved RMP. For planning purposes, an “issue” is defined 

as a matter of controversy, dispute, or general concern over resource management activities, the 

environment, or land uses. In essence, issues help determine what decisions were made and 

analyzed in the Proposed Plan/FEIS.

Based on the scoping comments received and their subsequent analysis and evaluation, five 

major planning issues were identified as being within the scope of this planning effort, which 

were then addressed and analyzed in the associated EIS. All of these issues center on the larger 

question of just how much human activity should be allowed while still providing the mandated 

level of resource protection. The five issues are presented below, followed by a short description 

of why each is significant and the management decisions that they required. 

Issue 1: How will transportation and access be managed?

Transportation and access (i.e., travel management) emerged from the scoping process as the 

primary issue for the public, and is closely tied to the other issues addressed. A network of 

routes currently exists throughout the Arizona Strip FO. Some people believe closing a number 

of routes and limiting vehicular access would provide the best protection of resources in the 

Arizona Strip FO. Others think all existing routes should remain open for recreational and 

resource uses. 

While many route inventories for the main transportation routes in the sub-regions of the Arizona 

Strip FO were completed during development of this Approved RMP (see Map 2.21), some
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 5

inventories of routes in the field office remain to be completed and were outside the scope of this

planning effort. The inventory and subsequent route evaluation for the Ferry Swale sub-region, 

that portion of the Arizona Strip FO between Vermilion and Glen Canyon National Recreation 

Area (NRA), was completed and the routes within that sub-region are designated with the 

signing of the Record of Decision (ROD) that accompanies this Approved RMP. 

Once the route inventories are completed for the remainder of the sub-regions in the Arizona 

Strip FO, route evaluations and eventual designations will then be conducted following the same 

procedure used for designating routes in Parashant, Vermilion, and the Ferry Swale area. Public 

participation will be a crucial part of the route evaluation process for the Arizona Strip FO, just 

as it was for the Ferry Swale area and the Monuments.

Decisions about restricting or improving access are addressed in Chapter 2 of this Approved 

RMP. Proposed travel management implementation decisions and associated maps for the Ferry 

Swale area are also detailed in Chapter 2.

Issue 2: How will areas with wilderness characteristics be managed? 

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

characteristics in the Arizona Strip FO. Many brought up the concept of additional wilderness 

designations during the public scoping period. Some felt that additional wilderness designations 

in the Arizona Strip FO would be the best way to protect resources. Others were not in favor of 

additional wilderness designations because they felt such actions would prevent the majority of 

visitors from accessing the remote sections of the field office, especially those that enjoy 

motorized forms of recreation. Such arguments, however, are outside the scope of this Approved 

RMP as only Congress has the authority to designate new wilderness areas. 

The BLM historically has had the authority to inventory, assess, and recommend suitable public 

lands as WSAs; however, recent guidance clarified that this authority expired in 1991. With the 

passage of FLPMA in 1976, the BLM had 15 years to inventory and identify lands suitable for 

designation as wilderness by Congress. That inventory and review was completed in 1991 and 

submitted to Congress in 1993. Many of the WSAs identified Bureau-wide are still managed 

today under an Interim Management Policy (IMP). With the passage of the Arizona Wilderness 

Act of 1984, any WSAs in Arizona not included as part of a statutory wilderness by Congress 

were “released” by Congress from the IMP. The Arizona Strip FO contains no WSAs from that 

15-year period. 

In 2001, the BLM issued new policies in the Wilderness Inventory and Study Procedure 

Handbook (H-6310-1). The handbook reiterated the BLM’s authority to inventory, assess, and 

designate public lands as WSAs. These lands would then be available at any time for Congress 

to consider for designation as wilderness areas. The state of Utah and others challenged the 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 6

authority of the Department of the Interior (DOI)/BLM to designate and manage new (post 1993) 

WSAs as wildernesses, arguing that BLM completed the wilderness suitability process for public 

lands with the submission of recommendations to Congress in 1993. In the ensuing Utah 

Wilderness Settlement (April 2003), the DOI/BLM agreed that FLPMA does not allow 

identification or protection of new WSAs after 1993. In 2003, the BLM formally rescinded the 

Wilderness Inventory and Study Procedures Handbook. Therefore, in this planning process, 

additional BLM lands cannot be considered or recommended for designation as WSAs. 

In September 2003, the BLM provided new guidance in Instruction Memorandum (IM) 2003-

274 and IM 2003-275, Change 1. Specifically, IM 2003-274, Implementation of the Settlement 

of Utah v. Norton Regarding Wilderness Study, applied the terms of the Utah Wilderness 

Settlement Bureau-wide. Additionally, IM 2003-275, Change 1, Consideration of Wilderness 

Characteristics in Land Use Plans, provides guidance for planners and the public for assessing 

areas that may exist in essentially natural condition, or landscapes where the opportunities to 

experience solitude or engage in primitive and unconfined recreation may be outstanding. IM 

2003-275, Change 1, also provides guidance for making decisions about maintaining these 

values where they are reasonably present or have sufficient value and need, and are practical to 

manage. The “non-impairment standard” of FLPMA Section 603 and the BLM IMP for WSAs 

are not applied as measures to protect naturalness, solitude, and primitive recreation. 

Issue 3: How will Arizona Strip FO resources be protected?

There are valuable natural and cultural resources within the Arizona Strip FO in need of 

protection. Decisions for protecting these resources, including additional Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern (ACECs) for protecting natural and cultural resources, are identified in 

this Approved RMP.

Issue 4: How will livestock grazing be addressed?

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

ranged from eliminating livestock grazing in many parts of the Arizona Strip FO to supporting

all grazing activities in the field office. Those in the middle supported eliminating livestock 

grazing only in environmentally sensitive areas.

All land uses, including livestock grazing, were incorporated into the concept of overall 

environmental health. Modifications to current grazing systems are detailed in Chapter 2.

Issue 5: How will people’s recreation activities be managed?

Lands in the Arizona Strip FO are used for a variety of recreational activities, including 

exploring, sightseeing, hiking, backpacking, camping, hunting, off-highway vehicle (OHV) use 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 7

on designated routes or “open OHV areas,” and mountain bike riding. Given growth projections 

for communities in the southwestern U.S. and the increased participation of people in recreation 

pursuits on public lands over time, ineffective management of visitor activities is recognized as 

potentially having profound environmental effects on Arizona Strip FO lands. These possible 

effects, along with potential user conflicts, make appropriate management of these activities 

crucial to protecting Arizona Strip FO resources.

During the scoping process, the public frequently referred to the important relationship between 

the remoteness of the Arizona Strip FO and the quality of visitor experiences. The special 

recreation management areas and recreation management zones in Chapter 2 of the Approved 

RMP detail how land managers decided where and what types of recreation-tourism markets 

should be targeted for more structured types of recreation opportunities. They also decided what 

kinds of custodial management are needed for unstructured, dispersed recreation found in the 

extensive recreation management areas. 

Decisions, such as where and what kind of interpretation and signage to provide, how to 

minimize potential user conflicts, and what types of recreation settings should be maintained in 

specific areas, are important elements addressed in Chapter 2. For identified markets, Chapter 2

includes more specific decisions for various recreation management zones that address 

maintaining or enhancing the public benefits, experiences, and activities and settings each zone 

provides.

ISSUES ADDRESSED IN OTHER PARTS OF THE FEIS

In addition to the five issues identified during public scoping, the planning team identified two 

management concerns that also need to be addressed regarding restoration of degraded

ecosystems and consideration of the local communities and human use in the Arizona Strip FO, 

which are presented below. These concerns are presented below followed by a short description 

of why each is significant and the management decisions that support them. 

Management Concern 1: How will degraded ecosystems be restored? 

Restoration of degraded ecosystems is an important management concern. Disruption of the 

natural fire regime has caused the degradation of ecosystems within the Arizona Strip FO (e.g., 

grasslands are being overrun by shrubs and ponderosa pine forests are unnaturally dense). The 

use of such techniques as mechanized thinning and prescribed fire can help restore degraded 

ecosystems. The actions to assist in restoring these degraded ecosystems are detailed in Chapter 

2 and the possible vegetation treatment tools and methods are described in Appendix E.
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 8

Management concern 2: How will the human factors in the Arizona Strip FO be 

considered? 

While the focus of this RMP is on the area’s natural and cultural resources and on the uses of 

these resources, the human or social factors were also considered. While largely uninhabited, the 

Arizona Strip FO surrounds some small communities dependent upon public lands for deriving 

certain economic, personal, family, community, and environmental benefits. These communities 

include Beaver Dam, Colorado City, Fredonia, Littlefield, Desert Springs, and Scenic, Arizona. 

Other small and mid-sized communities and one urban area located just outside the field office

boundaries are also closely connected to the public lands in Arizona. These include Page, 

Kaibab Village, and Moccasin, Arizona; Mesquite, Nevada; and Big Water, Hildale, Hurricane, 

Washington, Kanab, and St. George, Utah. 

Public safety is also a concern. Sections in Chapter 2 on health and safety; recreation; and air, 

soil, and water identify management approaches to assist with public safety.

Rapid population growth on private lands in the region will also affect the natural and cultural 

resources and future uses on the Arizona Strip. Decisions identified in Chapter 2 address actions 

necessary to maintain or protect the resources and uses in the Arizona Strip FO. Monitoring and 

adaptive management will assist the BLM in modifying some uses, if conditions exceed 

acceptable levels. Management approaches to be used in the Arizona Strip FO are detailed in 

Chapter 2. 

ISSUES CONSIDERED BUT NOT FURTHER ANALYZED

While all issues identified during the public scoping process were considered by the BLM, not 

all were further analyzed. These include issues that were beyond the scope of the EIS, mainly 

because they did not meet the purpose and need of the Approved RMP. Other issues are not 

further analyzed in this Approved RMP because they are addressed through administrative or 

policy action.

Issues Beyond the Scope of the EIS

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) guidelines for implementing NEPA require 

Federal agencies to analyze all “reasonable” alternatives that substantially meet the purpose and 

need for this Approved RMP. The purpose of this Approved RMP is to provide for management 

of the Arizona Strip FO within the provisions of the proclamation and to meet the requirements 

of FLPMA and other laws and regulations. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 9

The following specific alternatives, or actions that could be components of alternatives, were 

suggested but not analyzed or carried forward because they did not fulfill the requirements and 

needs of this Approved RMP.

Recommendations for BLM Wilderness Study Areas

The Arizona Wilderness Coalition and members of the public provided recommendations on 

WSAs in the Arizona Strip FO. In addition, the planning team was working toward making 

recommendations for WSAs early in the planning process. However, guidance issued in 2003 

clarified that the BLM’s authority to designate WSAs expired in 1993, resulting in the 

termination in any attempts to designate new WSAs. The BLM has, however, assessed 

wilderness characteristics (naturalness, solitude, and primitive recreation) on BLM-administered

lands in the field office and has management actions regarding where, how, and to what extent 

these characteristics will be managed in the Approved RMP (see Chapter 2 and previous 

discussion in this chapter on pages 1-5 and 1-6). 

The Arizona Wilderness Coalition also provided comments and proposed management 

prescriptions on areas managed to maintain wilderness characteristics. Including this 

information of these prescriptions would be contrary to BLM policy as outlined in BLM IM 

2003-274 and IM 2003-275 and more recent guidance in IM AZ-2005-007, Guidelines for 

achieving consistency in ongoing and future Arizona Land Use Planning efforts.

PLANNING CRITERIA/LEGISLATIVE CONSTRAINTS

Bureau of Land Management planning regulations (43 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1610) 

require preparation of planning criteria to guide development of all RMPs. Planning criteria 

provide the principles that guide and direct the development of the Approved RMP and influence 

all aspects of the planning process, including inventory and data collection, alternative 

development, and impact analysis, as well as the selection of a preferred alternative, followed by 

the selection of the Proposed Plan and the final selection of the Approved RMP. In effect, 

planning criteria ensure the tailoring of plans to the identified issues and the avoidance of 

unnecessary data collection and analysis. The basis of determining planning criteria includes 

applicable laws, agency guidance, public comment, data analysis, professional judgment, and 

coordination with other Federal, state, and local governments and American Indian tribes. 

The planning criteria used in developing the Approved RMP for the Arizona Strip FO are as 

follows:

This Approved RMP was completed in compliance with FLPMA. Provisions of the 

Endangered Species Act, NEPA, the National Historic Preservation Act, the Clean Water 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 10

Act, and other Federal laws and executive orders and management policy requirements were

also met.

 

This Approved RMP and associated ROD includes data and maps that provide information 

on the Arizona Strip FO.

Valid existing management decisions from previous plans, if appropriate, may be carried 

forward into this Approved RMP or subsequent activity and/or implementation plans. 

Decisions from the following plans were considered and may be modified or amended, as 

appropriate: Arizona Strip RMP (BLM 1992) as amended, Mojave Desert Plan Amendment 

(BLM 1998), Paiute and Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness Management Plan (BLM 1990), 

Cottonwood Point Wilderness Management Plan (BLM 1991), Habitat Management Plans,

and the Arizona Strip Bighorn Sheep Management Plan (BLM and Arizona Game and Fish 

Department [AGFD] 2001). 

The Approved RMP is consistent with officially approved or adopted resource-related plans, 

policies, and programs of other Federal agencies, state and local governments, and Indian 

tribes so long as such plans, policies, and programs are consistent with the purposes, policies, 

and programs of Federal laws and regulations.

Terms and conditions and reasonable and prudent alternatives from all applicable Final 

Biological Opinions will be implemented. Conservation measures are included.

Cooperating agency status was encouraged for affected Federal, State, and local governments 

and Indian tribes. The environmental analysis input and proposals of Cooperating Agencies 

was used to the maximum extent possible consistent with BLM responsibilities (43 CFR 

1501.6 (a) (2).

An adaptive management approach will be followed to achieve desired outcomes. 

Monitoring outlined in the Approved RMP will be used to determine if desired outcomes at 

the land use plan level are being achieved. If not, implementation actions and/or allowable 

uses will be modified to achieve land use plan objectives. 

The Approved RMP emphasizes ecological restoration and preservation of natural and 

cultural resources. 

The statewide land health standards, established by the Arizona Resource Advisory Council 

and approved by the Secretary of Interior, will be used to evaluate all surface disturbing 

activities on public lands where BLM administers grazing privileges. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 11

This Approved RMP does not identify any public lands for designation as WSAs. However, 

the BLM has identified lands that will be managed to maintained wilderness characteristics 

so that such lands remain in a natural condition and provide outstanding opportunities for 

solitude and primitive and unconfined types of recreation activities. 

Arizona Strip FO lands were designated as “open,” “limited” or “closed” to motorized and 

mechanized vehicle uses. As the availability of route inventory data allowed, only those 

decisions concerning specific routes in the “limited” areas of the Ferry Swale area were made 

in the land use plan. Decisions about specific routes for other areas in the Arizona Strip FO 

with insufficient inventory will be deferred until route inventory is completed. A final travel 

management network for the Arizona Strip FO will be achieved within 5 years of the ROD.

This Approved RMP directly involved American Indian tribal governments by providing 

strategies for the protection of recognized sacred and traditional uses and sites.

The lifestyles of area residents, including the activities of grazing, hunting, other resource 

uses, and recreation, are recognized in the Approved RMP. Much of the area’s historic value 

is connected with ranching operations, both past and present.

 

The Approved RMP does not address statutory wilderness boundary adjustments. 

This Approved RMP sets forth a framework for managing recreation and commercial 

activities in order to produce a variety of beneficial outcomes gained through safe and 

enjoyable visitor experiences and activities that require appropriate natural and community 

landscapes.

This Approved RMP used the Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing 

Management to ensure appropriate grazing practices are followed to protect watershed 

integrity and habitats for plant and wildlife species on public lands. 

The Approved RMP considered public input, interests, and values; past and present uses of 

public land and adjacent land; public benefits of providing goods and services; environmental 

impacts; social and economic values; public safety; and ecosystem restoration. 

PLANNING PROCESS

This Approved RMP was developed in conjunction with the Approved Plans for Parashant and 

Vermilion. The overall planning process began in February 2001 when the BLM formed an 

interdisciplinary planning team, based in St. George, Utah (see Appendix P for the list of 

preparers). Since the NPS manages a portion of Parashant, the NPS acted as a joint-lead agency 

with the BLM in writing the Approved Plan for that Monument. While the history of the 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 12

planning process involves the other two planning areas (Parashant and Vermilion), the discussion 

here focuses solely on the development of the Approved RMP for the Arizona Strip FO. 

The interdisciplinary planning team for the creation of this Approved RMP was comprised of 

BLM staff and resource specialists. The planning team met numerous times beginning in 2001 

to gather background information, identify goals and objectives, examine resource issues, 

develop alternatives, and write/review the Draft Plan/EIS and Proposed Plan/FEIS for this

Approved RMP. In addition, a series of Community Based Partnership and Stewardship courses 

were held in northern Arizona and southern Utah in which the public provided early information 

and communication regarding the Arizona Strip FO. The NOI to prepare an EIS for this 

Approved RMP for the Arizona Strip FO (as well as the other two planning areas) was published 

in the Federal Register on April 24, 2002. Following this, the BLM hosted a series of public 

open houses in 2002 and 2003 to solicit public comment on the scoping issues and preliminary 

alternatives for the Draft Plan/EIS. 

The Draft Plan/EIS presented a No Action Alternative (Alternative A) and four action 

alternatives (Alternatives B, C, D, and E). Alternative E was BLM's Preferred Alternative 

because it balanced human use/influence with resource protection. The Notice of Availability 

(NOA) of the Draft Plan/EIS was published on November 16, 2005, initiating a 90-day public 

review. The BLM also held a series of open house meetings to solicit public comment on the 

Draft Plan/EIS in January of 2006. 

The Proposed Plan/FEIS, published in January 2007, responded to public comment and 

cooperative agency review of the Draft Plan/EIS through numerous revisions and modifications, 

as well as provided direct responses to comments. In this fashion, the BLM's Preferred 

Alternative in the Draft Plan/EIS was modified and presented as the Proposed Plan (Alternative 

E) in the Proposed Plan/FEIS. The NOA for the Proposed Plan/FEIS was published in the 

Federal Register on March 2, 2007, which opened the 30-day public protest period in accordance 

with 43 CFR Part 1610.5-2. The BLM received seven protest letters during this period. The 

BLM Director addressed all protests without making significant changes to the Proposed Plan; 

however, the protests received did lead to minor adjustments, corrections, and clarifications were 

made as a result of the protests received. This Approved RMP is one of three management plans 

that were developed from the Proposed Plan/FEIS that guides future management actions in their 

respective units.

RELATIONSHIP TO BLM POLICIES, PLANS, AND PROGRAMS

This section describes the relationship of this Approved RMP to other BLM policies and 

programs, the role of collaboration efforts in the planning process, the consideration of related 

plans (state, local, and tribal), and policies and decisions that have affected the planning process.
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 13

Under NEPA, Federal agencies are mandated to prepare EISs for major Federal actions. This 

Approved RMP conforms to the CEQ regulations for implementing NEPA requirements (40 

CFR 1500-1508). 

The BLM planning process, which is guided by NEPA, FLPMA and the planning guidance 

contained in 43 CFR 1600, involves an interdisciplinary approach and provides opportunities for 

public involvement and interagency coordination. 

Management plans ensure that the BLM manages public lands in accordance with the intent of 

Congress as stated in FLPMA, under the principles of multiple use and sustained yield. As 

required by FLPMA, public lands must be managed in a manner that:

a) Protects the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and 

atmospheric, water, and cultural resources and values

b) Where appropriate, preserves and protects certain public lands in their natural condition 

and provides food and habitat for fish and wildlife and domestic animals

c) Provides for outdoor recreation and human occupancy and use by encouraging 

collaboration and public participation through the planning process. 

In addition, public lands must be managed in a manner that recognizes the Nation’s need for 

domestic sources for minerals, food, timber, and fiber from public lands. 

In addition to the Federal mandates and guidelines mentioned above, the planning team 

considered a number of existing management plans, programmatic documents, and standards and 

guidelines in the preparation of this Approved RMP. These include the following:

Land Use Plans and Amendments

Arizona Strip District RMP (BLM 1992) 

Arizona Strip RMP Mojave Desert Amendment (BLM 1998) 

Arizona Statewide Land Use Plan Amendment for Fire, Fuels, and Air Quality 

Management Finding of No Significant Impact and Environmental Assessment (BLM 

2003)

Legislative EIS

Arizona Statewide Wild and Scenic Rivers Legislative EIS (BLM 1994)

Activity (Implementation) Level Plans

Shivwits Resource Area Implementation Plan for the Arizona Strip District Approved 

RMP (BLM 1992)

Vermilion Resource Area Implementation Plan for the Arizona Strip District Approved 

RMP (BLM 1992)
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 14

Paiute and Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness Management Plan (BLM 1990)

Cottonwood Point Wilderness Management Plan (BLM 1991)

Arizona Strip Desert Bighorn Sheep Management Plan (BLM and AGFD 2001)

Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) Final Recovery Plan (U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 2002)

Virgin River Resource Management and Recovery Program (USFWS 2000)

Biological Opinion for the Arizona Strip RMP-Mojave Amendment (USFWS 1998)

Recovery Plan for the California Condor (USFWS 1996)

Virgin River Fishes Recovery Plan (USFWS 1995)

Desert Tortoise (Mojave Population) Recovery Plan (USFWS 1994)

Programmatic NEPA Documents 

BLM Vegetation Treatment FEIS (BLM 1991)

Policy and Rules

Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing Administration 

(BLM 1997)

These documents were examined not only to assure appropriate integration and compliance, but 

also to identify information still appropriate for inclusion in this RMP and/or decisions that are 

still valid and could be carried forward. Activity plans that have been tiered off these plans have 

also been considered in this planning effort.

COLLABORATION

A variety of Federal, state, county, local, and tribal groups played a vital role in this planning 

process by attending meetings, providing databases and general information, conducting peer 

reviews, and assisting with the development of the management alternatives presented in this 

Approved RMP. 

Intergovernmental, Interagency, and Tribal Relationships

The CEQ requirements 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 USC 

4331(a), 4332(2)). In support of this mandate, the BLM planning team invited a broad range of 

local, county, state, tribal, and Federal agencies to attend a series of meetings to develop 

Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) 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 planning documents. Although they are 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 15

time-limited documents, MOUs describe the roles and responsibilities of the BLM and the 

cooperating agencies during the planning process. Invitations to become formal cooperators 

were sent to more than 200 agencies, communities, and tribes. 

Ten cooperating agencies worked with the BLM to provide verbal and/or written comments 

during the planning process, which helped to develop this Approved RMP. These cooperating 

agencies were concerned with the management of the resources and uses in the Arizona Strip FO

and provided planning information on various planning topics, including Geographic 

Information System data. The following counties, communities, tribe, and state agencies signed 

MOUs to be cooperating agencies with the BLM for this planning effort: 

Coconino County, Arizona

Mohave County, Arizona

Kane County, Utah

Washington County, Utah

Fredonia, Arizona

Colorado City, Arizona

Kaibab Paiute Tribe

AGFD

U.S. Federal Highway Administration

Arizona Department of Transportation

In addition, representatives from other interested Federal and state agencies and one tribe were 

provided planning information and were given the opportunity to comment on preliminary drafts 

of the RMP/EIS. Some attended the cooperating agency meetings and provided verbal and/or 

written comments. These entities were as follows:

Arizona State Land Department

NPS: Grand Canyon National Park, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, Pipe Spring 

National Monument

BLM: Kanab Field Office, Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, St. George 

Field Office, Las Vegas Field Office

Department of Defense, Air Force Regional Environmental Office, San Francisco, 

California

USFWS, Arizona Ecological Services Field Office, Flagstaff and Phoenix, Arizona

USFS; North Kaibab Ranger District, Kaibab National Forest

Hopi Tribe

The planning team also initiated consultation with American Indian tribes and bands who have 

oral traditions and historical or cultural concerns relating to the Arizona Strip FO, or who are 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 16

documented as having occupied or used portions of the field office during prehistoric or historic 

times. In January 2002, the BLM initiated consultation with 14 tribes or bands, which included

five bands within the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah and six chapters within the Navajo Nation. Of 

these, six tribes and six chapters use or have concerns regarding the resources of the Arizona 

Strip FO. All of the consulted tribes or bands currently live on or near the Arizona Strip or have 

historic ties to the area. Some continue to use the resources in the Arizona Strip FO. These 

tribes, bands, and chapters include:

Chemehuevi Indian Tribe

Colorado River Indian Tribe

Havasupai Indian Tribe

Hopi Tribe

Hualapai Indian Tribe

Kaibab Band of Paiutes

Las Vegas Indian Center

Las Vegas Paiute Tribe

Moapa Band of Paiutes

Navajo Nation (Cameron, Coppermine, Bodaway/Gap, Tuba City, LeChee, and Coalmine 

Chapters)

Pahrump Band of Paiutes

Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah (Indian Peak, Cedar, Shivwits, Koosharem, and Kanosh Band

of Paiutes)

Pueblo of Zuni

San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe

Tribal members expressed concern for the natural and cultural resources in the Arizona Strip FO, 

access to and use of these resources, opportunities to expand reservation boundaries onto public 

lands, and management of these resources on public lands. Kaibab Paiute band members 

expressed concern about access and subsequent vandalism on the reservation from public lands.

The Bureau of Applied Research and Anthropology at the University of Arizona in Tucson 

conducted a Southern Paiute ethnographic and place name study on the Arizona Strip in 

conjunction with this planning effort (Stoffle et al. 2004, 2005). 

The BLM administers livestock grazing and minerals in Glen Canyon NRA, subject to Glen 

Canyon NRA policy and enabling legislation (see discussion below on administration of 

livestock grazing within the NRA). The planning team met several times with Glen Canyon 

NRA staff and received input from them regarding the management of livestock grazing, 

minerals, and specific route designations near Glen Canyon NRA boundaries.
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 17

Other Stakeholder Relationships

Various other groups also played a vital role in the planning process. Their participation was 

informal and infrequent. One of these groups, the Arizona Strip Alliance, was formed in the late 

1990s in response to the early discussions regarding the establishment of the Monuments on the 

Arizona Strip. Local communities, counties, and agency representatives from southern Utah and 

northern Arizona united in order to plan on a regional scale. Employees from BLM's planning 

team attended Alliance meetings and kept members up-to-date on current planning efforts.

The Arizona Wilderness Coalition, Grand Canyon Chapter of the Sierra Club, Wilderness 

Society, Grand Canyon Wildlands Council, and Grand Canyon Trust are other groups that played 

an important role in the planning process. Grand Canyon Trust acquired the Kane and Two Mile 

Ranches midway through the planning effort and provided recommendations on future 

management of livestock grazing and the natural and cultural resources within the Arizona Strip 

FO. These groups all provided major contributions in the development of this Approved RMP

including public scoping comments recommending a transportation plan and additional WSAs

and ACECs, information on the effects of transportation systems on wildlife, and other planning 

and resource information and recommendations. 

In order to address the specific needs of wildlife, fish, and special status plants and animals, a 

group of biologists and botanists met to develop specific guidance and direction to meet those 

needs for this Approved RMP. Team participants included staff from AGFD, USFWS, Lake 

Mead NRA, North Kaibab Ranger District of the USFS, and Arizona Strip District of the BLM. 

On occasion, representatives from the Nature Conservancy and the Grand Canyon Wildlands 

Council also participated. Major contributions from this team included the development of a 

comprehensive resource assessment for wildlife and special status species, background 

information on the biology of a variety of species affected by the Approved RMP, and a set of 

proactive decisions appropriate to each of the alternatives. The team also provided comments 

and recommendations on route designations, ACECs, vegetation management, and other sections 

of the Approved RMP.

ADMINISTRATION OF GRAZING WITHIN GLEN CANYON NATIONAL 

RECREATION AREA

Glen Canyon NRA was established on October 27, 1972, under Public Law (P.L.) 92–593. In 

establishing Glen Canyon NRA, Congress directed that, “The administration of...grazing leases 

within the recreation area shall be by the BLM. The same policies followed by the BLM in 

issuing and administering...grazing leases on other lands under its jurisdiction shall be followed 

in regard to lands within the boundaries of the recreation area, subject to provisions of Section 

3(a) and 4 of this Act.” The BLM administers grazing on the NRA subject to this enabling 

legislation and in accordance with the NRA General Management Plan, Grazing Management 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 18

Plan, and interagency agreements and MOUs. The Arizona Strip FO administers livestock 

grazing on a portion of one allotment that occurs on public land and within Glen Canyon NRA:

the Lees Ferry (Soap Creek) Allotment.

RELATED PLANS

Title II, Section 202 of FLPMA provides guidance for the BLM’s planning process to coordinate 

planning efforts with American Indian tribes, other Federal departments and agencies, and 

agencies of state and local governments. To accomplish these directives, the BLM has kept 

abreast of state and local plans, assured that consideration is given to such plans, and worked 

with these other entities to avoid inconsistencies among their various plans. Section 202 of 

FLPMA goes on to state in Subsection (c)(9) that “[L]and use plans of the Secretary under this 

section shall be consistent with state and local plans to the maximum extent he [sic] finds 

consistent with Federal law and the purposes of this Act.”

In keeping with the above mandates, members of the planning team reviewed the Federal, 

county, and municipal plans listed below for consistency:

Coconino County, Arizona, Comprehensive Plan (Coconino County 2003)

Kane County, Utah, General Plan (Kane County 1998)

Mohave County, Arizona, Comprehensive Plan (Mohave County 2003)

Washington County, Utah, General Plan (Washington County 1994)

Glen Canyon NRA RMP (1986)

Glen Canyon NRA GMP (1979, reprinted 1991)

Grand Canyon National Park General Management Plan (NPS 1995)

Colorado River Management Plan (NPS 2006)

Kaibab National Forest Land Management Plan (USFS 1996)

Las Vegas BLM RMP (BLM 1998)

Dixie Resource Area RMP (BLM 1998)

Town of Colorado City, Arizona, General Plan (HDR 2002)

St. George, Utah, General Plan (St. George City 2002)

Fredonia, Arizona, General Plan (Fredonia Town 1994)

Mesquite, Nevada, Master Plan (1994) and Updates (2007)

AGFD Strategic Plan (AGFD 2006)

OVERALL VISION

A vision, as used in this context, is an ideal to strive for which is not quantifiable or set to a 

specific time frame. A goal is a statement of a desired outcome that often has quantifiable 

measures and established time frames for achievement.
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 19

The vision for the Arizona Strip FO is to retain, where it currently exists, the present natural and 

socially remote nature of the field office while still allowing compatible human use to occur 

within “the place where the West stays wild.”

SIGNIFICANCE AND MISSION STATEMENTS

The BLM has developed significance and mission statements for the Arizona Strip FO based on 

management principals identified by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 

1976, as amended. Significance statements address what makes the area unique while mission 

statements reflect ideal conditions that managers should strive to attain. 

Significance

A variety of resources on the Arizona Strip FO lands is significant from a regional and national 

perspective. 

The Arizona Strip FO contains a long and rich human history spanning at least 12,000 years. 

These lands contain irreplaceable archaeological resources that are significant because of their 

good condition, scientific potential, and historic and cultural importance. Opportunities exist for 

study, preservation, and interpretation of these resources.

Arizona Strip FO lands are rich in historic resources from the past 150 years such as ranch 

structures and corrals, fences, water tanks, mines, and historic routes. These structures exist in 

nearly their original context. They provide a unique opportunity for public interpretation, 

appreciation, and education of the historical and social significance of these early lifestyles. 

These lands contain remote, wide-open landscapes of incredible beauty, with unique geologic 

features that have remained essentially unchanged through time.

The Arizona Strip FO is located at the junction of two physiographic units (Basin and Range and 

Colorado Plateau) and three floristic provinces (the Colorado Plateau, Mojave Desert, and Great 

Basin).

The area includes fragile and healthy ecosystems ranging from the Mojave Desert to pinyonjuniper and ponderosa pine forests. Opportunities exist to restore vital habitats and study 

ecosystems. 

Much of the area includes broad expanses of pinyon-juniper woodlands that provide 

opportunities for harvest of woodland products such as firewood, posts, and Christmas trees. 

Opportunities also exist for collection of native seeds and plants.
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 20

The area supports sustainable populations of a full range of native wildlife and plant species. 

The majority of the special status species in the Arizona Strip FO is on the edge of their 

geographic range and surviving in one of the largest remaining blocks of relatively undisturbed 

habitat available to them.

Recreation opportunities abound that produce a variety of personal, familial, community, 

economic, and environmental benefits from visitors enjoying outdoor experiences while engaged 

in activities such as hiking, biking, backpacking, camping, sightseeing, driving for pleasure, 

hunting, wildlife viewing, geo-caching, and OHV driving and exploring .

Livestock grazing and related ranching activities occur over most of Arizona Strip FO lands. 

Traditional ways of life are preserved, as well as economic benefits to local communities.

The area contains broad expanses of pinyon-juniper- and sage-covered plateaus and tributary 

canyons leading to the north rim of the Grand Canyon.

Much of the Arizona Strip FO is open to mineral development. Uranium deposits are found in 

breccia pipe features across the Arizona Strip. The lands are also suitable for gypsum, sand and 

gravel, picture stone, and flagstone collection.

High quality, night sky viewscapes occur across the Arizona Strip FO.

Unique desert riparian areas offer places of high biological diversity and a rich variety of native 

wildlife species. Other ecosystems also offer a rich variety of native wildlife species.

These lands support ecological processes that provide opportunities to study physical and natural 

systems.

The Arizona Strip FO offers opportunities for community expansion and other development in 

and adjacent to local communities.

The lands contain remote landscapes, much of which remain essentially unchanged through time 

and exemplify “the place where the West stays wild.”

Mission

The goal of Arizona Strip FO management is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of 

the public lands and resources for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations, with 

multiple uses being the primary emphasis of management. This will be accomplished in a 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 1: Introduction

Approved Resource Management Plan

1 - 21

cooperative and cost-effective manner by working jointly with state, county, local and Federal 

agencies and with tribes, communities, universities, researchers, and the interested public.

Remote natural and social settings are managed to preserve unspoiled landscapes, where they 

exist, while providing opportunities for people, communities, and the environment to benefit 

from visitors experiencing adventure, beautiful vistas, retreat from the pressures of modern life, 

and a sense of discovery through a variety of appropriate and sustainable backcountry activities. 

Another goal is to serve the needs of the American people under principles of multiple use and 

sustained yield (FLPMA Sec. 302 (a), see also FLPMA Sec. 102(7)). Management balances 

recreational, community, commercial, scientific, historical, and cultural interests with long-term 

protection of renewable and nonrenewable resources. These resources include diverse vegetative 

communities and unique habitats with timber, minerals, watersheds, fish, wildlife, and 

wilderness areas encompassing a host of natural, scenic, scientific, recreational, and cultural 

values. In managing and protecting these resources, the BLM also recognizes public needs for 

energy, defense, minerals, food, communication, wood products, rights-of-way, community 

lands, forage, and fiber. 

The Arizona Strip FO’s “Blueprint for the Future” consists of six goals:

1. Maintain healthy ecosystems, with emphasis on recovery and protection of special status 

species and preservation of cultural values, providing for economic and social benefits. 

2. Serve current and future publics in their use and enjoyment of the Arizona Strip FO.

3. Promote collaboration with agencies, communities, tribes, and groups.

4. Invite and support open dialogue with the public. 

5. Inform and educate the public about resources and wise uses of such resources.

6. Assist the public in benefiting from safe, enjoyable experiences and activities on public 

lands.
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 1 

CHAPTER 2: THE PLAN 

INTRODUCTION 

This chapter describes desired future conditions (DFCs) and actions to fulfill the management 

direction discussed in Chapter 1. It is arranged under the headings of Management Units, 

Management Decisions, Decision Tables (the decisions), Administrative Actions, Environmental 

Analysis and Interrelationships, and Public Involvement. The management units described 

below were used to guide development of the management decisions made in the Arizona Strip 

Field Office (FO). 

MANAGEMENT UNITS 

Management units are geographic areas with similar resource management goals (see Map 2.1). 

Four management units (Community, Corridors, Back Roads, and Outback) guide land use plan 

decisions in specific geographic areas with similar landscapes, resources, and resource uses in 

the Arizona Strip FO. 

The polygons that outline the location of the four management units are identical to the travel 

management areas (TMAs; see Map 2.18). The corresponding TMAs for each management unit 

are shown below in parentheses after the management unit name. Travel Management Areas, 

however, describe areas delineated for varying types of access, while management units are not 

land use allocations or decisions. This does not diminish their value as management tools as 

they assisted in better understanding the differing areas and associated uses and resources in the 

Arizona Strip FO. 

Improvements (facilities or projects) associated with valid, existing rights and permitted uses can 

occur in any management unit, though the influence they have on the landscape character may 

vary greatly. Facilities include, but are not limited to transmission lines, communications 

facilities, and kiosks. Projects can include, but are not limited to corrals, catchments, pipelines, 

fences, wells, and troughs. 

COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT UNIT (RURAL TRAVEL MANAGEMENT AREA) 

Public lands within the Community Management Unit provide room for community growth and 

development. These lands also offer the widest variety of recreation opportunities, such as 

viewing scenery and activities, riding motorcycles/off-highway vehicles (OHVs), vehicle 

touring, flying aircraft, hiking and walking, bicycling, horseback riding, camping, picnicking, 

hunting, studying nature, using interpretive services, and attending organized events. These 

activities, however, will not be to the detriment or exclusion of the protection of resources upon 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 2 

Map 2.1. Management Units 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 3 

which the natural environment and recreation experiences depend. Visitors to this management 

unit will experience the highest frequency of interaction with other people. 

These areas will also provide the most opportunities for short-term or day-use recreation 

activities “close to home.” Lands within the Community Management Unit may also provide 

resources, such as fuelwood and mineral materials, access to permitted commercial and 

recreational activities, and scenic backdrops or settings for communities. 

Moderate to substantial modifications to the landscape character will be allowed to occur in the 

Community Management Unit compared to other management units but not to the exclusion of 

protecting important resources. Sights, sounds, and uses of other people will be readily evident. 

Eleven percent of public lands in the Arizona Strip FO are found within the Community 

Management Unit. These areas are concentrated along the northern border of the Arizona Strip 

FO, primarily around the communities of Beaver Dam, Littlefield, Scenic, Colorado City, 

Fredonia, and Marble Canyon, as well as south of the Arizona/Utah border near St. George. 

CORRIDORS MANAGEMENT UNIT (BACKWAYS TRAVEL MANAGEMENT AREA) 

Lands within the Corridors Management Unit occur along major travel routes, providing, among 

other things, access to the Back Roads and Outback management units. They offer a variety of 

recreation opportunities, such as viewing scenery, riding motorcycles/OHVs, vehicle touring, 

flying aircraft, hiking and walking, bicycling, horseback riding, camping, picnicking, hunting, 

studying nature, using interpretive services, and participating in compatible organized events. 

Such activities occur with a moderate frequency of interaction with other people. These areas 

also provide the most opportunities for short-term or day-use recreation activities related to 

vehicle touring. 

Predominantly natural-appearing environments with moderate evidences of the sights and sounds 

and uses of others characterize the Corridors Management Unit. Some modifications to the 

landscape can occur, but not to the exclusion of the protection of visual, natural, and cultural 

resources and uses. Fourteen percent of public lands in the Arizona Strip FO are found in the 

Corridors Management Unit. 

BACK ROADS MANAGEMENT UNIT (SPECIALIZED TRAVEL MANAGEMENT 

AREA) 

Lands within the Back Roads Management Unit provide a variety of dispersed recreation 

opportunities such as viewing scenery, riding motorcycles/OHVs, vehicle touring, hiking and 

walking, bicycling, horseback riding, camping, picnicking, hunting, studying nature, using 

interpretive services, and participating in compatible organized events. Such activities occur 

with low to moderate frequency of interaction with other people. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 4 

While concentration of users will be low, evidence of other users will be relatively high. These 

lands may also provide resources such as fuelwood and mineral materials for use on the Arizona 

Strip FO, and access to permitted commercial activities and to lands in the Outback Management 

Unit. 

Lands identified within the Back Roads Management Unit are characterized by predominantly 

natural or natural-appearing environments of moderate to large size with moderate probabilities 

of experiencing isolation from the sights and sounds of other people. These natural appearing 

landscapes and open spaces contribute to high-quality visitor experiences. Some modifications 

to the landscape may be expected, but will be tempered by the need to protect important 

resources. Approximately 41 percent of public lands in the Arizona Strip FO are within the Back 

Roads Management Unit. 

OUTBACK MANAGEMENT UNIT (PRIMITIVE TRAVEL MANAGEMENT AREA) 

Lands within the Outback Management Unit provide opportunities for undeveloped, primitive, 

and self-directed recreation opportunities such as viewing scenery, hiking and walking, 

horseback riding, backpacking, hunting, studying nature, canyoneering, and rock climbing. The 

frequency of interaction with other people is low and evidence of other users is minimal. 

Lands classified as within the Outback Management Unit are characterized by predominantly 

natural or natural-appearing environments of moderate to large size. The lowest level of 

landscape modifications is expected compared to the other management units. Remote settings, 

natural landscapes, solitude, and opportunities for primitive recreation are minimally impacted 

by human activity. Approximately 34 percent of public lands in the Arizona Strip FO are within 

the Outback Management Unit. 

MANAGEMENT DECISIONS 

This section of the Approved Resource Management Plan (RMP) presents the goals, DFCs, 

special designations, land use allocations, management actions, and implementation decisions 

established for public lands within the Arizona Strip FO. 

The goals for the Arizona Strip FO are as follows: 

1. The variety of remote natural and social settings will be managed to preserve essentially 

natural appearing landscapes. Visitors will have the opportunity to experience adventure, 

beautiful vistas, retreat from the pressures of modern life, and a sense of discovery 

through a variety of appropriate and sustainable outdoor recreation activities and travel 

modes. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 5 

2. The Arizona Strip FO lands will be managed to balance protection of the natural and 

cultural resources with recreational, community, commercial, scientific, and social 

interests and needs. 

3. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) will provide long-term protection and sustain 

the health and diversity of the public lands and resources that they manage for the use and 

enjoyment of present and future generations. 

4. The BLM will work cooperatively with local, regional, state, county, and Federal 

agencies; tribes; communities; user groups; universities; researchers; and the interested 

public to achieve the above goals. 

LAND USE PLAN DECISIONS 

 

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

Development of these decisions used the planning process found in 43 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) 1600, which guide future land management actions and subsequent sitespecific implementation decisions. 

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

management plan and may include DFCs, land use allocation, or designation decisions such as 

OHV-area designations, and all special designations such as Areas of Critical Environmental 

Concern (ACECs). Management actions that require additional site-specific project planning as 

funding becomes available will require further environmental analysis. Decisions to implement 

site-specific projects are subject to administrative review at the time such decisions are made. 

The BLM will continue to involve and collaborate with the public during implementation of this 

RMP. 

Desired Future Conditions 

Land use plans express DFCs 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, BLM state director 

guidance, and other resource or social needs. The allocations or designations, actions to achieve 

the DFCs, restrictions on uses, allowable uses, and special designations are the decisions that 

allow the BLM to work toward achieving the DFCs. 

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 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 6 

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 ACECs or watchable wildlife 

viewing sites) are also considered special designations and can be made in the land use plan. 

Allowable Uses (Land Use Allocations) 

Allowable uses or land use allocations are land use plan decisions that set apart geographic areas 

for specific resources or uses, such as areas where wildland fire is not desired, lands available or 

not for livestock grazing, or where OHV-designated areas are necessary. Allocations have 

geographic boundaries and are represented by polygons on maps in the land use plan. The 

management of allocated resources is described through the decisions identified later in this 

chapter. It is common for specific resource or use allocations to overlap with other resource or 

use allocations. 

Management Actions 

Management actions set the framework that allows achievement of the DFCs. Management 

actions are categorized as actions to achieve desired outcomes, including actions to maintain, 

restore, or improve land health. 

IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS 

Implementation decisions are management actions tied to a specific location. For the BLM, 

these are decisions that take action to implement land use plan decisions and are generally 

appealable to the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) under 43 CFR 4.410. Implementation 

or activity-level decisions generally constitute BLM’s final approval allowing on-the-ground 

actions to proceed. These types of decisions require appropriate site-specific planning and 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis. They may be incorporated into 

implementation plans (activity or project plans) or may exist as stand-alone decisions. 

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

the planning regulations. Instead, implementation decisions are subject to various administrative 

remedies, particularly appeals to the IBLA. 

DECISION TABLES 

The management decisions (DFCs, special designations [SDs], land use allocations [LAs], and 

management actions [MAs]) and implementation decisions (IMPLs) under the Approved RMP 

for the Arizona Strip FO are presented in the following decision tables (Tables 2.1 –2.17). Each 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 7 

decision is numbered and arranged by specific resources and resource uses, and is assigned one 

of the following codes: 

• AC = Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 

• CL = Cultural Resources 

• FM = Wildland Fire/Fire and Fuels Management 

• GL = Geology and Paleontology 

• GM = Livestock Grazing 

• HM = Public Health and Safety 

• LR = Lands and Realty 

• MI = Minerals 

• RR = Recreation and Visitor Services/Interpretation and Environmental Education 

• RP = Riparian Ecological Zone 

• HT = National Historic Trail (NHT) 

• SN = Soundscapes 

• SR = Scientific Research 

• TE = Special Status Species 

• TM = Travel Management 

• VM = Vegetation 

• VR = Visual Resources 

• WC = Wilderness Characteristics 

• WF = Wildlife and Fisheries 

• WM = Wilderness 

• WR = Wild and Scenic Rivers (W&SRs) 

• WS = Air, Water, and Soils 

Area and length figures referenced in Tables 2.1 – 2.17 and throughout this document are based 

on the best available Geographic Information System (GIS) data at the time of publication. 

These figures are based on the Universal Transverse Mercator Zone 12 projection referencing the 

North American Datum of 1983. Analysis and calculation have been made on various GIS 

layers, which may or may not correspond to each other. Differences in area or length 

correlations between the various calculations in this document are due to minor discrepancies 

between GIS layers. 

Acreage numbers provided for Vegetation and Fire and Fuels Management decisions were 

generated as actual acres treated or by specialists’ projections based on available habitat. They 

are not GIS generated numbers. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 8 

TABLE 2.1. AIR, WATER, SOILS (WATERSHED: WS) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

AIR MANAGEMENT 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-WS-01 Federal and State air quality standards will be maintained within the Arizona Strip FO. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTION 

MA-WS-01 Impacts to air quality will be prevented or reduced through the application of specific mitigation measures identif

planning and NEPA review.

WATER MANAGEMENT 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-WS-02 All surface water will meet Arizona State water quality standards. DFC-WS-03 Surface water availability at seeps and springs will be appropriate for the soil type, climate, and landform. DFC-WS-04 Ecological functions and processes will be intact at all seeps and springs. DFC-WS-05 Flowing water systems will provide continuous flowing water and associated riparian vegetative cover, where poDFC-WS-06 The natural hydrologic functions of all watersheds will be intact. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-WS-02 Impacts to water quality will be prevented or reduced through the application of specific mitigation measures iden

planning and NEPA review.

MA-WS-03 The BLM will file for water rights in accordance with State of Arizona water laws on available water sources for 

livestock, administrative uses, and in-stream flows, subject to funding/staffing constraints.

MA-WS-04 

Natural values associated with floodplains and wetlands will be restored and preserved by avoiding floodplain oc

development. If development or occupancy is necessary, impacts will be mitigated through consulting and permi

agencies.

MA-WS-05 The BLM will continue to work with appropriate state authorities to ensure that necessary water resources will be 

SOIL MANAGEMENT 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-WS-07 Soils will exhibit infiltration, permeability, and erosion rates appropriate for the soil type, climate, and landform. DFC-WS-08 Physical soil crusts will show an increase in organic cover including cryptobiotic colonies, moving them towards 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-WS-06 Surface disturbance and reclamation activities will proceed consistent with current permits and subject to the follo

• Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health will be followed to maintain or improve soil conditions. (See Grazin
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 9 

TABLE 2.1. AIR, WATER, SOILS (WATERSHED: WS) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

• Activities will be the minimum necessary to accomplish the task. 

• Reclamation will be required for road realignments. 

• Measures to stabilize soils and minimize surface water runoff will be required, both during project activities an

completion. 

• Reclamation of all surface disturbances will be initiated during or immediately upon completion of the authori

can include re-contouring the disturbed area to blend with the surrounding terrain, ripping compacted areas, repseeding, planting, and/or providing effective ground cover. 

• All temporary roads will be closed and reclaimed immediately upon completion of the project. Reclaimed roa

signed until reclamation objectives are achieved. 

• Facilities or improvements no longer necessary will be removed and the sites will be reclaimed, provided no hi

affected. 

MA-WS-07 Restoration and reclamation actions will be consistent with vegetation management decisions for each Ecological MA-WS-08 

Emphasis for management of all grazing allotments in Watershed Condition Class IV will be to reduce erosion an

condition class. Evaluations will be completed through the Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health (see Grazing 

More detailed assessments of watershed conditions will be done in priority watersheds, subject to funding/staffin

watershed program.

MA-WS-09 

The following watersheds will be priority for assessment, treatments, and/or restrictions on use to reduce erosion, 

reduce salt contributions to the Colorado River: Upper Lang’s Run, Black Rock Mountain, Lower Hurricane Valley, Fort Pearce Salinity Area, Clayhole Flood C

and Wild Band Valley
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 10 

TABLE 2.2. GEOLOGY AND PALEONTOLOGY (GL) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-GL-01 Paleontological resources will be managed for their scientific, educational, and recreational values. DFC-GL-02 Vertebrate and uncommon invertebrate paleontological resources will be protected. 

B. LAND USE ALLOCATIONS 

LA-GL-01 

Areas will be classified according to their potential to contain vertebrate fossils or noteworthy occurrences of inve

These Paleontological Sensitivity Classes are: • Class 1 (Low sensitivity): Igneous and metamorphic geologic units and sedimentary geologic units where verte

non-vertebrate fossils are unlikely to occur. 

• Class 2 (Moderate sensitivity): Sedimentary geologic units that are known to contain or have unknown potent

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 ri

adverse impacts and/or low risk of natural degradation. 

• Class 4 (High sensitivity): Areas where geologic units regularly and predictably contain vertebrate fossils and/

vertebrate fossils, and are at risk of natural degradation and/or human-caused adverse impacts. 

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-GL-01 The BLM will identify and protect significant fossils and allow for scientific research at paleontological sites, in a

procedures.

MA-GL-02 Should paleontological resources be discovered within the Arizona Strip FO, the sites will be evaluated for sensiti

classified and managed consistent with the land use allocation classifications described in Table 2.3.

MA-GL-03 Prior to authorizing land uses in any Class 4 areas, a records search and paleontological survey and/or monitoring 

impacts to vertebrate fossils and/or uncommon invertebrate fossils can be minimized or mitigated.

MA-GL-04 Adverse impacts to vertebrate and/or uncommon invertebrate paleontological resources will be mitigated.

CAVE AND KARST RESOURCES 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-GL-03 Significant cave and karst resources will be protected. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-GL-05 All caves and karst features will be considered significant, if they meet the criteria defined in 43 CFR Part 37.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 11 

TABLE 2.2. GEOLOGY AND PALEONTOLOGY (GL) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

MA-GL-06 

Cave and karst resources will be evaluated to determine proper and needed protective measures to ensure their conProtective measures may include restricting surface disturbing activities, limiting fire suppression, controlling visi

management actions.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 12 

TABLE 2.3. VEGETATION AND FIRE AND FUELS MANAGEMENT (VM, FM, RP) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

ALL ECOLOGICAL ZONES (See Map 2.2)

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-VM-01 All watersheds will meet, or will be progressing towards meeting, the Standards for Rangeland Health (See AppeDFC-VM-02 

Native vegetative communities will be protected. A mosaic of native perennial and non-invasive annual vegetativ

present across the landscape with diversity of species, canopy, density, and age class reflecting its local ecologicanaturally occurring habitat conditions. 

DFC-VM-03 Vegetative communities will provide sufficient plant cover and litter accumulation to protect soils from wind and 

enhance nutrient cycling and productivity, even during drought years. 

DFC-VM-04 Ecological processes and functions will be protected, enhanced, and/or restored by allowing tools that are necessa

mitigate adverse impacts of allowable uses and undesirable disturbances, and contribute to meeting the Standards 

DFC-VM-05 Invasive plant species will be contained, controlled, or eliminated and native species restored to meet desired plan

objectives. 

DFC-VM-06 Each vegetation community is maintained within its natural range of variation in plant composition, structure, and 

are maintained below levels that are considered to be hazardous. 

Wildland Fire 

DFC-FM-01 Loss of key ecosystem components to wildfire will be minimized. DFC-FM-02 Fire return intervals and natural disturbances will be appropriate for the ecological site. DFC-FM-03 Fire is recognized as a natural process in fire-adapted ecosystems and is used to achieve objectives for other resouDFC-FM-04 Fuels in Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) areas are maintained at non-hazardous levels to provide for public and DFC-FM-05 Prescribed fire activities comply with Federal and State air quality regulations. 

B. LAND USE ALLOCATIONS 

Wildland Fire Use Areas (See Map 2.3) 

LA-FM-01 

In Wildland Fire Use: Areas Suitable for Wildland Fire Use for Resource Management Benefit where fuel loadin

conditions constrain the use of fire (prescribed fire and fire use), prevention and mitigation programs will be emp

unwanted ignitions and use mechanical, manual, chemical, or biological treatments to reduce fuel loads and meet 

Where conditions allow, consistent with land use allocations, naturally ignited wildland fire, prescribed fire, and mechanical, manual, chemical, and biological treatments will be used to maintain non-hazardous fuel levels, reduof unplanned wildland fires, achieve DFCs, and meet resource objectives (See BLM Fire Amendment, BLM Fire 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 13 

TABLE 2.3. VEGETATION AND FIRE AND FUELS MANAGEMENT (VM, FM, RP) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

LA-FM-02 

Wildland Fire Use areas will include Riparian, Great Basin, Grassland, Interior Chaparral, Ponderosa Pine, and C

Transition Ecological Zones, and WUI areas (depending on the surrounding vegetation, fuel loads, and other factBLM Fire Amendment and BLM Fire Management Plan). Wildland fire use in the riparian ecological zone will o

areas where riparian restoration is planned, where fire use will help meet restoration objectives (e.g., reduce exotisubsequent restoration work will be implemented (e.g., planting native vegetation).

Non-Wildland Fire Use Areas (See Map 2.3) 

LA-FM-03 

In Non Wildland Fire Use: Areas Not Suitable for Wildland Fire Use for Resource Management Benefit, program

ignitions will be implemented, and prevention, detection, and rapid suppression response techniques will be emph

loading is high, mechanical, manual, chemical, or biological treatments and prescribed fire will be used to maintaof fuels and meet resource objectives. 

LA-FM-04 Non Wildland Fire Use areas will include Mojave Desert and Mojave-Great Basin Transition Ecological Zones, a

on the surrounding vegetation, fuel loads, and other factors as determined in the BLM Fire Amendment and BLM 

Fire Suppression 

LA-FM-05 

Appropriate Management Response (AMRs) for managing wildland fires will be used (as identified in the BLM FFire Management Plan). The AMR is based on firefighter and public safety and objectives and constraints derived management allocations (Wildland Fire Use, Non Wildland Fire Use), relative risk to natural and cultural resourcmanagement unit objectives, potential complexity, the ability to defend management boundaries, and costs of pro

used in areas classified as Wildland Fire Use and Non Wildland Fire Use.

LA-FM-06 

Firefighter and public safety will be the first priority in every fire management activity. Setting priorities among p

communities and community infrastructure, other property and improvements, and natural and cultural resources 

values to be protected, human health and safety, and costs of protection.

LA-FM-07 Education, enforcement, and administrative fire prevention mitigation measures will continue to be provided to re

caused fires.

LA-FM-08 

Prescribed fire and fire use will be used in areas classified as Wildland Fire Use within designated wilderness are

wilderness area management objectives described in the BLM’s Fire Management Plan. Vegetation may also be tminimum tool requirements are met.

LA-FM-09 Minimum impact suppression tactics will be used in designated wilderness. LA-FM-10 

Conservation measures described in Appendix F will be implemented for all fire suppression, restoration and reha

treatments, prescribed burning, and other fire related actions in special status species habitats (See Special Status 

Appendix F).
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 14 

TABLE 2.3. VEGETATION AND FIRE AND FUELS MANAGEMENT (VM, FM, RP) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

LA-FM-11 Suppression tactics that limit damage or disturbance to sensitive vegetation, soils, and wildlife habitat will be use

equipment, such as dozers, will require approval from the BLM authorized officer. 

LA-FM-12 

Prescribed fire and fire use may be used within designated wilderness areas where the areas have been classified 

achieve DFCs and wilderness management objectives. Selection of vegetation treatment methods in designated w

consistent with minimum tool requirements and non-impairment standards.

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

Desired Plant Community Objectives 

MA-VM-01 Seasonal restrictions, temporary reductions, or elimination of authorized activities will be implemented in conjun

treatment projects to protect sensitive resources and/or ensure attainment of DPC objectives.

Vegetative and Restoration Treatments 

MA-VM-02 

Restoration and vegetation treatments will be authorized where protection of sensitive resources is ensured. Priorvegetative treatment projects will be defined by ecological zone and major vegetation type and based on the follo• To increase indigenous rare or uncommon species; 

• Where soil productivity has been reduced due to removal of soil organic matter or active erosion; 

• Where vegetative cover is inadequate to prevent soil erosion; 

• To improve habitat conditions for wildlife and/or special status species; 

• To restore degraded, drought-stricken, weed infested, or otherwise unhealthy areas; 

• To maintain previously treated areas; 

• To achieve DPC objectives; and 

• To meet activity plan objectives. 

MA-VM-03 

The use and perpetuation of native species will be emphasized. However, when restoring or rehabilitating disturb

rangelands, non-intrusive, non-native plant species may be used where native species: 

• Are not available, 

• Are not economically feasible, 

• Cannot achieve DFCs, DPCs, or other ecological objectives as well as non-native species, and/or 

• Cannot compete with already established non-native species. 

Non-native forbs and perennial grasses can be used in preference to monocultures of non-native annuals.

The development of site-specific DPC objectives, in accordance with ecological site potential, will continue. DPC achieved through vegetation treatments and management of resource uses. DPC objectives will be included in all plans, including AMPs (allotment management plans). 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 15 

TABLE 2.3. VEGETATION AND FIRE AND FUELS MANAGEMENT (VM, FM, RP) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

MA-VM-04 

Treatment methods and tools appropriate to the land use allocation will be authorized to achieve DFCs and DPCs

include, but are not limited to mechanical, chemical, biological and fire, or any combination thereof. Vegetation t

be monitored as part of an adaptive management process. Seed priming and other enhancement techniques may bgermination rates. Treatments will be designed so that they do not encourage an increase in any invasive species of potential methods and tools). 

Sale or Use of Vegetation Products 

MA-VM-05 No areas will be allocated to sustained yield timber harvest.MA-VM-06 Fees or permits will not apply for the collection of pinyon pine seeds (pine nuts) for non-commercial, personal usMA-VM-07 Collection of listed, proposed, or candidate plant species will not be authorized.MA-VM-08 Fees may not apply for non-commercial, personal use quantities of items necessary for traditional, religious, or ce

as herbals, medicines or traditional use items.

MA-VM-09 Gathering of dead and downed wood for campsite use will be authorized in areas where campfires are allowed.MA-VM-10 

• The sale, collection, or use of vegetative materials (e.g. native seed, medicinals, landscape mulch, posts, fuel w

etc.) will require a permit. Permits will be authorized only for those areas where resource management objectiv

Interested parties will need to check with the BLM office concerning specific locations, stipulations, fees, and 

• Collection of vegetative materials in ACECs will be restricted unless it meets specific resource management ob

Salvage of Vegetation 

MA-VM-11 

Salvage of vegetation that will be destroyed through surface disturbing activities may be authorized where doing DPCs. Salvage and use will be allowed in the following priority (may require a permit from the State of Arizona)• Removal and maintenance for replanting during rehabilitation of the site being disturbed. 

• Removal and transplanting out of the area to be disturbed, especially to an area needing rehabilitation. 

• Removal and salvage by private individuals or to benefit the public (includes schools, churches, non-profit org

Noxious Weeds 

MA-VM-12 

Implementation of ongoing noxious weed and invasive species control actions will continue as per national guidaManagement Area Plan. Integrated weed management will continue using available tools to control noxious weedvegetation management decisions for each Ecological Zone and as appropriate to the land use allocation and in or

MA-VM-13 Certified weed-free feed, mulch, and seed will be required for all permitted uses to limit the spread of noxious we

species (See Grazing Management and Recreation decisions).

MA-VM-14 Construction equipment, fire vehicles, and/or vehicles from outside the Arizona Strip FO used to implement auth

uses will be required to be cleaned (using air, low pressure/high volume, or high-pressure water) prior to initiating 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 16 

TABLE 2.3. VEGETATION AND FIRE AND FUELS MANAGEMENT (VM, FM, RP) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

vehicles will also be cleaned after being used within any infested area. As national policy is developed, the more implemented. Vehicles leaving the area and later returning to continue the project will require re-cleaning.

RIPARIAN ECOLOGICAL ZONE (See Map 2.2)

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-RP-01 Riparian areas (see Map 2.2) will consist of a diversity of vertical and horizontal structures, vegetative age classeDFC-RP-02 Riparian areas will 

be protected, enhanced, and/or restored by allowing tools that are necessary and appropriate to 

of allowable uses and undesirable disturbances, and contribute to meeting the Arizona Standards for Rangeland H

DFC-RP-03 Ecological functions and processes will be intact with vegetative species composition and cover appropriate to thDFC-RP-04 Where sites have the potential for over-story vegetation, the canopy cover of over-story and under-story vegetatio

approaching maximum density. 

DFC-RP-05 All riparian areas will be in, or moving towards, proper functioning condition. DFC-RP-06 All surface water will meet, or be improving towards, Arizona State water quality standards. DFC-RP-07 Flowing water systems will provide contiguous water and associated riparian vegetative cover, where possible. DFC-RP-08 Availability of surface water at seeps and springs will be appropriate for the soil type, climate, and landform and 

population of endemic plant and wildlife species. 

DFC-RP-09 A sufficient quantity of water with safe access for wildlife will be available, where appropriate. DFC-RP-10 

Riparian communities will provide habitat for common species such as rush, cottonwood, willow, and yellow-bre

species such as southwestern willow (SW) flycatcher, common black hawk, Lucy’s warbler, and speckled dace w

potential. 

DFC-RP-11 Invasive plants and animals such as tamarisk, Russian olive, and brown-headed cowbird will be reduced or elimin

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-RP-01 

Habitat conditions at priority riparian areas will be maintained or improved. Priority riparian areas meet two or mcriteria: • Federal land with water rights. 

• Ecologically and economically feasible of reaching DFCs. 

• All riparian areas > or = to 0.5 acres in size. 

• Presence of special status species. 

• Presence of surface water and/or saturated soil. 

• Presence of riparian species. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 17 

TABLE 2.3. VEGETATION AND FIRE AND FUELS MANAGEMENT (VM, FM, RP) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

• Distance to adjacent riparian areas greater than three miles. 

MA-RP-02 The Riparian Ecological Zone will be managed for a mixture of herbaceous and woody vegetation in accordance 

native and non-native species.

MA-RP-03 

Vegetation treatments can be used in the Riparian Ecological Zone to enhance vegetative diversity, restore native 

maintain or increase wildlife habitat, and reduce or eliminate hazardous fuels. Treatment priority areas will be wh

non-functional, functioning at risk with a downward trend, or dominated by invasive plant species.

MA-RP-04 A combination of wildland fire, fire use, prescribed fire, chemical, mechanical, and biological treatment methods 

appropriate within land use allocations and areas managed to maintain wilderness characteristics.

MA-RP-05 

Prior to conducting vegetation treatments in the Riparian Ecological Zone, the area’s ability to serve as habitat fo

will be evaluated. Treatments will not be authorized in occupied SW flycatcher habitat unless such treatments wil

benefits to the species or its habitat, will reduce fire frequency or intensity, or will provide replacement habitat of 

removed. 

MA-RP-06 Up to 5,000 acres of Riparian Ecological Zone can be treated over the life of this RMP (approx. 63% of available 

Wildland Fire 

MA-FM-01 

Based on total acres burned by wildland fires from 1984-2003, approximately 37 acres of wildland fires are antic

the RMP. Because the size of individual wildland fires and the number of annual fires can vary greatly, this estimunknown how proposed vegetation treatments will affect total acres burned by wildland fires.

MA-FM-02 Up to 37 acres of post-fire rehabilitation are anticipated to meet DFCs. Additional post-fire rehabilitation may be 

fires exceed the estimated acreage.

C. IMPLEMENTATION DECISION 

Virgin River Invasive Plant Species Removal 

IMPL-RP-01 

Mechanical, chemical, and biological treatment methods will be used to remove invasive plants such as tamarisk 

the Virgin River outside of designated wilderness for the purpose of restoring ecological conditions and functions 

hazards. Within the Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness, non-motorized hand tools (such as clippers, axes and pu

and remove invasive species, after which a hand chemical treatment will be used on any resprouting. 

PONDEROSA PINE ECOLOGICAL ZONE (See Map 2.2) 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-VM-07 The Ponderosa Pine Ecological Zone (see Map 2.2) will consist of a mosaic of tree densities, age classes, and ope

scattered trees), with healthy, diverse understories of native shrubs, grasses, and forbs. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 18 

TABLE 2.3. VEGETATION AND FIRE AND FUELS MANAGEMENT (VM, FM, RP) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

DFC-VM-08 Ponderosa pine vegetation communities will be resilient to natural or human-caused disturbances, and losing key 

components to wildfire will be minimized. 

DFC-VM-09 There will be no net loss of total acres within the ponderosa pine plant communities (i.e., long-term or permanent 

landscape). A no net loss objective will not preclude restoration, rehabilitation, or related management actions. 

DFC-VM-10 Patches of old and/or large trees and standing and fallen dead trees will be maintained and protected. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-VM-15 

Vegetation treatments can be used in the Ponderosa Pine Ecological Zone to enhance vegetative diversity, restore communities, maintain or increase wildlife habitat, and reduce or eliminate hazardous fuels. Treatment objectives 

vegetation communities will focus on restoring natural disturbance processes such as fire; increasing vegetative g

grasses, forbs, and shrubs; enhancing forest structure, function, and composition; and removing invasive, non-nat

MA-VM-16 

Stands of ponderosa pine will be managed for a balanced mosaic between tree, shrub, and perennial grass cover t

ecosystem while providing habitat for Merriam’s turkey, Kaibab squirrel, and mule deer. The mosaics will includponderosa to support white-breasted nuthatch; a component of Gambel oak with grass and forb understory to provmule deer; large openings of grasses, forbs, and shrubs to provide foraging habitat for raptors such as sharp-shinngoshawk, Coopers hawk, American kestrel, and red-tailed hawk; and areas of sparse to dense tree canopy cover wgrasses, forbs, and shrubs to provide nesting habitat for Merriam’s turkey, hiding cover for mule deer, and habitat 

Fish and Wildlife decisions).

MA-VM-17 Up to 3,800 acres of Ponderosa Pine Ecological Zone will be treated over the life of this RMP (approx. 100% of a

Wildland Fire 

MA-FM-03 

Based on total acres burned by wildland fires from 1984-2003, approximately 301 acres of wildland fires are anti

the RMP. Because the size of individual wildland fires and the number of annual fires can vary greatly, this estimunknown how proposed vegetation treatments would affect total acres burned by wildland fires. 

MA-FM-04 Up to 301 acres of post-fire rehabilitation are anticipated to meet DFCs. Additional post-fire rehabilitation may b

fires and fire use exceed the estimated acreage.

GREAT BASIN ECOLOGICAL ZONE (SAGEBRUSH COMMUNITIES; See Map 2.2) 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-VM-11 

Sagebrush (primarily Artemisia tridentata) communities will consist of a healthy, diverse mosaic of different heig

a thriving community of native grasses and forbs. Mosaics may include stands of young and old sagebrush, openi

ground to short or sparse vegetation to high-density grasslands), wet meadows, seeps, healthy streamside (riparianinterspersed shrub and woodland habitats. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 19 

TABLE 2.3. VEGETATION AND FIRE AND FUELS MANAGEMENT (VM, FM, RP) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

DFC-VM-12 There will be no net loss of total acres within sagebrush communities (i.e., long-term or permanent removal from 

loss objective will not preclude restoration, rehabilitation, or related management actions. 

DFC-VM-13 Treatment objectives in sagebrush communities will focus on restoring natural disturbance processes, such as by 

vegetative ground cover of native grasses and forbs, and removing invasive non-native plants. 

DFC-VM-14 

Existing stands of sagebrush will have a balance between shrub and perennial grass cover, for open to moderate s

25%), and multiple height classes. This mosaic will include young, sparse stands to support Vesper sparrows and dense stands to benefit Brewer’s sparrows, sage sparrows, black-throated sparrows, gray flycatchers, and sage thr

DFC-VM-15 Sagebrush communities will include small, grassy openings to support long-billed curlews and burrowing owls. DFC-VM-16 Sagebrush communities will include large, continuous blocks (>300 acres) of unfragmented sagebrush habitat, in

to moderate shrub canopy cover (5 to 25%) and multiple age and height classes to benefit sage-dependent species

DFC-VM-17 Sagebrush communities will include openings of short vegetation surrounded by sagebrush for ground foraging b

loggerhead shrikes, Brewer’s sparrows, and sage sparrows. 

DFC-VM-18 Sagebrush communities will include openings of short vegetation (2 to 8 in.) with wide visibility to provide breed

curlews, and burrowing owls. 

DFC-VM-19 Sagebrush communities will include native grass and forb cover in balance with open to moderate (5 to 25%) shr

within ecological site potential. Perennial grass components will be at or above 10%. Native forb composition wi

DFC-VM-20 Fragmentation of sagebrush habitat will be less than 50% of the treatment area. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-VM-18 

Vegetation treatments can be used in the Great Basin Ecological Zone to enhance vegetative diversity, restore natmaintain or increase wildlife habitat, and reduce or eliminate hazardous fuels. Treatment priority areas will be whcover exceeds 20%, perennial grasses and forbs are less than 5%, and bare ground exceeds 40%.

MA-VM-19 A combination of wildland fire, fire use, prescribed fire, and chemical treatment methods will be used in preferen

exclusion of, other available tools in the Great Basin Ecological Zone sagebrush communities.

MA-VM-20 Up to 200,000 acres of sagebrush habitat can be treated over the life of this RMP (approx. 30% of available habit

Wildland Fire (See Map 2.3) 

MA-FM-05 

Based on total acres burned by wildland fires from 1984-2003, approximately 19,168 acres of wildland fires are a

of this RMP. Because the size of individual wildland fires and the number of annual fires can vary greatly, this esIt is unknown how proposed vegetation treatments would affect total acres burned by wildland fires.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 20 

TABLE 2.3. VEGETATION AND FIRE AND FUELS MANAGEMENT (VM, FM, RP) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

MA-FM-06 Up to 19,168 acres of post-fire rehabilitation are anticipated to meet DFCs. Additional post-fire rehabilitation ma

wildland fires and fire use exceed the estimated acreage.

GREAT BASIN ECOLOGICAL ZONE (PINYON-JUNIPER COMMUNITY (See Map 2.2) 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-VM-21 

Healthy, diverse woodland communities will consist of a mosaic of trees, shrubs, grasses, and forbs. Mosaic patch

young and old pinyon-juniper, openings, wet meadows, seeps, and other interspersed shrub habitats. The communa variety of different height structures and age classes, with a thriving understory community of native grasses, fo

DFC-VM-22 To reduce the threat of catastrophic fire, ladder fuels and downed woody debris will be limited or not present. W

present to stabilize soil and enhance vegetation recovery in restoration areas. 

DFC-VM-23 Treatment objectives in the pinyon-juniper vegetation communities will focus on restoring the natural disturbance 

vegetative ground cover of native grasses, forbs, and shrubs; and removing non-native invasive species. 

DFC-VM-24 

Stands of pinyon-juniper will include a balance between tree, shrub, and perennial grass cover to support pinyon j

mosaic will include stands of old growth pinyon-juniper to support juniper titmouse; large openings of grasses, fo

mule deer and provide foraging habitat for raptors such as sharp-shinned hawk, northern goshawk, Coopers hawkred-tailed hawk; and areas of sparse to dense tree canopy cover to support pinyon jay. 

DFC-VM-25 Individual old growth trees will be present and will be protected during treatment implementation. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-VM-21 

Vegetation treatments can be used in the Great Basin Ecological Zone to enhance vegetative diversity, restore natmaintain or increase wildlife habitat, and reduce or eliminate hazardous fuels. Treatment priority areas will be whexceeds 40%, perennial grasses and forbs are less than 5%, and bare ground exceeds 50%.

MA-VM-22 Treatment preferences will be to use a combination of wildland fire, fire use, prescribed fire, mechanical, and cheMA-VM-23 Up to 100,000 acres of pinyon-juniper habitat can be treated over the life of this RMP (approx. 50% of available 

Wildland Fire (See Map 2.3) 

MA-FM-07 

Based on total acres burned by wildland fires from 1984-2003, approximately 1,421 acres of wildland fires are an

of this RMP. Because the size of individual wildland fires and the number of annual fires can vary greatly, this esIt is unknown how proposed vegetation treatments will affect total acres burned by wildland fires.

MA-FM-08 Up to 1,421 acres of post-fire rehabilitation are anticipated to meet DFCs. Additional post-fire rehabilitation may 

wildland fires and fire use exceed the estimated acreage.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 21 

MOJAVE DESERT ECOLOGICAL ZONE (See Map 2.2) 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-VM-26 

Endemic plant species and associated communities such as creosote bush, Joshua tree, Mojave yucca and cacti, w

other shrubs, grasses, and wildflowers. These communities can include stands of young and old shrubs, sparse ve

larger expanses of creosote bush or Joshua trees, seeps, healthy streamside (riparian) vegetation, and other intersphabitats. 

DFC-VM-27 Endemic animal species such as desert tortoise and chuckwalla will be present and thriving with more than adequ

resources. 

DFC-VM-28 There will be no net loss of acres of Mohave Desert plant communities (i.e., long-term or permanent removal from 

loss objective will not preclude restoration, rehabilitation, or related management actions. 

DFC-VM-29 Treatment emphasis will be to reduce the proliferation of non-indigenous annual plant species, reduce fire intensi

improve tortoise structural and forage habitat components. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-VM-24 

Vegetation treatments can be used in the Mojave Desert Ecological Zone to enhance vegetative diversity, restore maintain or increase wildlife habitat, and reduce or eliminate hazardous fuels. Treatment priority areas will be wh

has been burned and/or converted to invasive annual grass communities.

MA-VM-25 

Treatment preference will be to use chemical methods. Prescribed fire and mechanical treatment methods will on

doing so will benefit desert tortoise or their habitat, reduce invasive plant species, reduce fire frequency or intensi

hazardous or flashy fuels, or be necessary for research.

MA-VM-26 Up to 10,000 acres will be treated in the Mojave Desert Ecological Zone over the life of this RMP (approx. 6% o

500 acres may be treated with prescribed fire if associated with scientific research.

Wildland Fire (See Map 2.3) 

MA-FM-09 

Based on total acres burned by wildland fires from 1984-2003, approximately 3,794 acres of wildland fires are an

of this RMP. Because the size of individual wildland fires and the number of annual fires can vary greatly, this esIt is unknown how proposed vegetation treatments will affect total acres burned by wildland fires. 

MA-FM-10 Up to 3,794 acres of post-fire rehabilitation are anticipated to meet DFCs. Additional post-fire rehabilitation may 

wildland fires exceed the estimated acreage. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 22 

MOJAVE-GREAT BASIN TRANSITION ECOLOGICAL ZONE (See Map 2.2) 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-VM-30 

Endemic plant species and associated communities such as black brush, Joshua tree, Mojave yucca, and cacti will 

other shrubs, grasses, and wildflowers. These communities can include stands of young and old shrubs, sparse velarger expanses of black brush to various mixes of black brush, Joshua trees, pinyon-juniper, yucca, and shrub ha

DFC-VM-31 Endemic animal species such as desert tortoise, chuckwalla, and desert bighorn sheep will be present and thriving 

food, water, and cover resources. 

DFC-VM-32 

Priority plant species and associated communities such as black brush, Joshua tree, Mojave yucca, and cacti will 

other shrubs, grasses, and wildflowers. These communities can include stands of young and old shrubs, sparse velarger expanses of black brush to various mixes of black brush, Joshua trees, pinyon-juniper, yucca, and shrub ha

DFC-VM-33 There will be no net loss in acres of Transition plant communities (i.e., long-term or permanent removal from the 

objective will not preclude restoration, rehabilitation, or related management actions. 

DFC-VM-34 Management of Mohave-Great Basin Transition Ecological Zone plant communities will focus on removing inva

especially cheatgrass, Sahara mustard, and red brome, and preventing habitat degradation due to wildfire. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-VM-27 Prescribed fire and mechanical treatment methods will only be authorized where doing so will reduce invasive pl

frequency and/or intensity by removing hazardous fuels, or will be done for research.

MA-VM-28 

Vegetation treatments can be used in the Mojave-Great Basin Transition Ecological Zone to enhance vegetative d

plant communities, maintain or increase wildlife habitat, and reduce or eliminate hazardous fuels. Treatment prioprotection of unburned desert tortoise habitat and restoration and rehabilitation of habitat previously burned and/o

annual grass communities.

MA-VM-29 Chemical treatment methods will be used in preference to, but not to the exclusion of, other available tools in the 

Transition Ecological Zone.

MA-VM-30 Up to 30,000 acres of Mojave-Great Basin Transition Ecological Zone can be treated over the life of this RMP (a

habitat). Up to 500 acres may be treated with prescribed fire if associated with scientific research. 

Wildland Fire (See Map 2.3) 

MA-FM-11 

Based on total acres burned by wildland fires from 1984-2003, approximately 3,561 acres of wildland fires are an

of the RMP. Because the size of individual wildland fires and the number of annual fires can vary greatly, this est

It is unknown how proposed vegetation treatments would affect total acres burned by wildland fires.

MA-FM-12 Up to 3,561acres of post-fire rehabilitation are anticipated to meet DFCs. Additional post-fire rehabilitation may 

wildland fires exceed the estimated acreage.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 23 

COLORADO PLATEAU TRANSITION ECOLOGICAL ZONE (See Map 2.2) 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-VM-35 

Endemic plant species and associated communities such as fourwing saltbush, shadscale, and black brush, will be 

shrubs, grasses, and forbs. These communities can include stands of young and old shrubs, sparse vegetation, scaof fourwing and black brush. 

DFC-VM-36 Endemic animal species such as House Rock Valley chisel-toothed kangaroo rat, peregrine falcon, and desert big

and thriving with more than adequate food, water, and cover resources. 

DFC-VM-37 There will be no net loss in acres of Transition plant communities (i.e., long-term or permanent removal from the 

objective will not preclude restoration, rehabilitation, or related management actions. 

DFC-VM-38 Management of the Colorado Plateau Transition Ecological Zone plant communities will focus on removing inva

especially cheatgrass and red brome, and preventing habitat degradation. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-VM-31 

Vegetation treatments can be used in the Colorado Plateau Ecological Zone to enhance vegetative diversity, restocommunities, maintain or increase wildlife habitat, and reduce or eliminate hazardous fuels. No treatment priority established for this Ecological Zone.

MA-VM-32 All available treatment methods can be used, alone or in combination, to achieve DFCs as defined for adjacent ecMA-VM-33 Up to 30,000 acres of Colorado Plateau Transition Ecological Zone can be treated over the life of this RMP (appr

habitat). 

Wildland Fire (See Map 2.3) 

MA-FM-13 

Based on total acres burned by wildland fires from 1984-2003, less than one acre of wildland fire is anticipated du

Because the size of individual wildland fires and the number of annual fires can vary greatly, this estimate can be 

how proposed vegetation treatments will affect total acres burned by wildland fires. 

MA-FM-14 Less than one acre of post-fire rehabilitation is anticipated to meet DFCs. Additional post-fire rehabilitation may 

wildland fires and fire use exceed the estimated acreage.

INTERIOR CHAPARRAL ECOLOGICAL ZONE (See Map 2.2) 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-VM-39 The Interior Chaparral Ecological Zone will consist of diverse populations of endemic vegetative species, particu

of age class distributions of these species. 

DFC-VM-40 Endemic plant species and associated communities such as manzanita, silk tassel, and live oak will be present, alo
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 24 

grasses, and forbs. 

DFC-VM-41 Endemic animal species such as black-chinned sparrow and mule deer will be present and thriving with more than 

and cover resources. 

DFC-VM-42 There will be no net loss of acres of Interior Chaparral plant communities (i.e., long-term or permanent removal f

net loss objective will not preclude restoration, rehabilitation, or related management actions. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-VM-34 

Vegetation treatments can be used in the Interior Chaparral Ecological Zone to enhance vegetative diversity, restocommunities, maintain or increase wildlife habitat, and reduce or eliminate hazardous fuels. Treatment objectives 

for shrub regeneration, wildlife access for cover and browse, and exclusion of invasive non-native plants.

MA-VM-35 Mechanical or chemical treatment methods will be used to create openings and to achieve DFCs, in preference to

of, other available tools

MA-VM-36 Up to 5,000 acres of Interior Chaparral Ecological Zone will be treated over the life of this RMP (approx. 21% of 

Wildland Fire (See Map 2.3) 

MA-FM-15 

Based on total acres burned by wildland fires from 1984-2003, approximately 846 acres of wildland fires are anti

this RMP. Because the size of individual wildland fires and the number of annual fires can vary greatly, this estimis unknown how proposed vegetation treatments will affect total acres burned by wildland fires. 

MA-FM-16 Up to 846 acres of post-fire rehabilitation are anticipated to meet DFCs. Additional post-fire rehabilitation may b

fires and fire use exceed the estimated acreage.

PLAINS-GRASSLAND ECOLOGICAL ZONE (See Map 2.2) 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-VM-43 Endemic plant species and associated communities such as galleta, sand dropseed, Indian ricegrass, blue grama, b

thread grass, four-wing saltbush, shadscale, winterfat, and Mormon tea will be present, along with other shrubs, g

DFC-VM-44 Endemic animal species such as pronghorn antelope, Cassin’s sparrow, and Brewer’s sparrow will be present and 

adequate food, water, and cover resources. 

DFC-VM-45 Grassland plant communities will be managed for no net loss (i.e., long-term or permanent removal from the landDFC-VM-46 A no net loss objective will not preclude restoration, rehabilitation, or related management actions. DFC-VM-47 The Plains-Grassland Ecological Zone habitats will include a mosaic of grassland and shrub communities, varyin

vegetation, scattered to larger expanses of separate grassland or shrub communities, or various mixes of these com
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 25 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-VM-37 

Vegetation treatments can be used in the Plains-Grassland Ecological Zone to enhance vegetative diversity, restorcommunities, maintain or increase wildlife habitat, and reduce or eliminate hazardous fuels. Treatment emphasis 

proliferation of non-indigenous, annual plants and improve pronghorn antelope habitat consistent with site potent

decisions). 

MA-VM-38 

The following plant and priority wildlife species will be managed as indicators of the condition of Plains-Grasslahabitat condition: Fickeisen plains cactus, four-wing saltbush, needle and thread grass, grama species, pronghorn 

sparrow (see Fish and Wildlife decisions). 

MA-VM-39 Use of prescribed fire will be authorized where doing so will benefit priority species or their habitat or will reduc

intensity by removing hazardous fuels, consistent with land use allocations and minimum tool requirement for de

MA-VM-40 Treatment priority areas in the Plains-Grassland Ecological Zone will be where grasses and forbs are less than 5% 

45%.

MA-VM-41 Mechanical, chemical, or biological treatment methods will be used in preference to, but not to the exclusion of, o

Plains-Grassland Ecological Zone.

MA-VM-42 Up to 100,000 acres of Plains-Grassland Ecological Zone can be treated over the life of this RMP (approx. 13% o

Wildland Fire (See Map 2.3) 

MA-FM-17 

Based on total acres burned by wildland fires from 1984-2003, approximately 4,496 acres of wildland fires are an

of this RMP. Because the size of individual wildland fires and the number of annual fires can vary greatly, this esis unknown how proposed vegetation treatments will affect total acres burned by wildland fires. 

MA-FM-18 Up to 4,496 acres of post-fire rehabilitation are anticipated to meet DFCs. Additional post-fire rehabilitation may 

wildland fires and fire use exceed the estimated acreage.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 26 

Map 2.2. Ecological Zones 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 27 

Map 2.3. Wildland Fire Use Allocations 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 28 

TABLE 2.4. WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES (WF) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

GENERAL WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-WF-01 Ecological conditions will be within the range of natural variability and will be functional for dependant animal sDFC-WF-02 Native wildlife communities will be protected. A complete range of diverse, healthy, and self-sustaining populat

species will occupy all available suitable habitats. 

DFC-WF-03 Forage, water, cover, and space will be available to wildlife of sufficient quantity and quality to support productiv

populations. 

DFC-WF-04 All waters will be safely accessible to wildlife. DFC-WF-05 Fences will be the minimum necessary for effective livestock control or other administrative purposes. Fences w

consistent with the species found in the area. 

DFC-WF-06 Habitat connectivity and wildlife movement between ecological zones will be maintained. DFC-WF-07 Adverse impacts to wildlife and wildlife resources will be avoided or mitigated. DFC-WF-08 Predators will be recognized as an important component of plant and animal communities. DFC-WF-09 Human/wildlife conflicts will be avoided, resolved, or mitigated. DFC-WF-10 Management of game and nongame species by Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) will be consistent w

and other appropriate guidelines. 

DFC-WF-11 

The natural biological diversity of fish, wildlife, and plant species will be maintained or, where necessary and fea

the Arizona Strip FO. Habitats will be managed on an ecosystem basis, ensuring that all parts of the ecosystem a

functional. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

Priority Species and Habitats 

MA-WF-01 

Management emphasis and priority will be given to priority species and habitats in conflict resolution. Priority sp

following: • All special status wildlife species known or suspected to occur in the area. Special status species include those 

proposed, or candidate species; species for which there is a signed conservation agreement or strategy; all specWildlife Species of Concern in Arizona document; and species included on the Arizona BLM sensitive list. 

• All species of migratory birds known or suspected to occur within the Arizona Strip FO. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 29 

TABLE 2.4. WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES (WF) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

• All game mammals including: mule deer, pronghorn antelope, desert bighorn sheep, mountain lion, Kaibab squ

cottontail rabbit. 

• Game birds including Merriam’s turkey, Gambel’s quail, white-winged dove, mourning dove, band-tailed pige

waterfowl. 

• The following carnivores: kit fox, gray fox, and long-tailed weasels. 

Priority habitats include the following: • All aquatic and/or riparian areas, including springs, seeps, and man-made waters. These areas are important for 

particularly native fish and migratory birds. 

• All portions of the ponderosa pine ecological zone. This habitat is important for Merriam’s turkey and a variety 

birds. It is also crucial summer range for mule deer. 

• All areas considered crucial mule deer winter range, including the Buckskin Mountains, Whitmore Canyon, Gr

north, and eastern slopes of Seegmiller Mountain, Bull Rush Point, Andrus Point, and the western slope of the 

• All bighorn sheep habitat areas, including the Virgin Mountains, Hurricane Cliffs, and Kanab Creek Wildlife H

(WHA; see Map 2.4). 

• House Rock Valley. The only known habitat for an endemic kangaroo rat and includes several special status pl

MA-WF-02 

Decisions and specific actions from this RMP intended to benefit fish and wildlife resources will be implemented 

and implementation of three interdisciplinary wildlife Habitat Management Plans (HMPs). These plans will be d

cooperatively with AGFD, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and other interested participants. HMP area 

AGFD Game Management Units 12B, 13A, and 13B. Implementation accomplishments will be monitored and redocumented in HMP files. The HMPs will be amended or revised, as necessary, and will incorporate existing and 

strategies as applicable. 

MA-WF-03 Activities that adversely affect breeding, feeding, or sheltering activities of priority wildlife species may be modif

otherwise restricted to minimize disturbance to the species.

MA-WF-04 Recreational collecting of animals or animal parts (e.g. antlers, skulls, feathers) in ecologically non-sensitive area

assuming compliance with AGFD regulations. 

MA-WF-05 

Access to public lands with fish and wildlife hunting and viewing opportunities will be maintained as determined 

evaluation/designation process. Access to public lands with sensitive wildlife and/or fisheries resources can be cldetermined necessary through monitoring of resource conditions.

Wildlife Transplants and Augmentations 

MA-WF-06 Reintroductions, transplants, capture operations, and supplemental stockings (augmentations) of native wildlife p

habitats will be carried out in collaboration with the AGFD and/or the USFWS where consistent with achieving D
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 30 

TABLE 2.4. WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES (WF) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

applicable agencies policies. Restoration of native wildlife will be for the following purposes: • To maintain current populations, distributions, and genetic diversity; 

• To conserve or recover threatened or endangered species; and/or 

• To restore or enhance native populations, diversity, or distribution of special status species. 

Species that may be reintroduced, transplanted, or augmented include but are not limited to the following: prongh

desert bighorn sheep, Merriam’s turkey, Kaibab squirrel, and special status species.

Wildlife Enhancement Projects 

MA-WF-07 

Construction of wildlife habitat improvement projects, including water developments and vegetation treatments, m

DFCs, assuming compliance with NEPA, the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and other applicable laws, regulatioobjectives for wildlife will be incorporated into all habitat improvement projects including restoration and vegetaSpecific projects will be listed in HMPs. 

MA-WF-08 Existing vegetation treatment projects that benefit wildlife can be maintained.MA-WF-09 

Existing water developments will be modified to ensure wildlife have safe access to water. Existing water develo

to ensure reliability of the water. Maintenance of existing waters will generally take priority over new constructiocooperative waters for livestock and wildlife will be encouraged where doing so benefits wildlife, is consistent w

is economically efficient. 

MA-WF-10 Escape ramps will continue to be maintained and, where needed, installed at all waters accessible to wildlife to m

hazards.

Animal Damage Control 

MA-WF-11 No members of the pig family (Suiidae) will be authorized.MA-WF-12 

The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service-Wildlife Services (APHIS-WS) will conduct predator control ef

FO on an as needed basis. The BLM will request proactive control to benefit priority species, protect livestock, or 

planned wildlife transplants or augmentations.

Watchable Wildlife 

MA-WF-13 

The following areas will be identified, nominated, and managed as Watchable Wildlife areas: 

• Black Rock 

• Beaver Dam Confluence 

• Lime Kiln Pass 

• Buckskin Mountains 

• House Rock Valley 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 31 

TABLE 2.4. WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES (WF) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

MULE DEER 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-WF-12 Mule deer habitat will provide the necessary forage, water, and shelter components for healthy, self-sustaining po

of natural variability. 

DFC-WF-13 Mule deer populations will be at or near maximum levels sustainable for the habitat. DFC-WF-14 Forage in crucial summer mule deer habitat will include at least 10% grasses and forbs composition by weight (C

palatable browse species CBW at all key areas, where consistent with site potential. 

DFC-WF-15 Forage in crucial winter mule deer habitat will include at least 30% palatable browse species CBW at all key area

site potential. 

DFC-WF-16 Mule deer habitat in pinyon-juniper woodland sites will include a healthy diverse mosaic of trees, shrubs, grassesDFC-WF-17 Water sources within mule deer habitat will be safely accessible to deer and other wildlife. DFC-WF-18 Water sources within mule deer habitat will be spaced no more than 3 miles apart. DFC-WF-19 All fences in mule deer habitat will be deer passable. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-WF-14 

Self-sustaining mule deer populations will be enhanced or maintained in Game Management Units 12B, 13A, and 

supplemental transplants may be authorized on a case-by-case basis. Existing habitat areas can be expanded and n

added where consistent with protection of Management Unit objectives. 

MA-WF-15 

Crucial summer mule deer habitat will be managed for at least 10% grasses and forbs and at least 30% palatable b

where consistent with site potential. Crucial winter mule deer habitat will be managed to include at least 30% pa

where consistent with site potential. Palatable browse species will be maintained and enhanced through vegetatio

browse species can include, but are not limited to cliffrose, bitterbrush, ceanothus, four-wing saltbush, desert hollmountain mahogany.

MA-WF-16 Mule deer will be managed for healthy, self-sustaining populations in accordance with population goals and objec

AGFD Strategic Plan for the species. 

MA-WF-17 

A HMP will be developed and implemented for mule deer habitat in Game Management Units 12B, 13A, and 13B

AGFD Strategic Plan. Site-specific management actions will be included. The RMP will be amended or revised Implementation accomplishments will be monitored annually. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 32 

TABLE 2.4. WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES (WF) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

PRONGHORN ANTELOPE

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-WF-20 Pronghorn habitat will provide the necessary forage, water, and shelter components for healthy, self-sustaining po

range of natural variability. 

DFC-WF-21 Pronghorn antelope populations will be at or near maximum levels sustainable for the habitat. DFC-WF-22 Forage composition in pronghorn antelope habitat will include at least 20% grasses and forbs, and 20% palatable 

key areas, where consistent with site potential. 

DFC-WF-23 Where consistent with site potential, the shrub component will be at least 15 inches tall at key fawning areas in pr

provide fawning cover. 

DFC-WF-24 Water sources within pronghorn antelope habitat will be safely accessible to pronghorn and other wildlife. DFC-WF-25 Water sources within pronghorn antelope habitat will be spaced no more than 3 miles apart. DFC-WF-26 All fences in pronghorn antelope habitat will be pronghorn passable and necessary for effective range manageme

functions. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-WF-18 

Self-sustaining pronghorn populations will be enhanced or maintained in Game Management Units 12B, 13A, an

supplemental transplants may be authorized on a case-by-case basis. Existing habitat areas can be expanded and nadded where appropriate.

MA-WF-19 Pronghorn antelope will be managed for healthy, self-sustaining populations in accordance with population goals 

established in the AGFD Strategic Plan for the species. 

MA-WF-20 The BLM will identify and map pronghorn fawning areas in the Arizona Strip FO. The BLM will implement acti

height and density to enhance fawning cover, consistent with site potential. 

MA-WF-21 Pronghorn habitat will be managed for at least 20% grasses and forbs and at least 20% palatable browse species C

with site potential. 

MA-WF-22 Fences in pronghorn antelope habitat will be modified to ensure they are passable to pronghorn. Fences not nece

management or other administrative purposes will be removed. 

MA-WF-23 

A HMP for pronghorn antelope will be developed and implemented in Game Management Units 12B, 13A, and 1

AGFD Strategic Plan. Site-specific management actions will be included. The RMP will be amended or revised Implementation accomplishments will be monitored annually.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 33 

TABLE 2.4. WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES (WF) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

DESERT BIGHORN SHEEP 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-WF-27 Desert bighorn habitat will provide the necessary forage, water, and shelter components for healthy, self-sustainin

range of natural variability. 

DFC-WF-28 Desert bighorn sheep populations will be at or near maximum levels sustainable for the habitat. DFC-WF-29 Forage in desert bighorn sheep habitat areas will include at least 20% grasses, 20% forbs, and 20% palatable shru

consistent with site potential. 

DFC-WF-30 Water sources within bighorn sheep habitat areas will be safely accessible to bighorn and other wildlife. DFC-WF-31 Water sources within bighorn sheep habitat will be spaced no more than 4 miles apart. 

B. LAND USE ALLOCATION 

LA-WF-01 172,110 acres will be allocated as the Virgin Mountains, Hurricane Cliffs, Kanab Creek, and Vermilion Cliffs WH

sheep (see Map 2.4). The majority of Vermilion Cliffs WHA is located in Vermilion Cliffs National Monument.

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-WF-24 Desert bighorn sheep will be managed for healthy, self-sustaining populations in accordance with population goa

established in the AGFD Strategic Plan for the species.

MA-WF-25 

Implementation of site-specific actions benefiting bighorn sheep will continue by implementing the Arizona Strip 

Management Plan (BLM and AGFD 2001) insofar as it is consistent with this RMP. The Desert Bighorn Sheep M

amended or revised as necessary. Implementation accomplishments will be monitored annually. 

MA-WF-26 Self-sustaining bighorn sheep populations will be enhanced or maintained within all WHAs for bighorn sheep. N

added where appropriate. Initial or supplemental transplants will be authorized on a case-by-case basis. 

MA-WF-27 Activities that will adversely affect the lambing or rearing of newborn bighorn sheep will generally not be author

bighorn sheep between December 1 and May 31.

MA-WF-28 

Exotic/non-native wildlife species and/or feral, non-permitted livestock will be immediately eliminated or control

within nine miles of WHAs for desert bighorn sheep to minimize the threat of disease. Agents authorized to elimi

include BLM rangers, AGFD, Wildlife Services, and county and local law enforcement agencies.

MA-WF-29 Changes in kind of livestock to other than cattle and horses will not be authorized within nine miles of WHAs for 

Sheep and goats will not be authorized as pack stock within nine miles of desert bighorn sheep WHAs. 

KAIBAB SQUIRREL

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-WF-32 Kaibab squirrel habitat will provide the necessary forage, water, and shelter components for healthy, self-sustaini

range of natural variability. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 34 

TABLE 2.4. WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES (WF) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

DFC-WF-33 Forage composition in Kaibab squirrel habitat will include at least 20% grasses and forbs, 20% mast-producing sp

ponderosa pine CBW at all key areas, where consistent with site potential. 

DESERT COTTONTAIL RABBIT

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-WF-34 Desert cottontail habitat will provide the necessary forage, water, and shelter components for healthy, self-sustain

the range of natural variability. 

DFC-WF-35 Desert cottontail rabbits will be present in sufficient quantity to provide an adequate prey base for raptors, carnivo

species, as well as ample recreational opportunities for hunting and wildlife viewing. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-WF-30 Cottontails in the Arizona Strip FO will be managed for healthy, self-sustaining populations in accordance with p

objectives established in the AGFD Strategic Plan for this species. 

MA-WF-31 Cottontail rabbit habitat will be maintained, monitored, and improved to ensure a healthy and diverse predator co

habitat area. 

MIGRATORY BIRDS 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-WF-36 Migratory bird habitats will provide the necessary forage, water, and shelter components for healthy, self-sustaini

range of natural variability. 

DFC-WF-37 Migratory birds that nest in the Arizona Strip FO will have resources of sufficient quantity and quality to provide 

fledge young successfully. 

DFC-WF-38 Wintering populations of waterfowl will be sufficiently abundant to provide for recreational wildlife viewing and 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-WF-32 Projects to enhance waterfowl populations through habitat manipulations will be developed and implemented. O

waterfowl will be promoted. 

MA-WF-33 Adverse effects to breeding bird populations caused by disturbances from authorized activities will be minimized 

other mitigation.

MA-WF-34 Migratory birds will be managed through implementation of Executive Order 13186. Additional restrictions on s

activities will be developed on a case-by-case basis through NEPA analysis.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 35 

GAME BIRDS

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-WF-39 Merriam’s turkey habitat will provide the necessary forage, water, and shelter components for healthy, self-sustai

the range of natural variability. 

DFC-WF-40 Vertical structure and understory density will be sufficient in the ponderosa pine ecological zone to provide nestin

Merriam’s turkey. 

DFC-WF-41 Forage composition in turkey habitat will include at least 20% grasses and forbs, and 20% mast-producing specie

where consistent with site potential. 

DFC-WF-42 Water sources within game bird habitats will be safely accessible by all wildlife. DFC-WF-43 Water sources within Merriam’s turkey habitat will be spaced no more than 3 miles apart. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-WF-35 Priority game bird species will include Merriam’s turkey, Gambel’s quail, white-winged dove, mourning dove, ch

tailed pigeons.

MA-WF-36 Self-sustaining populations of Merriam’s turkey will be established within all habitat areas, including Black Rock

be added where appropriate. Initial or supplemental transplants will be authorized on a case-by-case basis.

MA-WF-37 

Merriam’s turkey habitat will be managed for at least 20% grasses and forbs and at least 20% mast-producing spe

consistent with site potential. Old growth in the ponderosa pine ecological zone will be protected to ensure roost 

turkey.

MA-WF-38 No initial or supplemental transplants of chukar partridge will occur.MA-WF-39 Game bird populations will be managed for healthy, self-sustaining populations in accordance with population go

established in the AGFD Strategic Plan for these species.

MA-WF-40 

An HMP for game birds will be developed and implemented in Game Management Units 12B, 13A, and 13B con

Strategic Plan. Site-specific management actions will be included. The RMP will be amended or revised as nece

accomplishments will be monitored annually. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 36 

CARNIVORES AND FURBEARERS

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-WF-44 Carnivore habitat will provide the necessary forage, water, and shelter components for healthy, self-sustaining po

of natural variability. 

DFC-WF-45 Opportunities for hunting, trapping, and viewing carnivores and furbearers such as coyote, bobcat, mountain lion

others will continue to be provided. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-WF-41 Priority carnivore species will include mountain lion, kit fox, gray fox, and long-tailed weasel.MA-WF-42 The historical range and distribution of furbearers and predatory mammals will be maintained. Maximum recreat

aesthetic uses commensurate with existing populations will be allowed.

MA-WF-43 Carnivores will be managed for healthy, self-sustaining populations in accordance with population goals and obje

AGFD Strategic Plan for these species. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 37 

Map 2.4. Wildlife Habitat Areas 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 38 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

ALL SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-TE-01 All Federally listed threatened or endangered species found in the Arizona Strip FO will be recovered. DFC-TE-02 Management of discretionary activities in the Arizona Strip FO will not contribute to the need to list proposed, ca

sensitive species, and will include conservation measures and stipulations benefiting special status species. 

DFC-TE-03 The Arizona Strip will provide a block of remote, contiguous habitat that will serve as refugia for populations of DFC-TE-04 There will be no net loss in the quality or quantity of special status species habitat throughout the Arizona Strip FDFC-TE-05 The public will be well informed about special status species in the Arizona Strip FO and the need for conservatio

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-TE-01 

Priority for the application of management actions will be for: • Species Federally listed under the ESA as endangered or threatened, • Species proposed for Federal listing, 

• Species that are candidates for Federal listing, 

• Species included in the Wildlife Species of Concern in Arizona document, 

• Species for which a conservation strategy/agreement has been developed, and 

• Species included on the BLM Sensitive Species Lists. 

MA-TE-02 

Specific actions and direction for managing special status species will be guided by the use of interdisciplinary w

cooperatively with the AGFD, USFWS, and other interested participants. Implementation accomplishments will b

reviewed annually and documented in HMP files. HMPs will be amended or revised as necessary to incorporate n

adjust management. 

MA-TE-03 Management of special status species will be consistent with biological opinions, recovery plans, conservation str

and the ESA, and will be consistent with achieving all DFCs, to the extent possible

MA-TE-04 

Reintroductions, transplants, and supplemental stockings (augmentations) of special status species populations wi

collaboration with the AGFD and or the USFWS for the following purposes: • To maintain current populations, distributions, and genetic diversity; 

• To conserve or recover threatened or endangered species; and/or 

• To restore or enhance native populations, diversity, or distribution of special status species. 

Species that may be reintroduced, transplanted, or augmented may include, but will not be limited to, desert tortoGila monster, northern leopard frogs, relict leopard frogs, lowland leopard frogs, endemic springsnails, woundfin 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 39 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

chub, Virgin spinedace, desert sucker, flannelmouth sucker, California condor, Yuma clapper rail, yellow-billed cferruginous hawk, northern goshawk, western burrowing owl, white-faced ibis, and House Rock Valley chisel-tooactions will be based on the best available scientific information. Introductions of non-endemic, special status animal species native to the region can be authorized only on a case-

coordination with the AGFD, USFWS, counties, and adjacent landowners.

MA-TE-05 

The BLM will continue to cooperate with USFWS to ensure specific actions comply with the ESA. The BLM wil

active management programs to inventory, monitor, restore, and maintain listed species habitats, control detrimencontrol detrimental public access, and re-establish extirpated populations as necessary to maintain the species and 

MA-TE-06 

Where actions authorized or permitted may adversely affect a listed or proposed species, or adversely modify des

critical habitat, the BLM will work cooperatively with USFWS to resolve or mitigate these impacts through implespecific conservation measures (See Appendix F).

MA-TE-07 

Where actions that occur within the Arizona Strip FO, but are not specifically authorized or permitted, may result 

listed or proposed species or adversely modify designated or proposed critical habitat, the BLM will work cooper

as well as county, state, and other Federal agencies, non-governmental organizations, and members of the public 

possibility of adverse effects in a timely and appropriate manner. The BLM can use planning, education program

use or number of users, area closures, law enforcement contact, or other vigorous compliance efforts to discourag

injury or mortality or degrade habitat of listed or proposed species.

Vegetation Management and Fire and Fuels 

MA-TE-08 Conservation measures described in Appendix F. will be implemented for all vegetation management actions incl

rehabilitation, fuels treatments, prescribed burning, and other related actions in special status species habitats.

MA-TE-09 Collection of dead and down wood in special status species habitats will be allowed for personal camp use only.MA-TE-10 Conservation measures described in Appendix F. will be implemented for all fire suppression, restoration and reh

treatments, prescribed burning, and other fire related actions in special status species habitats.

Grazing Management 

MA-TE-11 Season of use or other modifications to livestock grazing systems can be implemented to protect special status sp

implementation actions are discussed below for the species they benefit and in the Livestock Grazing Managemen

Recreation Management 

MA-TE-12 No new developed campgrounds will be authorized or constructed in listed or proposed special status species habMA-TE-13 The BLM can further limit or restrict any recreation activity or use that degrades any special status species habita

disturbance, injury, or mortality to the species. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 40 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

Surface Disturbing Actions 

MA-TE-14 Prior to surface disturbing activity, a special status species review will be conducted by a qualified specialist. MA-TE-15 Special status species habitat surveys will be required whenever surface disturbances occur within an area of know

occupancy by special status species.

Lands and Realty Management 

MA-TE-16 

• The BLM will retain in Federal ownership designated or proposed critical habitat for listed or proposed threate

species. 

• BLM will retain in Federal ownership habitats essential to the survival and recovery of federally listed species 

occupied habitats). 

• The BLM will seek to acquire non-Federal lands and interests in lands within the above-identified areas and le

public land from willing sellers by purchase, exchange, or donation. Interests in land include, but are not limite

subsurface rights, conservation easements, and water rights. 

MA-TE-17 

New land use authorizations will only be allowed within listed species habitat when no reasonable alternative exi

species and their habitat can be mitigated. New rights-of-way (ROWs) will be routed away from high-density list

and along the edges of avoidance areas. (See Lands and Realty decisions). 

MA-TE-18 Unauthorized dumpsites in special status species habitat will be given the highest priority for removal and cleanu

Travel Management 

MA-TE-19 

Following completion of route inventory and evaluation, roads/routes causing or contributing to mortality of indiv

degradation of their habitat will be identified. Where practical, such roads/routes will be closed and signed. Wher

would not be practical, seasonal restrictions or other mitigation will be developed to minimize adverse effects to sWhere necessary, fences, culverts or other physical barriers will be installed to protect special status species.

Minerals Management 

MA-TE-20 Special mitigation will be required in mining plans of operation to avoid impacts to special status species or propo

habitat.

MA-TE-21 Exploration, drilling, and/or other development activity within a special status species ACEC or WHA/ Vegetatio

Area (VHA: see Maps 2.4 and 2.5 for WHAs and VHAs) may be restricted seasonally to a period when the specie

MA-TE-22 

Mineral leasing will include notification to potential lessees of presence or potential for occurrence of special stat

proposed for leasing. Lessees will also be advised of additional stipulations or other restrictions that will apply at stage (See Appendix G for lease stipulations by species). 

MA-TE-23 New mineral material sites will not be authorized in listed species ACECs. Existing material sites will be evaluate
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 41 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-TE-06 Populations of plants that are listed or proposed for Federal listing will be recovered. DFC-TE-07 Populations of special status plant species will increase to stable, self-sustaining levels. DFC-TE-08 There will be no net loss in the quality or quantity of special status species habitat throughout the Arizona Strip F

B. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS 

SD-TE-01 The Fort Pearce ACEC for protection of threatened Siler pincushion cactus will be increased to 5,724 acres. The i

is due to incorporating areas with known populations of Siler pincushion cactus not previously included within th

SD-TE-02 

The Johnson Spring ACEC for protection of threatened Siler pincushion cactus will be increased to 3,444 acres. T

acreage is due to incorporating areas with known populations of Siler pincushion cactus not previously included w

boundary. 

SD-TE-03 The Lost Spring Mountain ACEC for protection of threatened Siler pincushion cactus will be increased to 19,248 

ACEC acreage is due to inclusion of areas with significant resource values not previously included. 

SD-TE-04 The Moonshine Ridge ACEC for protection of threatened Siler pincushion cactus will be increased to 9,310 acres

acreage is due to inclusion of areas with significant resource values not previously included. 

SD-TE-05 The Shinarump ACEC will be designated southwest of the originally proposed location and will be designated fo

Siler pincushion cactus at 3,237 acres. 

SD-TE-06 

The Marble Canyon ACEC for the protection of Brady pincushion cactus will be enlarged to 11,797 acres. The c

due to inclusion of areas of occupied habitat, removal of areas where repeated surveys have indicated the cactus i

of portions of House Rock Valley with Fickeisen plains cactus, pronghorn antelope, and House Rock Valley chise

SD-TE-07 The Lone Butte ACEC for protection of threatened Jones cycladenia will be designated at 1,762 acres. SD-TE-08 The Black Knolls ACEC for the protection of endangered Holmgren milkvetch will be designated at 428 acres an

critical habitat for the species 

C. LAND USE ALLOCATIONS 

LA-TE-01 The Twist Hills (1,255 acres) will be allocated for Fickeisen plains cactus. Management emphasis and priority w

plains cactus to meet DFCs (see Map 2.5). 

LA-TE-02 The Clayhole VHA (7,362 acres) will be allocated for Fickeisen plains cactus. Management emphasis and priorit

Fickeisen plains cactus to meet DFCs (see Map 2.5). 

LA-TE-03 The Buckskin VHA (160 acres) will be allocated for cliff milkvetch. Management emphasis and priority will be 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 42 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

to meet DFCs (see Map 2.5). 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-TE-24 

• Participation in conservation efforts for special status plant species will continue. 

• Special status plant habitat in the Arizona Strip FO will be preserved, protected, and managed. 

• Monitoring efforts for special status plant populations within the Arizona Strip FO will continue. 

• A program of public conservation education and planning directed towards preservation of special status plant 

out. 

MA-TE-25 The BLM will develop and implement HMPs for special status species in cooperation with the AGFD and the US

serve as the ACEC plan for listed plant ACECs and as the management plan for VHAs.

Recreation Management 

MA-TE-26 

• Recreational activities that degrade special status plant habitats will be modified or relocated to minimize or el

• In listed plant habitats, hiking will be allowed. Biking will be allowed only on designated routes. Education pro

enforcement contact will be used to minimize recreational activities that cause injury or mortality or degrade h

Travel Management 

MA-TE-27 

• Vehicle use in special status plant habitats will be limited to designated routes with reasonable use of the shoul

• In special status plant ACECs, use of OHVs off of designated routes will not be authorized except in emergenc

• In special status plant ACECs, vehicles will not be allowed to pull off the road to camp. 

Grazing Management 

MA-TE-28 

• Disturbance, injury, or mortality of special status plants resulting from grazing by livestock will be minimized 

grazing by livestock is leading to adverse effects, conservation measures will be implemented to reduce or miti

species. Measures can include fencing, seasonal restrictions, or relocation of livestock developments. The need conservation measures will be assessed on a case-by-case basis, typically at the time of the rangeland health as

Vegetation Management 

MA-TE-29 

• Restoration and vegetation treatments will not be authorized in special status plant habitat, unless doing so pro

species. 

• The impact of herbicide and pesticide use on special status plant species will be determined. The use of harmf

where special status plants might be affected will be limited or eliminated. 

• Collection of fuel wood will not be authorized in special status plant ACECs. 

• Conservation measures will be implemented for all vegetation management actions in special status plant habit
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 43 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

Appendix F. 

Surface Disturbing Activities 

MA-TE-30 

• Impacts to special status plants and their habitats from surface disturbing activities will be reduced or eliminate

• Proposed actions will be evaluated to ensure that trampling or crushing of special status plants will be minimiz

BLM will continue to coordinate with USFWS to delineate buffer areas around special status plant populations

developed to minimize or eliminate trampling and/or crushing of special status plants within buffer areas. 

• Conservation measures will be implemented for special status plants for all surface disturbing activities as desc

DESERT TORTOISE 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-TE-09 The Mojave population of desert tortoise will be recovered and delisted. DFC-TE-10 There will be no net loss in the quality or quantity of desert tortoise habitat within the ACECs or WHA (see Map DFC-TE-11 Desert tortoise populations within the ACECs and Desert Wildlife Management Area (DWMA) will be healthy a

Populations will be stable or increasing. Population declines will be halted. 

DFC-TE-12 Desert tortoise populations outside of the ACECs and WHA will be healthy and stable. Declines in the WHA wil

extent possible through mitigation. 

DFC-TE-13 Desert tortoise habitat will provide sufficient forage and cover attributes to support thriving populations of the speDFC-TE-14 Habitat connectivity will be maintained, providing sufficiently frequent contact between tortoises to maintain gen

B. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS 

SD-TE-09 

The Beaver Dam Slope ACEC for protection of threatened desert tortoise and Mojave Desert Ecological Zone va

51,984 acres. Boundary adjustments will incorporate areas of critical habitat, desert tortoise habitat previously in 

Corridor ACEC, and lower quality habitat not previously included in the ACEC. Desert tortoise needs will be conpriority in resolving resource conflicts in the Beaver Dam Slope ACEC. 

SD-TE-10 

The Virgin Slope ACEC for protection of threatened desert tortoise and Mojave Desert Ecological Zone values w

acres. Boundary adjustments will incorporate areas of critical habitat, desert tortoise habitat previously in the VirgACEC, and lower quality habitat not previously included in the ACEC. Desert tortoise needs will be considered thresolving resource conflicts in the Virgin Slope ACEC. 

SD-TE-11 

The Virgin River Corridor ACEC for protection of Virgin River fishes and threatened desert tortoise will be modi

100-year floodplain (approx. 2,065 acres). Boundary adjustments will eliminate areas outside of the 100-year floincluded in the ACEC. Desert tortoise habitat previously included within this ACEC will be incorporated into anthe Beaver Dam Slope or Virgin Slope ACEC. The ACEC will be managed for Virgin River fishes and riparian v
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 44 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-TE-31 

• Active participation in the recovery of desert tortoise will continue. • Assistance will be provided in the implementation of recovery tasks identified in the recovery plan. 

• Adjacent landowners will be encouraged in the development of a habitat conservation plan (HCP) to provide fo

desert tortoise while managing community and regional growth. Assistance will be provided in the developme

will be integrated with the Arizona Strip RMP. 

• Highest quality desert tortoise habitat will be identified based on habitat features, vegetation, and tortoise dens

• Lowest quality desert tortoise habitat will be identified based on habitat features, vegetation, and tortoise densi

low quality habitat between the impassable boundaries of Interstate 15 and the Virgin River, outside of critical 

tortoise ACECs, will be assessed for suitability for other allowable uses or disposal. A preliminary list of these 

Appendix J. 

• Wilderness management plans (WMPs) for the Beaver Dam Mountains and Paiute wilderness areas will be am

incorporate applicable recovery needs for desert tortoise. 

• The BLM will continue to monitor and patrol desert tortoise habitat, and to investigate illegal activities on pub

Law enforcement presence will be at a level adequate to promote public compliance with use regulations. 

MA-TE-32 

The BLM can authorize translocations of desert tortoises onto public lands only when all of the following conditi

authorization from USFWS and AGFD is obtained; 2) the desert tortoise population in the area to which a tortoisedepressed; 3) testing of animals to be translocated is conducted to ensure that spread of upper respiratory tract disnot facilitated as a result of translocations; 4) handling of desert tortoises is in compliance with conservation mea

are followed to ensure that translocated animals have the greatest chance for survival and do not disrupt the behav

Fire Management 

MA-TE-33 

• Appropriate action will be taken to suppress all wildfires in desert tortoise habitat, based on preplanned analysi

land management objectives, including threats to life and property. All wildfires in desert tortoise habitat will 

minimum surface disturbance, in accordance with the guidelines in Duck et al. (1995). 

• Protection of highest quality desert tortoise areas from wildfire will be the highest priority. 

• Suppression forces will be pre-positioned in critical areas during periods of high fire dangers. 

• Assistance with design, funding, and implementation of efforts to construct minimal impact firebreaks in deser

continue. 

• Conservation measures for desert tortoise will be implemented for all fire suppression and management actions 

habitat as described in Appendix F (fire suppression, fuels treatment, prescribed burning). Fire management ac
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 45 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

use, prescribed fire, restoration, and rehabilitation. 

Vegetation Management 

MA-TE-34 

• Invasive exotic annual grasses in desert tortoise habitat will be reduced and/or removed. 

• DPC objectives will be developed during rangeland health assessments that consider desert tortoise forage, cov

DPC objectives and recommended actions for achieving these objectives will be incorporated into AMPs. 

• Areas of highest quality, unburned desert tortoise habitat will receive highest priority for restoration. 

• Vegetative conditions in desert tortoise habitat will be maintained or improved in accordance with DPC object

• Desert tortoise habitat will be closed to live vegetation harvest, except salvage in areas where surface disturban

• Conservation measures for desert tortoise will be implemented for all vegetation management actions in desert 

described in Appendix F. Vegetation management actions will include vegetation treatments, fuels reduction, r

rehabilitation. 

MA-TE-35 No mechanical treatment or vegetation conversion will be allowed unless the project benefits or improves tortoise 

condition of habitat. 

Grazing Management 

MA-TE-36 

Grazing systems will be established for all allotments with desert tortoise habitat with a full range of managemen

grazing (unavailable), inactive season grazing, and rotational grazing prescriptions. Grazing will be authorized ba

improving vegetation conditions in desert tortoise habitat using ecological site inventory data as the baseline condmanagement will be used to determine if and when changes in grazing systems, season of use, and other paramete

to meet DFCs. Exclusion fences or other methods will be used to ensure areas unavailable to grazing will not be gManagement decisions for specific grazing management and proposed season of use by allotment. 

Surface Disturbing Activities 

MA-TE-37 

• Effects to desert tortoise from authorized projects will be minimized or eliminated. “Project” refer to any surfa

proposed that may cause disturbance of desert tortoise habitat and/or death or injury of a desert tortoise, with thby livestock and activities associated with fire suppression. 

• To the extent possible, project activities will be scheduled when tortoises are inactive (October 15 through Mar

project activities will only be authorized between October 15 and March 15: surface disturbance associated wi

organized, non-speed vehicular events; construction and non-emergency maintenance activities in ROWs; and 

maintenance of existing roads. 

• To the extent possible, project features will be located in previously disturbed areas or outside of desert tortois

MA-TE-38 Reclamation will be required for activities that result in loss or degradation of tortoise habitat. Habitat will be rest

close a pre-disturbance condition as practicable. Mitigation measures may be included in decision documents to 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 46 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

or quantity of desert tortoise habitat. 

MA-TE-39 Compensation may be required to mitigate residual impacts from authorized actions. MA-TE-40 The BLM will not authorize any military maneuvers in desert tortoise habitat.MA-TE-41 

Authorized actions that may result in adverse effects to desert tortoises will require implementation of project stip

personnel education programs, pre-construction clearances, defined construction areas, operational restrictions, an

moving tortoises out of harm's way. (See Appendix F for a list of stipulations.) 

MA-TE-42 

Proposed actions will be evaluated to ensure they do not contribute to the proliferation of natural predators within 

New water developments may be authorized if they are designed to minimize or eliminate the potential for tortoispredators are not attracted. 

Recreation Management 

MA-TE-43 

• No competitive speed vehicle events will be authorized in desert tortoise habitat. 

• The BLM will apply the following stipulations to any non-speed motor vehicular events in desert tortoise habit

portions of speed events) requiring permitting: 1. No organized non-speed events will occur from March 15 through October 15. 

2. Permits will be required for events with 50 or more participants. 3. Vehicle travel will be limited to designated routes, or before route designation, to existing routes. 4. Vehicles will not exceed the legal speed limit (posted or unposted) of the road in which they are on during th

5. No more than 400 motorcycles or all terrain vehicles, or 300 four-wheeled vehicles will be allowed in any o

• Events will have enough monitors to ensure compliance with regulations.

• Vehicle camping will be restricted to disturbed areas along designated routes in desert tortoise habitat. Mounta

on designated routes throughout the area; backpacking and horseback riding will also be allowed, providing dehabitats are not adversely impacted. 

• Activities that can adversely affect desert tortoise during their active season within tortoise habitat will be limit

October 15 and March 15. The BLM may restrict season of use, number of visitors, and/or close an area to recr

MA-TE-44 The BLM will identify areas where uncontrolled dogs are causing desert tortoise mortality. If predation of tortois

discovered, the BLM will encourage Mohave County to enforce ordinances prohibiting uncontrolled dogs in thos

Travel Management 

MA-TE-45 Motorized and mechanized travel will be limited to designated roads. MA-TE-46 Vehicles associated with agency-authorized projects traveling on unpaved roads in desert tortoise habitat will be r

at or below 40 mph during the tortoise’s active season to protect the species. Speed limits may be less on specific 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 47 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

density tortoise areas. 

MA-TE-47 

The BLM will maintain or authorize maintenance of existing roads in desert tortoise habitat, except that non-eme

activities will be conducted from October 15 to March 15. Operators of road graders and other maintenance equip

attend an educational briefing prior to performing the work. Maintenance activities will be limited to previously d

cleared by a qualified biologist.

Arizona Strip FO (Areas outside desert tortoise ACECs) 

Grazing Management 

MA-TE-48 The Cedar Wash Allotment will be available for livestock grazing from October 15 – March 15. Ephemeral exten

authorized when conditions outlined in Guideline 3-5 of the Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health are met. 

Lands and Realty 

MA-TE-49 

• Specific parcels of low density (former category 3) desert tortoise habitat that have little to no potential for self

populations have been identified in Appendix J as eligible for disposal. These parcels occur in the area betwee

of Interstate 15 and the Virgin River, outside of any ACEC, and their disposal will allow for regional growth n

Beaver Dam with the least disturbance to desert tortoise. Parcels will be surveyed for special status species an

resources prior to disposal. The effects of future development on water quality and flows in the Virgin River w

NEPA documents and ESA consultation will occur prior to disposal. Up to 200 acres not listed in Appendix J purposes will be retained in public ownership unless needed for recreation or public purposes. Disposal propo

and Public Purposes (R&PP) Act on lands not identified for disposal will be considered on a case-by-case basiMap 2.8. Also, see Acquisitions/Retentions [MA-LR-01 - MA-LR-03] for lands exempt from disposals.) Reve

sale of Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA) parcels may be used to acquire adjacent lands with 

accordance with the Arizona Statewide Interagency Implementation Agreement. 

• The BLM will seek to acquire non-Federal lands in the desert tortoise ACECs from willing sellers through pur• New ROWs through desert tortoise habitat will be routed away from high-density tortoise populations. Linear 

adjacent or parallel to existing ROWs and share vehicular access. 

• No new landfills or sewage treatment ponds will be authorized in the desert tortoise ACECs. 

MA-TE-50 Utilities will be co-located with other utility projects whenever feasible. Utility lines will be designed, located, an

avoid attracting desert tortoise predators.

Surface Disturbing Activities 

MA-TE-51 Compensation may be required to mitigate residual impacts from authorized actions. The BLM will assess compe
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 48 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

1 rate for any proposed projects in the Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness. 

Travel Management 

MA-TE-52 

The BLM will complete a proposal to close roads and designate routes in the desert tortoise ACECs. Roads targe

include those that: 1) have no purpose; 2) are duplicative or redundant; or 3) are causing high levels of mortality owill be restricted to existing roads and trails prior to route designation. After designation, vehicles will be restrict

administrative routes only. Implementation of the closure/designation plan will include the following actions: 1) 

intersections with signs that read "Limited to Designated Roads;" 2) sign all designated routes as open; 3) and sig

routes indicating that driving off of designated routes is not permitted. 

New paved roads and highways in desert tortoise habitat or major reconstruction or modifications of existing pav

tortoise habitat will be fenced with desert tortoise barrier fencing. Culverts, to allow safe passage of tortoises, wicoordination with Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), an

MA-TE-53 Roads constructed for specific non-public purposes, such as access to communication sites, will be limited to admMA-TE-54 Temporary access routes in desert tortoise habitat created during project construction will be modified as necessa

Minerals Management 

MA-TE-55 

• Desert tortoise habitat will remain open to mineral entry under the mining laws. 

• Special mitigation will be required in mining plans of operation to avoid impacts to desert tortoise in their habi

• Desert tortoise habitat will remain open to leasing subject to seasonal restrictions and subject to a waivable no 

(WNSO) stipulation. Surface disturbing activity will be limited to the period from October 15 to March 15 und

• The BLM will require plans of operations and bonding for any activity above the level of casual use, pursuant 

management regulations (43 CFR 3809). The BLM will approve plans of operation that reduce the chance of taccordance with these terms and conditions. 

D. IMPLEMENTATION DECISION 

Livestock Grazing 

IMPL-TE-01 Grazing utilization levels will be set at 45% of current year’s growth on allotments in desert tortoise habitat.

NATIVE FISH

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-TE-15 Essential habitats, important migration routes, required flows, and water quality will be protected and maintained 

systems in the Arizona Strip FO. 

DFC-TE-16 All biologically suitable perennial waters on public lands in the Arizona Strip FO will be occupied by thriving, se

of native fish, as appropriate. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 49 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

DFC-TE-17 Populations of woundfin minnow and Virgin chub in the Arizona Strip FO will be recovered and delisted. DFC-TE-18 Virgin spinedace habitat will support viable populations sufficient to preclude the need for Federal listing. 

B. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS 

SD-TE-12 

The Virgin River Corridor ACEC for protection of Virgin River fishes and threatened desert tortoise will be modi

100-year floodplain (approx. 2,065 acres). Boundary adjustments will eliminate areas outside of the 100-year floincluded in the ACEC. Desert tortoise habitat previously included within the Virgin River Corridor ACEC will bmanaged as a part of the Beaver Dam Slope or Virgin Slope ACEC. The ACEC will be managed for Virgin Rivevalues. 

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-TE-56 

• Active participation in the recovery of Virgin River fishes will continue. 

• Assistance will be provided in implementing recovery tasks identified in the recovery plan. 

• Protection from threats will be provided and sufficient habitat will be created/secured to assure maintenance of 

and/or habitats over time. 

• Applications for instream flow rights with the Arizona Department of Water Resources in rivers supporting na

continue to be supported. 

• Riparian area river channels, floodplains, and terraces will be retained in Federal ownership. All exchanges th

(either groundwater or surface water) will be carefully examined to ensure that development on those lands wi

riparian habitats. 

• In cooperation with the USFWS, AGFD, and the Virgin River Fishes Recovery Team, assistance will be provid

or eradicate non-native fish populations. 

• In cooperation with the USFWS, AGFD, and the Virgin River Fishes Recovery Team, assistance will be provid

and installation of habitat improvement projects to benefit native fish species. The BLM will assist in location 

native fish barriers at suitable locations along the Virgin River in the Arizona Strip FO. 

• Employees and public users will be educated about Virgin River fishes. 

Fire Management 

MA-TE-57 

• Fire management buffer zones between riparian habitats and adjacent upland areas will be established. 

• Fire management actions within the Virgin River Corridor ACEC will include conservation measures for nativ

Appendix F. 

Vegetation Management 

MA-TE-58 • Native riparian vegetation in floodplains and channels will be retained. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 50 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

• A temporally staged approach will be used in habitats where exotic species are to be removed through chemica

so that some mature habitat remains throughout the restoration period for cover and shade for Virgin River fish

• Riparian and aquatic habitats for Virgin River fishes will be maintained or enhanced. The establishment of are

will be promoted. 

• Regeneration of native species will be promoted in regenerating riparian habitats. Natural reaches of riparian h

by restoring intervening degraded segments. In accordance with guideline 3-1 of Standard 3 of the Arizona Sta

habitat restoration in riparian areas shall not include planting or seeding of nonnative plants. 

• Vegetation management actions within the Virgin River Corridor ACEC will include conservation measures fo

described in Appendix F. 

Grazing Management 

MA-TE-59 Disturbance, injury, mortality, or other forms of take of Virgin River fishes resulting from grazing by livestock w

eliminated. 

Watershed Activities 

MA-TE-60 

• Impact of pesticide use on Virgin River fishes will be determined. 

• The use of harmful pesticides adjacent to riparian areas will be limited or eliminated. If used, application will 

avoids drift, according to directions (i.e. not broad applications). 

• Water diversions and groundwater withdrawals will be managed to maintain streamside vegetation. 

• Where possible and practicable, physical stresses, such as high salinity or reduced stream flows that favor exot

or eliminated. Actions that do not allow for natural stream flow regimes including periodic flood events will n

MA-TE-61 Actions that degrade riparian habitat or reduce the potential of the area to support riparian vegetation will be mod

prohibited.

Lands and Realty 

MA-TE-62 

• Specific parcels identified for disposal will be surveyed for special status species and other sensitive resources 

effects of future development on water quality and flows in the Virgin River will be addressed in NEPA documconsultation will occur prior to disposal. Revenues generated from the sale of FLTFA parcels may be used to with high resource values in accordance with the Arizona Statewide Interagency Implementation Agreement. 

• No acquired lands will have ground or surface water used or reserved for use by non-Federal interests after it is 

government. All existing such uses must be terminated upon acquisition and all rights transferred to the Feder

• Lands to be acquired will have development potential similar to the disposed lands and will be located in simil

Virgin River or significant tributaries. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 51 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

Recreation Management 

MA-TE-63 Impacts to Virgin River fishes and their habitat from recreational activities will be reduced or eliminated. Recrea

riparian habitat will be prohibited in riparian areas along the Virgin River.

AMPHIBIANS AND AQUATIC INVERTEBRATES

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-TE-19 Essential habitats, important migration routes, required flows, and water quality will be protected and maintained 

systems in the Arizona Strip FO. 

DFC-TE-20 No net loss will occur in the quality and quantity of suitable habitat for endemic amphibians and aquatic invertebr

Arizona Strip FO. 

DFC-TE-21 All biologically suitable perennial waters on public lands in the Arizona Strip FO will be occupied by thriving, se

of native, endemic amphibians and aquatic invertebrate species, as appropriate. 

DFC-TE-22 New introduced (or re-introduced) populations of relict leopard frog will increase to the point of being viable and DFC-TE-23 Relict leopard frogs will be recovered and managed in accordance with the Conservation Agreement to maintain 

throughout their range. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-TE-64 Actions that degrade riparian habitat or reduce the potential of the area to support riparian vegetation will be mod

prohibited. 

SPECIAL STATUS RAPTORS (ALL SPECIAL STATUS RAPTORS)

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-TE-24 Special status raptor populations will be healthy and self-sustaining throughout their range. DFC-TE-25 Habitat areas for special status raptors will provide sufficient forage and cover attributes to support thriving popuDFC-TE-26 No net loss will occur in the quality and quantity of suitable habitat for special status raptors within the Arizona SDFC-TE-27 Potential roosting and nesting sites (for special status raptors) will be abundant. DFC-TE-28 Riparian areas will be in proper functioning condition and be of sufficient quantity and quality to provide adequat

eagles, peregrine falcon, common black hawk, and other special status raptors. 

DFC-TE-29 Rodent populations, as a prey base (for special status raptors), within the Arizona Strip FO will be abundant. DFC-TE-30 Mexican spotted owls will be recovered and delisted. DFC-TE-31 The experimental non-essential population of California condor will be at or above 150 individuals, viable, and st

number. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 52 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

DFC-TE-32 Peregrine falcon, ferruginous hawks, common black hawks, northern goshawks, and burrowing owls will be suffi

there will be no need to list these species. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-TE-65 

• Priority special status raptors will include bald eagles, California condors, Mexican spotted owls, peregrine fal

ferruginous hawks, northern goshawks, and common black hawks. 

• Special status raptor habitats in the Arizona Strip FO will be preserved, protected, and managed for population 

expansion. 

• A policy of “no net loss” of special status raptor habitat will be maintained. 

• Occupied special status raptor habitats will be protected as a first priority. 

• The BLM and AGFD will determine population numbers, distribution, and trends of special status raptors. • The effects of pesticide and herbicide use on special status raptors in the Arizona Strip FO will be assessed. 

Vegetation Management 

MA-TE-66 

• Existing and potential habitat for special status raptor population continuance and expansion will be identified, 

improved. Land use practices and developments that alter the character of the habitat that make it suitable for sbe limited, modified, or relocated. 

• Suitable and potential habitats will be maintained and upgraded to ensure they remain attractive to special statu

• The use of harmful pesticides or herbicides will be reduced or eliminated within one mile of special status rapt

application will occur in a manner that avoids drift, according to directions (i.e. not broad applications). 

• Suitable habitats for special status raptors in the Arizona Strip FO will be maintained and increased. Suitable s

may be achieved through restoring, maintaining, enhancing, and creating habitat. 

• Suitable habitats will be managed so their suitable characteristics are not eliminated or degraded. Habitats will 

contiguous blocks, rather than for small fragmented areas. Connectivity to currently isolated suitable sites will buffer zones between suitable and unsuitable areas will be encouraged. 

Surface Disturbing Activities 

MA-TE-67 Actions that adversely affect special status raptors during their nesting period may be subject to stipulations, mitig

approved. 

Recreation Management 

MA-TE-68 

• Impacts to special status raptors and/or their habitat from recreational activities will be reduced or eliminated. 

• The presence and intensity of allowable recreational activities within special status raptor habitats will be asses

of specifically designated recreation activities may be considered where appropriate. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 53 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

Bald Eagle Habitat Management 

MA-TE-69 

• Assistance will be provided in implementation of recovery tasks identified in the recovery plan. • Areas for construction of roost and perch poles will be identified to replace natural roosts and perches lost by d

• Patterns of movement for wintering eagles, including fledglings, immatures, and adults, will be determined. F

eagles within the Arizona Strip FO will be determined. 

Surface Disturbing Activities 

MA-TE-70 

• The BLM can limit, modify, or relocate authorized and/or permitted activities within 0.5 miles of active bald e

• Projects and activities causing disturbance to roosting bald eagles shall be avoided from October 15 to April 15

• The BLM will implement conservation measures for protection of bald eagles as defined in Appendix F. 

SPECIAL STATUS RAPTORS (MEXICAN SPOTTED OWL) 

Mexican Spotted Owl Habitat Management 

MA-TE-71 Active participation in the recovery of the Mexican spotted owl will continue. Assistance will be provided in imp

tasks identified in the recovery plan. 

Vegetation Management 

MA-TE-72 Canyon and forest habitats with the potential to support Mexican spotted owl will be managed for maintenance or 

habitat attributes that make them suitable. 

Surface Disturbing Activities 

MA-TE-73 

• Land use practices and developments which alter the character of the habitat that make it suitable for Mexican 

limited, modified, or relocated 

• The BLM will implement conservation measures for protection of Mexican spotted owl as defined in Appendix 

SPECIAL STATUS RAPTORS (CALIFORNIA CONDOR) 

California Condor Habitat Management 

MA-TE-74 

• The BLM will continue to actively participate in the recovery of the California condor. 

• The BLM will assist in implementation of recovery tasks identified in the recovery plan. 

• Restoration of California condor into historic habitats in northern Arizona will continue in cooperation with the 

AGFD, USFWS, California Condor Recovery Program, and others. Supplemental releases will be authorized. 

• The population objective for California condor will be to maintain a self-sustaining population with a positive 

150 individuals with at least 15 breeding pairs. Population objectives will be modified or changed in accordan
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 54 

TABLE 2.5. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (TE)

Decision No. Decision Text 

plan for the species. 

• The BLM will identify and, where possible, reduce or eliminate sources of lead contamination for condors with

The BLM will encourage voluntary use of non-lead ammunition in the Arizona Strip FO. 

Vegetation Management 

MA-TE-75 

• The protective measures for California condors that are contained in the July 2004 “Recommended Protection 

Applications in the Southwest Region of the USFWS” when conducting chemical treatments will be implemen

• California condor foraging habitat will be maintained. 

Surface Disturbing Activities 

MA-TE-76 • The BLM will implement conservation measures for protection of California condors as defined in Appendix FMA-TE-77 

• Within the 10(j) area, the BLM will not restrict authorized and/or permitted activities solely for the benefit of C

Persons engaged in authorized or permitted actions that encounter a condor will be requested not to haze the bi

BLM or the Peregrine Fund. Administrative or other actions implemented may be subject to additional stipula

measures as described in Appendix F. 

SPECIAL STATUS RAPTORS (PEREGRINE FALCON) 

Peregrine Falcon Habitat Management 

MA-TE-78 

• Active participation will continue in the post-delisting recovery monitoring of peregrine falcons in the Arizona 

• Actions that adversely affect nesting peregrines (between March 1 and August 1) may be subject to stipulation

be approved 

Surface Disturbing Activities 

MA-TE-79 

• Authorized actions, including construction projects, will be limited, modified, or relocated to areas more than 0

peregrine falcon during the active nesting season (between April 15 and August 15). 

• The BLM will implement conservation measures for protection of peregrine falcon as defined in Appendix F.

SPECIAL STATUS RAPTORS (BURROWING OWL) 

MA-TE-80 

Burrowing owl populations will be augmented by installing artificial nest burrows and releasing owls displaced b

activities from other parts of their range. Priority sites for release include the St. George Basin, Clayhole Valley, L

the area east of Kanab Creek, and House Rock Valley. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 55 

RIPARIAN DEPENDENT SPECIAL STATUS BIRDS (ALL RIPARIAN-DEPENDENT SPECIAL STATUS 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-TE-33 No net loss will occur in the quality and quantity of suitable habitat for riparian-dependent special status bird spe

Strip FO. 

DFC-TE-34 Occupied habitats will be protected as a first priority. DFC-TE-35 Riparian areas will be in proper functioning condition and be of sufficient quantity and quality to provide adequa

flycatcher, Yuma clapper rail, yellow-billed cuckoo, and other special status birds. 

DFC-TE-36 SW flycatcher and Yuma clapper rail will be recovered and delisted. DFC-TE-37 Riparian areas that can physically support SW flycatcher habitats due to floodplain width and gradient will attain 

plant species diversity, density, and canopy cover to be suitable habitat. 

DFC-TE-38 Riparian vegetation will be sufficiently dense and structurally complex to minimize or eliminate the effects of SW 

and preclude brown-headed cowbirds from finding SW flycatcher nests. 

DFC-TE-39 Cattail and dense marsh habitats will be abundant and provide habitat for Yuma clapper rails. DFC-TE-40 Cottonwood gallery forests will be abundant and provide habitat for yellow-billed cuckoos. DFC-TE-41 Potential roosting and nesting sites for riparian dependent special status birds will be abundant. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

Riparian-Dependent Special Status Bird Species and Habitat Management 

MA-TE-81 

• Protection from threats will be provided and sufficient habitat to assure maintenance of populations and/or hab

created/secured. 

• Water diversions and groundwater withdrawals will be managed to maintain streamside vegetation. 

• Impacts of pesticide use on riparian-dependent special status bird species’ reproduction adjacent to riparian ar

• The BLM and AGFD will determine population numbers, distribution, and trends of riparian-dependent specia• The use of harmful pesticides adjacent to riparian areas will be limited or eliminated. If used, application will 

avoids drift, according to directions (i.e. not broad applications). 

Vegetation Management 

MA-TE-82 

• Riparian areas will be managed to achieve and/or maintain proper functioning condition in accordance with pr

the vegetation management section of this document (See Vegetation Management and Fire Management deci

• Suitable nesting riparian habitats for riparian-dependent special status bird species will be maintained or incre

characteristics may be achieved through restoring, maintaining, enhancing, and creating habitat. Management contiguous blocks of habitat rather than for small fragmented areas. Connectivity to currently isolated suitable 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 56 

The use of buffer zones between riparian habitats and adjacent upland areas will be encouraged. Establishmenwaters will be promoted. 

• Regeneration of native vegetation in restoring riparian habitats will be promoted. Natural reaches of riparian h

restoring intervening degraded segments. 

• Occupied, suitable, and potential breeding habitat will be increased and improved. 

• Restoration of native riparian vegetation will continue in sites that have the potential to support future breedin

dependent special status bird species. 

• Support will continue for applications for instream flow rights with the AZ Department of Water Resources in 

riparian-dependent species. 

• Native riparian vegetation in floodplains or channels will be retained. 

• Protective measures for riparian-dependent special status bird species that are contained in the July 2004 “Rec

Measures for Pesticide Applications in The Southwest Region of the USFWS” will be implemented when contreatments. 

• The BLM will implement conservation measures for protection of riparian-dependent special status bird speci

Appendix F. 

Grazing Management 

MA-TE-83 

• Disturbance, injury, mortality, or other forms of take of riparian-dependent special status bird species resulting 

livestock will be minimized or eliminated. 

• Grazing systems, strategies, and intensities for riparian recovery and maintenance will be investigated. 

• Direct effects of livestock grazing on SW flycatchers and their habitat will be investigated. 

Lands and Realty 

MA-TE-84 

• Specific parcels identified for disposal will be surveyed for special status species and other sensitive resources 

effects of future development on water quality and flows in the Virgin River will be addressed in NEPA documconsultation will occur prior to disposal. Revenues generated from the sale of FLTFA parcels may be used to with high resource values in accordance with the Arizona Statewide Interagency Implementation Agreement. 

• Riparian area river channels, floodplains, and terraces will be retained in Federal ownership. All exchanges th

(either groundwater or surface water) will be carefully examined to ensure that development on those lands wihabitats. 

• Lands to be acquired will have development potential similar to the disposed lands and will be located in simi

Virgin River or significant tributaries. 

• No acquired lands will have ground or surface water used or reserved for use by non-Federal interests after it i

government. All existing such uses must be terminated upon acquisition and all rights transferred to the Feder
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 57 

Travel Management 

MA-TE-85 • Roads and trails used by OHVs within riparian areas, or areas with the potential to support riparian veget

rehabilitated. 

Surface Disturbing Activities 

MA-TE-86 

• Where possible and practicable, physical stresses, such as high salinity or reduced stream flows that favor exo

or eliminated. Actions that do not allow for natural stream flow regimes, including periodic flood events, will 

• Direct impacts that topple or otherwise destroy nests of special status species will be reduced. 

Recreation Management 

MA-TE-87 

• Impacts to riparian-dependent special status bird species and/or their habitat from recreational activities will b

Recreation that degrades riparian habitat will be prohibited in riparian areas in the Arizona Strip FO. Restricti

• Reducing or eliminating recreational fires. 

• Confining camping areas. 

• Locating recreational activity areas away from suitable or potential SW flycatcher habitat. 

• Minimizing trash, debris, and other attractants to scavengers, predators, and brown-headed cowbirds. 

RIPARIAN DEPENDENT SPECIAL STATUS BIRDS (SOUTHWESTERN WILLOW FLYCATC

B. SPECIAL DESIGNATION 

SD-TE-13 The Kanab Creek ACEC for the protection of endangered SW flycatcher habitat will be designated at 13,148 acr

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Habitat Management 

MA-TE-88 

• Active participation will continue in the recovery of the SW flycatcher. Assistance will provide the implement

identified in the recovery plan. 

• The BLM will continue to identify and evaluate areas where concentrations of brown-headed cowbirds occur 

Arizona Strip FO. 

• The BLM will evaluate ways to reduce cowbird concentrations. 

• Cowbird management programs will be developed and implemented where parasitism rates are greater than 20

cowbird trapping at present locations will be evaluated by monitoring nests for parasitism and reproductive su

will be given to assessment of habitat quality or other threats if cowbird control measures do not increase num

flycatchers. 

Vegetation Management 

MA-TE-89 • Suitable SW flycatcher habitat shall be managed so that its suitable characteristics are not eliminated or degrad
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 58 

for large, contiguous blocks of habitat rather than for small fragmented areas. Connectivity to currently isolate

enhanced. The use of buffer zones between riparian habitats and adjacent upland areas will be encouraged. Es

slow/back waters will be promoted. 

• Potential habitat will be managed to achieve structural and vegetation characteristics necessary to support incr

breeding SW flycatcher pairs within 5-20 years. Potential flycatcher habitat shall be managed to allow natura

natural processes) into suitable habitat as rapidly as possible. 

• The use vs. availability of invasive exotic species, such as tamarisk, by SW flycatcher at occupied nesting site

• Native riparian vegetation will be retained in floodplains or channels. 

• At native dominated sites, tamarisk will be retained in occupied SW flycatcher habitat and, where appropriate

unoccupied habitat, unless there is a trend for steady increase of tamarisk. 

• The BLM will implement conservation measures for protection of SW flycatcher as defined in Appendix F. 

Grazing Management 

MA-TE-90 

• Livestock will be excluded from suitable flycatcher habitat (whether occupied or unoccupied) during the grow

leaf drop). This includes portions of the following allotments: the River Pasture of Lambing Allotment and Ka

suitable habitat shall be considered occupied. If livestock are excluded using fencing, fencing shall be inspecteannually. 

• In potential habitat, it will be determined if livestock grazing is a major stressor or is otherwise preventing dev

into suitable flycatcher habitat. Where this is the case, livestock grazing will be excluded from potential SW f

during the growing season (bud-break to leaf drop). 

Yuma Clapper Rail Habitat Management 

MA-TE-91 • Participation in the recovery of the Yuma clapper rail will continue. 

• Assistance will be provided in implementation of recovery tasks identified in the recovery plan. 

Vegetation Management 

MA-TE-92 

• Occupied Yuma clapper rail habitats will be protected as a first priority. 

• Fresh water marsh habitat suitable for Yuma clapper rail nesting will be maintained, enhanced, restored, and/o

uneven aged marsh vegetation will be maintained. Mechanical manipulation will be avoided during the breedi

• Management of potential habitat will be aimed at achieving structural and vegetation characteristics necessary 

numbers of breeding Yuma clapper rails. Potential habitat shall be managed to allow natural regeneration (thr

into suitable habitat as rapidly as possible. 

• Cattail marshes will be retained in occupied clapper rail habitat and, where appropriate, in suitable but unoccu
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 59 

Grazing Management 

MA-TE-93 

• Disturbance, injury, mortality, or other forms of take of Yuma clapper rail resulting from grazing by livestock 

eliminated. 

• Livestock grazing will be excluded from occupied suitable Yuma clapper rail nesting habitat. 

• In potential habitat, it will be determined if livestock grazing is a major stressor or is otherwise preventing dev

clapper rail habitat. Where this is the case, livestock grazing will be excluded from potential clapper rail habit

season (bud-break to leaf drop).

RIPARIAN-DEPENDENT SPECIAL STATUS BIRDS (YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOO) 

Yellow-Billed Habitat Management 

MA-TE-94 • Participation in actions to prevent the need to list yellow-billed cuckoo will continue. 

Vegetation Management 

MA-TE-95 

• Mature cottonwood-willow gallery forest habitat suitable for yellow-billed cuckoo nesting will be maintained, 

and/or created. Large, contiguous blocks of habitat (>15 ha) will be managed in conjunction with removal of c

(i.e. tamarisk). The use of buffer zones between riparian habitats and adjacent development will be encouraged

“islands” of suitable habitat will be established to allow natural dispersal and recolonization of historic habitat

• Potential habitat will be managed to achieve structural and vegetation characteristics necessary to support incr

breeding yellow-billed cuckoo. Potential habitat shall be managed to allow natural regeneration (through natusuitable habitat as rapidly as possible. 

• Retain mature cottonwood-willow gallery forests in yellow-billed cuckoo habitat. 

Grazing Management 

MA-TE-96 

• Disturbance, injury, or mortality of yellow-billed cuckoo resulting from grazing by livestock will be minimize

• Grazing impacts on cottonwood and willow seedlings in riparian systems will be closely monitored and grazin

removed when seedlings are being impacted. 

Recreation Management 

MA-TE-97 • Intense and repeated human disturbance will be avoided at nesting areas from May 15 through September 1. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 60 

Map 2.5. Vegetation Habitat Areas 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 61 

TABLE 2.6. CULTURAL RESOURCES (CL)

Decision No. Decision Text 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-CL-01 Significant cultural resources will be identified, conserved, protected, stabilized, or restored, and maintained in go

ensure they are available for appropriate uses by present and future generations. 

DFC-CL-02 

Imminent threats and potential conflicts from natural or human-caused deterioration or potential conflict with othreduced (Federal Land Policy and Management Act [FLPMA] Sec. 103, National Historic Preservation Act (NHP(a) (2)) by ensuring that all land uses and resource uses initiated or authorized by the BLM comply with Section 1

accordance with the BLM’s National Cultural Resources Programmatic Agreement and Arizona Protocol. 

DFC-CL-03 All sites will be managed according to the DFCs of their use allocation(s). DFC-CL-04 Preservation/restoration will preserve existing original work and maintain it by restoration, replacement, or repair

B. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS 

SD-CL-01 The Little Black Mountain ACEC for the protection of cultural resources will be maintained at 241 acres SD-CL-02 The Johnson Spring ACEC for protection of cultural resources will be increased to 3,444 acres. SD-CL-03 The Lost Spring Mountain ACEC for protection of cultural resources will be enlarged to 19,248 acres. The increa

due to inclusion of areas with significant resource values not previously included 

SD-CL-04 The Moonshine Ridge ACEC for protection of cultural resources will be enlarged to 9,310 acres. The increase in 

inclusion of areas with significant resource values not previously included. 

SD-CL-05 The Marble Canyon ACEC for the protection of cultural resources will be enlarged to 11,797 acres. SD-CL-06 The Kanab Creek ACEC for the protection of cultural resources will be designated at 13,148 acres. 

C. LAND USE ALLOCATIONS 

LA-CL-01 

The following sites will continue to be managed for public use: • Little Black Mountain 

• Paiute Cave 

• Honeymoon Trail 

• Temple Trail 

• Dominguez/Escalante Trail 

LA-CL-02 The following additional sites will be allocated to public use: 

• Old Spanish NHT 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 62 

TABLE 2.6. CULTURAL RESOURCES (CL)

Decision No. Decision Text 

D. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-CL-01 Historic structures that do not merit preservation because of minimal significance, advanced deterioration, or exc

recorded and allowed to deteriorate. Some removal of hazardous elements will be allowed for safety and to avoid 

MA-CL-02 Geocache sites will be prohibited in cultural sites including, but not limited to, archaeological sites, alcoves, rock 

landscapes, Traditional cultural properties (TCPs), and historic sites.

E. IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS 

IMPL-CL-01 Interpretation of and education about previous human occupation and use of the area will be accomplished using 

methods.

IMPL-CL-02 Protective measures will be taken to preserve significant sites, such as monitoring through patrol, signing, fencing

mitigate vandalism, and stabilizing undamaged deposits, and preserving at risk features such as standing walls or 

RESOURCES OF TRADITIONAL IMPORTANCE TO AMERICAN INDIANS

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-CL-05 Specific information on ancestral and traditional cultural places on the Arizona Strip will be protected to the exten

when appropriate, interpreted for the public. 

DFC-CL-06 

A good working relationship will be maintained with the Kaibab Paiutes, the Paiute Tribe of Utah, the Moapa PaiPaiute Tribe, the San Juan Paiute Tribe, the Hopi Tribe, the Hualapai Tribe, the Havasupai Tribe, and the Navajo accomplished particularly through specific affected local chapters (Bodaway/Gap, Cameron, Coalmine, Copperm

City). 

DFC-CL-07 TCPs of importance and associated with American Indians whose cultural memory, traditions, and lives are close

Arizona Strip FO will be nominated to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). 

DFC-CL-08 American Indians with cultural and historic ties to the Arizona Strip FO will have access to and use of sites alloca

consistent with laws, regulations, and authorities. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-CL-03 Tribes will be consulted to determine limitations for use on sites allocated to traditional use areas.MA-CL-04 Fees will not apply to American Indians for the collection of non-commercial, personal use quantities of herbals, 

items, or items necessary for traditional, religious, or ceremonial purposes.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 63 

TABLE 2.7. VISUAL RESOURCES (VR)

Decision No. Decision Text 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-VR-01 Public lands will be managed in a manner, which will protect the quality of the scenic (visual) values of these lan

1701, Section 102 (a) (8)) 

DFC-VR-02 Esthetically pleasing surroundings will be assured for all Americans (43 USC 4321, Section 101 (b)). DFC-VR-03 The region’s scenic beauty, open space landscapes, and other high-quality visual resources will be maintained wiDFC-VR-04 The existing “footprint” of cultural landscapes (facilities, projects, and improvements) will generally be maintainDFC-VR-05 Dark night sky conditions that are affected primarily by natural light sources will be maintained. DFC-VR-06 

There are four visual resource management (VRM) classes. The objectives for each class, which provide visual m

the design and development of future projects and for rehabilitation of existing projects in the Arizona Strip FO a

Appendix I: VRM Classes; see Map 2.6). Class 1 - The objective of this class is to preserve the existing character of the landscape. This class provides for 

changes; however, it does not preclude very limited management activity. The level of change of the c

should be very low and must not attract attention. 

Class 2 - The objective of this class is to retain the existing character of the landscape. The level of change to th

should be low. Management activities may be seen, but should not attract the attention of the casual obrepeat the basic elements of form, line, color, and texture found in the predominant natural features of 

landscape. 

Class 3 - The objective of this class is to partially retain the existing character of the landscape. The level of cha

landscape should be moderate. Management activities may attract attention but should not dominate thobserver. Changes should repeat the basic elements found in the predominant natural features of the ch

Class 4 - The objective of this class is to provide for management activities that require major modification of th

landscape. The level of change to the characteristic landscape can be high. These management activitieand be the major focus of viewer attention. However, every attempt should be made to minimize the imthrough careful location, minimal disturbance, and repeating the basic elements. 

B. LAND USE ALLOCATIONS 

LA-VR-01 

The following VRM classes will be designated to support management of the various other resources, such as des

segments, primary travel corridors, areas where wilderness characteristics are to be maintained, Virgin River GorWithdrawal, certain special recreation management areas (SRMAs), Great Western and Arizona Trail Corridors, 

important watershed and wetland areas (Map 2.6). 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 64 

TABLE 2.7. VISUAL RESOURCES (VR)

Decision No. Decision Text 

Class I: 80,760 acres Class II: 368,032 acres Class III: 1,459,374 acres Class IV: 72,897 acres 

LA-VR-02 During the life of this RMP, any areas designated as wilderness or classified as “wild” as part of a national W&SR 

designation, be re-designated as VRM Class I. 

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-VR-01 

• To the extent opportunities are practicable, extreme visual contrast created by past management practices or hu

minimized. Examples include ROW amendments, mineral material sites, abandoned mines, and areas impacted 

road driving, etc. 

• Basic criteria for “practicality” include: 1) location (is the site in an area with high visual sensitivity and in a fo

distance zone as mapped in the visual resource inventory?); 2) feasibility (is it physically possible to achieve a 

restoration success, as measured by use of the contrast rating process?); and 3) cost (will the cost be reasonable obtainable?). 

New Projects and Activities 

MA-VR-02 

Ecosystem restoration projects will ensure that visual impacts are minimized in the short term (5 years) and that Vthe project area are met in the long term (life of the project) when such projects are a) considered essential for pub

DFCs, or reducing hazardous fuels buildups and b) expected to be visually prominent.

MA-VR-03 

All new surface disturbing projects or activities, regardless of size or potential impact, will incorporate visual desproject design as a reasonable attempt to meet the VRM class objectives for the area and minimize the visual impVisual design considerations will be incorporated by: • Using the VRM contrast rating process (required for proposed projects in highly sensitive areas, high impact p

projects where it appears to be the most effective design or assessment tool), or by 

• Providing a brief narrative visual assessment for all other projects that require an environmental assessment (E

impact statement (EIS). 

Measures to mitigate potential visual impacts include the use of natural materials, screening, painting, project des

restoration (see Appendix I; BLM Handbook H-8431-1, Visual Resource Contrast Rating; or online at http://www.blm.gov/nstc/VRM/8431.html, for information about the contrast rating process).
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 65 

Night Sky 

MA-VR-04 Permanent outdoor lighting in VRM Class I areas will not be allowed.MA-VR-05 

Impacts to dark night skies will be prevented or reduced through the application of specific mitigation measures i

planning and NEPA review. These measures may include directing all light downward, using shielded lights, usiillumination necessary, using lamp types such as sodium lamps (less prone to atmospheric scattering), using circumotion sensors.

MA-VR-06 Any facilities authorized will use the best technology available to minimize light emissions.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 66 

Map 2.6. Visual Resource Management 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 67 

TABLE 2.8. SOUNDSCAPES (SN)

Decision No. Decision Text 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-SN-01 Natural quiet and natural sounds will be preserved or restored, where practicable. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-SN-01 

Under any Section 4(f) consultations with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the BLM will recommend 

restoration of natural quiet in and above noise sensitive areas defined as all statutory wilderness areas and all area

wilderness characteristics. 

TABLE 2.9. WILDERNESS CHARACTERISTICS (WC)

Decision No. Decision Text 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-WC-01 

The following wilderness characteristics will be maintained: • High Degree of Naturalness: Lands and resources affected primarily by the forces of nature and where the imp

substantially unnoticeable. 

• Outstanding Opportunities for Solitude: When the sights, sounds, and evidence of other people are rare or infre

can be isolated, alone or secluded from others. 

• Outstanding Opportunities for Primitive and Unconfined Recreation: Where the use of the area will be through 

mechanical means, and where no or minimal developed recreation facilities are encountered. 

DFC-WC-02 Areas where wilderness characteristics will be maintained will be ecologically sustainable and resilient to natural 

disturbances. 

DFC-WC-03 Wildlife populations and habitat are important aspects of the ecosystem and are an important component of naturDFC-WC-04 Wildlife management activities will be consistent with naturalness in areas having wilderness characteristics 

B. LAND USE ALLOCATION 

LA-WC-01 

Formal allocations will not be made for areas where wilderness characteristics are to be maintained, nor will thes

wilderness study areas or proposed for wilderness in this RMP. Decisions to maintain wilderness characteristics following areas (See Map 2.7): 34,942 acres 

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

Visual Resource Management 

MA-WC-01 Any changes to the characteristic landscape must be low on 34,764 acres, moderate on 178 acres and high on 0 ac
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 68 

TABLE 2.9. WILDERNESS CHARACTERISTICS (WC)

Decision No. Decision Text 

Land Tenure 

MA-WC-02 The BLM will retain lands in Federal ownership and seek to acquire non-Federal lands and interests in lands in ar

wilderness characteristics.

Restoration 

MA-WC-03 Restoration, vegetation treatments, wildlife management projects, and other surface disturbing actions may be au

to maintain wilderness characteristics to achieve DFCs.

MA-WC-04 New projects or maintenance of existing projects that enhance wildlife habitat or other resources may be allowed

designed to be substantially unnoticeable over time.

Fire Management 

MA-WC-05 Within areas managed to maintain wilderness characteristics, the BLM will use minimum impact suppression tac

fire. Fire management actions will be consistent with DFCs for wilderness characteristics described in the Fire M

Motorized and Mechanized Uses 

MA-WC-06 Use of non-motorized, wheeled game carriers to retrieve game kills will be allowed in areas managed to maintain 

characteristics.

Competitive Events 

MA-WC-07 Non-motorized competitive events may be authorized where wilderness characteristics are to be maintained provi

with achieving DFCs.

Land Use Authorizations 

MA-WC-08 

New ROWs will be discouraged within avoidance areas, which include areas managed to maintain wilderness chaexception may be granted for communication sites necessary for public safety where no other suitable sites are av

authorizations (ROWs, permits, leases, etc.) will be administered within areas managed to maintain wilderness ch

accordance with the terms and conditions of the authorizations.

Leasable Minerals and Mineral Management 

MA-WC-09 Mineral leasing in areas managed to maintain wilderness characteristics will be subject to standard stipulations. MA-WC-10 Mineral material sales will not be authorized in areas managed to maintain wilderness characteristics. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 69 

Map 2.7. Wilderness Characteristics 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 70 

TABLE 2.10. LANDS AND REALTY (LR)

Decision No. Decision Text 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-LR-01 The lands and realty program will respond effectively to the needs of external customers (i.e., the public) and inte

resource programs) for the use and enjoyment of current and future generations and for the protection and conserv

DFC-LR-02 Public lands will be retained in Federal ownership unless because of land use planning, it is determined that dispo

will serve the national interest (See FLPMA, Section 102(a) (1) and Map 2.8). 

DFC-LR-03 Lands or interests in lands may be acquired by purchase, exchange, or donation where they complement existing 

determined by land use planning (See FLPMA Section 205). 

DFC-LR-04 

Lands or interests in lands that, as a result of land use planning, have been determined to be difficult and unecono

acquired for a specific purpose and are no longer required for Federal purposes, or will serve important public objof or transferred (See FLPMA Sections 203 and 206). 

DFC-LR-05 Community growth and expansion needs will be supported by making public lands available under the R&PP AcDFC-LR-06 The BLM will strive to increase and diversify our nation’s sources of both traditional and alternative energy resou

transportation network, and ensure sound environmental management in accordance with the President’s Nationa

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

Land Tenure Decisions 

Acquisitions/Retentions 

MA-LR-01 

All lands and interests in lands (including minerals) will be retained in Federal ownership within National Landsc

(NLCS) units (e.g., designated wilderness, NHTs), administratively designated areas (e.g., ACECs), areas manag

characteristics, eligible and suitable W&SR segments, habitats essential to the survival and recovery of Federally

historically-occupied habitats), priority riparian areas, springs and seeps, etc. The BLM will seek to acquire non-F

in lands within the above-identified areas and legal access to landlocked public land from willing sellers by purch

donation. Exchanges with the State of Arizona to acquire lands within the above-identified areas will be pursued 

provided the authority. Interests in land include, but are not limited to, surface and subsurface rights, water rights

access, conservation, or other purposes (see Special Status Species decisions).

MA-LR-02 

Lands and interests in lands within NLCS units or administratively designated areas will, upon acquisition, be res

a part of the NLCS unit or administratively designated area. Upon acquisition, lands and interests in lands outside administratively designated areas will be open to operation of public land laws and mining/mineral laws consisten

and objectives, unless specifically modified by the opening order for purchases or donations, or unless a withdrawsegregation is established on exchange lands.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 71 

TABLE 2.10. LANDS AND REALTY (LR)

Decision No. Decision Text 

MA-LR-03 

In split estate situations a) where the surface estate is in Federal ownership and the mineral estate is in non-Federa

will seek acquisition of the mineral estate on all lands identified for retention; and b) where the mineral estate is i

the surface estate is in non-Federal ownership, the BLM will seek acquisition of the surface estate on all lands ide

Disposals 

MA-LR-04 

Up to 19,743 acres of public land are identified for exchange, sale, or R&PP lease/sale with NEPA and ESA com

with planning guidance and objectives. Specific parcels of low density (former category 3) desert tortoise habitat potential for self-sustaining tortoise populations have been identified in Appendix J as eligible for disposal. These 

between the impassable barriers of Interstate 15 and the Virgin River, outside of any ACEC, and their disposal w

growth near Littlefield and Beaver Dam with the least disturbance to desert tortoise. Parcels will be surveyed for other sensitive resources prior to disposal. The effects of future development on water quality and flows in the Viaddressed in NEPA documents and ESA consultation will occur prior to disposal. Up to 200 acres not listed in Ap

specific purposes will be retained in public ownership unless needed for recreation or public purposes. Disposal p

Act on lands not identified for disposal will be considered on a case-by-case basis. (See Appendix J and Map 2.8. Acquisitions/Retentions section [MA-LR-01 - MA-LR-03] for lands exempt from disposals.) Revenues generated parcels may be used to acquire adjacent lands with high resource values in accordance with the Arizona StatewidImplementation Agreement approved May 9, 2006. Exchanges with the State of Arizona to consolidate land own

for retention will be pursued when the State is provided the authority.

MA-LR-05 No Desert-Land Entries, Indian Allotments, or Carey Act Grants (disposals under the agricultural land laws) will 

Land Use Authorizations 

MA-LR-06 

Individual land use authorizations (ROWs, permits, leases, easements) will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis i

RMP provisions and NEPA compliance. New land use authorizations will be discouraged within avoidance areas 

supporting listed species, NHTs, riparian areas, and areas managed to maintain wilderness characteristics) and all

when no reasonable alternative exists and impacts to these sensitive resources can be mitigated. New ROWs will high-density listed species’ populations and cultural sites, and along the edges of avoidance areas. In addition, mi

include underground placement of linear ROWs along existing roads in the House Rock Valley area and special parchaeological resources (See Special Status Species and Cultural decisions). 

MA-LR-07 

The use of designated ROW corridors/sites and existing ROW use areas will be encouraged to the extent possible 

specific needs, actual locations may vary. Such variances shall be considered consistent with other RMP provisiolocations and uses are consistent with the selection criteria, and goals and objectives for ROW corridors and ROW 

MA-LR-08 Existing ROWs in wilderness areas (i.e., exclusion areas) will be evaluated prior to expiration, and if still needed

43 CFR 2920.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 72 

TABLE 2.10. LANDS AND REALTY (LR)

Decision No. Decision Text 

MA-LR-09 

New ROWs requiring new physical facilities (new tower or building) at Black Rock Mountain communication sit

Upgrades to the facilities/site that do not change the existing footprint or esthetics of the site may be allowed on a necessary, to allow additional uses in the existing facilities.

MA-LR-10 

Applications for new communication sites, outside designated multi-user sites, will be considered on a case-by-ca

analysis, emphasizing co-location and subleasing of existing facilities. Communication site management plans, inoptions and designation of the first leaseholder as the site manager, will be required prior to authorization as deter

MA-LR-11 The unoccupied Lime Kiln Utility Corridor shown on the Western Utility Group priority corridor map beginning 

McCullough power line on the Arizona Strip FO and ending at the Arizona/Nevada state line will be terminated. 

MA-LR-12 The existing utility corridor beginning at Glen Canyon Dam and ending at the Arizona/Nevada border as shown o

Group priority corridor map will be designated 1-mile wide.

MA-LR-13 

The existing utility corridor shown on the Western Utility Group priority corridor map through Rosy Canyon will 

at the Utah/Arizona state line and extending to the section line between sections 7 and 18, T. 41 N., R. 5 W., Gila 

approximately 1⁄2-mile wide, confined to the valley bottom.

C. IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS 

IMPL-LR-01 The Hybrid Oak (318 total acres; 164 in Parashant and 154 in Arizona Strip FO) and Boulder Canyon withdrawal

Scenic Area will be recommended for revocation.

IMPL-LR-02 Part of the Virgin River Gorge Recreation Lands Withdrawal (Public Land Order [PLO] 5263) that overlaps statu

acres) will be recommended for revocation. (See Recreation decisions)

IMPL-LR-03 Public land will be made available for airport expansion at the existing Colorado City Airport in coordination wit

ADOT, and the FAA, subject to NEPA and ESA compliance.

IMPL-LR-04 

Reclamation withdrawals in the Virgin River Communities area will be reviewed and if no longer necessary will 

revocation including, but not limited to, AZA-12948, AZA-12948-01, AZA-12948-02, AZAZAA-10755, AZAZAAZAZAA-10755-06.

IMPL-LR-05 

Those R&PP classifications that are no longer necessary will be terminated which include, but are not limited to, 

acres), AZA-6272 (20.00 acres), AZA-7379 (20.00 acres), AZA-9230 (160.00 acres), AZA-27333 (797.90 acres)acres), AZA-2482701 (199.530 acres), AZA-30897 (15.00 acres), and AZA-30909 (0.697 acre).

IMPL-LR-06 Upon termination or expiration of the two Federal Energy Regulatory Commission withdrawals in Ferry Swale, R

existing power transmission lines will be issued, if still needed. 

IMPL-LR-07 Point-of-Rock, Seegmiller Mountain, and Low Mountain will be designated as multi-user communication sites an

with their approved Communications Site Plans. Seegmiller Mountain will be the only site allowed for commerci
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 73 

TABLE 2.10. LANDS AND REALTY (LR)

Decision No. Decision Text 

transmitter power levels above 1,000 watts effective radiated power. Co-location and subleasing will be encouragoption. Upgrades to existing facilities may be allowed upon review and approval authorized officer.

IMPL-LR-08 An easement across state of Arizona lands from Quail Hill Road to Little Black Mountain ACEC will be acquired 

from the west, if determined to be the most feasible option. 

IMPL-LR-09 In Ferry Swale, the paved access road to the now closed Page Landfill will remain in place for monitoring purpos

and Federal regulations. The city of Page will not be required to remove the pavement. 

IMPL-LR-10 Existing agricultural leases to Hafen and Hughes will continue. A lease was not issued to Hemmeter.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 74 

Map 2.8. Land Ownership and Adjustments 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 75 

TABLE 2.11. LIVESTOCK GRAZING (GM)

Decision No. Decision Text 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-GM-01 

Healthy, sustainable rangeland ecosystems will be maintained or improved to meet Arizona’s Standards for Rang

Appendix B), and produce a wide range of public values such as wildlife habitat, livestock forage, recreation oppand functional watersheds. 

DFC-GM-02 

Livestock use and associated management practices will be conducted in a manner consistent with other resource 

ensure that the health of rangeland resources is preserved or improved so that they are productive for all rangelan

public rangeland ecosystems will be improved to meet objectives. 

B. LAND USE ALLOCATIONS 

LA-GM-01 All allotments will continue to be classified as available for grazing by livestock under the principle of multiple u

except where specifically noted (See Map 2.9). 

LA-GM-02 The Beaver Dam Confluence of the Littlefield Community Allotment will continue to be unavailable for grazing. LA-GM-03 

The following livestock grazing allotments with desert tortoise habitat will be available for livestock grazing : • Beaver Dam Slope 

• Highway 

• Mormon Well 

• Littlefield Community 

• Mesquite Community 

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-GM-01 Changes in kind of livestock to sheep or goats will not be authorized within nine miles of desert bighorn sheep ha

will not be authorized as pack stock within nine miles of desert bighorn sheep habitat.

MA-GM-02 

Implementing the Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health will continue on all grazing allotments in accordance 

schedules and congressional requirements. The Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health and guidelines for grazinto all livestock grazing activities. These guidelines address management practices at the grazing AMP-level and a

desirable conditions or improve undesirable rangeland conditions within reasonable time frames (see Appendix B

MA-GM-03 

The interdisciplinary allotment evaluation process will continue to be used to provide specific guidance and actiograzing. Existing AMPs and other activity plans will be consistent with achieving the DFCs and standards for ran

contain the site-specific management objectives, as well as actions, methods, tools, and appropriate monitoring pr

MA-GM-04 

Existing management practices and levels of use on grazing allotments will be reviewed and evaluated on a priorithey meet or are making progress toward meeting the Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health. Appropriate and t

implemented to deal with those areas not meeting the standards.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 76 

TABLE 2.11. LIVESTOCK GRAZING (GM)

Decision No. Decision Text 

MA-GM-05 

The allotment management categorization process will continue to be used to define the level of management nee

administer livestock grazing according to management needs, resource conflicts, potential for improvement, and 

constraints. The allotment categories are Custodial, managed custodially to protect resource conditions and valuemaintain current satisfactory resource conditions and are actively managed to ensure that the condition of resourcand Improve, actively managed to improve unsatisfactory resource conditions.

MA-GM-06 The category of grazing allotments will be changed as objectives are accomplished and/or conditions change. See 

specific allotment category assignments, grazing systems, preference, etc.

MA-GM-07 Allowable use on key forage species is 50% on allotments with rotational grazing systems except in tortoise habit

desert tortoise habitat or being less intensively managed, utilization is set at 45%.

MA-GM-08 Any hay or other feed used in administering the livestock operation will be certified weed-free.MA-GM-09 Water developments in listed species habitats may be modified to minimize adverse effects to the species. MA-GM-10 

Season of use on the following livestock grazing allotments with desert tortoise habitat will be from October 15 th

authorization of ephemeral extensions (see Special Status Species decisions): • Beaver Dam Slope 

• Highway 

• Mormon Well 

• Littlefield Community (Littlefield Slope Pasture only) 

• Mesquite Community (Littlefield Slope Pasture only) 

MA-GM-11 

Season of use and other management prescriptions consistent with achieving DFCs, as identified through the rangprocess, will be established, along with a management plan detailing specifics of grazing use, on the remaining po

Community and Mesquite Allotments, outside the Littlefield Slope Pastures.

MA-GM-12 Season of use for livestock grazing on the Cedar Wash Allotment will be from October 15 through March 15. Eph

May 15 may be authorized when conditions outlined in Guideline 3-5 of the Arizona Standards for Rangeland He

MA-GM-13 

Portions of the following livestock grazing allotments with SW flycatcher habitat will be available for grazing duseason (leaf drop to bud break). Conservative grazing guidelines will be used consistent with the SW flycatcher rwill be used to ensure compliance with utilization levels and to determine actual growing season and livestock grauthorized later than April 15 in the following portions of identified livestock grazing allotments (see Special Sta• Clearwater portion (suitable habitat) of the Kanab Creek Allotment • Clearwater portion (suitable habitat) of the Wildband Allotment 

• The river portions of the Lambing and Littlefield Allotments with SW flycatcher habitat 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 77 

Map 2.9. Grazing Allotments 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 78 

TABLE 2.12. MINERALS MANAGEMENT (MI)

Decision No. Decision Text 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-MI-01 

Mineral exploration and development is encouraged on public land in keeping with the BLM’s multiple-use conc

the management of mineral resources appears in the Domestic Minerals Program Extension Act of 1953, the MinAct of 1970, FLPMA of 1976, the National Materials and Minerals Policy, Research and Development Act of 19

Resources Policy of May 29, 1984, and the Energy Policy Act of 2005

DFC-MI-02 

Leasable Minerals: the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, Geothermal Steam Act of 1970, and 43 CFR 3100-3500 proregulatory framework for the issuance and management of mineral leases. These regulations apply where public i

development of oil, gas, geothermal, coal and non-energy leasable mineral resources. Stipulations are attached to order to ensure protection of non-mineral resources that are susceptible to impacts resulting from the exploration 

leasable mineral resources 

DFC-MI-03 

Locatable Minerals: Exploration and development of locatable mineral resources are provided for by the Mining 

3809 provides for mineral exploration and development while assuring that activities are conducted in a manner tor undue degradation, provides protection of non-mineral resources, and provides for reclamation of disturbed are

DFC-MI-04 

Salable Minerals: The Materials Sale Act of 1947 and 43 CFR 3600 provide for the disposal and regulation of mi

is administered on a case-by-case basis. Salable minerals are sold at fair market values. Free use permits are issue

agencies, local communities, and non-profit groups as the need arises 

DFC-MI-05 Allow entire Arizona Strip FO to remain open to mineral leasing, location, and sale except where restricted by wi

withdrawals, or specific areas identified in this RMP. 

B. LAND USE ALLOCATIONS (see Appendix L for Minerals and Associated Land Classes) 

Fluid Mineral Leasing 

LA-MI-01 

Desert tortoise ACECs will remain open to leasing subject to seasonal restrictions and subject to a WNSO stipula

activity will be limited to the period from October 15 to March 15 under a seasonal restriction. Surface occupancy 

BLM authorized officer after consultation with USFWS on the authorization.

LA-MI-02 

Fluid Mineral leasing categories will be designated as follows: Category 1, open to lease subject to standard lease 

appropriate special stipulations; Category 2, open with special terms and conditions or seasonal restrictions; Cateoccupancy (NSO) or other surface disturbance; and, Category 4, withdrawn from minerals leasing (See Map 2.10

• Category 1: 1,722,197 acres 

• Category 2: 62,397 acres 

• Category 3: 115,710 acres 

• Category 4: 80,760 acres 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 79 

TABLE 2.12. MINERALS MANAGEMENT (MI)

Decision No. Decision Text 

Locatable Minerals 

LA-MI-03 

The following designations will apply to the Arizona Strip FO with regard to locatable minerals (See Map 2.11):

• 1,534,396 acres: Open to the operation of mining laws 

• 145,226 acres: Open with restrictions 

• 182,699 acres: Open with plan of operation 

• 118,743 acres: Withdrawn to mining location subject to valid existing rights 

Salable Minerals 

LA-MI-04 

The following designations will apply to the Arizona Strip FO with regard to mineral material sales (See Map 2.1

• 1,264,889 acres: Open subject to standard stipulations 

• 433,460 acres: Open with restrictions 

• 282,715 acres: Closed to mineral material disposals

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-MI-01 

New reclamation stipulations for exploration and development plans directed toward maintaining naturalness and remoteness on the Arizona Strip FO will be developed and will be added to or replace the existing stipulations. T

applied to site-specific proposals (See Appendix K). 

Locatable Minerals 

MA-MI-02 Special mitigation will be required in mining plans of operation to avoid impacts to cultural resources, special sta

sensitive resources in ACECs.

Salable Minerals 

MA-MI-03 New mineral material sites will not be allowed in ACECs. Existing material sites will be evaluated for retention. MA-MI-04 Permits may continue to be issued for noncommercial, hand collection of rock within 100 feet of designated road

Virgin Slope ACECs.

MA-MI-05 Salable materials will continue to be available in a timely and orderly manner consistent with environmental cons

will continue to be issued to Federal and State agencies and to local communities (See Appendix M for current m

MA-MI-06 Material disposal in VRM Class II areas will not be allowed, if reasonable alternative sources are available.MA-MI-07 Extraction of mineral resources will proceed consistent with protection of sensitive resources and achieving DFC

and K). 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 80 

Map 2.10. Fluid Mineral Leasing Categories 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 81 

Map 2.11. Locatable Mineral Land Classifications 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 82 

This page left intentionally blank
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 83 

Map 2.12. Salable Mineral Land Classifications 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 84 

 This page left intentionally blank
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 85 

TABLE 2.13. RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES/INTERPRETATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ED

Decision No. Decision Text 

RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-RR-01 

Recreation and visitor services will be managed to provide varying levels of both: 1. Structured recreation opportunities that offer a range of specific benefits, activities, and experiences within out

see Map 2.13) and/or, 

2. Dispersed, unstructured recreation opportunities that focus only on visitor health and safety, user conflict, and 

(extensive recreation management areas (ERMAs). 

DFC-RR-02 Information needed to plan, prepare, and choose safe, enjoyable, and appropriate uses of the Arizona Strip region 

public. 

DFC-RR-03 Existing opportunities for visitors to enjoy sightseeing and viewing wildlife in the Backways TMAs will be mainDFC-RR-04 The excellent opportunities that exist to enjoy remote, rustic settings that provide moderate challenge and solitude 

will be maintained/enhanced. 

DFC-RR-05 

In Backways and Specialized TMAs, recreation opportunities associated with somewhat remote settings, such as 

roads, vehicle camping, hunting, sightseeing, recreation aviation, and picnicking will be maintained/enhanced on 

they will be compatible with the protection and enhancement of sensitive resource values, where appropriate. 

DFC-RR-06 

In the Primitive TMA, high quality recreation opportunities associated more with primitive recreation experience motorized uses such as camping, sightseeing, hiking, horseback riding, and hunting, will be maintained/enhancedcompatible with the protection and enhancement of sensitive resource values, where appropriate. 

DFC-RR-07 

In Rural TMA, a wide variety of recreation opportunities associated with near-urban settings, such as walking, OHcrawling, mountain biking, and viewing events, may be maintained/enhanced, provided they will be compatible wsensitive resource values. 

DFC-RR-08 The Virgin River Gorge Recreation Lands Withdrawal (PLO 5263) will be managed for the values listed in the w

6451). 

Recreation Management Area

DFC-RR-09 Two types of Recreation Management Areas (RMAs) will be identified in the land use plan: SRMAs and ERMADFC-RR-10 

Any area not delineated as a SRMA will be identified as one or more ERMA. ERMAs will receive only custodial 

visitor health and safety, user conflict and resource protection issues, with no activity level planning. Therefore, a

will generally be implemented directly from land use plan decisions. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 86 

TABLE 2.13. RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES/INTERPRETATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ED

Decision No. Decision Text 

DFC-RR-11 

The specific DFCs for each SRMA are described in the DFC decisions numbered DFC-RR-14 to DFC-RR-26 Ea

distinct, primary recreation-tourism market as well as a corresponding and distinguishing recreation management Community, Destination, or Undeveloped (see Glossary). In identifying SRMAs and prescribing the managemenbenefits-based management (BBM) approach will be utilized. BBM or “beneficial outcomes” focuses on the desirecreation and leisure activities tied to experiences and benefits. 

DFC-RR-12 

Within each SRMA, one or more potential Recreation Management Zones (RMZs) has been identified, with each 

particular recreation niche (see Glossary) within the overall SRMA (See Map 2.13 for SRMAs and Map 2.14 for be characterized by a description of its own DFCs in the form of outcomes (management objective(s), benefits, ex

the setting prescriptions (physical, social, and administrative conditions) required to produce the outcomes. 

DFC-RR-13 

The primary strategy for the St. George Basin SRMA will be to target a demonstrated community recreation-tour

primarily local communities (dependent on public lands recreation and/or related tourism use, growth, and/or dev

some other seasonal regional visitors, for motorized/mechanized/non-mechanized exploring, technical sports, fitn

tours, sightseeing, equestrian, hiking, competitive and organized events, viewing and appreciating natural landsca

This demand is supported by the area’s distinctive landscape, warm winters, and its close proximity to the rapidly 

St. George, Santa Clara, Middleton, Washington, Hurricane, and Toquerville, Utah. Local recreation-tourism vis

lands as their own ‘back-yard’ recreation settings (See Appendix N for more information and Maps 2.15 – 2.17). 

DFC-RR-14 

The St. George Basin Rural Park RMZ will be managed for: • Quick, easy access from town to sustainable day-use adventure, challenge, exercise, social, and outdoor recreat

• By the year 2011, manage this zone to produce close-to-town opportunities for community residents and season

enjoy directed day-use adventure activities in natural, scenic landscapes along structured travel routes and area

75% of responding visitors and affected community residents at least a “moderate” realization of these benefits 

scale where 1=not at all, 2=somewhat, 3=moderate, 4=total realization). 

• Exploring activities (i.e., OHV driving, all-terrain vehicle (ATV) and motorcycle riding, equestrian, hiking); pe

(i.e., rock climbing, rock crawling, mountain biking, competitive events); social activities (i.e., organized groupfitness activities (i.e., walking, running, hiking). 

• Enjoying going exploring on one’s own; enjoying having easy access to natural landscapes; developing your sk

getting some needed physical exercise; enjoying participating in group outdoor events; enjoying having access 

amenities. 

• Personal Benefits: Greater freedom from urban living; improved appreciation of nature’s splendor; improved 

community’s rural-urban interface impacts its quality of life; improved skills for outdoor enjoyment; improved 

health maintenance; greater self-reliance; restored mind from unwanted stress; Improved mental well-being; st

family and friends. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 87 

TABLE 2.13. RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES/INTERPRETATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ED

Decision No. Decision Text 

• Household & Community Benefits: Increased nurturance of others; improved functioning of individuals in fam

• Economic Benefits: Reduced health maintenance costs. 

• Environmental Benefits: Increased awareness and protection of natural landscapes. 

The RMZ will be managed to produce recreation opportunities in the following essential settings: • Physical Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Rural, with regard to remoteness; Semi-Primitive Motori

to recreation facilities; and Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Roaded Natural, regarding naturalness 

• Social Benefits: Semi-Primitive Motorized to Rural, with regard to group size and evidence of use; Primitive to 

contacts; portions may spike to Urban-like settings during special use activities. 

• Administrative Benefits: Rural, with regard to visitor services; Semi-Primitive Motorized to Roaded Natural, w

controls; and Primitive to Urban, with regard to mechanized/motorized use. May spike to Urban-like managemspecial use activities or for protection of listed species (see Travel Management decisions regarding access for 

DFC-RR-15 

The Canyons and Mesas RMZ will be managed for: • Self-directed, primitive, adventure in a natural setting close to town. • By the year 2011, manage this zone to produce close-to-town recreation opportunities for community resident a

enjoy self-directed, primitive day-use adventure in rugged, trackless canyons, cliffs, bajadas, and mesas, provid

responding visitors and affected community residents at least a “moderate” realization of these benefits (i.e., 3.where 1=not at all, 2=somewhat, 3=moderate, 4= total realization). 

• Hiking, equestrian, hunting, viewing nature. • Enjoying going exploring on one’s own; enjoying having easy access to natural landscapes; feeling good about 

and independent. 

• Personal Benefits: Greater freedom from urban living; improved appreciation of nature’s splendor; closer rela

world. 

• Household & Community Benefits: Greater appreciation for one’s wildland/parkland heritage and how manage

sense of community dependency on public lands. 

• Environmental Benefits: Increased awareness and protection of natural landscapes. 

The RMZ will be managed to produce recreation opportunities in the following essential settings: • Physical Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Rural, with regard to remoteness; Primitive to Semi-Prim

with regard to naturalness; and Primitive to Semi-Primitive Motorized with regard to recreation facilities. 

• Social Benefits: Primitive to Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized, with regard to group size and evidence of use an

regard to contacts. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 88 

TABLE 2.13. RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES/INTERPRETATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ED

Decision No. Decision Text 

• Administrative Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Roaded Natural, with regard to visitor services; Sem

Motorized to Semi-Primitive Motorized, with regard to management controls; and Primitive to Urban, with regmechanized/motorized use (See Travel Management decisions regarding access for administrative uses). 

DFC-RR-16 

The primary strategy for the Virgin River SRMA will be to target a demonstrated destination recreation-tourism mmainly local community residents and regional visitors for day-use and overnight hiking, family outings, rock climoutings, and white water activities. Similarly, there is market demand from local, regional, and national visitors fappreciation of geologic resources, rest from travel and escaping the cold winter weather of other locations. This 

the area’s distinctive location along high traffic volume Interstate Highway 15, its place in the Grand Canyon-like 

River Gorge, and ease of access for day and overnight recreation. National, regional, and local recreation-tourism 

public lands as recreation-tourism destinations (See Appendix N for more information). 

DFC-RR-17 

The Virgin River RMZ will be managed for: • Group-oriented white-water and climbing adventures amidst rugged and stunning geologic features.

• By the year 2010, manage this zone to produce opportunities for visitors to enjoy white-water boating adventu

affiliation, water-play for family affiliation, and challenging rock climbing within a naturally-appearing ‘mini 

providing no less than 75% of responding visitors and affected community residents at least a “moderate” reali

(i.e., 3.0 on a probability scale where 1=not at all, 2=somewhat, 3=moderate, 4= total realization).

• Kayaking, river floating, water play, viewing geology, rock climbing.• Enjoying the closeness of friends and family; enjoying participating in group outdoor events; enjoying strenuo• Personal Benefits: Greater personal enrichment through involvement with other people; confirmation/develop

values; improved muscle strength; improved cardiovascular health; a more holistic sense of wellness. 

• Household & Community Benefits: Stronger ties with one’s family and friends. 

• Economic Benefits: Reduced health maintenance costs.

• The RMZ will be managed to produce recreation opportunities in the following essential settings: 

• Physical Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Rural, with regard to remoteness; Primitive to Roaded N

naturalness; and Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Roaded Natural, with regard to recreation facilities. 

• Social Benefits: Semi-Primitive Motorized to Roaded Natural, with regard to group size; Primitive to Rural, w

Primitive to Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized, with regard to evidence of use. 

• Administrative Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Roaded Natural, with regard to visitor services; Se

Motorized to Semi-Primitive Motorized, with regard to management controls; and Primitive to Urban, with regmotorized uses (See Travel Management decisions regarding administrative uses).
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 89 

TABLE 2.13. RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES/INTERPRETATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ED

Decision No. Decision Text 

DFC-RR-18 

The Virgin River Gorge Scenic Gateway RMZ will be managed for: • Self-sustaining, recreation gateway between the Colorado Plateau and Basin and Range regions, nestled within 

landscape. 

• By the year 2010, manage this zone to produce safe day-use and overnight opportunities for community residen

national travelers passing through the Virgin River Gorge to appreciate geologic and riparian resources and stru

education within a stunning gateway between geologic provinces, providing no less than 75% of responding vicommunity residents at least a “moderate” realization of these benefits (i.e., 3.0 on a probability scale where 1=3=moderate, 4=total realization). 

• Camping, picnicking, nature study, viewing geology, hiking, walking, viewing education presentations, group e• Savoring the total sensory—sight, sound, and smell—experience of a natural landscape; learning more about th

closeness of friends and family; enjoying participating in-group outdoor events. 

• Personal Benefits: Improved appreciation of nature’s splendor; greater sensitivity to/awareness of outdoor aes

elegance; greater personal enrichment through involvement with other people; confirmation/development of on

• Household & Community Benefits: Stronger ties with one’s family and friends. 

• Environmental Benefits: Increased awareness and protection of natural landscapes. 

The RMZ will be managed to produce recreation opportunities in the following essential settings: • Physical Benefits: Rural, with regard to remoteness and recreation facilities and Roaded Natural, with regard t

• Social: Primitive to Semi-Primitive Motorized, with regard to group size---frequently spiking to Urban for gro

Natural, with regard to contacts; and Roaded Natural to Rural, with regard to evidence of use. 

• Administrative Benefits: Roaded Natural to Urban, with regard to visitor services; Rural to Urban, with regard t

uses; and Roaded Natural to Rural, with regard to management controls (see Travel Management decisions regadministrative uses). 

DFC-RR-19 

The Motorways RMZ will be managed for: • Interpretive respites for travelers at pullout sites along primary highways. 

• By the year 2015, collaborating with ADOT and Mohave County, manage this zone to produce safe day-use op

regional and national travelers along Interstate Highway 15 and community residents along Old Highway 91 tgeologic and riparian resource appreciation and education recreation, providing no less than 75% of respondincommunity residents at least a “moderate” realization of these benefits (i.e., 3.0 on a probability scale where 1=

3=moderate, 4=total realization). 

• Viewing geology, viewing wildlife, viewing nature, viewing roadside exhibits. 

• Learning more about things here/releasing or reducing some built-up mental tensions. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 90 

TABLE 2.13. RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES/INTERPRETATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ED

Decision No. Decision Text 

• Personal Benefits: Enhanced awareness and understanding of nature; closer relationship with the natural worl

fatigue; diminished mental anxiety. 

• Household & Community Benefits: Increased compassion for others. 

• Environmental Benefits: Increased awareness and protection of natural landscapes. 

The RMZ will be managed to produce recreation opportunities in the following essential settings: • Physical Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Rural, with regard to remoteness; Roaded Natural to Rur

naturalness; and Semi-Primitive Motorized to Roaded Natural, with regard to recreation facilities. 

• Social Benefits: Primitive to Semi-Primitive Motorized, with regard to group size; Primitive to Rural, with reg

Roaded Natural to Rural, with regard to evidence of use. 

• Administrative Benefits: Roaded Natural, with regard to visitor services; Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Sem

with regard to management controls; and Primitive to Urban, with regard to mechanized/motorized uses (See Tdecisions regarding access for administrative uses). 

DFC-RR-20 

The primary strategy for the Virgin Ridge SRMA will be to target a demonstrated community recreation-tourism 

primarily local communities (dependent on public lands recreation and/or related tourism use, growth, and/or dev

some other regional visitors, for motorized/mechanized/non-mechanized exploring, world-class rock climbing, anto-town natural settings. This demand is supported by the area’s distinctive landscape, its close proximity to the r

communities of Mesquite, Bunkerville, Logandale, and Overton, NV and Beaver Dam, Scenic and Littlefield, AZ

tourism visitors value these public lands as their own ‘back-yard’ recreation settings (See Appendix N for more in

– 2.17). 

DFC-RR-21 

The Lime Kiln Cliffs RMZ will be managed for: • Close-to-town world-class rock climbing in a natural setting. • By the year 2009, manage this zone to produce opportunities for visitors to enjoy easy-to-access, world class ro

less than 75% of responding visitors and affected community residents at least a “moderate” realization of thes

probability scale where 1=not at all, 2=somewhat, 3=moderate, 4=total realization). 

• Rock climbing (sport climbing on bolted routes). • Enjoying risk taking adventure; enjoying strenuous physical exercise. • Personal Benefits: Enhanced sense of personal freedom and awareness; improved outdoor knowledge, skills, a

improved muscle strength; improved cardiovascular health; a more holistic sense of wellness. 

• Household & Community Benefits: Greater sense of independence. 

• Economic Benefits: Reduced health maintenance costs. 

The RMZ will be managed to produce recreation opportunities in the following essential: 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 91 

TABLE 2.13. RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES/INTERPRETATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ED

Decision No. Decision Text 

• Physical Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Roaded Natural, with regard to remoteness; Semi-Primiti

Semi-Primitive Motorized, with regard to naturalness and recreation facilities. 

• Social Benefits: Primitive to Semi-Primitive Motorized, with regard to group size and contacts and Primitive to 

Motorized, with regard to evidence of use. 

• Administrative Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized, with regard to visitor services; Semi-Primitive Non-M

Primitive Motorized, with regard to management controls; and Primitive to Roaded Natural, with regard to mec

(See Travel Management decisions for administrative use access). 

DFC-RR-22 

The Virgin Ridge RMZ will be managed for: • Self-directed, rugged, adventure in a natural setting close to town with opportunities for scenic, natural and hist

• By the year 2009, manage this “close-to-town” zone to produce close-to-town recreation opportunities for com

regional visitors to enjoy self-directed, day and overnight adventure recreation in natural settings, providing no responding visitors and affected community residents at least a “moderate” realization of these benefits (i.e., 3where 1=not at all, 2=somewhat, 3=moderate, 4= total realization) to enjoy “close-to-home” access to sustaina

motorized/mechanized adventure. 

• Hiking, scrambling, equestrian, hunting, OHV exploring, mountain bike riding. • Enjoying risk-taking adventure; feeling good about solitude, being isolated, and independent; developing skills 

going exploring on one’s own. 

• Personal Benefits: Improved outdoor knowledge, skills, and self-confidence; enhanced sense of personal freed

greater sense of independence; closer relationship with the natural world; enhanced sense of personal freedom; 

enlarged sense of personal accountability for acting responsibly on public lands; a more outdoor oriented lifest

• Household & Community Benefits: Greater appreciation for one’s wildland/parkland heritage and how manage

sense of community dependency on public lands; increased work productivity. 

• Environmental Benefits: Improved understanding of this/our community’s dependence and impacts on public la

The RMZ will be managed to produce recreation opportunities in the following essential settings: • Physical Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Roaded Natural, with regard to remoteness; Semi-Primiti

Semi-Primitive Motorized, with regard to naturalness and recreation facilities. 

• Social Benefits: Primitive to Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized, with regard to group size; Primitive to Semi-Prim

regard to contacts; and Primitive to Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized, with regard to evidence of use. 

• Administrative Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized, with regard to visitor services; Semi-Primitive Non-M

Primitive Motorized, with regard to management controls; and Primitive to Roaded Natural, with regard to me(See Travel Management decisions for administrative use access). 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 92 

TABLE 2.13. RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES/INTERPRETATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ED

Decision No. Decision Text 

DFC-RR-23 

The primary strategy for the Fredonia SRMA will be to target a demonstrated community recreation-tourism marprimarily local communities (dependent on public lands recreation and/or related tourism use, growth, and/or devsome regional visitors, for motorized/mechanized/non-mechanized exploring, managed target shooting, fitness ac

equestrian, hiking, competitive and organized events, viewing and appreciating natural landscapes and cultural sisupported by the area’s distinctive landscape and its close proximity to the communities of Fredonia, AZ and Kan

recreation-tourism visitors value these public lands as their own ‘back-yard’ recreation settings (See Appendix N Maps 2.15 – 2.17). 

DFC-RR-24 

The Fredonia Rural Park RMZ will be managed for: • Quick, easy access from town to sustainable day-use adventure, challenge, exercise, social, and outdoor recreat

• By the year 2011, manage this zone to produce close-to-town opportunities for community residents and season

enjoy directed day-use adventure activities in scenic landscapes along structured travel routes and open space aWoodhill Road, providing no less than 75% of responding visitors and affected community residents at least a 

these benefits (i.e., 3.0 on a probability scale where 1=not at all, 2=somewhat, 3=moderate, 4=total realization)

• Exploring activities (i.e., OHV driving, ATV and motorcycle riding, equestrian, hiking); personal challenge act

climbing, rock crawling, mountain biking, BMX riding, target shooting, competitive events); social activities (

group/family events); and fitness activities (i.e., walking, running, hiking). 

• Enjoying going exploring on one’s own; enjoying having easy access to natural landscapes; developing your sk

getting some needed physical exercise; enjoying participating in group outdoor events; enjoying having access 

amenities. 

• Personal Benefits: Greater freedom from urban living; Improved appreciation of nature’s splendor; Improved 

community’s rural-urban interface impacts its quality of life; Improved skills for outdoor enjoyment; Improved 

health maintenance; Greater self-reliance; Restored mind from unwanted stress; Improved mental well-being; 

family and friends. 

• Household & Community Benefits: Increased nurturance of others; Improved functioning of individuals in fam

• Economic Benefits: Reduced health maintenance costs. 

• Environmental Benefits: Increased awareness and protection of natural landscapes. 

The RMZ will be managed to produce recreation opportunities in the following essential settings: • Physical Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Rural, with regard to remoteness and Semi-Primitive Mo

Natural, with regard to naturalness and recreation facilities. 

• Social Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized Roaded Natural, with regard to group size and evidence of use 

Primitive Motorized, with regard to contacts. May spike to Rural to Urban-like setting during special use activ
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 93 

TABLE 2.13. RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES/INTERPRETATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ED

Decision No. Decision Text 

• Administrative Benefits: Rural, with regard to visitor services; Semi-Primitive Motorized to Roaded Natural, w

controls; and Primitive to Urban, with regard to mechanized/motorized uses (See Travel Management decisionadministrative uses) 

DFC-RR-25 

The Shinarump Cliffs RMZ will be managed for: • Close-to-home, self-directed motorized/mechanized adventure for scenic, natural, and historic appreciation. • By the year 2011, manage this zone to produce opportunities for visitors to enjoy “close-to-home” access to na

along structured travel routes and areas for motorized/mechanized adventure recreation, providing no less than 

visitors and affected community residents at least a “moderate” realization of these benefits (i.e., 3.0 on a probat all, 2=somewhat, 3=moderate, 4=total realization). 

• Off-highway adventure driving and exploring, mountain bike riding. • Developing skills and abilities; enjoying going exploring on one’s own. • Personal Benefits: Enhanced sense of personal freedom; greater self-reliance; increased adaptability; greater e

and sensitivity; enlarged sense of personal accountability for acting responsibly on public lands; a more outdoo

• Household & Community Benefits: Heightened sense of satisfaction with one’s community, increased work pr

community involvement in other land-use decisions. 

• Environmental Benefits: Improved understanding of this/our community’s dependence and impacts on public la

The RMZ will be managed to produce recreation opportunities in the following essential settings: • Physical Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Semi-Primitive Motorized, with regard to remoteness, na

facilities. 

• Social Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Semi-Primitive Motorized, with regard to group size and ev

Primitive to Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized, with regard to contacts. 

• Administrative Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Semi-Primitive Motorized, with regard to visitor ser

controls, and Primitive to Semi-Primitive Motorized, with regard to mechanized/motorized uses (See Travel Mregarding access for administrative uses). 

DFC-RR-26 

The Badlands RMZ will be managed for: • Self-directed, primitive, adventure, challenge, exploration in a natural setting close to town 

• By the year 2011, manage this zone to produce close-to-town recreation opportunities for community resident 

enjoy self-directed, primitive day-use adventure in rugged, trackless, highly eroded and colorful formations, prof responding visitors and affected community residents at least a “moderate” realization of these benefits (i.e.

where 1=not at all, 2=somewhat, 3=moderate, 4= total realization). 

• Hiking, equestrian, viewing nature. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 94 

TABLE 2.13. RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES/INTERPRETATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ED

Decision No. Decision Text 

• Personal Benefits: Greater freedom from urban living; improved appreciation of nature’s splendor; closer rela

world. 

• Household & Community Benefits: Greater appreciation for one’s wildland/parkland heritage and how manage

sense of community dependency on public lands. 

• Environmental Benefits: Increased awareness and protection of natural landscapes. 

The RMZ will be managed to produce recreation opportunities in the following essential settings: • Physical Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized to Roaded Natural, with regard to remoteness; Semi-Primiti

Semi-Primitive Motorized, with regard recreation facilities; and Primitive to Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized, w

• Social Benefits: Primitive to Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized, with regard to group sized, contacts, and evidenc

• Administrative Benefits: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized, with regard to visitor services and management contr

Primitive Motorized, with regard to mechanized/motorized uses (See Travel Management decisions regarding 

uses). 

B. LAND USE ALLOCATIONS 

LA-RR-01 

The RMAs (both Special and Extensive), and accompanying RMZs within each SRMA, are identified as follows 

more information about RMAs and Map 2.14 for locations): St. George Basin SRMA: 141,024 acres St. George Basin Rural Park RMZ: 104,113 acres Canyons and Mesas RMZ: 36,911acres Virgin River SRMA: 4,955 acres Virgin River RMZ: 2,110 acres Virgin River Gorge Scenic Gateway RMZ: 135 acres The Motorways: 2,710 acres Virgin Ridge SRMA: 23,034 acres Lime Kiln Cliffs RMZ: 1,746 acres Virgin Ridge RMZ: 21,288 acres Fredonia SRMA: 14,969 acres Fredonia Rural Park RMZ: 5,853 acres Shinarump Cliffs RMZ: 3,965 acres The Badlands RMZ: 5,151 acres 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 95 

TABLE 2.13. RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES/INTERPRETATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ED

Decision No. Decision Text 

Gateways SRMA: 2,246 acres (also falls within the Vermilion Cliffs National Monument boundary) 

House Rock RMZ: 352 acres Vermilion Cliffs RMZ: 1,894 acres Paria SRMA: 1,413 acres (also falls within the Vermilion Cliffs National Monument boundary) Coyote Buttes RMZ: 1,1413 acres Sand Hills SRMA: 8,503 acres (also falls within the Vermilion Cliffs National Monument boundary) 

Uplands RMZ: 8,503 acres Arizona Strip ERMA (Extensive): 1, 784,921 acres

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

Recreation Management Actions 

Resources 

MA-RR-01 To the extent practicable, the natural or “remote” settings in Specialized and Primitive TMAs will be restored and

combination of projects and natural processes as the need or opportunity arises.

MA-RR-02 Geocache sites will be relocated with help from local geocachers if, through monitoring, it were determined that i

risk of unacceptable change due to use of the site. 

Signing and Recreation Facilities 

MA-RR-03 Major visitor facilities (visitor center or contact stations) will be collaborative efforts with nearby communities, w

Virgin River SRMA where a small contact facility may be considered.

MA-RR-04 Recreation facility development and maintenance will be limited in listed species and other sensitive habitats (See 

and Vegetation Management decisions).

MA-RR-05 

• Within SRMAs, the levels and types of signing and recreation facility development will be guided by the indiv

the administrative and physical recreation settings components prescribed for each RMZ. 

• Where ERMAs are allocated, the main emphasis areas for any signing and/or recreation facility placement will 

Backways TMAs. 

• Generally, signing and recreation facility development in the ERMAs will be the minimum necessary to provid

reduce user conflicts, and protect resources. 

MA-RR-06 Sign material and design will be unobtrusive in order to blend with local landscape settings and retain the natural 

of the site. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 96 

TABLE 2.13. RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES/INTERPRETATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ED

Decision No. Decision Text 

Recreation Marketing Actions 

Promotion 

MA-RR-07 Sensitive areas, where increased visitation can create unacceptable changes or impacts to natural or cultural resou

promoted. Public information will be provided only for those cultural sites designated for public use.

Recreation Monitoring Actions 

Inventory and Monitoring 

MA-RR-08 A Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) framework will be used to establish acceptable resource and social and m

conditions using appropriate indicators and standards. 

Recreation Administration Actions 

Visitor Limits and Regulations 

MA-RR-09 Recreational activities may be limited or restricted in special status species and other sensitive habitats (See Spec

Vegetation Management decisions).

MA-RR-10 Visitor limits, supplemental rules, or restrictions will be based on LAC.MA-RR-11 

Management responses to unacceptable resource and/or social conditions will range from least restrictive method

education) to most restrictive (e.g., visitor limits, supplemental rules, or restrictions). Where feasible, the least res

the first priority.

MA-RR-12 

No person or persons shall occupy one area within the Arizona Strip FO for longer than 14 consecutive days in an

however, extensions beyond the 14-day length of stay can be authorized for permitted uses on a case-by-case baswithin 30 air miles constitutes the same area for the purpose of this rule. Persons occupying a regular campsite w

Canyon Recreation Area are exempt from this rule. To protect resources, for public safety, or for other administra

authorized officer may, by posting notification, close a given site to occupancy. 

MA-RR-13 

• Camping may be limited in listed species and other sensitive habitats (see Special Status Species & Vegetation 

• Camping may be restricted or limited to protect cultural and/ or natural resources through campsite monitoring 

• Dispersed camping will be allowed, subject to Trail and Travel Management decisions. 

MA-RR-14 In developed campgrounds, camping outside designated campsites will be prohibited.MA-RR-15 Recreational shooting will be allowed except where public health and safety is jeopardized and subject to state an

Status Species decisions). Voluntary use of non-lead ammunition will be encouraged. 

MA-RR-16 Collection of antlers or other unregulated animal parts will be allowed (See Travel Management decisions for veh

and Wildlife and Special Status Species decisions for animal parts).
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 97 

TABLE 2.13. RECREATION & VISITOR SERVICES/INTERPRETATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ED

Decision No. Decision Text 

MA-RR-17 Reasonable limits for collecting petrified wood for personal use will be defined as no more than 25 pounds per pe

piece of petrified wood) up to a total of 250 pounds per person per year.

MA-RR-18 The recreational collecting of plants and dead and down firewood will be allowed (See Vegetation Management dMA-RR-19 Recreational stock use may be limited in listed species and other sensitive habitats or in the vicinity of cultural pr

Status Species, Fish and Wildlife, Vegetation Management, and Cultural decisions).

MA-RR-20 Certified weed-free feed is required for all recreation stock use (See Vegetation Management decisions).MA-RR-21 Where geocaches are allowed, they may remain so long as acceptable resource and social conditions are maintainMA-RR-22 

• Geocache sites are prohibited in archaeological sites, alcoves, caves, rock shelters, threatened and endangered 

nesting sites, and where identified natural and cultural resources are at risk. 

• In-the-ground placement of geocaches will be prohibited in designated wilderness. 

Permits and Fees 

MA-RR-23 Visitor limits, regulations, or restrictions may be instituted and/or adjusted when monitoring of resource and soci

trend toward unacceptable resource and social changes brought about by such use. 

MA-RR-24 Special recreation permit (SRP) application packages (application, operating plan, maps, etc.) will be considered 

case-by-case basis upon receipt of application. (See 43 CFR 2930 for requirements) 

MA-RR-25 Current recreation use permit and fee program required for use in the Virgin Gorge Recreation Area will continue

management decisions deemed necessary through monitoring, evaluation, and further planning. 

MA-RR-26 Motorized speed events will only be authorized in the Motorized Speed Event Area in the St. George Basin and li

(See Motorized Speed Event Area on Map 2.20) 

MA-RR-27 No competitive events will be authorized in designated wilderness. MA-RR-28 

• Commercial, competitive, organized group/event, and special area permits can be authorized when such uses a

compatible with management objectives and other plan provisions. Commercial services in designated wildernfor commercial activities within wilderness. 

• Recreation activities requiring use authorization may be limited in listed species and other sensitive habitats (S

and Vegetation Management decisions). 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 98 

INTERPRETATION AND EDUCATION

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-RR-27 

The Arizona Strip’s interpretation and environmental education program will be grounded in: • Arizona Strip natural and cultural resources; 

• Themes related Arizona Strip FO significance and mission statements; and 

• BLM mission and goals. 

DFC-RR-28 The public will understand and appreciate the purposes and significance of the Arizona Strip FO and their resourc

generations. 

DFC-RR-29 The public will understand the importance of natural and cultural resources in the Arizona Strip FO through inter

wildlife, and other environmental education programs. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-RR-29 Outreach efforts will be established, such as field institutes or elder hostels, to focus on interpretive and environm

not previously addressed. 

MA-RR-230 Visitors will be provided with environmental educational opportunities that are appropriate for each RMZ or for t

them to enjoy the variety of challenges that are presented when visiting these areas.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 99 

Map 2.13. Special Recreation Management Areas 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 100 

Map 2.14. Recreation Management Zones 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 101 

Map 2.15. Recreation Settings (Physical) 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 102 

Map 2.16. Recreation Settings (Social) 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 103 

Map 2.17. Recreation Settings (Administrative) 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 104 

TABLE 2.14. TRAVEL MANAGEMENT (TM) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-TM-01 The region’s remoteness, scenic beauty, open spaces and natural and cultural resources will be maintained by carDFC-TM-02 A variety of existing motorized, mechanized, and non-motorized trail and travel opportunities will be sustained, w

public and administrative needs. 

DFC-TM-03 Compatible traditional, current, and future use of the land will be sustained by establishing a transportation system 

protection of sensitive resource, promotes dispersed recreation, and minimizes user conflicts. 

DFC-TM-04 

Public use, resource management, and regulatory needs will be considered through travel management planning, consideration of the effects of, and interactions among, all forms of travel including motorized, mechanized, non-mechanized, equestrian and other livestock, walking, mountain biking, and other travel modes.

Travel Management Areas

DFC-TM-05 

Rural TMA (see Map 2.18)

• Objectives: The Rural TMA will provide for the widest variety of motorized, non-motorized, and mechanical 

existing and future recreational, traditional, casual, commercial, educational, and private needs adjacent to comdetriment or exclusion of the protection of resources. It will also facilitate linking existing and future regional tcommunities. 

• Primary Travelers: The Rural TMA will serve the day-to-day needs of those with permits for the use of resour

fuelwood and mineral materials, as well as private, state, and other land ownership needs and a variety of localagency resource management needs. It will also serve the “after work and on weekends” motorized and non-m

and regional visitors engaged in activities such as viewing scenery and cultural resources, exploring, camping, studying nature, and participating in organized events. 

• Setting Characteristics: Settings will be maintained within the Rural TMA that typically provide for communi

development and the widest variety of recreation opportunities in near-urban, moderately developed areas with mechanized use.

DFC-TM-06 

Backways TMA (see Map 2.18)

• Objectives: The Backways TMA will provide for a variety of motorized, non-motorized, and mechanical trave

and future recreational, traditional, casual, commercial, educational, and private needs, but not to the detriment protection of resources. It will also supply the primary travel system that will provide public entry from comm

and semi-primitive TMAs. 

• Primary Travelers: The Backways TMA will serve the day-to-day needs of those with permits for the use of re
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 105 

TABLE 2.14. TRAVEL MANAGEMENT (TM) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

fuelwood, and mineral materials, as well as private, state, and other land ownership needs and a variety of loca

agency resource management needs. It will also serve the motorized and non-motorized needs of local, regionainternational visitors engaged in activities such as viewing scenery, visiting cultural resources and interpretive vehicle, camping, picnicking, hunting; studying nature, and participating in organized events. It will also provifor day-use recreation activities related to motor touring. 

• Setting Characteristics: Settings will be maintained within the Backways TMA that typically provide entry to 

interpretive developments, and administrative facilities in mostly natural-appearing areas with motorized and m

DFC-TM-07 

Specialized TMA (see Map 2.18)

• Objectives: The Specialized TMA will provide for a variety of motorized, non-motorized, and mechanical tra

existing and future recreational, traditional, casual, commercial, and private needs in remote, rustic settings, buexclusion of the protection of resources. It will also be characterized by low to moderate densities of improved that will provide public entry portals from Backways corridors to the more remote Primitive TMAs. 

• Primary Travelers: The Specialized TMA will serve the day-to-day needs of those with permits for the use of 

grazing, fuelwood, and mineral materials, as well as private, state, and other land ownership needs and a varietFederal agency resource management needs. It will also serve the motorized and non-motorized needs of prim

national visitors engaged in activities such as viewing scenery and cultural resources, exploring, camping, hiki

gathering, and studying nature. 

• Setting Characteristics: Settings will be maintained within the Specialized TMA that typically provide for mot

entry to the most remote areas on lower standard, primitive roads with few and widely scattered, rustic developappearing areas. Rudimentary facilities may be present when necessary to protect resources or educate visitors

DFC-TM-08 

Primitive TMA (see Map 2.18)• Objectives: The Primitive TMA will provide for adequate, but limited motorized travel to serve existing and f

some commercial, private, and emergency needs and for non-motorized, non-mechanized travel to serve existi

needs in the most remote, rustic settings, for the enhancement and protection of important resource values. It w

areas containing no routes to areas characterized by low densities of primitive roads that will provide entry to a

facilities for administrative users. 

• Primary Travelers: The Primitive TMA will serve the occasional needs of those with permits for the use of res

research, as well as private, state, and other land ownership needs and a variety of local, state, and Federal agenneeds. It will also serve the non-motorized/non-mechanized needs of primarily local, regional, and national vis

such as viewing scenery and cultural resources, backcountry exploring, and hunting. 

• Setting Characteristics: Settings will be maintained within the Primitive TMA that provide for limited motori
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 106 

TABLE 2.14. TRAVEL MANAGEMENT (TM) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

administrative users on a small number of primitive roads in the most remote areas. Few and widely scattered, facilities can be present in mostly natural-appearing areas where they will be necessary to protect and/or admin

Remote settings, natural landscapes, solitude, and opportunities for primitive recreation will be minimally imp

B. LAND USE ALLOCATIONS 

Travel Management Areas 

LA-TM-01 

TMAs will not be formally allocated or designated. Per Land Use Planning Handbook, H-1601-1, TMAs will be 

Appendix O):• Rural 226,542 ac. 11% • Backways 275,608 ac. 14% • Specialized 805,008 ac. 41% • Primitive 673,906 ac. 34% 

Off-Highway Vehicle 

LA-TM-02 

The following OHV area (polygons) designations, which are required land use plan decisions, are subject to valid administrative purposes (see Glossary). Specific route designations are implementation level decisions and can be full implementation of OHV area designations, BLM policy will be followed regarding compliance with Section 

• 80,829 acres will be closed to motorized and mechanized vehicle use, which includes designated wilderness (S

• 1,899,260 acres will be limited to designated roads by motorized and mechanized vehicle use. 

• No areas will be designated limited to existing roads. 

• 976 acres will be open to motorized and mechanized vehicle use (following archeological survey and Section 

includes a 628-acre area south of St. George and a 348-acre area east of Fredonia. 

LA-TM-03 A motorized speed event area will be designated on 151,161 acres (following archeological survey and Section 10

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

Conditions of Use 

MA-TM-01 

State of Arizona traffic law statutes will continue to apply to all motorized vehicle use on State, County, and BLM 

“registration requirement will not apply on lands under BLM jurisdiction to an all-terrain vehicle or an off-road reoperating on a dirt road that is located in an unincorporated area of this state. For the purposes of this paragraph, unpaved or ungraveled road that is not maintained by this state or a city, town, or county of this state” (ARS 28-2

MA-TM-02 Motorized, mechanized, or non-motorized/non-mechanized use of routes that are designated as “limited” will be 

users, seasons, or vehicle types as identified on a route-by-route evaluation and designation (see Route Designatio

MA-TM-03 Motorized or mechanized use of administrative routes will be subject to the terms of an appropriate authorization 

ROW, permit, lease, maintenance agreement, or transportation plan that specifies the authorized administrative u
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 107 

TABLE 2.14. TRAVEL MANAGEMENT (TM) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

potential frequencies, and acceptable intensities maintenance (see Appendix O).

MA-TM-04 Motorized or mechanized use of administrative routes in “closed” areas will be the minimum necessary for the ad

the exercise of the right or permitted use (see Glossary for definition of “administrative routes”).

MA-TM-05 

All cross-country (off-transportation system) motorized or mechanized travel will be prohibited, with the followin

• Any designated open OHV areas. 

• Minimum necessary for administration of the area. • For emergency purposes. 

• Minimum necessary for the exercise of a valid existing right or authorized use; 

• In areas designated as “limited,” motorized-vehicles may be allowed to pull off a designated route 100 feet eith

use shall be monitored on a continuing basis. If monitoring results show effects that exceed limits of acceptablvehicles will not be allowed to pull off a designated route 100 feet either side of centerline. 

In areas designated as ACECs and along national trails, motorized use will keep within the designated route with 

shoulder and immediate roadside, allowing for vehicle passage, emergency stopping, or parking, unless otherwise 

MA-TM-06 Use of non-motorized, wheeled game carriers to retrieve game kills will be allowed in all areas except designated MA-TM-07 Use of non-motorized, mechanized vehicles (including bicycles) will be prohibited off the transportation system i

cultural or listed species values and in designated wilderness.

D. IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS 

Route Designation 

IMPL-TM-01 Prior to the full implementation of route designations, the requirements of AZ IM 2007-030 will be met regarding 

106 of the NHPA. 

IMPL-TM-02 

Routes will be designated as follows (See Designated Transportation System & Preliminary Route Network Map 

Evaluation Reports© and Sub-region Map 2.20 and Sub-region maps on the CD version of the RMP): • O: open to all users for motorized/mechanized travel (various special mitigating measures designed to ensure s

resources are protected may apply. Route Evaluation Report© designations = O or MO) 

• A: administrative use only (open to administrative motorized uses and non-motorized public uses; public mec

vary. Route Evaluation Report© designations = L or ML) (see Glossary for definition of administrative users). 

• NM: open to all users for non-motorized uses only (such as, horseback, foot or mechanized vehicles; mechani

(Route Evaluation Report© designations = ML)

Ferry Swale Sub-region only O: 49 miles A: 5 miles 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 108 

TABLE 2.14. TRAVEL MANAGEMENT (TM) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

NM: 0 miles

Trail Systems Designation 

IMPL-TM-03 

• State Trails System: Temple Trail (lower section) will continue to be managed as an Arizona State Trail Syst

• State Trails System: Old Arizona Road/Honeymoon Trail and Old Spanish Trail will continue to be managed 

System components. 

• State Trails System: Virgin River Interpretive Trail, Little Black Mountain Trail, Mokaac Trail (main segmen

Arizona Trail (Segment 34), and Paiute Wilderness Trails will continue to be managed as Arizona State Trail S

IMPL-TM-04 National Historic Trails: Old Spanish Trail will continue to be managed as a NHT.IMPL-TM-05 Millennium Trails: Arizona Trail (Millennium Legacy Trail) and Great Western Trail (National Millennium Tra

managed as Millennium Trails.

IMPL-TM-06 

Other: Vermilion Cliffs Highways will continue to be managed as a multi-partner interpretation and education tr

Establishment of new trail/road systems (motorized, mechanized, or non-motorized) such as the High Desert TraiHurricane ATV Trails; and Kanab-Fredonia Trails System may be considered where appropriate for targeted mar

and/or where public safety, user conflict, or resource protection issues can be resolved by establishing trails in the 

Preliminary Route Network (ASFO Undesignated Sub-regions Only) 

IMPL-TM-07 

• Until such time as route designations will be completed for the Arizona Strip FO (within 5 years of the Record 

preliminary route network will be based initially on existing routes in the Littlefield, St. George Basin, ColoradUinkaret, Yellowstone Mesa, Kanab Plateau, Grama Canyon, Buckskin, White Sage, and House Rock sub-reg2002 aerial photography. Following completion of the route inventory, the preliminary route network will be b

inventory until route designations for the sub-regions are complete. 

• Any existing vehicle type and size restrictions or seasonal limitations will remain in effect pending final route 

alter or remove such restrictions and/or limitations. 

O: 5,569 miles A: 22 miles 

NM: 7 miles 

Note: For GIS calculations, miles include routes that cross private & state land. The BLM acknowledges it only h

routes on BLM-administered land and only those on BLM-administered land will be designated within the next 3

IMPL-TM-08 MO: 13 miles of the higher elevation segment of the Black Rock Road will be temporarily closed to vehicle use f
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 109 

TABLE 2.14. TRAVEL MANAGEMENT (TM) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

December 1 to March 15 for public safety as rain or snow conditions warrant.

Route Closures 

IMPL-TM-09 

Routes will be closed as follows (See Designated Transportation System & Preliminary Route Network Map 2.21 

Reports© and Sub-region Map 2.20 and Sub-region maps on CD version of the Approved RMP): C: closed to all motorized and mechanized use (with an objective of future natural and/or project rehabilitation. R

designations = C) 

(Ferry Swale Sub-region Only) C: 2 miles 

TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-TM-09 The building of new roads, or altering or upgrading of existing roads, will be minimized to the greatest extent pos

protect natural and cultural resources on public lands or support achieving other resource management objectives 

Specific Desired Future TMA Conditions

DFC-TM-10 Transportation facilities that will be available, suitable, and appropriate in the Arizona Strip FO will vary by TMA

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

Management of Transportation Facilities 

MA-TM-08 Installations/structures (e.g., unobtrusive barriers, gates, signs) on or along routes will be allowed when they are t

control unauthorized use and when consistent with TMA objectives.

MA-TM-09 

• Routes causing resource damage or with safety concerns can be rerouted and/or reclaimed. Minor rerouting of 

wilderness characteristics are to be maintained can be considered when it is determined that: 1) it resolves the mentioned; 2) the road is an important travel link for public and administrative uses; 3) topography and engine

consideration of such a reroute; and 4) public motorized and mechanized travel will remain on the road throug

• Rehabilitation of closed routes will only occur after completion of NEPA review and compliance with the requ

of the NHPA. 

MA-TM-10 Newly constructed temporary routes (i.e. routes intended to serve a short-term purpose only,) will be reclaimed af

specific need.

MA-TM-11 No new roads will be allowed in designated wilderness.MA-TM-12 Routes where motorized/mechanized vehicle use is authorized for administrative use only, may be designated as 

public use.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 110 

TABLE 2.14. TRAVEL MANAGEMENT (TM) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

MA-TM-13 Trail construction (non-motorized) can occur to support RMZ objectives or to resolve issues of public safety, use

protection in ERMAs.

MA-TM-14 

Route maintenance will occur within standard widths based on route type. Widening, passing lanes, realignments

upgrades can occur if needed to achieve route standards consistent with Appendix O, TMAs, Appropriate Route CMaintenance Standards by TMA or for public safety. 

MA-TM-15 

New permanent motorized route construction will be the minimum necessary to achieve RMP provisions and to p

recreation opportunities and benefits in RMZs. However, new permanent roads will not be constructed in areas m

wilderness characteristics.

MA-TM-16 

In ACECs (see Special Status Species decisions): 

• Some rerouting of existing roads may occur. 

• Criteria must be met for modifications to existing roads. 

• Establishment of new permanent roads and/or upgrades may be restricted. 

• Speed limits may apply. 

MA-TM-17 A travel management plan will be developed and maintained that supports resource protection and uses identified 

Appendix O).

MA-TM-18 

• Routes created by unauthorized use will be immediately obscured and rehabilitated. 

• Implementation plans will include outreach efforts to actively recruit service-oriented volunteers, organization

with accomplishing appropriate implementation projects. 

MA-TM-19 New routes and any associated ROWs, once authorized, will become part of the designated transportation system

removed from the transportation plan.

Management of Preliminary Route Network 

MA-TM-20 Existing locations, types, and maintenance intensities of the preliminary route network will be maintained until fo

are complete.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 111 

Map 2.18. Travel Management Areas 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 112 

Map 2.19. Off-Highway Vehicle Designations 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 113 

Map 2.20. Route Designations by Sub-Regions 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 114 

Map 2.21. Designated Transportation System Route Network 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 115 

TABLE 2.15. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS (AC, WM, HT, WR) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

CONGRESSIONALLY DESIGNATED WILDERNESS (WM)

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

Goals

DFC-WM-01 

The first and dominant goal will be to provide for the long-term protection and preservation of the areas' wilderne

principle of non-degradation. The areas' natural condition, opportunities for solitude, opportunities for primitive arecreation, and any ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value pthat they remain unimpaired. 

DFC-WM-02 

The second goal will be to manage the wilderness areas for the use and enjoyment of visitors in a manner that lea

for future use and enjoyment as wilderness. The wilderness resource will be a dominant factor in all management must be made between preservation of wilderness character and visitor use. 

DFC-WM-03 

The third goal will be to manage the areas using the minimum tools, equipment, and/or structures necessary to ac

successfully, safely, and economically. The chosen tools, equipment, or structures will be the ones that least degr

temporarily or permanently. Management will seek to preserve spontaneity of use and as much freedom from reg

DFC-WM-04 

The fourth goal will be to manage non-conforming but accepted uses permitted by the Wilderness Act and subseq

that will prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the areas' wilderness character. Nonconforming uses are ththe rule; therefore, emphasis will be placed on maintaining wilderness character. 

Objectives

DFC-WM-05 

The wilderness character of the four designated BLM wilderness areas within the Arizona Strip FO will be protec

Wilderness character is defined by (from Section 2(c), Wilderness Act): • Naturalness: An area that generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the im

substantially unnoticeable. 

• Outstanding Opportunities for Solitude: Superior or excellent condition favorable for avoiding the sights, soun

people in the area or for attaining a state of being alone or remote from others. A lonely or secluded place. 

• Outstanding Opportunities for Primitive and Unconfined Recreation: Superior or excellent situations favorable 

mechanical (except as provided by law), and undeveloped types of recreation activities. Provides dispersed, un

either through the diversity in the number of primitive and unconfined recreational activities possible in the arquality of a singular opportunity. 

• Supplemental Values: Ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical v
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 116 

TABLE 2.15. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS (AC, WM, HT, WR) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

DFC-WM-06 

BLM wilderness areas will be managed to be ecologically sustainable and resilient to natural and human-caused 

Vegetation Management and Fire Management decisions). The BLM will strive to preserve or restore the natural 

associated with the physical and biological resources of designated wilderness. 

DFC-WM-07 Ecological DFCs will be adopted as objectives for wilderness areas. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

Wilderness Management 

MA-WM-01 

• Lands within designated wilderness may be restored where ecological integrity is outside the range of natural v

compatible with wilderness objectives (See Vegetation Management decisions). 

• The Minimum Requirement Decision Guide (Arthur Carhart National Wilderness Training Center, most recen

all decisions, giving greatest weight to accomplishing objectives via natural processes and non-mechanized/no

• When fire is managed in designated wilderness, MIST will be used. Fire management actions will be consisten

management objectives and guidelines described in the BLM Fire Management Plan. 

Wilderness Management Plans 

MA-WM-02 Existing WMPs will be evaluated and amended where necessary to conform to new management direction where 

DFCs or listed species recovery plans. 

MA-WM-03 A joint BLM/U.S. Forest Service (USFS) WMP will be written with the North Kaibab Ranger District for Kanab 

Wilderness Restoration 

MA-WM-04 Prescribed fire and fire use may be used in areas classified as Wildland Fire Use within designated wilderness to 

wilderness area management objectives described in the BLM’s Fire Management Plan. Vegetation may also be 

MA-WM-05 

Natural processes will be primarily relied on to restore areas of pre-existing human imprints in designated wilder

restoration of wilderness conditions is desirable, the BLM will require conformance with wilderness policy (BLM 

require restoration plans to address restoration of pre-existing human impacts.

MA-WM-06 In conformance with BLM wilderness policy (BLM Manual 8560), the best mix of manual, chemical, biological, 

with fire and natural processes, will be determined in order to restore ecological functions and structure in wilder

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS (WR)

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

Wild and Scenic Rivers Interim Management

DFC-WR-01 The viability of W&SR candidates for congressional consideration will be ensured through effective interim manDFC-WR-02 Until Congress acts to designate or release from further consideration rivers determined to be eligible and suitabl

RMP process and the subsequent Arizona Statewide W&SR Legislative EIS, the following desired conditions wi
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 117 

TABLE 2.15. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS (AC, WM, HT, WR) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

• Preservation of the stream’s free-flowing nature. 

• Preservation, protection, and, to the greatest extent practicable, enhancement of identified outstandingly remar

 Virgin River: scenic, geologic, aquatic, and riparian values 

• Preservation of characteristics that establish the potential classifications as Wild, Scenic, or Recreational: 

 Wild: free of impoundments, generally inaccessible except by trail, with shorelines essentially primitive and  Scenic: free of impoundments and generally inaccessible except by trail. However, shoreline disturbance fro

is apparent at several points. 

• Recreational: several access points and noticeable human developments. 

Congressional Release

DFC-WR-03 

Should the Virgin River study area lands not be included by Congress in the National W&SRs System but instead 

consideration and/or interim management, those lands will be managed using the goals, guidance and prescriptio

corresponding land use allocations (see Map 2.22).

B. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS 

SD-WR-01 The Virgin River will retain its tentative classification as wild from the Utah state line to the first I-15 bridge, sce

to the Virgin River Campground, and recreational from the campground to the Nevada state line (see Map 2.22). 

SD-WR-02 The Virgin River will retain its designation as the Virgin River Corridor ACEC to protect important W&SR charSD-WR-03 The Virgin River study area will retain its suitability determination for inclusion in the National W&SRs SystemSD-WR-04 The Virgin River study area will retain its recommendation for designation as a Study River under Section 5(a) o

Law [PL] 90-542). 

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-WR-01 Implementation of the recommendations for the Virgin River will continue the protective status (interim managem

eligibility findings defined in the Arizona Strip District RMP until Congress makes a decision about W&SR desi

MA-WR-02 The Virgin River will be studied in conjunction with Utah and Nevada to determine suitability under the W&SR MA-WR-03 The recommendation for designation of the Virgin River study area to be designated as a study river will preclud

management actions associated with implementation.

Restrictions of Uses Under Interim Management 

MA-WR-04 

Potential actions that may affect Virgin River wild and scenic values will be subject to interim protection. Manag

be allowed to damage the existing eligibility, classification, or suitability. The free-flowing characteristics of the 

modified.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 118 

TABLE 2.15. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS (AC, WM, HT, WR) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL (HT)

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-HT-01 

The following DFCs will apply to the Old Spanish NHT: • Visitors seeking to experience the NHT will understand and appreciate the trail’s history and significance. 

• Visitors will appreciate and respect the rights of landowners in the area. 

• High-potential NHT segments and historic sites will be protected from over-use, inappropriate use, and vandal

• Scenic values related to historical resources will be protected. 

• The viability of NHT resources for comprehensive planning will be ensured through effective interim managem

• Maximum protection of historic and prehistoric properties within the trail corridor will be provided. 

• The trail will be managed using the interim provisions of this RMP until a Comprehensive Management Plan/E

Old Spanish NHT planning team. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

Visitor Information and Education 

MA-HT-01 

Trail resources (natural, cultural, and historical) will be identified, recorded, and protected on Federal land. The B

information on known or additional high-potential historic sites and segments and cooperate with other Federal m

tions, trail scholars, and state historic preservation offices (SHPOs) in adding, deleting, or modifying the list of si

MA-HT-02 

The following criteria, based on the NRHP and the National Trails System Act, will be used to begin to identify h

high-potential route segment resources on public lands: • Significance to the trail (based on documentation and/or archeological research). 

• Integrity of the physical remains. 

• Integrity and quality of the setting including scenic quality and relative freedom from intrusion. 

• Opportunity for high-quality recreation evoking the historic trail experience. 

• Opportunity to interpret the primary period of trail use. 

Resource Protection 

MA-HT-03 Where significant trail corridor segments and associated sites are documented, viewsheds, as observed from these 

maintained.

MA-HT-04 When high potential trail sites and/or trail segments are documented, existing routes that may adversely affect the

limited or closed.

MA-HT-05 Any changes to the characteristic landscape must be low in the Old Spanish NHT corridor on public lands (See V

Management decisions).
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 119 

TABLE 2.15. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS (AC, WM, HT, WR) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

MA-HT-06 Recreational development of the trail will not occur prior to the development of the Comprehensive Management 

Allowable Uses 

MA-HT-07 Valid existing rights and existing land use authorizations will be recognized on public lands.

AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AC)

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-AC-01 ACECs will provide protection for special status plant and animal species, scenic values, riparian values, and sign

resources. 

DFC-AC-02 ACECs will be managed for information, protection, conservation, interpretation, and education (see Map 2.23). 

B. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS (see Appendix H) 

SD-AC-01 

The Beaver Dam Slope ACEC for protection of threatened desert tortoise and Mojave Desert Ecological Zone va

51,985 acres. Boundary adjustments will incorporate areas of critical habitat, desert tortoise habitat previously in 

ACEC, and lower quality habitat not previously included in the ACEC (see Map 2.23). 

SD-AC-02 The Little Black Mountain ACEC for the protection of cultural resources will be maintained at 241 acres (see MaSD-AC-03 

The Marble Canyon ACEC for the protection of Brady pincushion cactus and cultural resources will be enlarged 

in ACEC acreage are due to inclusion of areas of occupied habitat, removal of areas where repeated surveys have not present, and removal of portions of House Rock Valley with Fickeisen plains cactus, pronghorn antelope, and chisel-toothed kangaroo rat (see Map 2.23). 

SD-AC-04 

The Virgin River Corridor ACEC for protection of Virgin River fishes and threatened desert tortoise will be mod

100-year floodplain (approx. 2,065 acres). Boundary adjustments will eliminate areas outside of the 100-year flooincluded in the ACEC. Desert tortoise habitat previously included within this ACEC will be incorporated into an

Beaver Dam Slope or Virgin Slope ACEC. The Virgin River Corridor ACEC will then be managed for Virgin Ri

values only (see Map 2.23). 

SD-AC-05 

The Virgin Slope ACEC for protection of threatened desert tortoise and Mojave Desert Ecological Zone values w

acres. Boundary adjustments will incorporate areas of critical habitat, desert tortoise habitat previously in the VirACEC, and lower quality habitat not previously included in the ACEC (see Map 2.23). 

SD-AC-06 The Fort Pearce ACEC for protection of threatened Siler pincushion cactus will be enlarged to 5,724 acres. The i

is due to incorporating areas with known populations of Siler pincushion cactus not previously included within th

SD-AC-07 The Johnson Spring ACEC for protection of cultural resources and threatened Siler pincushion cactus will be enl

increase in the ACEC size is due to incorporating areas with known populations of Siler pincushion cactus not pr
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 120 

TABLE 2.15. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS (AC, WM, HT, WR) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

the ACEC boundary (see Map 2.23). 

SD-AC-08 The Lost Spring Mountain ACEC for protection of cultural resources and threatened Siler pincushion cactus will 

acres. The increase in ACEC acreage are due to inclusion of areas with significant resource values not previously 

SD-AC-09 The Moonshine Ridge ACEC for protection of cultural resources and threatened Siler pincushion cactus will be e

The increase in ACEC acreage are due to inclusion of areas with significant resource values not previously includ

SD-AC-10 The Black Knolls ACEC for the protection of endangered Holmgren milkvetch will be designated at 428 acres an

critical habitat for the species (see Map 2.23). 

SD-AC-11 The Kanab Creek ACEC for the protection of endangered SW flycatcher habitat and riparian, scenic, and cultura

designated at 13,148 acres (see Map 2.23). 

SD-AC-12 The Lone Butte ACEC for protection of threatened Jones Cycladenia and scenic values will be designated at 1,76SD-AC-13 The Shinarump ACEC will be relocated southwest of the originally proposed location and will be designated for 

Siler pincushion cactus at 3,237 acres (see Map 2.23). 

C. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-AC-01 Vegetation diversity will be maintained or improved in accordance with ecosite guides. MA-AC-02 ACECs will be closed to all vegetative product sales.MA-AC-03 Restoration and vegetation treatments will be authorized only where doing so will result in benefits for resources 

the ACEC.

MA-AC-04 ACECs designated for the protection of plants will be closed to the collection of vegetative materials. In other A

and down wood will be allowed for personal campfire use only, subject to fire restrictions.

MA-AC-05 The BLM will seek to acquire non-Federal lands and interests in lands within the ACECs from willing sellers by 

donation. Acquisitions will include surface and subsurface rights, and water rights, whenever possible (see decisi

MA-AC-06 The BLM will retain the ACECs in public ownership (see decision MA-LR-01).MA-AC-07 ACECs will remain open to locatable mineral exploration and development. A Mining Plan of Operation with sp

will be required to avoid impacts to critical resources or proposed or designated critical habitat. 

MA-AC-08 ACECs will remain open to leasable mineral exploration and development. Special mitigation will be required to 

status species and proposed or designated critical habitat and cultural resources.

MA-AC-9 New mineral material disposal sites in ACECs will not be authorized. Existing material sites will be evaluated an

impacting significant resources.

MA-AC-10 Motorized and mechanized vehicle use in ACECs will be limited to designated roads or trails (see Travel Manag
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 121 

TABLE 2.15. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS (AC, WM, HT, WR) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

purpose of protecting the resources and values of the ACEC, no areas will be authorized for cross-country, off-ro

for authorized administrative and emergency purposes. Motorized use will keep within the designated route with 

shoulder and immediate roadside, allowing for vehicle passage, emergency stopping, or parking, unless otherwise 

MA-AC-11 The BLM will authorize only temporary upgrading of existing roads. MA-AC-12 New roads will be authorized on a temporary basis only or when beneficial for relevant resources. 

Beaver Dam Slope and Virgin Slope ACECs (Desert Tortoise ACECs [DT]) 

Fire Management 

MA-AC-01(DT) Fire management in desert tortoise habitat will include conservation measures for desert tortoise as described in A

Vegetation Management 

MA-AC-02(DT) No mechanical treatment or conversion will be allowed unless the project benefits or improves tortoise managemMA-AC-03(DT) Habitat restoration in desert tortoise habitat can include planting or seeding of nonnative plants. MA-AC-04(DT) Desert tortoise ACECs will be closed to live vegetation harvest, except salvage in areas where surface disturbancMA-AC-05(DT) Vegetation management in desert tortoise habitat will include conservation measures for desert tortoise as describ

Desert Tortoise Management 

MA-AC-06(DT) The BLM will seek funding and cooperate with Mojave County, ADOT, FHWA, and others on opportunities to e

fencing along Highway 91 on the Beaver Dam Slope and along other routes where desert tortoise mortality is or b

Cultural Resources Management 

MA-AC-07(DT) 

Proposed actions will be evaluated to ensure they do not adversely impact cultural resources. Where proposed wa

developments may lead to adverse effects to cultural resources, specific actions will be taken to reduce or elimina

Such actions include, but are not limited to complete recordation, excavation to obtain information, redesign, relonew features, or abandonment. 

Travel Management 

MA-AC-08(DT) 

New paved roads will not be authorized in desert tortoise ACECs. Temporary upgrading of existing roads and counpaved roads in ACECs may be authorized only where positive benefits result for desert tortoise or their managand highways or major reconstruction or modifications of existing paved roads along the edges of the ACECs wi

tortoise barrier fencing. Culverts, to allow safe passage of tortoises, will be constructed in coordination with ADO

MA-AC-09(DT) 

The BLM will maintain or authorize maintenance of existing roads in desert tortoise habitat, with non-emergency 

allowed only from October 15 to March 15. Operators of road graders and other maintenance equipment will be r

education class prior to performing the work. Maintenance activities will be limited to previously disturbed areas
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 122 

TABLE 2.15. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS (AC, WM, HT, WR) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

qualified biologist. 

MA-AC-10(DT) Temporary access routes in desert tortoise habitat created during project construction will be modified as necessaMA-AC-11(DT) 

Vehicles associated with BLM-authorized projects traveling on unpaved roads in ACECs will be required to keep 

mph during the active tortoise season (from March 15 to October 15) to protect desert tortoises. Speed limits mathrough high-density tortoise areas.

MA-AC-12(DT) 

BLM will complete a proposal to close roads and designate routes in the desert tortoise ACECs. Roads targeted 

those that 1) have no purpose, 2) are duplicative or redundant, or 3) are causing high levels of mortality of tortois

restricted to existing roads and trails prior to route designation. After designation, vehicles will be restricted to dImplementation of the closure/designation plan will include the following actions 1) sign entry portals/major interead "Limited to Designated Roads", 2) sign all designated routes as open, 3) and sign along designated routes inof designated routes is not permitted.

MA-AC-13(DT) Use of new roads constructed for specific non-public purposes, such as access routes to microwave towers, will b

administrative use only. 

Grazing Management 

MA-AC-14(DT) The Beaver Dam, Highway, and Mormon Well Allotments will be available for livestock grazing from October 1MA-AC-15(DT) The Littlefield Slope Pasture of the Littlefield and Mesquite Community Allotments will be available for livestoc

15 to March 15. 

Recreation Management 

MA-AC-16(DT) 

The BLM will restrict vehicle-based camping in the desert tortoise ACECs to within 50 ft of designated routes. Bvehicle-based camping will be limited to within 50 ft of existing routes. No camping will be authorized for longe

days in any one area within the desert tortoise ACECs. 

MA-AC-17(DT) 

Camping will be allowed, but vehicles must keep motorized use within the designated route with reasonable use immediate roadside. Backpacking, horseback riding, and mountain biking will be allowed throughout the area, pr

or populations are not adversely impacted 

MA-AC-18(DT) Competitive speed events will be prohibited within the desert tortoise ACECs.MA-AC-19(DT) Organized non-speed events will be restricted to designated roads within the desert tortoise ACECs.MA-AC-20(DT) Activities that can adversely affect the desert tortoise during their active season within tortoise habitat may be lim

between October 15 and March 15. The BLM may restrict season of use, number of visitors, and/or close an area 

Minerals Management 

MA-AC-21(DT) ACECs will remain open to mineral entry under the mining laws.
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 123 

TABLE 2.15. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS (AC, WM, HT, WR) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

MA-AC-22(DT) Mineral leasing in the desert tortoise ACECs will only be authorized with the stipulation of WNSO or NSO.MA-AC-23(DT) All activities associated with surface occupancy for mineral leasing within DWMAs/ACECs will be limited to th

March 15 and subject to all other conservation measures. 

MA-AC-24(DT) Special mitigation will be required in mining plans of operation to avoid impacts to desert tortoise within the desMA-AC-25(DT) The desert tortoise ACECs will be closed to mineral material sales. MA-AC-26(DT) 

In regards to locatable minerals in DWMAs/ACECs, the BLM will require plans of operation and bonding for anof casual use, pursuant to the surface management regulations (43 CFR 3809). The BLM will approve plans of opchance of take occurring in accordance with these terms and conditions. 

MA-AC-27(DT) Mineral material disposals will not be authorized within the desert tortoise ACECs.MA-AC-28(DT) Non-commercial hand collection of rocks within 100 feet of designated open roads will be permitted in desert tor

Lands and Realty 

MA-AC-29(DT) New ROWs through desert tortoise habitat will be routed away from high-density tortoise populations. Linear R

adjacent or parallel to existing ROWs and share vehicular access.

MA-AC-30(DT) No new landfills or sewage treatment ponds will be authorized in the desert tortoise ACECs. MA-AC-31(DT) Utilities will be co-located with other utility projects whenever feasible. Utility lines will be designed, located, an

attracting desert tortoise predators. 

Surface-Disturbing Activities 

MA-AC-32(DT) 

Reclamation will be required for activities that result in loss or degradation of tortoise habitat within ACECs. Habreclaimed to as close a pre-disturbance condition as practicable. Mitigation measures may be required to offset thquantity of desert tortoise habitat. 

MA-AC-33(DT) Compensation may be required to mitigate residual impacts from authorized actions. The BLM will assess compe

rate for any proposed projects in the Beaver Dam Slope or Virgin Slope ACEC. 

MA-AC-34(DT) 

Proposed actions will be evaluated to ensure they do not contribute to the proliferation of natural predators within 

Where proposed waters or other developments may lead to adverse effects to the desert tortoise, specific actions 

eliminate the adverse effects. Such actions include, but are not limited to redesign, incorporation of new features, abandonment.

MA-AC-35(DT) Surface disturbing activities will be limited to the period from October 15 through March 15. 

Other Management Actions 

MA-AC-36(DT) The BLM will cooperate with agencies and private land owners on a case-by-case basis to relocate tortoises from 

Federal lands within the Arizona FO that are slated for development. No translocations of desert tortoises from p
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 124 

TABLE 2.15. SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS (AC, WM, HT, WR) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

occur without completion of a Section 7 consultation or Section 10 (a) habitat conservation plan. 

MA-AC-37(DT) The BLM will cooperate with other agencies and groups to identify areas where uncontrolled dogs are causing de

Marble Canyon ACEC (MC) 

MA-AC-01(MC) Motorized and mechanized travel will be limited to designated roads. MA-AC-02(MC) The ACEC plan will be updated to ensure that management of Brady pincushion cactus is consistent with the rec

Virgin River Corridor ACEC (VG) 

MA-AC-01(VG) Fire management within the Virgin River Corridor ACEC will include conservation measures for SW flycatchers 

described in Appendix F.

MA-AC-02(VG) Suitable flycatcher habitat will be managed so that its suitable characteristics are not eliminated or degraded. MA-AC-03(VG) Potential flycatcher habitat will be managed to allow natural regeneration (through natural processes) into suitabl

possible. 

MA-AC-04(VG) Livestock will be excluded from suitable flycatcher habitat (whether occupied or unoccupied) during the vegetati

break to leaf drop).

MA-AC-05(VG) The River Pasture of the Lambing Allotment will be unavailable for grazing during the vegetative growing seasoMA-AC-06(VG) Vegetation management within the Virgin River Corridor ACEC will include conservation measures for SW flyc

as described in Appendix F.

MA-AC-07(VG) The Virgin River Gorge Scenic Withdrawal area (6,741 acres) will continue on lands outside wilderness.MA-AC-08(VG) The Virgin River Gorge Scenic Withdrawal area will continue to be closed to mineral entry. The remainder of th

ACEC is open to mineral entry and a plan of operation will be required. 

MA-AC-09(VG) The ACEC will be open to fluid mineral leasing subject to NSO in the Virgin River Gorge Scenic Withdrawal ar

terms and conditions in the remainder of the ACEC.

MA-AC-10(VG) Riparian areas will be managed to achieve and/or maintained in proper functioning condition in accordance with 

the vegetation management section of this document. 

Fort Pearce, Johnson Springs, Lost Spring Mountain, and Moonshine Ridge ACECs (PS) 

MA-AC-01(PS) 

Proposed actions within the ACEC will be evaluated to ensure they do not adversely impact cultural resources. W

other developments may lead to adverse effects to the cultural resources, specific actions will be taken to reduce effects. Such actions include, but are not limited to complete recordation, excavation to obtain information, redesincorporation of new features, or abandonment.

MA-AC-02(PS) The feasibility of relocating existing corrals or water developments outside the ACEC boundary will be considere
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 125 

Kanab Creek ACEC (KC) 

MA-AC-01(KC) Fire management within the Kanab Creek ACEC will include conservation measures for SW flycatchers as descrMA-AC-02(KC) Vegetation management within the Kanab Creek ACEC will include conservation measures for SW flycatchers a

F.

MA-AC-03(KC) The Kanab Creek Allotment will be unavailable for grazing during the growing season.MA-AC-04(KC) No new corrals or water developments will be authorized or constructed within the ACEC boundary.MA-AC-05(KC) The feasibility of relocating existing corrals or water developments outside the ACEC boundary will be considereMA-AC-06(KC) Riparian areas will be managed to achieve and/or maintain proper functioning condition in accordance with presc

VM decisions.

Shinarump ACEC (SH) 

MA-AC-01(SH) No new corrals or water developments will be authorized or constructed within the ACEC boundary. MA-AC-02(SH) The feasibility of relocating existing corrals or water developments outside the ACEC boundary will be considere

D. IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS 

Beaver Dam Slope and Virgin Slope ACECs 

IMPL-AC-01 A signing and fencing plan will be developed. Signing and fencing will occur as funding allows. 

Marble Canyon ACEC 

IMPL-AC-02 Rock or similar barriers to off-road vehicle travel will be installed in areas where threatened and endangered cact

rim overlooks. 

Virgin River Corridor ACEC 

IMPL-AC-03 Utilization levels of native riparian trees within the Virgin River Corridor ACEC will be limited to 30% of the ap

season. 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 126 

Map 2.22. Suitable Wild and Scenic River (Virgin River) 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 127 

Map 2.23. Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 
Arizona Strip Field Office 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 128 

TABLE 2.16. PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY (HM)

Decision No. Decision Text 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-HM-01 All hazardous or potentially hazardous sites and situations, including hazardous materials, hazardous or solid was

sites, abandoned well sites, and other potential hazards on public lands, will be mitigated or eliminated. 

DFC-HM-02 The potential for intentional or accidental releases of hazardous materials or wastes and solid waste onto BLM wi

eliminated. 

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-HM-01 Areas known to have hazardous materials, hazardous wastes, or solid wastes, including abandoned mine lands, w

restored, or corrected.

MA-HM-02 Responsible parties will be actively sought to reimburse hazardous materials cleanup costs.MA-HM-03 Recreational shooting will be allowed within the context of the law. MA-HM-04 Public access to abandoned mine and well sites will be controlled by providing warning signage and barriers, as aMA-HM-05 

As funding allows, abandoned mines will be identified and prioritized for remediation, restoration, or corrections 

• Those that are public safety hazards. 

• Those that may contain high levels of heavy metals in waste rock or tailings. 

• Those that may be degrading water quality. 

TABLE 2.17. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (SR) 

Decision No. Decision Text 

A. DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

DFC-SR-01 Approved scientific research will contribute to management of natural and cultural resources and achieving DFCs

B. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS 

MA-SR-01 Permits will be required for approved scientific research to ensure compatibility and reporting of results. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 129 

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS 

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

addressed in EIS- or EA-level documents, such activities are not management decisions at either 

the land use plan level or implementation level. Administrative actions do not require NEPA 

analysis or a written decision by a responsible official in order to be accomplished. Instead, 

administrative actions (and standard operating procedures) are day-to-day activities conducted by 

the BLM, often required by FLPMA, which outline the objectives, basic management policy, and 

program direction. Examples of administrative actions include mapping, surveying, 

inventorying, monitoring, and collecting information needed such as research and studies. Some 

specific administrative actions associated with the management of the Arizona Strip FO are 

presented below. This is, however, not a complete list of all standard operating procedures 

required by law or policy that the BLM will use in administering the resources and uses in this 

FO. 

Geology and Paleontology 

• Inventories for paleontological resources will continue.

• A sensitivity map for paleontological resources will be developed and screening for all 

projects against potential for the project to impact vertebrate fossils or noteworthy 

occurrences of invertebrate or plant fossils will be required.

Vegetation Management: 

o Desired Plant Community Objectives 

• Ecological site inventories will be completed to determine site potentials and ecological 

conditions (see Appendix B for Arizona Standards and Guidelines).

o Vegetation and Restoration Treatments 

• Vegetation treatments and uses will be monitored as part of an adaptive management 

process. When new information from monitoring or other studies becomes available, 

practices and guidelines will be modified to incorporate best science available.

Vegetation Management (Ponderosa Pine Ecological Zone) 

• The BLM will monitor fire effects and ecological conditions within treated areas. 

• Treatments will continue to be monitored to provide short- and long-term information on 

the effects of ponderosa pine restoration treatments on the plant and animal communities 

affected by the treatments. 

Fish and Wildlife (General) 

• Benefits for dollars spent on managing and improving wildlife habitat on public lands 

will be maximized by continuing and expanding cooperative partnerships with AGFD, 

USFWS, and other interested groups.
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 130 

Fish and Wildlife (Migratory Birds) 

• Migratory bird populations will be monitored in cooperation with AGFD. Significant 

waterfowl habitat sites will be inventoried. Standardized surveys will be used to 

inventory breeding bird populations and evaluate existing habitat.

Fish and Wildlife (Carnivores and furbearers) 

• Carnivore and furbearer habitats will be monitored to ensure a healthy and diverse 

predator component throughout the Arizona Strip FO. 

Special Status Species (All Special Status Species) 

• Public awareness of special status species will be increased through signs, educational 

media, and other outreach efforts to promote conservation of the species.

• Guidance criteria for assessing impacts to listed species from livestock grazing actions 

will be used as appropriate.

• To the extent practicable, inventory and monitoring of special status species will be 

conducted in accordance with accepted survey protocols.

Special Status Species (Special Status Plants) 

• The BLM will continue to inventory and map known locations and potential habitat for 

special status plant populations to ensure protection of these populations and facilitate 

management.

• The BLM will continue appropriate monitoring of all special status plant species within 

the Arizona Strip FO.

• Public conservation education programs will be implemented to inform publics of the 

value of conserving special status plant habitats and the rules and policies governing their 

protection.

Special Status Species (Desert Tortoise) 

o Desert Tortoise Management in Desert Tortoise ACECs 

• Assisting with funding, adaptation, and implementation of monitoring programs, 

including line-distance sampling or other approved techniques, will continue. 

• Assisting with funding, inventory, and modeling efforts to develop a habitat map of 

desert tortoise habitat in the Arizona Strip FO will continue. 

• Assisting with design, funding, and implementation of research to determine limiting 

factors for desert tortoise within the Arizona Strip FO will continue. 

• The BLM will use various mechanisms of public outreach to inform the public about 

desert tortoise recovery. These may include interpretive displays, interpretive kiosks, 

news releases, open houses to answer questions about DWMA/ACEC designation and 

management, and/or other actions. 

o Vegetation Management in Desert Tortoise ACECs 

• Assisting with design, funding, and implementation of research to determine methods for 

reducing exotic invasive annual grasses in desert tortoise habitat will continue. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 131 

o Fire Management in Desert Tortoise ACECs 

• Assistance with design, funding, and implementation of research to determine the effects 

of chemical fire retardants on the desert tortoise and its habitat will continue. 

Special Status Species (Native Fish) 

• Appropriate monitoring of all riparian areas within the Arizona Strip FO will continue, 

including greenline transects, riparian functionality assessments, etc. 

• Assistance in monitoring efforts for native Virgin River fish populations will continue in 

cooperation with the USFWS, AGFD, and the Virgin River Fishes Recovery Team. 

• Grazing systems, strategies, and intensities for riparian recovery and maintenance will be 

investigated. 

Special Status Species (All Special Status Raptors) 

• The BLM will continue to survey and/or monitor potential habitat for special status 

raptors within the Arizona Strip FO. 

• The BLM will continue to maintain a database of raptor observations. 

• The BLM will continue to identify roost locations. 

• A program of public conservation education and planning directed towards preservation 

of special status raptor habitats will be carried out. 

Special Status Species (Bald Eagle) 

• Important foraging habitat of bald eagles within the Arizona Strip FO will be located and 

mapped. 

• Bald eagle habitat assessments will continue at least every third year. 

• Bald eagle occurrence surveys will continue at least every other year at all suitable 

habitat locations. 

Special Status Species (Peregrine Falcon) 

• The BLM will cooperate and assist with post-delisting monitoring efforts for peregrine 

falcon within the Arizona Strip FO.

Special Status Species (Riparian-Dependent Special Status Birds: Southwestern Willow 

Flycatcher) 

• Identification and mapping of suitable and potential habitat areas for SW flycatchers will 

continue. 

• Habitat conditions in suitable and potential SW flycatcher habitat will continue to be 

monitored at least every third year in order to determine best management of riparian 

areas. 

• SW flycatcher occurrence surveys will continue at least every other year at all suitable 

habitat locations. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 132 

• Nest monitoring will continue to determine nesting success, parasitism rates, and 

predation rates. 

• Baseline data on cowbird parasitism will be collected. 

• Employees and public users will be educated about SW flycatchers. 

• The BLM will continue to maintain a database of SW flycatcher observations. 

Special Status Species (Riparian-Dependent Special Status Birds: Yuma Clapper Rail) 

• Identification and mapping of suitable and potential habitat areas for Yuma clapper rails 

will continue. 

• Yuma clapper rail occurrence surveys will continue at least every other year at all 

suitable habitat locations. 

• Monitoring of habitat conditions in Yuma clapper rail habitat will continue at least every 

third year in order to determine how best to manage riparian habitats to protect this 

species. 

• A program of public conservation education and planning directed towards preservation 

of Yuma clapper rail habitat will continue. 

Special Status Species (Riparian-Dependent Special Status Birds: Yellow-billed Cuckoo) 

• The BLM will continue to maintain updated maps of yellow-billed cuckoo habitat in the 

Arizona Strip FO. 

• Support and Participation for yellow-billed cuckoo survey and monitoring efforts on 

lands within the Arizona Strip FO will continue. 

• Habitat conditions in yellow-billed cuckoo habitat will continue to be monitored in order 

to be able to determine how best to manage these riparian areas to protect this and other 

riparian dependent species. 

• The BLM will continue to maintain a database of yellow-billed cuckoo observations. 

Cultural Resources (Archaeological and Historic Resources) 

• Non-destructive research proposals such as inventory, intensive site mapping, Historic 

American Building Survey /Historic American Engineering Record documentation of 

historic structures, cultural landscapes, and other significant historic properties, and 

scaled rock art recording will be pursued through interagency cooperation, grants, 

contracts, and other funding sources.

• The Arizona Site Steward Program, service groups, and other volunteers will be 

supported in order to monitor resource conditions, assist in resource protection, assist in 

project work, aid in effective land management, and to serve as advocates and stewards 

of BLM mission to protect and conserve cultural resources.

• Proactive research, protection, and inventories with universities, avocational and service 

groups, site stewards, tribes, and communities will be used to gain a better understanding 

of cultural resources for present and future management and protection.

• Properties eligible for listing on the NRHP will be nominated.
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 133 

• Traditional Cultural Properties will be identified and associated socio-cultural values will 

be documented.

• Cooperative management agreements will be developed with the neighboring Federal 

agencies, local and regional American Indian tribes and communities, institutions of 

higher learning, and/or other agencies or groups to improve the efficiency and quality of 

site management. 

• Scientific study to gain knowledge on the full array of cultural resources in the Arizona 

Strip FO will be allowed in order to fulfill regional research objectives and to fill regional 

data gaps identified in Altschul and Fairley (1989), when possible. Such studies can 

include ethnographic and oral histories, historic and landscape studies, archaeological 

studies, and ethnobotanical and environmental studies.

• Databases, maps, site, and inventory records will be maintained to current professional 

standards.

• Databases and finder guides that help to locate, use, and organize archives and museum 

collections will be established.

• Priority geographic and historic areas for new field inventory will include the first terrace 

above riparian areas, woodlands, the vicinity of Johnson Springs, Shinarump Plateau, 

Lost Spring Mountain, Yellowstone Mesa, House Rock Valley, current and potential high 

visitor use areas, and wilderness areas.

• Geographic and archaeological scientific inventories will be continued based on 

imminent threats from natural or human-caused deterioration, potential conflict with 

other resource uses, and the probability for unrecorded significant resources.

• Archives and museum collections will be located, inventoried, and managed to ensure 

accessibility and use for research, documentation, and public interpretation.

• All implementation actions will be contingent upon the outcome of Sec 106 consultation 

with the Arizona SHPO and will not proceed until that process is completed.

Cultural Resources (Resources of Importance to American Indians) 

• Tribes and individual members of tribes with cultural and historic ties to the Arizona 

Strip will be consulted, according to the provisions specified in Native American Grave 

Protection and Repatriation Act, Archaeological Resources Protection Act, NHPA, and 

pertinent Executive Orders.

• Mutually acceptable methods of protecting and preserving areas of sacred and traditional 

importance will be adopted.

Lands and Realty 

• The BLM will attempt to locate the potentially responsible party to remove/clean up any 

unauthorized use, restore/rehabilitate the public lands back to their original condition, and 

pay the administrative costs incurred by the BLM to investigate the unauthorized use 

along with applicable rental/additional fees as provided in BLM Manual 9232 and H9232-1. Where the potentially responsible party is not found, the BLM will conduct the 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 134 

removal/cleanup as funding allows. However, if the potentially responsible party were 

later identified, the BLM will seek reimbursement of the costs incurred.

• Existing withdrawals will continue for as long as needed or as statutorily/legislatively 

established/mandated which include wilderness (approximately 80,629797 acres), Grand 

Canyon Game Preserve (approximately 13, 124335 acres, BLM portion), power site 

reservation, reclamation, public water reserves (approximately 142,442 acres), 

administrative site, and other miscellaneous withdrawals (approximately 24,261 acres).

• Land ownership adjustments will not be considered on withdrawn land unless or until the 

withdrawal has been modified or revoked. Lands that become un-encumbered through the 

withdrawal review process will then be subject to and managed in accordance with 

planning guidance and objectives contained within this RMP. 

• There are a number of favorable places throughout the Arizona Strip FO that are 

commonly known and consistently used for aircraft landing and departure activities that, 

through such casual use, have evolved into backcountry airstrips (the definition contained 

in Section 345 of PL 106-914, the Interior, and Related Agencies Appropriation Act of 

2001). In accordance with that law, any closure of an aircraft landing strip contemplated 

in the future, will require full public notice, consultation with local and State government 

officials and the FAA.

• Existing land use authorizations (ROWs, permits, leases, etc.) will be administered in 

accordance with the terms and conditions of the authorizations.

• Floodplain occupancy and development will be avoided and base floodplain (100-year) 

will be retained or protected.

• The BLM will work with Mohave County to determine the best location for a landfill to 

serve the Virgin River communities, including Beaver Dam, Littlefield, Desert Springs, 

Scenic, and Arvada.

• Airstrips authorized by a public airport lease or permit (Cliffs Dwellers and a portion of 

Mesquite) will continue to be managed. The Colorado City Airport has been patented 

under the Airport and Airways Improvement Act.

• The BLM will advise prospective future owners of parcels identified for disposal on the 

need for ESA compliance. (See Special Status Species decisions).

• The BLM will work with the Washington County Water Conservancy District to 

determine the best route for the proposed water pipeline from Lake Powell to Sand 

Hollow Reservoir, Utah, and to authorize use of BLM-administered land for that route 

and a portion of the proposed flood control reservoir at Fort Pearce in Utah, in 

accordance with other plan provisions and with NEPA and ESA compliance.

• Commercial development of renewable energy sources will be encouraged on all public 

land outside of exclusion or avoidance areas including concentrating solar power, 

photovoltaics, wind, and biomass resources and technologies. Wind energy development 

will be in accordance with policies and best management practices in the Final Wind 

Energy Programmatic EIS (BLM 2005).
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 135 

Recreation and Visitor Services 

o Recreation Management Actions: Signing and Recreation Facilities 

• All recreation facilities and signs will be made consistent with the Americans with 

Disabilities Act of 1973, Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Architectural Barriers Act of 

1968.

• A sign plan for the Arizona Strip FO that addresses present and future needs involving 

road information, interpretation, and public safety will be written. The sign plans will be 

coordinated with the development of maps and access guides for the Monuments on the 

Arizona Strip District.

• Implementation plans will include outreach efforts to actively recruit service-oriented 

volunteers, organizations, and schools to assist with accomplishing appropriate 

implementation projects.

o Recreation Marketing Actions, Visitor Services and Information 

• Accurate information regarding recreation opportunities, interpretation of natural and 

human history, and specific rules and regulations pertaining to their use of BLM lands 

will be provided to visitors.

• The Interagency Information Center and partnerships with cooperating associations will 

continue to be used to distribute resource information to the public.

• The Interagency Information he BLM Arizona Strip Visitor Center and outlying visitor 

contact facilities (not necessarily BLM) will sell or provide free, maps, resource 

brochures, and safety information so that visitors will have a safe and enjoyable 

experience. A web site will continue to be maintained for online inquiries.

o Recreation Administration Actions, Permits and Fees 

• Public input, coordination, and consultation with affected Federal and State agencies will 

be sought prior to instituting any new permit or fee programs. 

• Annual training will be provided to SRP holders concerning appropriate use ethics, such 

as Leave No Trace and Tread Lightly.

Interpretation and Environmental Education

• Arizona Strip FO staff will seek partnerships with other state and Federal agencies, 

educational institutions, and other organizations to enrich interpretation and 

environmental educational opportunities.

• Outreach programs will be developed through organizations, schools, and partnerships to 

build emotional, intellectual, and recreational ties with the area and its cultural and 

natural heritage.

• Education and outreach programs like Tread Lightly and Leave No Trace will continue to 

be supported.

• Arizona Strip FO staff will remain informed of changing visitor demographics to better 

tailor interpretive media to visitor needs and desires.
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 136 

Travel Management 

• A route inventory database will be maintained using standard collection and information 

storage methods. 

• The Arizona Strip FO will be monitored to detect unauthorized route creation. 

• A variety of funding mechanisms and partnerships will be sought for completing the 

route inventory. 

• Standard data collection and storage methods will be used to complete the route 

inventory. 

Travel Management (Transportation Facilities) 

• Maps and portal signing will be developed and installed to inform public land users of the 

preliminary route network. 

• The BLM will actively recruit service-oriented volunteers, organizations, and schools to 

assist with accomplishing appropriate implementation projects. 

Special Designations (National Historic Trails) 

• Scheduled site monitoring of significant sites and trail segments on BLM-administered 

lands will be provided.

• The BLM and local partners will:

o Provide a supply of existing interpretive and educational materials about the Old 

Spanish NHT and NHT system.

o Provide, to the extent feasible, trip-planning and other information about the trail 

to support visitation to trail-related sites.

o Work with the Old Spanish Trail Association to provide brochures at regional 

visitor centers and museums to promote education about the trail.

Special Designations (Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) 

o Beaver Dam Slope, Little Black Mountain, Marble Canyon, Virgin River Corridor, Virgin 

Slope, Fort Pearce, Johnson Spring, Lost Spring Mountain, Moonshine Ridge, Black Knolls, 

Kanab Creek, Coyote Valley, Lone Butte, Shinarump, Clayhole, and Twist Hill ACECs 

• Site Steward patrols will be implemented in all ACECs with cultural values. 

• Opportunities for scientific research will be sought and encouraged for all ACECs. 

• Protective measures will be taken to protect cultural resources in ACECs from further 

damage because of natural or human causes. 

o Virgin River Corridor ACEC 

• In cooperation with the USFWS, AGFD, and the Virgin River Fishes Recovery Team, the 

BLM will assist in monitoring efforts for native Virgin River fish populations.

• The BLM will continue to maintain updated maps of SW flycatcher habitat in the 

Arizona Strip FO, which will include:

o Location, size, shape, and spacing of habitat areas.
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 137 

o Habitat stage with respect to SW flycatchers (suitable occupied, suitable 

unoccupied, suitable unsurveyed, potential or regenerating).

o Status of SW flycatcher surveys for each area of suitable habitat.

• The BLM will continue to maintain a database of SW flycatcher observations.

o Johnson Spring, Lost Spring Mountain, and Moonshine Ridge ACECs 

• These ACECs will be inventoried for cultural resources at Class II or III level, as funding 

allows. 

• Upon completion of cultural resource inventories, minor boundary adjustments may be 

refined, if appropriate, based on acquired data. 

o Kanab Creek ACEC 

• This ACEC will be inventoried for cultural resources at a Class II or III level, as funding 

allows. 

• Upon completion of cultural resource inventories, boundary adjustments may be refined, 

if appropriate, based on acquired data. 

• An ACEC plan will be developed for management of SW flycatchers and associated 

riparian values consistent with current recovery, conservation, and strategic planning 

documents. 

• The BLM will continue to maintain updated maps of SW flycatcher habitat in the 

Arizona Strip FO, which will include: 

o Location, size, shape, and spacing of habitat areas. 

o Habitat stage with respect to flycatchers (suitable occupied, suitable unoccupied, 

suitable unsurveyed, potential or regenerating). 

o Status of flycatcher surveys for each area of suitable habitat. 

• The BLM will continue to maintain a database of SW flycatcher observations. 

o Lone Butte and Shinarump ACECs 

• These ACECs will be inventoried for cultural resources at a Class II or III level, as 

funding allows. 

• Upon completion of cultural resource inventories, minor boundary adjustments may be 

completed, if appropriate, based on acquired data. 

Public Health and Safety 

• The Arizona Strip District Hazardous Material Response Plan will continue to be 

followed on BLM-administered lands. 

• Hazardous sites or locations that affect or may affect public health or safety will be 

inventoried and monitored. 

• All authorized or permitted activities will adhere to hazardous materials regulations for 

storage, use, and disposal.
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 138 

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND INTERRELATIONSHIPS 

REQUIREMENTS FOR FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

The land use plan decisions in this Approved RMP are to be implemented when the ROD is 

signed and do not require any further environmental analysis or documentation. Land use plan 

decisions are the basis for every on-the-ground action the BLM undertakes. Land use plans are 

guiding documents that present land use plan decisions as well as implementation or activitylevel decisions. Resource Management Plans address resources and values to be protected, uses, 

and public health issues within the Arizona Strip FO and must be consistent with resource 

management objectives, activities of the area, and environmental laws and regulations. 

Implementation decisions in this Approved RMP may also be implemented upon signing of the 

ROD. However, whenever implementation or activity level plans (e.g., wilderness plans, 

HMPs, etc.) are prepared, additional environmental analysis and documentation will be required. 

Environmental analysis of site-specific projects at the watershed, project, or activity level may 

analyze specific proposed actions or management. 

Site-specific environmental analyses and documentation (including the use of categorical 

exclusions and determinations of NEPA adequacy, where appropriate) may be prepared for one 

or more individual projects, in accordance with management objectives, DFCs, and decisions 

established in this Approved RMP. In addition, the BLM will ensure that the environmental 

review process includes evaluation of all critical elements. Cultural resources and threatened and 

endangered species will be identified and considered in accordance with Section 106 of the 

NHPA and Section 7 of the ESA, respectively. 

Interdisciplinary impact analysis will be based on this and other applicable environmental 

documents. The BLM may be required to draft a new EA or EIS, or supplement to an existing 

EIS, if the analysis prepared for site-specific projects finds potential for significant impacts not 

already described in an existing EA or EIS. 

Upon providing public notice of a decision, supporting environmental documentation will be 

sent to all affected parties and made available to others upon request. Decisions to implement 

site-specific projects are subject to administrative review at the time such decisions are made. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 139 

INTERRELATIONSHIPS 

The BLM coordinates its management activities with the actions of related Federal and state 

agencies responsible for land or resource management. This Approved RMP includes 

participation by the BLM in Utah and Nevada; Kaibab National Forest (North Kaibab Ranger 

District); Grand Canyon National Park; Pipe Spring National Monument; Glen Canyon NRA; 

USFWS; FHWA; Kaibab Paiute Tribe; counties in Arizona and Utah; communities in Arizona, 

Utah, and Nevada; and state agencies including AGFD; ADOT; and the Arizona State Land 

Department. 

As part of the planning process, the BLM requested formal consultation with the USFWS on 

potential impacts to federally listed, proposed, and candidate species and designated or proposed 

critical habitat. In April 2003, the BLM and USFWS finalized a Consultation Agreement to 

establish an effective and cooperative ESA Section 7 consultation process. The Agreement 

defined the process, products, actions, schedule, and expectations of the BLM and USFWS 

regarding project consultation. The Agreement also considered effects to, and management for, 

candidate species. A biological assessment (BA) was prepared and submitted to determine the 

effect of the RMP decisions 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 Approved RMP as analyzed in the Proposed Plan/Final EIS (FEIS). 

The biological opinion for this Approved RMP was completed on November 7, 2007 and 

resulted in a no jeopardy opinion from USFWS. The Incidental Take, Reasonable and Prudent 

Measures with Terms and Conditions, and Conservation Recommendations from this biological 

opinion can be found in Appendix A in this Approved RMP. 

The Approved RMP was also provided to the Arizona SHPO to comply with Section 106 of the 

NHPA. The BLM actions also comply with other Federal environmental legislation and land use 

plans, such as the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, and with applicable State and local 

government regulations, such as the Sikes Act (16 USC. 670 et seq., as amended). The Sikes Act 

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 

RMP must conform to overall land use and management plans for the lands involved. The RMP 

may 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 the appropriate state agencies in managing state-listed plant and animal species 

when the State has formally made such designations. 

The BLM and AGFD work cooperatively to manage wildlife and fish resources within the 

Arizona Strip FO. The BLM is responsible for managing wildlife habitat on BLM lands and 

AGFD, through the authority of the Arizona Game and Fish Commission, has public trust 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 140 

responsibility to manage fish and wildlife. The Arizona BLM and AGFD revised the current 

Master Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) at the writing of the Proposed Plan/FEIS that 

established protocols directing the cooperative working relationship between the agencies. The 

MOU provides context to 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 the 

implementation of this RMP. In addition, a separate MOU was signed giving AGFD cooperating 

agency status on BLM planning efforts in Arizona, including the efforts involved in preparation 

of this Approved RMP. 

Any permit system or restriction of use or access will include coordination with other state and 

Federal entities that issue use permits on Federal lands to assure that authorized permittees have 

fair and reasonable access to their permitted activity. For example, should a permit system be 

implemented, the BLM will work in cooperation with AGFD to enable coordination of access for 

hunters with valid hunting licenses and permits for the affected hunting unit. Coordination with 

AGFD during development of management plans and enhancement of wildlife habitat, species 

diversity, riparian health, and other activities to achieve the optimum health of wildlife species 

and populations will continue. Administrative access may be allowed for AGFD staff for law 

enforcement, natural resource management, and other purposes. Arizona Game and Fish 

Department'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 AGFD and the 

BLM) for such purposes including, but not limited to law enforcement activities, wildlife water 

supplementation (i.e., water hauling and maintenance, repair, building, or rebuilding of wildlife 

waters), collar retrieval, capture and release of wildlife, habitat manipulation (e.g., forage 

enhancement, burning, vegetation clearing, and planting), fence construction (enclosures/ 

exclosures), and research activities. 

On BLM-administered lands in the Arizona Strip FO, APHIS-WS and the AGFD oversee animal 

damage control, predator management, control of exotic wildlife species, and feral, nonpermitted livestock. A 1995 MOU recognizes the legal authority of APHIS-WS to conduct such 

wildlife damage management on public lands. The BLM acknowledges that authority and will 

continue close coordination with APHIS-WS and AGFD, as well as the USFWS, USFS North 

Kaibab Ranger District, Glen Canyon NRA, Arizona State Land Department, State Brand 

Inspector, and other affected agencies on animal damage control efforts within the Arizona Strip 

FO. Arizona Game and Fish Department predator management will continue under AGFD 

strategic plans as well as species management plans. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Chapter 2: The Plan 

Approved Resource Management Plan 

2 - 141 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 

The BLM will continue to actively seek the views of the public using techniques such as news 

releases, mass mailings, and website postings to ask for participation and to inform the public of 

new and ongoing project proposals, site-specific planning, and opportunities and timeframes for 

comment. The public is encouraged to actively participate in implementing these decisions by 

doing the following: 

• Requesting that their name be added to project or NEPA mailing lists by sending or 

calling in a request (via mail, phone, or email) to the following address/phone number: 

Arizona Strip Field Office 

345 East Riverside Drive 

St. George, UT 84790 

(435) 688-3200 

Email: Arizona_Strip@blm.gov 

• Talking with a manager or staff member by calling or emailing 

• Monitoring BLM's website (www.az.blm.gov) for project proposals or information 

• Attending public meetings and provide written comment on site-specific project 

proposals. 

The BLM will continue to coordinate and consult, both formally and informally, with various 

Federal and state agencies, Indian Tribes, local agencies, and officials and communities and 

groups interested and involved in the management of public lands in the Arizona FO. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Chapter 3: Implementation

3 - 1

CHAPTER 3: IMPLEMENTATION

IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

Land use plan decisions are generally implemented or become effective upon approval of the

Resource Management Plan (RMP) and signing of the record of decision. These decisions 

include the effective date of land health standards and desired future or resource condition 

decisions, land use allocation decisions, and all special designations.

Management actions in this Approved RMP that require additional site-specific project planning, 

as funding becomes available, will require further environmental analysis, completion of 106 

compliance for cultural resources, and Section 7 consultation. Implementation-level decisions, 

with the exception of routes designated open for off-highway vehicle use, are also contingent 

upon further environmental analysis, Section 106, and Section 7 consultation. Decisions to 

implement site-specific projects will be subject to administrative review at the time such 

decisions are made. 

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) will continue to involve and collaborate with the 

public during implementation of this Approved RMP. Opportunities to become involved in plan 

implementation will include development of partnerships and community-based citizen working 

groups. The BLM invites citizens and user groups interested in the management of the Arizona 

Strip Field Office (FO) to become actively involved in the implementation of plan decisions. 

The BLM and citizens can collaboratively develop site-specific goals and objectives that 

mutually benefit public land resources, local communities, and the people who live, work, or 

recreate on public lands.

MONITORING

Monitoring of actions related to implementing land use plans is an important part of adaptive 

management. Tracking the progress of actions and measuring changes resulting from these 

activities is important in either determining success or the need for a different management 

approach. 

Many activities and events are monitored on the Arizona Strip FO. For example, grazing 

utilization and vegetation trends are measured to support decisions on allotment Standards and 

Guideline evaluations. Off-highway vehicle events are monitored to determine that permit 

stipulations are followed and needed site rehabilitation is taken. A more detailed monitoring 

strategy is included in Table 3.1.
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Chapter 3: Implementation

3 - 2

TABLE 3.1: PRELIMINARY MONITORING STRATEGIES

Location(s) Issue/Objective Indicator (what) Protocol (how/methods) Frequency (when) *Trigger/Action

Soil, Water, and Air

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Study the effects of 

continuing erosion,

which endanger 

floodplain soils and 

threaten meadow soils. 

Map out these areas.

Gully, rill, and sheet 

erosion

Vegetative cover

Compaction

Monitor erosion 

Monitor Vegetative cover

Monitor impacts and gully 

progressions.

Collect and analyze sedimentation 

and erosion data.

On-going N/A

Blackrock 

Meadows

Assess the effects of 

the restoration of them 

and their watersheds

Soil water flux and 

genetic characteristics

Vegetative cover

Visual inspection Early spring after 

snow melt N/A

Upper Langs 

Run watershed 

and other 

selected sites

Assess the effects of 

restoration projects

Surface stability

Vegetative cover change

Sediment gains

Structural controls

Visual inspection Annually to 

occasional N/A

Salinity control 

project areas and 

other saline soils

Assess maintenance 

and function for 

existing projects and 

the needs for new ones

Structural damage

Surface or gully erosion

Salt content

Structural damage

Severe erosion

High to moderate salt yield

Annually to 

occasional N/A

Virgin River 

Campground 

and 

Administrative 

Sites

Potable water quality 

testing

Chemical 

Bacteriological Water testing for coliform Several times a year

Coliform contamination 

or exceeding chemical 

limits

Find source of 

contamination and clean 

up

Provide notice to public 

of non-potable water

Wildfire burns 

and other select 

disturbed areas

Assess the effects of 

disturbance and 

reclamation

Erosion or stabilization

Vegetative cover Visual inspection As needed Large wildfire

Erosion and flooding

Hazardous Materials

Old cleaned-up 

site at Millipede 

Cave

Clean up trash or 

chemicals that weather 

out of reclaimed soils

Visible trash

Chemical stains, odors, 

or sheens

Visual inspection for trash or 

chemicals or odors

Once per year after 

monsoon season

Clean up, if necessary
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Chapter 3: Implementation

3 - 3

TABLE 3.1: PRELIMINARY MONITORING STRATEGIES

Location(s) Issue/Objective Indicator (what) Protocol (how/methods) Frequency (when) *Trigger/Action

Old Highway 91 

Wireburns

Maintain the protective 

fence, signs, and the 

XRF grid markers

Fence down

Faded markers

Human disturbance

Visual inspection for downed fence, 

faded markers, or human disturbance

Biannually or as 

needed

Repair fence, if damaged 

or down

Forest & Woodlands

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Management of Public 

& Commercial 

Fuelwood Areas

Number of acres 

monitored

Monitor stipulations

Monitor permits

Monitor effectiveness 

Law Enforcement of Stipulation 

adherence 

Ongoing

Annually for 

selected sites and 

areas

As needed

Terminate design. areas, 

designate new areas or 

boundaries, modify 

stipulations, limit 

permitted amounts, 

terminate permits

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Management of Public 

& Commercial 

Fuelwood Areas 

(associated with fuels 

reduction & restoration 

projects)

Number of acres 

monitored

Monitor stipulations

Monitor permits

Monitor effectiveness 

Law Enforcement of Stipulation 

adherence 

Ongoing

Annually for 

selected sites and 

areas

As needed, 

occasional

Terminate designated 

areas, designate new 

areas or boundaries, 

modify stipulations, limit 

permitted amounts, 

terminate permits 

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Management of 

Stewardship Projects

Number of acres 

monitored

Monitor stipulations

Monitor contract adherence

Monitor project effectiveness 

Ongoing

Annually for 

selected sites and 

areas

Terminate design. areas, 

designate new areas or 

boundaries, modify 

stipulations and/or 

project implementation, 

limit permitted amounts, 

terminate contract 

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Management of Forest 

& Woodlands Restoration Projects (including 

other projects that 

attempt to or will 

change the character of 

overstory vegetation)

Number of acres 

monitored

Monitor stipulations

Monitor contract/project adherence

Monitor project effectiveness 

Ongoing

Annually for 

selected sites and 

areas

Terminate designated 

areas, designate new 

areas or boundaries, 

modify stipulations &/or 

project implementation, 

limit permitted amounts, 

terminate contracts

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Management of Forest 

and Woodland Health

Number of acres 

monitored

Monitor overall forest and woodland 

health issues (insect, disease and 

stand density issues)

Ongoing

Annually for selected sites and areas

Determine appropriate 

management of problem 

issues.
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Chapter 3: Implementation

3 - 4

TABLE 3.1: PRELIMINARY MONITORING STRATEGIES

Location(s) Issue/Objective Indicator (what) Protocol (how/methods) Frequency (when) *Trigger/Action

As needed

Cultural Resources

Designated road 

system in 

ACECs

Off-road impacts

Route proliferation

Vandalism

Surface collection

Visual site inspections 

for:

Site integrity

Surface integrity

Monitor and report (Law 

Enforcement, Site Stewards, Staff, 

local rancher)

Educate Public 

Class III surveys

Ongoing

Annually for 

selected sites and 

areas

As needed

Impacts/excavate, 

reroute, inventory

Route closures

Class III surveys

ACECs

Preservation of cultural 

values, Vandalism,

Surface collection,

Natural deterioration

Visual site inspections 

for:

Site integrity

Surface integrity

Monitor and report (Law 

Enforcement, Site Stewards, Staff, 

local rancher)

Educate Public

Class III surveys

Ongoing

Annually for selected 

sites and areas

As needed

Impacts/LEO, Site 

Stewards

Impacts/Class III 

inventories or mitigation

Standing 

structures and 

prehistoric intact 

features

Natural deterioration

Vandalism

Visual site inspections 

for:

Site integrity

Structural integrity 

Monitor (Staff and Site Stewards)

Annually for 

selected sites and 

areas

Ongoing

Destruction of standing 

features/stabilization, 

restoration, allow 

deterioration

Record sites, assign to 

category

Priority Cultural 

Areas (riparian, 

pinyon-juniper 

zone, etc.)

Off-road impacts

Route proliferation

Vandalism

Surface Collection

Natural deterioration

Visual site inspections 

for:

Site integrity

Surface integrity

Monitor and record (Site Stewards 

and staff)

Section 106 for new facilities

As needed

Ongoing

Annually for 

selected sites and 

areas

Impacts – Mitigation, 

Class III Inventories

Caves and Karst Resources

Throughout 

Arizona Strip FO

Monitor Visitor Use 

Impacts; Monitor for 

Natural Resource 

Degradation

Graffiti 

Trash

Trails

Damage to 

Speleotherms

Hazardous Materials

Digging in cave

Vandalism in cave

Monitor unacceptable impacts

Visual inspection

Set permanent photo documentation 

points

Photo document impacted areas

Create Visual Impact Evaluation 

System (VIES) for these caves and 

future caves as deemed necessary:

As needed

Ongoing

Annually for 

selected sites and 

areas

Restrict access

Clean, as necessary 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Chapter 3: Implementation

3 - 5

TABLE 3.1: PRELIMINARY MONITORING STRATEGIES

Location(s) Issue/Objective Indicator (what) Protocol (how/methods) Frequency (when) *Trigger/Action

Bobcat and Millipede

Recreation

SRMAs

Produce targeted 

recreation 

opportunities specific 

to each RMZ

Realization of targeted 

benefits for each RMZ.

Visitor surveys

Focus groups Every 5 years

Targeted recreation 

benefits not realized

SRMAs

Produce targeted 

recreation 

opportunities specific 

to each RMZ

Physical setting 

conditions, such as 

remoteness, naturalness, 

facilities

Monitor “development creep” with 

regard to authorizing expansion of 

designated road systems and 

recreation facilities into settings 

targeted as more primitive; monitor 

lack of development in RMZs where 

development was targeted

Monitor landscape change via VRM

For every project 

proposed in SRMAs

Targeted recreation 

benefits not realized

SRMAs

Produce targeted 

recreation 

opportunities specific 

to each RMZ

Social setting 

conditions, such as 

group size, encounters 

with other users, and 

evidence of use 

Existing NAU protocols for evidence 

of use (rapid site inventory, human 

impact site monitoring)

Actual counts for group size and 

encounters

Every 3-5 years for 

rapid site inventory

Every year to 2 

years for human 

impact site 

monitoring, 

encounters and 

group size

Targeted recreation 

benefits not realized

SRMAs

Produce targeted 

recreation 

opportunities specific 

to each RMZ

Administrative setting 

conditions, such as 

visitor services, 

management controls, 

mechanized use

Monitor level of effort to provide 

visitor information and assistance 

appropriate to targeted settings 

Monitor level of regulation, signing, 

and permitting applied as appropriate 

to targeted settings 

Project-by-project Targeted recreation 

benefits not realized

SRMAs, ERMA National RMiS 

requirements

Number of visits, visitor 

days, etc.

Traffic counters, visitor registers, 

Information Center counter, SRP 

post-use reports, direct counts

Monthly for traffic 

and Information 

Center counters

Bi-monthly for 

visitor registers

Ongoing
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Chapter 3: Implementation

3 - 6

TABLE 3.1: PRELIMINARY MONITORING STRATEGIES

Location(s) Issue/Objective Indicator (what) Protocol (how/methods) Frequency (when) *Trigger/Action

Annually for SRPs

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Authorizing recreation 

uses

Number of permits

Counting RUPs at VRC

Counting commercial and 

competitive SRPs

Counting individual SRPs

Monthly for RUPs

Post-use for 

commercial and 

competitive SRPs

Monthly for 

individual SRPS

Ongoing

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Authorizing recreation 

uses

Number of permit 

violations

Monitor authorized activities for 

compliance with permit stipulations As needed Ongoing

ERMAs

Resource protection, 

user conflict, visitor 

safety

N/A

Wilderness

Statutory 

wildernesses

Preservation of 

wilderness character

Number of acres 

monitored

Patrol (foot or aerial) and staff report 

findings and recommendations

NEPA process

Existing NAU protocols for 

naturalness (rapid site inventory, 

human impact site monitoring)

Actual counts for solitude

Monthly patrol

Project-by-project

Every 3-5 years for 

rapid site inventory

Every year to 2 

years for human 

impact site 

monitoring and 

solitude

N/A

Statutory 

wildernesses

Preservation of 

wilderness character

Number of wilderness 

boundary vehicle 

violations

Actual counts Ongoing N/A

Travel Management

Designated 

road/trail system

Management of 

designated system

Number of roads/trails 

meeting targeted 

maintenance intensities

Road/trail condition assessments Annually on rotating 

basis N/A

Designated 

road/trail system

Management of 

designated system

Placement and retention 

of all signing Road/trail condition assessments Annually on rotating 

basis N/A
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Chapter 3: Implementation

3 - 7

TABLE 3.1: PRELIMINARY MONITORING STRATEGIES

Location(s) Issue/Objective Indicator (what) Protocol (how/methods) Frequency (when) *Trigger/Action

Designated 

road/trail system

Management of 

designated system Average daily traffic Traffic counters on key roads/trails Monthly N/A

Designated 

road/trail system

Management of 

designated system

Number of illegal, offsystem vehicle 

incursions

Visual inspections

NAU protocols

Ongoing

Annually for 

selected rotating 

areas

N/A

National Scenic & Historic Trails

Old Spanish 

National 

Historic Trail

Protection of 

significant sites/

segments and retention 

of landscape character

Number of miles 

protected

Visual inspection

VRM contrast rating

Annually for 

inspections

Project-by-project 

for VRM

N/A

Wild & Scenic Rivers

Virgin River Free-flowing river 

Recommended suitable 

river miles remaining 

free-flowing

Other resource data

NEPA process Project-by-project N/A

Virgin River

Protect identified 

outstandingly 

remarkable objects

Number of identified 

outstandingly 

remarkable values 

remaining intact

Other resource data

NEPA process

Field surveys

Project-by-project

Every 5 years N/A

Wilderness Characteristics

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Maintenance of 

wilderness 

characteristics

Naturalness, 

outstanding 

opportunities for 

primitive recreation and 

solitude

NEPA process

Existing NAU protocols for 

naturalness (rapid site inventory, 

human impact site monitoring)

Actual counts for solitude

Project-by-project

Every 3-5 years for 

rapid site inventory

Every year to 2 

years for human 

impact site 

monitoring and 

solitude

N/A

Visual Resources

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Management of 

targeted visual classes

Degree of contrast 

(landscape change) 

created

VRM contrast rating Project-by-project N/A
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Chapter 3: Implementation

3 - 8

TABLE 3.1: PRELIMINARY MONITORING STRATEGIES

Location(s) Issue/Objective Indicator (what) Protocol (how/methods) Frequency (when) *Trigger/Action

T/E Species: Desert Tortoise

Highway 91 

from Beaver 

Dam to Utah 

border

Monitor effects of use 

of roads on desert 

tortoise.

Document number of 

live and dead tortoise to 

assess road mortality 

along Highway 91. 

Document route 

proliferation.

Early morning, low speed windshield 

survey by passenger

Total approx. 24 miles (12 mi each 

direction)

Repeat weekly 

March thru April, 

monthly May thru 

Oct.

Repeat monitoring 

every 5 years

Closures or other 

restrictions

Mojave Desert, 

desert tortoise 

habitat 

Monitor 

number/density of 

desert tortoise on the 

Arizona Strip.

Document numbers of 

live and dead tortoise 

and estimate tortoise 

population densities of 

desert tortoise. 

Line distance sampling (LDS) 

conducted by USFWS (BLM 

contributes $2-$5k annual funding) 

Random transects throughout NE 

Mojave Recovery Unit

Repeat annually 

Contributes to rangewide recovery efforts 

and recovery planning, 

could lead to RMP 

amendment

T/E Species: Mexican Spotted Owl

Canyon habitats 

Assess potential MSO 

nesting sites based on 

suitable habitats 

identified by 2001 

Willey model.

Document MSO nesting 

site suitability and

presence or absence of 

MSO. 

Protocol established by MSO 

recovery team

5-10 sites per year

Repeat annually 

Contributes to rangewide recovery efforts 

and planning, could lead 

to RMP amendment

T/E Species: Southwestern Willow (SW) Flycatcher

Riparian habitats 

Assess all suitable and 

potential SW

flycatcher nesting sites.

Document SW

flycatcher nesting site 

suitability and presence 

or absence of SW

flycatcher. 

Protocol established by SW

flycatcher recovery team

11 sites 

Repeat every other 

year 

Contributes to rangewide recovery efforts 

and recovery planning, 

could lead to RMP 

amendment

T/E Species: Peregrine Falcon

Canyon eyrie 

sites 

Assess specific nesting 

sites as assigned by 

AGFD and USFWS.

Document presence or 

absence of peregrine 

falcon. 

Protocol established by peregrine 

monitoring team

Up to 4 sites 

Repeat every year 

Contributes to rangewide recovery efforts 

and recovery planning, 

could lead to RMP 

amendment
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Chapter 3: Implementation

3 - 9

TABLE 3.1: PRELIMINARY MONITORING STRATEGIES

Location(s) Issue/Objective Indicator (what) Protocol (how/methods) Frequency (when) *Trigger/Action

T/E Species: Listed and Special Status Plants

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

To assess effects of 

management actions on 

populations of plants

Demography, counts, 

mortality, man-induced 

impacts

Marcroplots with tagged plants, 

macrcoplots and transects using 

counts.

Annually for listed 

plants, 1-3 years for 

special status plants

Down trends 

(demographic or counts) 

caused by man induced 

impacts

Vegetation

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Management of 

authorized uses

Vegetative trend of 

key species

Precipitation

Permanent photo plots, and 

Frequency transects, dry weight rank

Rain Can & Remote Automated 

Weather Station (RAWS)

Every 4-8 years

Quarterly

Up or down trend of key 

or undesirable species

Meeting or not meeting 

desired plant community 

objectives

Livestock grazing (BLM lands)

Desert tortoise 

habitat

Management of 

livestock grazing

Vegetation utilization 

level Grazed class method Annually in use 

pastures

Use levels in excess of 

45%

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Management of 

livestock grazing

Vegetation utilization 

level Grazed class method Annually in use 

pastures

Use levels in excess of 

45%

Fire and Fuels Management

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Assess the effects of 

fire

Prescribed fire

Fire use

Long term photo plots

Vegetation plots

Burn severity

Others as needed

Pre, during and post 

monitoring

Planning of ignition

Ignition

Throughout 

Arizona Strip 

FO

Assess the effects of 

fire Wildfire

Long term photo plots

Vegetation plots

Burn severity

Others as needed

Mostly post 

monitoring Ignition

*Trigger/Action – What would trigger an action, what the BLM would do if monitoring shows an undesirable direction or action.
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Chapter 3: Implementation

3 - 10

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT 

Adaptive management is a decision process that promotes flexible decision making that can be 

adjusted in the face of uncertainties as outcomes from management actions and other events 

become better understood. Careful monitoring of these outcomes both advances scientific 

understanding and helps adjust policies or operations as part of an iterative learning process. 

Adaptive management also recognizes the importance of natural variability in contributing to 

ecological resilience and productivity. It is not a “trial and error” process; rather, it emphasizes 

learning while doing. Adaptive management does not represent an end in itself: it represents a

means to more effective decisions and enhanced benefits. Its true measure is in how well it helps 

meet environmental, social, and economic goals, increases scientific knowledge, and reduces 

tensions among stakeholders (U.S. Department of the Interior [DOI] 2007).

Adaptive management involves ongoing, real-time learning and knowledge creation, both in a 

substantive sense and in terms of the adaptive process itself. Though it is commonly thought that 

an adaptive approach can produce results quickly at low cost, the opposite is more likely to be 

true. An initial investment of time and effort will increase the likelihood of better decisionmaking and resource stewardship in the future, but patience, flexibility, and support are needed 

over the life of an adaptive management project. For these reasons, it is important to carefully 

consider the potential use of an adaptive approach, and to engage in careful planning and 

evaluation when adaptive management is used (DOI 2007).

Adaptive management involves synthesizing existing knowledge, exploring alternative actions, 

and making explicit forecasts about their results. Management actions and monitoring programs 

are carefully designed to generate reliable feedback and clarify the reasons underlying results. 

Actions and objectives are then adjusted based on this feedback and improved understanding to 

continue to try to achieve the desired future conditions. In addition, decisions, actions, and 

results are carefully documented and communicated to others, so that knowledge gained through 

experience is passed on rather than lost when individuals move or leave the organization.

The Arizona Strip FO staff and management will involve interested stakeholders in 

implementing the decisions in this Approved RMP and commit to an adaptive management 

process that will work toward achieving the identified management objectives. Results from 

ongoing monitoring and assessment will be used to adjust and improve these management 

decisions. 
 

 

LIST OF APPENDICES 

FOR THE ARIZONA STRIP FIELD OFFICE APPROVED RMP 

APPENDIX A: U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE CONSULTATION: PORTIONS 

OF THE BIOLOGICAL OPINION ................................................................. A-1 

APPENDIX B: ARIZONA STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR LIVESTOCK 

GRAZING MANAGEMENT AND RANGELAND HEALTH 

IMPLEMENTATION STATUS ..................................................................... B-1 

APPENDIX C: LIVESTOCK GRAZING ALLOTMENT MANAGEMENT STATUS ......... C-1 

APPENDIX D: LIVESTOCK GRAZING ALLOTMENT ACRES AND ANIMAL UNIT 

MONTHS (AUMs) BY LAND STATUS ....................................................... D-1 

APPENDIX E: VEGETATION TREATMENT TOOLS AND METHODS ............................ E-1 

APPENDIX F: CONSERVATION MEASURES FOR SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES .......... F-1 

APPENDIX G: ARIZONA STRIP FIELD OFFICE OIL AND GAS LEASE 

STIPULATIONS ............................................................................................. G-1 

APPENDIX H: AREA OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN SUMMARY 

TABLE: VALUES, RELEVANCE, AND IMPORTANCE CRITERIA ........ H-1 

APPENDIX I: VISUAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CLASSES AND OBJECTIVES 

FOR CLASSES ................................................................................................. I-1 

APPENDIX J: LANDS IDENTIFIED FOR DISPOSAL ......................................................... J-1 

APPENDIX K: RECLAMATION STIPULATIONS ............................................................... K-1 

APPENDIX L: MINERALS AND ASSOCIATED LAND CLASSIFICATIONS ................... L-1 

APPENDIX M: ARIZONA STRIP MINERAL MATERIAL SITES ...................................... M-1 

APPENDIX N: RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREAS .................................................... N-1 

APPENDIX O: TRAVEL MANAGEMENT AREAS, TRANSPORTATION PLAN 

CONTENTS, AND APPROPRIATE ROUTE CONSTRUCTION AND 

MAINTENANCE STANDARDS BY TRAVEL MANAGEMENT AREA .. O-1 

APPENDIX P: LIST OF PREPARERS..................................................................................... P-1 
APPENDIX A 

U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE CONSULTATION 

PORTIONS OF THE BIOLOGICAL OPINION 

INCIDENTAL TAKE, REASONABLE AND PRUDENT 

MEASURES WITH TERMS AND CONDITIONS, AND 

CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 1 

APPENDIX A: U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE CONSULTATION: 

PORTIONS OF THE BIOLOGICAL OPINION 

INCIDENTAL TAKE, REASONABLE AND PRUDENT 

MEASURES WITH TERMS AND CONDITIONS, AND 

CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 

The following are pages 105 through 118 from the Biological Opinion for the Arizona Strip 

Resource Management Plan (which includes Vermilion Cliffs National Monument), dated 

November 7, 2007 (refer to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] document number 

AESO/SE [Arizona Ecological Services Office/Species Endangered], 22410-2002-F-0277-R1, 

22410-2007-F-0463). 

INCIDENTAL TAKE STATEMENT 

Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act and Federal regulations pursuant to section 4(d) of the 

Act prohibit the take of endangered and threatened species, respectively, without special 

exemption. “Take” is defined as to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture 

or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. “Harm” is defined (50 CFR 17.3) to 

include significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed 

species by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or 

sheltering. “Harass” is defined (50 CFR 17.3) as intentional or negligent actions that create the 

likelihood of injury to listed species to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavior 

patterns which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding or sheltering. “Incidental take” 

is defined as take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, the carrying out of an otherwise 

lawful activity. Under the terms of section 7(b)(4) and section 7(o)(2), taking that is incidental to 

and not intended as part of the agency action is not considered to be prohibited taking under the 

Act provided that such taking is in compliance with the terms and conditions of this Incidental 

Take Statement. 

AMOUNT OF EXTENT OF TAKE 

We recognize that some flexibility is built into, and some uncertainty is inherent in, some of the 

conservation measures that are part of the proposed action. We included consideration of that 

flexibility and uncertainty into our analysis in determining the amount of incidental take that we 

anticipate for each species. 

Virgin River Chub 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) anticipates incidental take of Virgin River chub 

will be difficult to detect because finding a dead or impaired individual is unlikely due to 

predation by other species. However, the following level of take of Virgin River chub could be 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 2 

anticipated by measuring a surrogate related to water availability in the Virgin River. We 

assume incidental take will be exceeded if baseflow in the Virgin River declines as a result of 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land disposal actions and subsequent development. 

The USFWS completed a biological opinion on September 3, 2004 (02-21-03-F-0210) for a fire 

and fuels management program on BLM-administered lands within Arizona. That opinion 

issued an incidental take statement for Virgin River chub for fire suppression activities along or 

near the Virgin River. That programmatic opinion included incidental take that could occur from 

fire suppression because of this proposed action. The following Incidental Take Statement is 

carried forward from the 2004 opinion: 

Fire Suppression 

We anticipate that incidental take of Virgin River chub could occur as a result of fire suppression 

actions. We anticipate that take will be difficult to detect and quantify because dead fish will be 

difficult to find. We anticipate that take could occur in the form of water drafting at up to two 

pools of deep water within the same reach of the Virgin River, per wildfire incident. The 

incidental take is expected to be in the form of harassment or injury to fish in a pool, or mortality 

of fish pumped from pools. 

Drafting will likely remove individuals or disturb all chub the first time that it is used; therefore, 

drafting may continue from the same pool for the duration of the suppression activity without 

further take of chub. 

Woundfin 

The USFWS anticipates that incidental take of woundfin will be difficult to detect because 

finding a dead or impaired individual is unlikely due to predation by other species. However, the 

following level of take of woundfin could be anticipated by measuring a surrogate related to 

water availability in the Virgin River. 

If baseflow in the Virgin River declines as a result of BLM land disposal actions and subsequent 

development, the level of incidental take will have been exceeded. 

Desert Tortoise 

We anticipate that the following incidental take of desert tortoises could occur as a result of the 

proposed action. Activities that may result in incidental take include vegetation treatments, lands 

and realty actions, livestock grazing, minerals exploration and development, recreational 

activities, and travel management. The incidental take is expected to be in the form of harm 

(injury or mortality related to project activities, livestock trampling, increased human access and 

uses) and/or harassment (resulting from habitat degradation or loss, loss of forage, disturbance of 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 3 

individuals during the breeding season, or moving animals out of harm’s way). A tortoise refers 

to one desert tortoise or one clutch of desert tortoise eggs. 

1. All desert tortoises found in harm’s way may be captured and moved according to permit 

stipulations and protocol. We estimate that an average of 10 tortoises per year may be 

harassed by project activities. We will not consider this level of incidental take to be 

exceeded as long as all conservation measures included in this opinion are followed and 

individual site-specific consultations are completed for these actions. 

2. Thirty desert tortoises may be injured or killed by project activities and BLM 

authorizations over the next 20 years. 

These estimates are based upon the small number of desert tortoises likely to occur in the project 

areas, the ability of biological monitors to detect and move adult tortoises, the timing of surface 

disturbing activities during the tortoise inactive period, and the lands available for disposal that 

are located in low quality desert tortoise habitat. 

The above anticipated take and our description of the effects of the action are based, in part, on 

the assumption that no more than 40 acres within DWMAs/ACECs will be disturbed as a result 

of authorized projects in the form of rights-of-ways and temporary use permits; no more than 20 

acres will be disturbed in DWMAs/ACECs due to locatable mineral extraction; no more than 20 

acres will be disturbed in DWMAs/ACECs due to mineral leasing. The BA does not quantify 

the acreage of land disposals or other actions that could occur outside of DWMAs/ACECs but 

within desert tortoise habitat; this estimate is based on the assumption that tortoise densities are 

low in these parcels and that no designated critical habitat will be leased, exchanged, or disposed 

of. If these limits are exceeded, BLM should informally consult with the USFWS to determine if 

formal consultation should be reinitiated. Also, although we anticipate loss of desert tortoises as 

a result of private development of land disposal and exchange parcels, this incidental take 

statement does not authorize agencies, individuals, or parties other than the BLM to incidentally 

take desert tortoises. Thus, if the actions of others may result in an incidental take of tortoise, 

such as take associated with development of disposal parcels, those individuals must comply 

with the Act before such incidental take occurs. 

The USFWS completed a biological opinion on September 3, 2004 (02-21-03-F-0210) for a fire 

and fuels management program on BLM-administered lands within Arizona. That opinion 

issued an incidental take statement for desert tortoise for fire suppression activities on the 

Arizona Strip. That programmatic opinion included incidental take that could occur from fire 

suppression as a result of this proposed action. The following Incidental Take Statement is 

carried forward from the 2004 opinion: 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 4 

Fire Suppression 

We anticipate that incidental take of desert tortoises could occur as a result of fire suppression. 

We anticipate that the following take of desert tortoises could occur, with individuals 

experiencing effects ranging from harassment, harm, injury, and/or mortality, as a result of the 

fire suppression actions (a tortoise refers to one desert tortoise or one clutch of desert tortoise 

eggs): 

1. Four desert tortoises every two years resulting from the following activities: a) operation 

of vehicles and equipment; b) development of crew camps, equipment staging areas, and 

aircraft landing/fueling sites; c) construction of firelines; d) use of retardants; and e) 

setting of backfires. 

2. Ten desert tortoises every five years as a result of moving animals from harm’s way 

during fire suppression activities. 

Yuma Clapper Rail 

We do not anticipate that the proposed action will result in incidental take of any Yuma clapper 

rails. 

California Condor 

This Amount or Extent of Take section applies to condors occurring on NPS-administered land 

within the Arizona Strip District within the California condor nonessential experimental 

population, and Arizona Strip District land outside of the nonessential experimental population 

area. 

Because condors that occur in the project area are known and are monitored, detecting any 

incidences of harm, harassment, injury, or death of individuals will be straightforward. 

However, because condors occur only rarely outside of the nonessential experimental population 

area, and because these areas are a considerable distance from nesting and roosting habitat, we 

do not anticipate that the proposed action will incidentally take any California condors. 

Mexican Spotted Owl 

As of the date of this biological opinion, most of the approximately 13,000 acres of Mexican 

Spotted Owl (MSO) canyon habitat on BLM land in the project area have not been surveyed to 

protocol, and no MSO PACs have been designated. However, BLM considers the unsurveyed 

habitat to be occupied by MSO due to the presence of key habitat components in these areas that 

provide high-potential for nesting and roosting MSO to occupy the area. Based upon this 

information, we are reasonably certain MSO currently occur within the action area. As surveys 

are conducted over the life of the proposed action, MSO may be detected in the project area. The 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 5 

USFWS anticipates that incidental take of MSO may result from vegetation treatments (not 

including fuels management), noxious weed control, mineral development, and permitted 

recreation that may be authorized under the proposed action. We anticipate that the take of 

MSOs will be difficult to detect because finding a dead or impaired specimen is unlikely, 

especially due to the remote nature of most of the MSO habitat in the action area. However, the 

level of incidental take could be anticipated by the loss of key habitat components and long-term 

disturbance that may affect the reproductive success and survival of the MSO within the project 

area. We anticipate that four MSO (two pairs) associated with habitat the BLM considers to be 

occupied (Paria, Kanab, and Hack canyon areas) may be taken as a result of the proposed action. 

The incidental take is expected to be in the form of harm and harassment resulting from the 

disruption of breeding, feeding, and sheltering activities from mineral development, permitted 

recreation, vegetation treatments and management, and noxious weed control. 

The USFWS completed a biological opinion on September 3, 2004 (02-21-03-F-0210) for a fire 

and fuels management program on BLM-administered lands within Arizona. That opinion 

issued an incidental take statement for MSO for fire suppression and fuels management 

activities. That programmatic opinion included incidental take that could occur from the fire 

management program as a result of this proposed action. The following Incidental Take 

Statement is carried forward from the 2004 opinion: 

Fire Suppression, and Fire and Fuels Management Treatments 

We anticipate that incidental take of MSO could occur as a result of fire suppression, wildland 

fire use, prescribed fire, and mechanical treatments. We anticipate that the take of MSOs will be 

difficult to detect because finding a dead or impaired specimen is unlikely, especially due to the 

remote nature of most of the MSO habitat in the action area. However, the level of incidental 

take could be anticipated by the loss of essential elements in the habitat and long-term 

disturbance that may affect the reproductive success and survival of the MSO within the project 

area. We anticipate that two MSO (one pair) could be taken as a result of the proposed action. 

The incidental take is expected to be in the form of harm and harassment resulting from: 

1. Harm through long-term disturbance from actions in unsurveyed MSO habitat associated 

with the proposed action. Unknown MSO may be present during wildland fire use, 

mechanical treatments, prescribed fire and/or suppression actions, which may result in direct 

impacts to owls, disrupted reproduction and/or the ability of the habitat to provide for 

essential elements of survival for resident MSO. 

2. Harm through the reduction of MSO nesting and roosting habitat due to temporary 

habitat loss that may result from mechanical thinning, prescribed or wildland fire, and/or fire 

suppression actions that result in the removal of MSO habitat components (multi-storied 

canopy, coarse woody debris, snags) to the extent that at least near-term survival of MSO 

within that habitat is not likely. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 6 

3. Harassment through the reduction of the habitat suitability for prey species, thus limiting 

the availability of prey for owls. Habitat suitability will be decreased through the loss of 

coarse woody debris and herbaceous vegetation following prescribed fires. These actions 

could impair the ability of MSO to survive and/or successfully raise young. 

Southwestern Willow Flycatcher 

The USFWS anticipates Southwestern Willow Flycatchers (SWWFs) could be taken as a result 

of harm (habitat loss) and harassment (disturbance) due to recreation activities and/or vegetation 

treatments. The anticipated level of take is the failure of one nesting attempt every three years. 

The incidental take is expected to be in the form of harassment and/or harm due to nest failure or 

the inability to nest due to the loss of suitable habitat. 

The USFWS completed a biological opinion on September 3, 2004 (file number 02-21-03-F0210) for a fire and fuels management program on BLM-administered lands within Arizona. 

That opinion issued an incidental take statement for SWWF for fire suppression activities. That 

programmatic opinion included incidental take that could occur from fire suppression as a result 

of this proposed action. The following Incidental Take Statement is carried forward from the 

2004 opinion: 

Fire Suppression 

The BLM has proposed fire suppression actions that, when wildfires occur, are expected to 

reduce the overall adverse effects to SWWF and their habitat. Although we are unable to 

determine where or when incidental take of SWWF could occur as a result of fire suppression 

actions, take as a result of these actions has occurred in the past. We anticipate that the take of 

SWWF will be difficult to detect because finding a dead or impaired specimen is unlikely. 

Survey data may not be available prior to a wildfire ignition; however, locations of existing 

territories on or adjacent to BLM land are known. The level of incidental take could be 

anticipated by the loss of essential elements in the habitat and long-term disturbance that may 

affect the reproductive success and survival of the SWWF within the project area. The average 

number of pairs per site within the Middle Gila/San Pedro Management Unit, where territories 

on BLM-administered land were found in 2004, is 5.2. Fire suppression actions within one 

habitat site will likely remove all habitat within the site and/or disturb all birds within the site. 

We anticipate that five pairs (ten SWWF) and their eggs and young could be taken as a result of 

the proposed action1

. The incidental take is expected to be in the form of harassment, harm, and 

mortality resulting from: 

1. Harassment through long-term disturbance from fire suppression actions in occupied SWWF 

habitat associated with the proposed action. SWWF present during fire suppression actions 

 

1

 This level of incidental take applies to BLM actions throughout Arizona as a result of fire suppression activities. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 7 

will be directly impacted, resulting in disrupted reproduction, and/or loss of habitat that 

provides for the essential elements of survival. 

2. Harm through the loss of SWWF nesting habitat due to temporary habitat loss that may result 

from backburning, bulldozing, aircraft use, and/or water drops during fire suppression that 

remove southwestern willow flycatcher habitat components (multi-storied canopy, dense 

vegetation) to the extent that the habitat patch is no longer suitable for nesting by SWWF. 

3. Mortality of SWWF eggs or young in nests from fire suppression actions in occupied SWWF 

habitat. 

Brady Pincushion Cactus, Holmgren Milk Vetch, Jones’ Cycladenia, Siler Pincushion 

Cactus, Welsh’s Milkweed 

Sections 7(b)(4) and 7 (o)(2) of the Act do not apply to the incidental take of listed plant species. 

However, protection of listed plants is provided to the extent that the Act requires a Federal 

permit for removal or reduction to possession of threatened or endangered plants from areas 

under Federal jurisdiction, or for any act that will remove, cut, dig up, or damage or destroy 

endangered plants on any other area in knowing violation of any regulation of any State or in the 

course of any violation of a State criminal trespass law. Neither incidental take authorization nor 

recovery permits are needed for implementation of the proposed action. 

The USFWS will not refer the incidental take of any migratory bird or bald eagle for prosecution 

under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, as amended (16 U.S.C. §§ 703-712), or the Bald 

and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940, as amended (16 U.S.C. §§ 668-668d), if such take is in 

compliance with the terms and conditions (including amount and/or number) specified herein. 

EFFECT OF THE TAKE 

In this biological opinion, we have determined that this level of anticipated take is not likely to 

result in jeopardy to these species or destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. 

REASONABLE AND PRUDENT MEASURES WITH TERMS AND CONDITIONS 

In order to be exempt from the prohibitions of section 9 of the Act, BLM must comply with the 

following terms and conditions (lettered and Roman numeral items), which implement the 

reasonable and prudent measures (numbered items) and outline reporting/monitoring 

requirements. The terms and conditions are non-discretionary. 

Virgin River Chub and Woundfin 

The following reasonable and prudent measures are necessary and appropriate to minimize take 

of Virgin River chub and woundfin: 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 8 

1. BLM shall monitor changes in the Virgin River flow data and report the findings to the 

AESO. 

A. The BLM shall monitor changes in flow data at the USGS “Virgin River at 

Littlefield” gage, including: 

i. tracking trends in median monthly flow. 

ii. seeking opportunities for more in-depth study to determine connectivity of 

groundwater to Virgin River surface flow. 

B. BLM shall submit annual reports as described in Reporting Requirements, below. 

Additionally, the following reasonable and prudent measure with terms and conditions are 

carried forward from the September 3, 2004 opinion (02-21-03-F-0210) for the Virgin River 

chub only: 

2. Minimize the effects of harassment and mortality of Virgin River chub. 

A. BLM shall coordinate all fire suppression actions along, and adjacent to, the Virgin 

River and its tributaries with the USFWS. 

B. BLM shall use screens with a maximum mesh size of 1 inch if pumping water from 

the Virgin River during fire suppression activities. 

Desert Tortoise 

The following reasonable and prudent measures are necessary and appropriate to minimize take 

of desert tortoise: 

1. BLM shall implement programs and procedures to minimize injury or mortality of 

tortoises during project activities. 

A. BLM will include the following stipulations in BLM-authorized or BLM-conducted 

activities within desert tortoise habitat, except livestock grazing and fire suppression 

(if precluded by protection of valuable property, resources, or human safety). 

i. All individuals handling tortoises must meet the USFWS desert tortoise monitor 

or biologist qualifications requirements (see Appendix D). Permitting of these 

individuals may be done through application for a section 10(a)(1)(a) research and 

recovery permit, or through project-specific section 7 consultation. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 9 

ii. Designate a field contact representative (FCR) who will have the authority to halt 

all non-emergency project activity should any danger to a listed species arise. 

Work will only resume after hazards to the listed species are removed. 

iii. Authorized biologists will act as biological monitors and be present during all 

construction activities for the protection of desert tortoises and other listed 

species. These biological monitors will be responsible for determining 

compliance with measures as defined in the biological opinion or other 

agreements between the project proponent and agencies. 

iv. A biological monitor will be assigned each activity within the project site 

requiring large equipment. A biological monitor will also be assigned to all 

backfilling, recontouring, and reclamation activities. 

v. Authorized activities will require monitoring of the desert tortoise population 

throughout the duration of the project. The appropriate level of monitoring will 

be developed in coordination with the BLM and USFWS. To ensure desired 

results are being achieved, minimization measures will be evaluated and, if 

necessary, section 7 consultation reinitiated. 

vi. For drilling activities, where technically and economically feasible, use 

directional drilling, or horizontal, or multiple wells from the same pad to reduce 

surface disturbance and eliminate drilling in occupied desert tortoise habitat. 

vii. Within DWMAs/ACECs during the tortoise active season (March 15-October 15), 

set a 20 mph speed limit on BLM roads. 

viii. Limit new access routes created by the project. 

ix. Powerlines will be minimized and if built, include anti-perching mechanisms to 

discourage raptors and corvids. Monitoring of such use may be necessary. 

Powerline alignment should be kept within existing utility corridors. 

x. Uncontrolled domestic dogs will be prohibited from the project site and site 

access routes. Use of firearms, except by law enforcement officers or licensed 

hunters during lawful hunting activities will also be prohibited. 

xi. No standing water as a result of project operations will be permitted. 

2. BLM shall take measures to eliminate or minimize take of desert tortoises resulting from 

livestock grazing. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 10 

A. The BLM shall monitor compliance with livestock removal from those allotments 

with seasonal restrictions (October 15 to March 15) and/or compliance on required 

pasture moves in the allotments managed with deferred grazing and take prompt 

action to resolve unauthorized grazing uses. 

B. The BLM shall monitor compliance with the established key forage use threshold of 

45 percent current annual growth on allotments with desert tortoise habitat to ensure 

that over-utilization of forage does not occur. 

C. The BLM shall complete proposed fencing to implement proposed management 

changes and to exclude livestock from areas identified for closure in a timely manner. 

3. BLM shall take measures to minimize incidental take from recreational activities and 

travel. 

A. Upon implementation of the route designation/closure plan, make available to the 

public a route designation map that displays all open routes and clearly explains 

vehicle, camping, recreational, and other public use regulations and opportunities in 

the DWMAs/ACECs, and explains the purpose of the DWMAs/ACECs. 

B. Use various mechanisms of public outreach to inform the public about the 

DWMAs/ACECs and recovery of the desert tortoise. These mechanisms may include 

interpretive displays, news releases, and open houses to answer questions about 

DWMAs/ACEC designation and management, and/or other actions. 

4. BLM shall submit annual reports as described in Reporting Requirements, below. 

Specifically for desert tortoises, the report shall briefly document for the previous 

calendar year actions taken to implement these terms and conditions, surface-disturbing 

activities authorized, the effectiveness of these terms and conditions at reducing take of 

desert tortoise, actual acreage of desert tortoise habitat disturbed, numbers of tortoises 

taken, including animals injured or killed, the number of desert tortoises excavated from 

burrows, the number of desert tortoises moved from construction sites, and information 

on individual desert tortoise encounters. The report shall make recommendations for 

modifying or refining these terms and conditions to enhance desert tortoise protection and 

reduce needless hardship on the BLM and users of public lands. 

Mexican Spotted Owl 

The following reasonable and prudent measure and terms and conditions are necessary and 

appropriate to minimize take of MSO. 

1. The Arizona Strip District Office (ASDO) shall take measures to minimize effects to 

individuals from project activities. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 11 

A. BLM will work with us to proactively develop appropriate measures to protect 

individual MSO from the site-specific effects of the activities authorized by the 

proposed action. 

2. BLM shall submit annual reports as described in Reporting Requirements, below. 

Southwestern Willow Flycatcher 

The following reasonable and prudent measures and terms and conditions are necessary and 

appropriate to minimize take of SWWF. 

1. BLM shall minimize the site-specific effects on SWWF of activities authorized by the 

proposed action. 

A. BLM will rehabilitate all undesignated routes used by OHVs within riparian areas, or 

areas with the potential to support SWWF breeding habitat. This can include 

obliterating the beginnings and ends of undesignated routes so that the routes are not 

accessible or visible to the public. 

B. BLM will monitor other recreational activities that contribute to degradation of 

habitat on BLM-administered lands along the Virgin River and Kanab Creek and take 

appropriate measures to minimize those activities or modify them to reduce habitat 

degradation. 

. 

2. BLM shall monitor the effects of incidental take and submit annual reports as described 

in Reporting Requirements, below. 

A. ASDO shall provide information on survey status for each area of suitable habitat, 

including location, size, shape, and spacing of habitat areas; either the date(s) 

surveyed (according to current protocol) or indication that the area has not been 

surveyed, and any other available information. 

Additionally, the following reasonable and prudent measure with terms and conditions are 

carried forward from the September 3, 2004 opinion (02-21-03-F-0210): 

3. Minimize the effects of harassment, harm, and mortality to southwestern willow 

flycatchers. 

A. In cooperation with us, and using guidance from the southwestern willow flycatcher 

recovery plan, BLM shall incorporate the elements recommended for fire risk 

evaluation and planning into its Fire Management Plans for all current flycatcher 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 12 

breeding sites on or adjacent to BLM-administered lands. This planning effort shall 

be initiated prior to the 2006 wildfire season. 

B. If additional sites become occupied over the life of the land use plan Amendment, 

BLM shall include them in the yearly Fire Management Plans in cooperation with us, 

prior to the next wildfire season. 

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 

The BLM shall submit annual monitoring reports to the Arizona Ecological Services Field Office 

by February 1 beginning in year 2009. These reports shall briefly document for the previous 

calendar year the effectiveness of the terms and conditions and locations of listed species 

observed, and, if any are found dead, suspected cause of mortality. The report shall also 

summarize tasks accomplished under the conservation measures and terms and conditions. The 

report shall make recommendations for modifying or refining conservation measures and terms 

and conditions to enhance listed species protection or reduce needless hardship on the BLM and 

its permittees. 

Disposition of Dead or Injured Listed Species 

Upon locating a dead, injured, or sick listed species initial notification must be made to the 

USFWS's Law Enforcement Office, 2450 W. Broadway Rd, Suite 113, Mesa, Arizona, 85202, 

telephone: 480/967-7900) 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 if possible, and any other pertinent information. The notification shall be sent to the 

Law Enforcement Office with a copy to this office. Care must be taken in handling sick or 

injured animals to ensure effective treatment and care, and in handling dead specimens to 

preserve the biological material in the best possible state. 

CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 

Section 7(a)(1) of the Act directs Federal agencies to utilize their authorities to further the 

purposes of the Act by carrying out conservation programs for the benefit of endangered and 

threatened species. Conservation recommendations are discretionary agency activities to 

minimize or avoid adverse effects of a proposed action on listed species or critical habitat, to 

help implement recovery plans, or to develop information. 

1. We recommend that BLM coordinate with us to develop specific management actions 

within ACECs to further protect special status species. 

2. We recommend that BLM continue to evaluate the recovery needs of the woundfin and 

Virgin River chub as described in the Virgin River Fishes Recovery Plan and prepare 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 13 

appropriate planning documents that outline how the BLM could further contribute to the 

recovery of these species. 

3. We recommend that BLM continue to assist Lake Mead National Recreation Area; other 

BLM offices in Utah, Nevada, and California; and other land managers in the 

northeastern Mojave recovery unit in the development of regional planning efforts to 

implement the recovery plan, and in the integration of those plans with the Arizona Strip 

RMP. 

4. We recommend that BLM fully implement the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan and 

subsequent revisions of the plan. 

5. We recommend that BLM manage activities so that they do not contribute to the 

proliferation of predators within desert tortoise habitat. 

6. We recommend that BLM construct new wildlife guzzlers in desert tortoise habitat only 

if they are designed so as to exclude desert tortoises, and if sufficient forage is available. 

7. We recommend that the BLM coordinate and partner with other local, State, and Federal 

agencies as well as private groups to sponsor and/or assist with public education 

regarding desert tortoise conservation to enhance public support for conservation 

activities. Target groups for education and outreach may include OHV groups, hunting 

groups, Home Owner Associations, scout troops, public schools, libraries, and other 

audiences and venues associated with regional land use and/or educational programming. 

8. We recommend that BLM support and participate in inventory and annual monitoring of 

Yuma clapper rails and their habitats within the Planning Area. The FEIS states that 

surveys will be done every other year; however, the multi-agency protocol is for annual 

surveys. 

9. We recommend that BLM require implementation of conservation measures for 

California condors for all activities within the non-essential experimental population area, 

unless firefighter or public safety, or the protection of valuable property, improvements, 

or natural resources, render them infeasible during a particular operation. 

10. We recommend that BLM continue to work with Arizona Game and Fish Department 

(AGFD) to educate and encourage hunters to use non-lead bullets when hunting game in 

condor habitat. 

11. We recommend that BLM conduct comprehensive surveys for MSO in predicted MSO 

habitat according to current survey protocol. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 14 

12. We recommend that BLM develop environmental education and information materials on 

the SWWF and other riparian species and make these materials available to the public at 

the ASDO office in St. George, Utah. 

13. We recommend that BLM work with us to proactively develop appropriate measures to 

protect listed plants from the effects of site-specific activities that will be implemented 

under the proposed action. 

14. We recommend that BLM not dispose of land that contains occurrences, habitat, or 

potential habitat of listed plant species or other special status plant species. 

15. We recommend that BLM actively pursue obtaining ownership of the habitat of listed 

and other sensitive plant species that exists on non-Federal lands in the project area. We 

recommend BLM work closely with us to identify and prioritize such lands. 

16. We recommend new transportation routes in listed plant species habitat not be 

authorized. We also recommend that existing routes that are resulting in effects to the 

species be closed or routed away from the species. 

17. We recommend installation of physical barriers or designation of parking areas that are 

necessary to keep vehicles from impacting listed plant species. 

18. We recommend that range developments that attract and or concentrate cattle be located 

away from listed plant species habitat and occurrence. 

19. We recommend installation of fences or development of other protective measures (e.g., 

herding) where cattle are attracted to concentrate in areas in listed plant species habitat. 

20. We recommend developing or modifying listed plant species monitoring programs so that 

they are efficient and effective in achieving desired monitoring results. 

21. We recommend conducting research to determine the actual effects of various actions on 

the plant community dynamics of listed plant species habitat. 

22. We recommend that the BLM encourage seasonal restrictions (April 1 to September 30) 

on mining and other project operations within or adjacent to occupied SWWF breeding 

habitat, if these activities can disturb nesting birds. The need for this restriction will be 

assessed during the NEPA analysis and section 7 consultation conducted for the mining 

plan of operations. 

23. We recommend working with Mohave County officials to establish a speed limit on 

county roads in desert tortoise habitat. Additionally, we recommend instituting a speed 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix A 

A - 15 

limit for grazing permittees during the desert tortoise active season (March 15-October 

15) in DWMAs/ACECs. 

In order for the USFWS to be kept informed of actions minimizing or avoiding adverse effects or 

benefiting listed species or their habitats, the USFWS requests notification of the implementation 

of any conservation recommendations.
APPENDIX B 

ARIZONA STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR LIVESTOCK 

GRAZING MANAGEMENT 

AND 

RANGELAND HEALTH IMPLEMENTATION STATUS 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 1 

APPENDIX B: ARIZONA STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR 

LIVESTOCK GRAZING MANAGEMENT 

INTRODUCTION

The Department of the Interior's final rule for Grazing Administration, issued on February 22, 

1995, and effective August 21, 1995, requires that Bureau of Land Management (BLM) State 

Directors develop State or regional standards and guidelines for grazing administration in 

consultation with BLM Resource Advisory Councils (RAC), other agencies and the public. The 

final rule provides that fallback standards and guidelines will be implemented, if State standards 

and guidelines are not developed by February 12, 1997. Arizona Standards and Guidelines and 

the final rule (BLM 1996) apply to grazing administration on public lands as indicated by the 

following quotation from the Federal Register, Volume 60, Number 35, page 9955. 

"The fundamentals of rangeland health, guiding principles for standards and 

the fallback standards address ecological components that are affected by all 

uses of public rangelands, not just livestock grazing. However, the scope of 

this final rule, and therefore the fundamentals of rangeland health of §4180.1, 

and the standards and guidelines to be made effective under §4180.2, are 

limited to grazing administration." 

Although the process of developing standards and guidelines applies to grazing administration, 

present rangeland health is the result of the interaction of many factors in addition to livestock 

grazing. Other contributing factors may include, but are not limited to, past land uses, land use 

restrictions, recreation, wildlife, rights-of-way, wild horses and burros, mining, fire, weather, and 

insects and disease. 

With BLM’s commitment to ecosystem and interdisciplinary resource management, the 

standards for rangeland health, as developed in this current process, will be incorporated into 

management goals and objectives. The standards and guidelines for rangeland health for grazing 

administration, however, are not the only considerations in resolving resource issues. 

The following quotations from the Federal Register, Vol. 60, No. 35, page 9956, February 22, 

1995, describe the purpose of standards and guidelines and their implementation: 

“The guiding principles for standards and guidelines require that State or 

regional standards and guidelines address the basic components of healthy 

rangelands. The Department believes that by implementing grazing-related 

actions that are consistent with the fundamentals of §4180.1 and the guiding 

principles of §4180.2, the long-term health of public rangelands can be 

ensured. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 2 

Standards and guidelines will be implemented through terms and conditions of 

grazing permits, leases, and other authorizations, grazing-related portions of 

activity plans (including Allotment Management Plans), and through range 

improvement-related activities. 

The Department anticipates that in most cases the standards and guidelines 

themselves will not be terms and conditions of various authorizations but that 

the terms and conditions will reflect the standards and guidelines. 

The Department intends that assessments and corrective actions will be 

undertaken in priority order as determined by BLM. 

"The Department will use a variety of data including monitoring records, 

assessments, and knowledge of the locale to assist in making the "significant 

progress" determination. It is anticipated that in many cases it will take 

numerous grazing seasons to determine direction and magnitude of trend. 

However, actions will be taken to establish significant progress toward 

conformance as soon as sufficient data are available to make informed changes 

in grazing practices." 

FUNDAMENTALS AND DEFINITION OF RANGELAND HEALTH

The Grazing Administration Regulations, at §4180.1 (43 Code of Federal Regulation [CFR] 

4180.1), Federal Register Vol. 60, No. 35, pg. 9970, direct that the authorized officer ensures 

that the following conditions of rangeland health exist: 

(a) Watersheds are in, or are making significant progress toward, 

properly functioning physical condition, including their upland, riparianwetland, and aquatic components; soil and plant conditions support infiltration, 

soil moisture storage, and the release of water that are in balance with climate 

and landform and maintain or improve water quality, water quantity, and 

timing and duration of flow. 

(b) Ecological processes, including the hydrologic cycle, nutrient 

cycle, and energy flow, are maintained, or there is significant progress toward 

their attainment, in order to support healthy biotic populations and 

communities. 

(c) Water quality complies with State water quality standards and 

achieves, or is making significant progress toward achieving, established BLM 

management objectives such as meeting wildlife needs. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 3 

(d) Habitats are, or are making significant progress toward being, 

restored or maintained for Federal threatened and endangered species, Federal 

Proposed, Category 1 and 2 Federal candidate and other special status species. 

These fundamentals focus on sustaining productivity of a rangeland rather than its uses. 

Emphasizing the physical and biological functioning of ecosystems to determine rangeland 

health is consistent with the definition of rangeland health as proposed by the Committee on 

Rangeland Classification, Board of Agriculture, National Research Council (Rangeland Health, 

1994, pg. 4 and 5). This Committee defined Rangeland Health ". . .as the degree to which the 

integrity of the soil and the ecological processes of rangeland ecosystems are sustained." This 

committee emphasized ". . .the degree of integrity of the soil and ecological processes that are 

most important in sustaining the capacity of rangelands to satisfy values and produce 

commodities." The Committee also recommended that, "The determination of whether a 

rangeland is healthy, at risk, or unhealthy should be based on the evaluation of three criteria: 

degree of soil stability and watershed function, integrity of nutrient cycles and energy flow, and 

presence of functioning mechanisms" (Rangeland Health, 1994, pg. 97-98). 

Standards describe conditions necessary to encourage proper functioning of ecological processes 

on specific ecological sites. An ecological site is the logical and practical ecosystem unit upon 

which to base an interpretation of rangeland health. Ecological site is defined as: 

". . . a kind of land with specific physical characteristics which differs from other kinds of land in 

its ability to produce distinctive kinds and amounts of vegetation and in its response to 

management" (Journal of Range Management, 48:279, 1995). Ecological sites result from the 

interaction of climate, soils, and landform (slope, topographic position). The importance of this 

concept is that the "health" of different kinds of rangeland must be judged by standards specific 

to the potential of the ecological site. Acceptable erosion rates, water quality, productivity of 

plants and animals, and other features are different on each ecological site. 

Since there is wide variation of ecological sites in Arizona, standards and guidelines covering 

these sites must be general. To make standards and guidelines too specific will reduce the ability 

of BLM and interested publics to select specific objectives, monitoring strategies, and grazing 

permit terms and conditions appropriate to specific landforms. 

Ecological sites have the potential to support several different plant communities. Existing 

communities are the result of the combination of historical and recent uses and natural events. 

Management actions may be used to modify plant communities on a site. The desired plant 

community for a site is defined as follows: "Of the several plant communities that may occupy a 

site, the one that has been identified through a management plan to best meet the plan's 

objectives for the site. It must protect the site at a minimum" (Journal of Range Management, 

48:279, 1995). 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 4 

Fundamentals (a) and (b) define physical and biological components of rangeland health and are 

consistent with the definition of rangeland health as defined by the Committee on Rangeland 

Classification, Board on Agriculture, National Research Council, as discussed in the paragraph 

above. These fundamentals provide the basis for sustainable rangelands. 

Fundamentals (c) and (d) emphasize compliance with existing laws and regulation and, therefore, 

define social and political components of rangeland health. Compliance with Fundamentals (c) 

and (d) is accomplished by managing to attain a specific plant community and associated wildlife 

species present on ecological sites. These desired plant communities are determined in the BLM 

planning process, or, where the desired plant community is not identified, a community may be 

selected that will meet the conditions of Fundamentals (a) and (b) and also adhere to laws and 

regulations. Arizona Standard 3 is written to comply with Fundamentals (c) and (d) and provide 

a logical combination of Standards and Guidelines for planning and management purposes. 

STANDARD AND GUIDELINE DEFINITIONS

Standards are goals for the desired condition of the biological and physical components and 

characteristics of rangelands. Standards: 

(1) are measurable and attainable; and 

(2) comply with various Federal and State statutes, policies, and directives applicable 

to BLM Rangelands. 

Guidelines are management approaches, methods, and practices that are intended to achieve a 

standard. Guidelines: 

(1) typically identify and prescribe methods of influencing or controlling 

specific public land uses; 

(2) are developed and applied consistent with the desired condition and within 

site capability; and 

(3) may be adjusted over time. 

IMPLEMENTING STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES

The authorized officer will review existing permitted livestock use, allotment management plans, 

or other activity plans, which identify terms and conditions for management on public land. 

Existing management practices and levels of use on grazing allotments will be reviewed and 

evaluated on a priority basis to determine if they meet, or are making significant progress toward 

meeting, the standards and are in conformance with the guidelines. The review will be 

interdisciplinary and conducted under existing rules which provide for cooperation, coordination, 

and consultation with affected individuals, federal, state, and local agencies, tribal governments, 

private landowners, and interested publics. 

This review will use a variety of data, including monitoring records, assessments, and knowledge 

of the locale to assist in making the significant progress determination. Significance will be 

determined on a case-by-case basis, considering site potential, site condition, weather and 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 5 

financial commitment. It is anticipated there will be cases where numerous years will be needed 

to determine direction and magnitude of trend. 

Upon completion of review, the authorized officer shall take appropriate action as soon as 

practicable but no later than the start of the next grazing year upon determining that the existing 

grazing management practices or level of use on public land are significant factors contributing 

to failure to achieve the standards and conform with the guidelines that are made effective under 

43 CFR 4180.2. Appropriate action means implementing actions that will result in significant 

progress toward fulfillment of the standards and significant progress toward conformance with 

guidelines. 

Livestock grazing will continue where significant progress toward meeting standards is being 

made. Additional activities and practices will not be needed on such allotments. Where new 

activities or practices are required to assure significant progress toward meeting standards, 

livestock grazing use can continue contingent upon determinations from monitoring data that the 

implemented actions are effective in making significant progress toward meeting the standards. 

In some cases, additional action may be needed as determined by monitoring data over time. 

New plans will incorporate an interdisciplinary team approach (Arizona BLM Interdisciplinary 

Resource Management Handbook, April 1995). The terms and conditions for permitted grazing 

in these areas will be developed to comply with the goals and objectives of these plans that will 

be consistent with the standards and guidelines. 

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 guideline. 

Standard 1: Upland Sites

Upland soils exhibit infiltration, permeability, and erosion rates that are appropriate to soil type, 

climate and landform (ecological site). 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 6 

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 proper 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. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 7 

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. Riparianwetland 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 condition 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. Riparianwetland areas are functioning properly as indicated by the results of the application of 

the appropriate checklist. 

The checklist for riparian areas is in 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 Condition for Lentic RiparianWetland 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. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 8 

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 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 9 

Exceptions and exemptions (where applicable):

Ecological sites or stream reaches on which a change in existing vegetation is physically, 

biologically, or economically impractical. 

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, wild horses and burros); and 

 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. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 10 

STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES ON THE ARIZONA STRIP DISTRICT 

The Standards were written by Arizona’s Resource Advisory Council (RAC) in 1997. They were 

accepted and approved that same year by the Secretary of the Interior. The Guidelines apply only 

to authorized livestock grazing activities, the Standards apply to all programs and all authorized 

activities. Two teams implement the Standards on all grazing allotments on the Arizona Strip. 

The Interdisciplinary Assessment Team (IAT), comprised of resource specialists from the BLM, 

Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD), the Natural Resources Conservation Service and 

Mohave County Extension Agency, carries out the assessment. The Arizona Resource Advisory 

Council appointed a nine member Rangeland Resource Team (RRT) to be involved in the 

process from beginning to end. 

• The RRT is constructed similar to the RAC with 3 representatives in each of 3 

diverse groups: 

1. Commodities: Livestock Grazing, Mining, Commercial Recreation 

2. Non-Commodities: Wildlife, Environmental, Dispersed Recreation 

3. Local Area Interest: Public-at-large, Native American Interests, Elected 

Officials 

• The RRT has 2 objectives: 

1. Ensure the Standards are consistently applied across allotment boundaries, 

and 

2. Ensure determinations are based on something..., monitoring data, 

professional opinion. 

There is a list of members on both teams below. 

Each year letters are sent to approximately 700 individuals notifying them which grazing 

allotments are to be evaluated in the upcoming fiscal year. The recipient is then instructed how to 

request designation as an “Interested Public” and be involved in the evaluation and decision 

making process. 

BLM grazing regulations at 43 CFR 4100.0-5 state, “Interested public means an individual, 

group or organization that has submitted a written request to the authorized officer to be 

provided an opportunity to be involved in the decision making process for the management of 

livestock grazing on specific grazing allotments or has submitted written comments to the 

authorized officer regarding the management of livestock grazing on a specific 

allotment”(emphasis added). 

The Arizona Strip District holds an issue-scoping meeting once a year, where all issues raised are 

documented as either relating, or not relating, to rangeland health. During the year each 

allotment with issues that relate to rangeland health is visited, after assembling all available 

information and monitoring data. Both teams visit sites representing each issue and the IAT 

determines, by consensus, whether the area is meeting standards. The interested public is invited 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 11 

to the scoping meetings and the field visits. If an area does not meet the standards, the cause is 

determined and recommendations are made to improve the situation. If the current livestock 

grazing practices are determined to be the cause of non-attainment, BLM regulations (43 CFR 

4180.1) require the modification of the practices by the next grazing season. 

The IAT then produces a report documenting the results of the evaluation. The S&G report is 

sent to the RAC, the RRT, State Agencies having lands or managing resources within the area, 

and the Interested Public. Any comments received are used in the preparation of an 

Environmental Assessment for renewing the ten-year grazing permit. A Grazing Decision is then 

issued to the Permittee, State Agencies having lands or managing resources within the area, and 

the Interested Public. This grazing decision outlines the terms and conditions of the grazing 

permit and may be protested or appealed by any or all recipients. 

RANGELAND HEALTH IMPLEMENTATION STATUS 

Standards for Rangeland Health 

Evaluation Results and Evaluation Schedule 

Arizona Strip Field Office (AZ110) 

Allotment Name Allotment Number Evaluation Result or FY Scheduled 

 Antelope 05206 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Antelope Spring 05210 Meeting the Standards 

 Atkin Well 05207 Evaluation in Draft 

 Badger Creek 05341 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Beanhole Well 05334 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Beaver Dam Slope 04828 2008 

 Big Warren 00119 Evaluation in Draft 

 Black Canyon 05256 Meeting the Standards 

 Black Knolls 05264 Evaluation in Draft 

 Black Rock 04841 Evaluation in Draft 

 Blake Pond 04813 Evaluation in Draft 

Allotment Name Allotment Number Evaluation Result or FY Scheduled 

 Brown-Shumway 05302 Meeting the Standards 

 Button 05308 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Canaan Gap 05205 Evaluation in Draft 

 Cane Beds 05212 Evaluation in Draft 

 Cedar Knoll 05318 Evaluation in Draft 

 Cedar Pockets Ut 04866 Evaluation in Draft 

 Cedar Ridge 05303 Meeting the Standards 

 Cedar Wash 04842 Evaluation in Draft 

 Chatterly 05307 Meeting the Standards 

 Clay Spring 04845 Meeting the Standards 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 12 

 Clayhole 05215 Evaluation in Draft 

 Cottonwood 05209 Evaluation in Draft 

 Cove 05204 Evaluation in Draft 

 Cowboy Butte 05310 Meeting the Standards 

 Coyote 05327 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Coyote Spring 04805 Evaluation in Draft 

 Crosby Tank 05219 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Diamond Butte 04833 Evaluation in Draft 

 Fern Tank 05217 Meeting the Standards 

 Ferrin 05246 Evaluation in Draft 

 Flat Top Well 05214 Meeting the Standards 

 Franks Reservoir 05325 Evaluation in Draft 

 Fuller Road 05324 Evaluation in Draft 

 Glazier Dam 05202 Evaluation in Draft 

 Grama Point 05233 Evaluation in Draft 

 Gramma Spring 05225 Meeting the Standards 

 Gulch 05230 Meeting the Standards 

 Gunsight 05320 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Hacks 05227 Meeting the Standards 

 Harris Well 05238 Meeting the Standards 

 Hat Knoll 04867 Meeting the Standards 

 Head of Hacks 05232 Meeting the Standards 

 Herd House 00096 Evaluation in Draft 

 Highway 04812 Evaluation in Draft 

 Highway East 05309 Meeting the Standards 

 Homestead 05253 Meeting the Standards 

 House Rock 05331 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Hurricane Cliff 05251 Meeting the Standards 

 Hurricane Rim 00114 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Ivanpah 04858 Meeting the Standards 

 Iverson 04834 Meeting the Standards 

 

Allotment Name Allotment Number Evaluation Result or FY Scheduled 

 Jackson Tank 04830 Evaluation in Draft 

 Jacob Canyon 05317 Meeting the Standards 

 Joe 05245 Meeting the Standards 

 Johnson Run 05330 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 June Tank 05221 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Kanab Creek 05321 Evaluation in Draft 

 Kanab Gulch 05224 Meeting the Standards 

 Lamb Tank 05257 Meeting the Standards 

 Lambing-Starvation 04838 Meeting the Standards 

 Lane 05271 Meeting the Standards 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 13 

 Lime Spring 02012 2008 

 Little Tank 04853 Meeting the Standards 

 Little Wolf 04814 Meeting the Standards 

 Littlefield 04843 2008 

 Littlefield Comm. 04827 2008 

 Lizard 04857 Evaluation in Draft 

 Loco Point 05260 Meeting the Standards 

 Lost Spring Gap 05316 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Lower Hurricane 04837 Meeting the Standards 

 Lynn & Tone 05211 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Mainstreet 04808 Meeting the Standards 

 Mesquite Community 04832 2008 

 Moonshine 05237 Meeting the Standards 

 Mormon Well 04844 2008 

 Mountain Sheep 04824 Meeting the Standards 

 Muggins Flat 05313 Meeting the Standards 

 Mustang Spring 04859 Meeting the Standards 

 Navajo Wells Ut 05348 Evaluation in Draft 

 Pat's Pond 04862 Meeting the Standards 

 Pigeon Tank 05322 Evaluation in Draft 

 Pipe Spring 05235 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Pipe Valley 05242 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Pocum 04871 Evaluation in Draft 

 Pocum Tank 04840 Meeting the Standards 

 Point of Rock 05241 Meeting the Standards 

 Pratt Tank 05314 Evaluation in Draft 

 Purgatory 04831 Meeting the Standards 

 Quail Canyon 04856 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Rider 05305 Meeting the Standards 

 Rock Canyon 00099 Meeting the Standards 

 Rock Canyon Tank 05319 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 

Allotment Name Allotment Number Evaluation Result or FY Scheduled 

 Rock Pockets 05213 Meeting the Standards 

 Rock Reservoir 05345 Evaluation in Draft 

 Sage 05311 Evaluation in Draft 

 Scotties Seep 05236 Meeting the Standards 

 Shinarump 05301 Meeting the Standards 

 Short Creek 05270 Evaluation in Draft 

 Shuttleworth 05315 Meeting the Standards 

 Soap Creek 05332 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 State Line 05244 Evaluation in Draft 

 Suicide 05323 Evaluation in Draft 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix B 

B - 14 

 Sullivan Canyon 04810 Evaluation in Draft 

 Sunshine 04863 Meeting the Standards 

 Sunshine Tank 05247 Meeting the Standards 

 Swapp Tank 05248 Evaluation in Draft 

 Temple Trail 05216 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Toquer Tank 04861 Evaluation in Draft 

 Tuckup 00097 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Valley Wash 05234 Progressing Towards Meeting 

 Wells 05208 Evaluation in Draft 

 White Pockets 05243 Meeting the Standards 

 White Sage 05349 Evaluation in Draft 

 Whiterock-Soapstone 04804 Evaluation in Draft 

 Wildband 05223 Evaluation in Draft 

 Wolfhole Canyon Sp 04811 Evaluation in Draft 

 Wolfhole Lake 04823 Evaluation in Draft 

 Wolfhole Mountain 04839 Meeting the Standards 

 Yellowstone 05263 Evaluation in Draft 
APPENDIX C 

LIVESTOCK GRAZING 

ALLOTMENT MANAGEMENT STATUS 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix C 

 C - 1 

APPENDIX C: LIVESTOCK GRAZING ALLOTMENT MANAGEMENT 

STATUS 

Resource Area: Arizona Strip Field Office 

Allotment Name Allotment Number Management Status AMP Current Mgt

 Antelope 05206 M A Rest-Rotation 

 Antelope Spring 05210 I A Best Pasture 

 Atkin Well 05207 I A Deferred 

 Badger Creek 05341 M A Deferred 

 Beanhole Well 05334 I A Deferred 

 Beaver Dam Slope 04828 M A Deferred 

 Big Warren 00119 I A Best Pasture 

 Black Canyon 05256 C Winter Spring 

 Black Knolls 05264 I A Rest-Rotation 

 Black Rock 04841 I A Deferred 

 Blake Pond 04813 M A Deferred 

 Brown-Shumway 05302 M A Deferred 

 Button 05308 C A Winter Spring 

 Canaan Gap 05205 I A Deferred 

 Cane Beds 05212 M A Season Long 

 Cedar Knoll 05318 M A Rest-Rotation 

 Cedar Pockets Ut 04866 I A Deferred 

 Cedar Ridge 05303 C A Spring 

 Cedar Wash 04842 I A Winter 

 Chatterly 05307 I A Deferred 

 Clay Spring 04845 M A Deferred 

 Clayhole 05215 I A Best Pasture 

 Cottonwood 05209 M C Deferred 

 Cove 05204 C Best Pasture 

 Cowboy Butte 05310 M A Rest-Rotation 

 Coyote 05327 I A Deferred 

 Coyote Spring 04805 I Winter Spring 

 Crosby Tank 05219 I A Deferred 

 Diamond Butte 04833 I Seasonal Rotation 

 Fern Tank 05217 I A Best Pasture 

 Ferrin 05246 C Winter Spring 

 Flat Top Well 05214 I A Deferred 

 Franks Reservoir 05325 I A Rest-Rotation 

 Fuller Road 05324 I A Deferred 

 Glazier Dam 05202 M A Deferred 

 Grama Point 05233 M A Deferred 

 Grama Spring 05225 C A Winter Spring 

 Gulch 05230 C Winter Spring 

 Gunsight 05320 I A Deferred 

 Hacks 05227 C A Winter Spring 

 Harris Well 05238 C Winter Spring 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix C 

 C - 2 

 Hat Knoll 04867 I A Deferred 

 Head of Hacks 05232 I A Deferred 

 Herd House 00096 M Winter Spring 

 Highway 04812 I A Winter 

 Highway East 05309 C A Season Long 

 Homestead 05253 I A Deferred 

 House Rock 05331 I A Deferred 

 Hurricane Cliff 05251 M Winter Spring 

 Hurricane Rim 00114 M A Deferred 

 Ivanpah 04858 M A Deferred 

 Iverson 04834 C Season Long 

 Jackson Tank 04830 M A Deferred 

 Jacob Canyon 05317 M A Winter Spring 

 Joe 05245 C Season Long 

 Johnson Run 05330 M A Deferred 

 June Tank 05221 I A Rest-Rotation 

 Kanab Creek 05321 C A Winter Spring 

 Kanab Gulch 05224 C Winter Spring 

 Lamb Tank 05257 M A Rest-Rotation 

 Lambing-Starvation 04838 M A Deferred 

 Lane 05271 C Winter Spring 

 Lime Spring 02012 I Seasonal Rotation 

 Little Tank 04853 M A Deferred 

 Little Wolf 04814 M A Rest-Rotation 

 Littlefield 04843 I Seasonal Rotation 

 Littlefield Comm. 04827 I Seasonal Rotation 

 Lizard 04857 M A Deferred 

 Loco Point 05260 I A Deferred 

 Lost Spring Gap 05316 C A Winter Spring 

 Lower Hurricane 04837 I A Best Pasture 

 Lynn & Tone 05211 M Deferred 

 Mainstreet 04808 M A Best Pasture 

 Mesquite Community 04832 I A Season Long 

 Moonshine 05237 M A Deferred 

 Mormon Well 04844 I Winter 

 Mountain Sheep 04824 C Winter Spring 

 Muggins Flat 05313 I A Rest-Rotation 

 Mustang Spring 04859 I A Deferred 

 Navajo Wells Ut 05348 M A Deferred 

 Pat's Pond 04862 C Season Long 

 Pigeon Tank 05322 I A Deferred 

 Pipe Spring 05235 M Rest-Rotation 

 Pipe Valley 05242 M Season Long 

 Pocum 04871 M Season Long 

 Pocum Tank 04840 M A Deferred 

 Point of Rock 05241 M Season Long 

 Pratt Tank 05314 M A Rest-Rotation 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix C 

 C - 3 

 Purgatory 04831 I A Winter Spring 

 Quail Canyon 04856 M A Deferred 

 Rider 05305 M A Winter Spring 

 Rock Canyon 00099 C Winter Spring 

 Rock Canyon Tank 05319 I A Deferred 

 Rock Pockets 05213 M A Deferred 

 Rock Reservoir 05345 I A Deferred 

 Sage 05311 C Winter Spring 

 Scotties Seep 05236 I A Deferred 

 Shinarump 05301 C Summer & Fall 

 Short Creek 05270 C A Season Long 

 Shuttleworth 05315 M A Winter Spring 

 Soap Creek 05332 I A Winter Spring 

 State Line 05244 C C Season Long 

 Suicide 05323 I Winter Spring 

 Sullivan Canyon 04810 I A Deferred 

 Sunshine 04863 I A Deferred 

 Sunshine Tank 05247 I A Deferred 

 Swapp Tank 05248 M A Deferred 

 Temple Trail 05216 I A Deferred 

 Toquer Tank 04861 M A Deferred 

 Tuckup 00097 M A Deferred 

 Valley Wash 05234 M A Rest-Rotation 

 Wells 05208 M C Season Long 

 White Pockets 05243 M Season Long 

 White Sage 05349 I A Rest-Rotation 

 Whiterock-Soapstone 04804 M A Deferred 

 Wildband 05223 I A Deferred 

 Wolfhole Canyon Sp 04811 I A Deferred 

 Wolfhole Lake 04823 I A Deferred 

 Wolfhole Mountain 04839 M A Deferred 

 Yellowstone 05263 I A Deferred 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix C 

 C - 4 

ALLOTMENT CATEGORIZATION CRITERIA 

Maintain (M) 

(a) Present range condition is satisfactory. 

(b) Allotments have high or moderate resource potential and are producing near their potential 

(or trend is moving in that direction.) 

(c) No serious resource-use conflicts/controversy exist. 

(d) Opportunities may exist for positive economic return from public investments. 

(e) Present management is satisfactory. 

(f) Other criteria appropriate to the Environmental Statement (ES) area. 

Improve (I) 

(a) Present range condition is unsatisfactory. 

(b) Allotments have high to moderate resource production potential and are producing at low to 

moderate levels. 

(c) Serious resource-use conflicts/controversy exists. 

(d) Opportunities exist for positive economic return from public investments. 

(e) Present management appears unsatisfactory. 

(f) Other criteria appropriate to the ES area. 

Custodial (C) 

(a) Present range condition is not a paramount factor. 

(b) Allotments have low resource production potential, and are producing near their potential. 

(c) Limited resource-use conflicts/controversy may exist. 

(d) Opportunities for positive economic return on public investment do not exist or are 

constrained by technological or economic factors. 

(e) Present management appears satisfactory or is the only logical practice under existing 

resource conditions or land ownership pattern. 

(f) Other criteria appropriate to the ES area. 
APPENDIX D 

LIVESTOCK GRAZING ALLOTMENT ACRES AND 

ANIMAL UNIT MONTHS (AUMs) BY LAND STATUS 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix D 

D - 1 

APPENDIX D: LIVESTOCK GRAZING ALLOTMENT ACRES AND 

ANIMAL UNIT MONTHS (AUMS) BY LAND STATUS 

Table D.1. Allotment Acres by Land Status for the Arizona Strip FO 

Allotment Allotment 

Number State Acres Private Acres Other Federal Acres Public Acres 

Antelope 05206 1,280 40 14,390 

Antelope Spring 05210 1,920 760 14,940 

Atkin Well 05207 477 2,555 25,220 

Badger Creek 05341 6,272 

Beanhole Well 05334 1,960 18,960 

Beaver Dam Slope 04828 715 358 30,623 

Big Warren 00119 600 9,066 

Black Canyon 05256 640 2,160 

Black Knolls 05264 2,040 120 38,589 

Black Rock 04841 3,540 590 36,392 

Blake Pond 04813 1,255 80 19,388 

Brown-Shumway 05302 1,477 

Button 05308 640 520 4,500 

Canaan Gap 05205 650 2,430 5,460 

Cane Beds 05212 1,230 2,435 12,105 

Cedar Knoll 05318 17,951 

Cedar Pockets Ut 04866 11,256 

Cedar Ridge 05303 1,420 

Cedar Wash 04842 14,354 

Chatterly 05307 640 80 4,170 

Clay Spring 04845 11,921 

Clayhole 05215 12,276 280 103,345 

Cottonwood 05209 3,520 

Cove 05204 491 76 

Cowboy Butte 05310 605 330 3,120 

Coyote 05327 4,040 36,721 

Coyote Spring 04805 360 20,437 

Crosby Tank 05219 650 1,920 10,187 

Diamond Butte 04833 320 1,600 3,536 

Fern Tank 05217 2,960 40 48,269 

Ferrin 05246 2,820 

Flat Top Well 05214 1,120 8,625 

Franks Reservoir 05325 711 6,589 

Fuller Road 05324 2,618 24,333 

Glazier Dam 05202 2,562 640 6,787 

Grama Point 05233 320 23,265 

Gramma Spring 05225 4,495 

Gulch 05230 3,400 

Gunsight 05320 7,230 

Hacks 05227 80 4,250 

Harris Well 05238 4,160 2,640 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix D 

D - 2 

Table D.1. Allotment Acres by Land Status for the Arizona Strip FO 

Allotment Allotment 

Number State Acres Private Acres Other Federal Acres Public Acres 

Hat Knoll 04867 40 3,160 

Head of Hacks 05232 1,920 29,490 

Herd House 00096 192 10 2,390 

Highway 04812 11,378 

Highway East 05309 2,790 1,280 13,010 

Homestead 05253 1,920 3,959 8,625 

House Rock 05331 920 210 16,909 

Hurricane Cliff 05251 320 4,830 

Hurricane Rim 00114 960 8,395 

Ivanpah 04858 1,279 680 12,997 

Iverson 04834 2,080 320 

Jackson Tank 04830 8,013 

Jacob Canyon 05317 640 3,200 

Joe 05245 3,320 320 

Johnson Run 05330 1,240 720 8,243 

June Tank 05221 4,480 111,316 

Kanab Creek 05321 640 4,260 

Kanab Gulch 05224 4,260 

Lamb Tank 05257 640 640 6,990 

Lambing-Starvation 04838 1,623 10,913 

Lane 05271 640 

Lime Spring 02012 160 3,596 

Little Tank 04853 1,609 4,356 

Little Wolf 04814 7,662 

Littlefield 04843 148 881 2,097 

Littlefield Comm. 04827 1,030 4,780 71,854 

Lizard 04857 8,315 4,198 

Loco Point 05260 640 5,720 

Lost Spring Gap 05316 790 

Lower Hurricane 04837 180 161 23,526 

Lynn & Tone 05211 2,170 

Mainstreet 04808 23,406 8,246 156,454 

Mesquite Community 04832 10,000 38,073 

Moonshine 05237 320 9,725 

Mormon Well 04844 2,806 155 12,892 

Mountain Sheep 04824 1,960 

Muggins Flat 05313 800 11,088 

Mustang Spring 04859 640 9,308 

Navajo Wells Ut 05348 960 360 6,736 

Pat's Pond 04862 640 

Pigeon Tank 05322 10,825 

Pipe Spring 05235 200 803 

Pipe Valley 05242 62 4,463 

Pocum 04871 13,006 

Pocum Tank 04840 200 8,212 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix D 

D - 3 

Table D.1. Allotment Acres by Land Status for the Arizona Strip FO 

Allotment Allotment 

Number State Acres Private Acres Other Federal Acres Public Acres 

Point of Rock 05241 2,280 640 6,261 

Pratt Tank 05314 1,370 920 21,905 

Purgatory 04831 4,970 

Quail Canyon 04856 160 15,784 

Rider 05305 640 2,410 

Rock Canyon 00099 407 640 1,360 

Rock Canyon Tank 05319 1,080 21,990 

Rock Pockets 05213 2,628 20 19,830 

Rock Reservoir 05345 1,105 

Sage 05311 280 3,380 

Scotties Seep 05236 640 6,783 

Shinarump 05301 463 1,100 

Short Creek 05270 2,412 2,998 2,233 

Shuttleworth 05315 120 9,437 

Soap Creek 05332 5,840 355 3,760 116,592 

State Line 05244 1,180 605 

Suicide 05323 4,830 

Sullivan Canyon 04810 25,302 

Sunshine 04863 17,522 

Sunshine Tank 05247 80 7,140 

Swapp Tank 05248 9,373 

Temple Trail 05216 1,241 120 21,812 

Toquer Tank 04861 640 11,785 

Tuckup 00097 639 12,638 

Valley Wash 05234 640 2,708 

Wells 05208 640 5,490 

White Pockets 05243 3,450 

White Sage 05349 1,330 11,010 

Whiterock-Soapstone 04804 42 18,388 

Wildband 05223 4,620 260 37,451 

Wolfhole - Canyon Sp 04811 2,560 160 33,757 

Wolfhole Lake 04823 640 12,590 

Wolfhole Mountain 04839 6,699 

Yellowstone 05263 760 1,850 8,311 

Summary 

(120 detail records) 141,039 54,456 13,760 1,790,073 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix D 

D - 4 

Table D.2 Allotment AUMs by Land Status for the Arizona Strip FO 

Allotment Name Allotment Number State AUMs Private 

AUMs 

Other Federal 

AUMs 

Public 

AUMs 

Antelope 05206 168 3 1,227 

Antelope Spring 05210 240 67 1,157 

Atkin Well 05207 35 397 2,339 

Badger Creek 05341 93 

Beanhole Well 05334 257 1,314 

Beaver Dam Slope 04828 21 7 897 

Big Warren 00119 74 704 

Black Canyon 05256 72 243 

Black Knolls 05264 240 28 1,338 

Black Rock 04841 1,463 

Blake Pond 04813 96 6 1,317 

Brown-Shumway 05302 114 

Button 05308 48 26 277 

Canaan Gap 05205 97 248 279 

Cane Beds 05212 171 105 324 

Cedar Knoll 05318 720 

Cedar Pockets Ut 04866 375 

Cedar Ridge 05303 78 

Cedar Wash 04842 333 

Chatterly 05307 48 4 323 

Clay Spring 04845 1,207 

Clayhole 05215 1,452 64 9,378 

Cottonwood 05209 312 

Cove 05204 12 

Cowboy Butte 05310 41 32 184 

Coyote 05327 360 2,060 

Coyote Spring 04805 48 1,359 

Crosby Tank 05219 72 150 470 

Diamond Butte 04833 36 217 395 

Fern Tank 05217 381 3 4,806 

Ferrin 05246 120 

Flat Top Well 05214 112 874 

Franks Reservoir 05325 265 

Fuller Road 05324 194 1,102 

Glazier Dam 05202 211 58 571 

Grama Point 05233 21 2,057 

Gramma Spring 05225 360 

Gulch 05230 96 

Gunsight 05320 425 

Hacks 05227 9 247 

Harris Well 05238 604 272 

Hat Knoll 04867 500 

Head of Hacks 05232 251 2,664 

Herd House 00096 12 95 

Highway 04812 13 200 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix D 

D - 5 

Table D.2 Allotment AUMs by Land Status for the Arizona Strip FO 

Allotment Name Allotment Number State AUMs Private 

AUMs 

Other Federal 

AUMs 

Public 

AUMs 

Highway East 05309 266 181 429 

Homestead 05253 253 485 654 

House Rock 05331 105 17 1,755 

Hurricane Cliff 05251 35 464 

Hurricane Rim 00114 109 3,424 

Ivanpah 04858 168 75 601 

Iverson 04834 306 64 

Jackson Tank 04830 857 

Jacob Canyon 05317 49 139 

Joe 05245 515 24 

Johnson Run 05330 107 17 253 

June Tank 05221 525 8,206 

Kanab Creek 05321 72 168 

Kanab Gulch 05224 143 

Lamb Tank 05257 84 61 423 

Lambing-Starvation 04838 72 471 

Lane 05271 54 

Lime Spring 02012 Ephemeral 

Little Tank 04853 180 693 

Little Wolf 04814 328 

Littlefield 04843 120 

Littlefield Comm. 04827 80 32 2,615 

Lizard 04857 588 210 

Loco Point 05260 51 535 

Lost Spring Gap 05316 48 

Lower Hurricane 04837 13 2,316 

Lynn & Tone 05211 216 

Mainstreet 04808 2,532 1,207 14,535 

Mesquite Community 04832 500 1,906 

Moonshine 05237 42 824 

Mormon Well 04844 82 420 

Mountain Sheep 04824 96 

Muggins Flat 05313 58 305 

Mustang Spring 04859 72 491 

Navajo Wells Ut 05348 44 16 376 

Pat's Pond 04862 60 

Pigeon Tank 05322 299 

Pipe Spring 05235 6 18 

Pipe Valley 05242 7 412 

Pocum 04871 813 

Pocum Tank 04840 9 494 

Point of Rock 05241 412 89 682 

Pratt Tank 05314 108 68 800 

Purgatory 04831 318 

Quail Canyon 04856 6 808 

Rider 05305 45 108 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix D 

D - 6 

Table D.2 Allotment AUMs by Land Status for the Arizona Strip FO 

Allotment Name Allotment Number State AUMs Private 

AUMs 

Other Federal 

AUMs 

Public 

AUMs 

Rock Canyon 00099 38 65 126 

Rock Canyon Tank 05319 36 891 

Rock Pockets 05213 346 3 1,760 

Rock Reservoir 05345 22 

Sage 05311 36 243 

Scotties Seep 05236 70 710 

Shinarump 05301 35 40 

Short Creek 05270 234 314 252 

Shuttleworth 05315 12 661 

Soap Creek 05332 386 25 78 6,867 

State Line 05244 156 29 

Suicide 05323 280 

Sullivan Canyon 04810 864 

Sunshine 04863 1,440 

Sunshine Tank 05247 8 752 

Swapp Tank 05248 958 

Temple Trail 05216 141 13 2,370 

Toquer Tank 04861 103 1,801 

Tuckup 00097 60 792 

Valley Wash 05234 75 237 

Wells 05208 74 310 

White Pockets 05243 420 

White Sage 05349 49 429 

Whiterock-Soapstone 04804 1,320 

Wildband 05223 449 8 3,802 

Wolfhole - Canyon Sp 04811 329 1,867 

Wolfhole Lake 04823 40 928 

Wolfhole Mountain 04839 315 

Yellowstone 05263 218 174 897 

Summary 

 (120 detail records) 14,078 5,467 578 125,124 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix D 

D - 7 

Table D.2 Allotment AUMs By Land Status for the Arizona Strip FO 

Allotment Name Allotment Number State AUMs Private AUMs Other Federal AUMs Public 

AUMs 

Antelope 5206 168 3 1,227 

Antelope Spring 5210 240 67 1,157 

Atkin Well 5207 35 397 2,339 

Beaver Dam Slope 4828 21 7 897 

Black Canyon 5256 72 243 

Black Knolls 5264 240 28 1,338 

Black Rock 4841 1,463 

Blake Pond 4813 96 6 1,317 

Brown-Shumway 5302 114 

Button 5308 48 26 277 

Canaan Gap 5205 97 248 279 

Cane Beds 5212 171 105 324 

Cedar Knoll 5318 720 

Cedar Pockets Ut 4866 375 

Cedar Ridge 5303 78 

Cedar Wash 4842 333 

Chatterly 5307 48 4 323 

Clay Spring 4845 1,207 

Clayhole 5215 1,516 64 10,082 

Cottonwood 5209 312 

Cowboy Butte 5310 41 32 184 

Coyote Spring 4805 48 1,359 

Crosby Tank 5219 72 150 470 

Diamond Butte 4833 36 217 395 

Fern Tank 5217 381 3 4,806 

Ferrin 5246 120 

Flat Top Well 5214 112 874 

Franks Reservoir 5325 265 

Fuller Road 5324 194 1,102 

Glazier Dam 5202 211 58 571 

Grama Point 5233 21 2,057 

Gramma Spring 5225 360 

Gulch 5230 96 

Gunsight 5320 425 

Hacks 5227 9 247 

Harris Well 5238 604 272 

Hat Knoll 4867 500 

Head Of Hacks 5232 251 2,664 

Herd House 96 12 95 

Highway 4812 13 200 

Highway 5309 266 181 429 

Home Ranch 5342 6 

Homestead 5253 253 485 654 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix D 

D - 8 

Table D.2 Allotment AUMs By Land Status for the Arizona Strip FO 

Allotment Name Allotment Number State AUMs Private AUMs Other Federal AUMs Public 

AUMs 

Hurricane Cliff 5251 35 464 

Hurricane Rim 114 109 3,424 

Ivanpah 4858 168 75 601 

Iverson 4834 306 64 

Jackson Tank 4830 857 

Jacob Canyon 5317 49 139 

Joe 5245 515 24 

Johnson Run 5330 107 17 253 

June Tank 5221 525 8,206 

Kanab Creek 5321 72 168 

Kanab Gulch 5224 143 

Lamb Tank 5257 84 61 423 

Lambing-Starvation 4838 72 471 

Lane 5271 54 

Little Tank 4853 180 693 

Little Wolf 4814 328 

Littlefield 4843 120 

Littlefield Comm. 4827 80 32 2,615 

Lizard 4857 588 210 

Loco Point 5260 51 535 

Lost Spring Gap 5316 48 

Lower Hurricane 4837 13 2,316 

Mainstreet 4808 2,532 1,207 14,535 

Mesquite Community 4832 500 1,906 

Moonshine 5237 42 824 

Mormon Well 4844 82 420 

Mountain Sheep 4824 96 

Muggins Flat 5313 58 305 

Mustang Spring 4859 72 491 

Navajo Wells Ut 5348 44 16 376 

Pat'S Pond 4862 60 

Pigeon Tank 5322 299 

Pipe Valley 5242 7 412 

Pocum 4871 813 

Pocum Tank 4840 9 494 

Point Of Rock 5241 412 89 682 

Pratt Tank 5314 108 68 800 

Purgatory 4831 318 

Quail Canyon 4856 6 808 

Rider 5305 45 108 

Rock Canyon 99 38 65 126 

Rock Canyon Tank 5319 36 891 

Rock Pockets 5213 346 3 1,760 

Rock Reservoir 5345 22 

Sage 5311 36 243 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix D 

D - 9 

Table D.2 Allotment AUMs By Land Status for the Arizona Strip FO 

Allotment Name Allotment Number State AUMs Private AUMs Other Federal AUMs Public 

AUMs 

Scotties Seep 5236 70 710 

Shinarump 5301 35 40 

Short Creek 5270 234 314 252 

Shuttleworth 5315 12 661 

State Line 5244 156 29 

Suicide 5323 280 

Sullivan Canyon 4810 864 

Sunshine 4863 1,440 

Sunshine Tank 5247 8 752 

Swapp Tank 5248 958 

Temple Trail 5216 141 13 2,370 

Toquer Tank 4861 103 1,801 

Tuckup 97 60 792 

Valley Wash 5234 96 328 

Wells 5208 74 310 

White Pockets 5243 420 

White Sage 5349 49 429 

Whiterock-Soapstone 4804 1,320 

Wildband 5223 449 8 3,802 

Wolfhole - Canyon Sp 4811 329 1,867 

Wolfhole Lake 4823 40 928 

Wolfhole Mountain 4839 315 

Yellowstone 5263 218 174 897 

Summary 

 (111 detail records) 12,975 5,425 500 113,066 
APPENDIX E 

VEGETATION TREATMENT TOOLS AND METHODS 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix E 

E - 1 

APPENDIX E: VEGETATION TREATMENT TOOLS AND METHODS 

This appendix briefly describes a variety of vegetation treatment tools and methods that may be used in 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM)-administered lands of the Arizona Strip Field Office (FO). Included 

are recommendations for uses of various tools and methods, as well as advantages and disadvantages of 

each. 

Manual 

In manual treatments, plants are cut at or above ground level; plant root systems are pulled or dug out to 

prevent subsequent sprouting and regrowth; or mulch is placed around desired vegetation to limit the 

growth of competing vegetation. Hand tools and hand-operated power tools are used in manual 

vegetation treatments to cut, clear, or prune herbaceous and woody species. Hand tools such as the 

handsaw, axe, shovel, rake, machete, grubbing hoe, mattock (combination of axe and grubbing hoe), 

brush hook, and hand clippers, etc. are used in manual treatments. 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 with roots that can quickly resprout in response to surface cutting or clearing. Power tools, such 

as chain saws and power brush saws, are used to sever the main stem of woody vegetation at or near 

ground level. 

The advantage of manual treatments is that they are species and individual plant specific, can be used in 

sensitive habitats, and can be used in areas inaccessible for mechanical treatments. The disadvantage is 

that they are labor intensive and, therefore, expensive. 

Mechanical

Mechanical treatments are used to kill or reduce the cover of undesirable vegetation and thus encourage 

the growth of desirable vegetation. Several different types of mechanical equipment are effective in 

suppressing, inhibiting, or controlling herbaceous and woody vegetation (Vallentine 1980). Equipment 

could include wheeled or track type tractors, mowers, shredders, ATV’s or specially designed vehicles 

with attached implements for mechanical vegetation treatments. 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 re-sprouting ability; 

2. Need for seedbed preparation and/or re-vegetation, 

3. Need to reduce erosion and improve effective ground cover, 

4. Soil characteristics such as type, depth, amount and size of rocks, erosion potential, and 

susceptibility to compaction; 

5. Climatic and seasonal conditions, 

6. Topography and terrain, 

7. Potential cost of project compared to expected results, and 

8. Vegetation type. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix E 

E - 2 

Wheeled or crawler tractors can uproot and/or push vegetation over (bulldozing) with a heavy, hydraulic 

controlled blade. Vegetation is either left scattered or pushed into windrows or piles. There are several 

different kinds of blades available, depending of the type of vegetation and goals of the project. 

Bulldozing is most effective in removing scattered large brush or trees. Soil disturbance is a disadvantage 

of bulldozing. 

Disk plowing in various forms can be used for removing shallow-rooted herbaceous and woody plants. 

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 disadvantages of disk plowing are that it disturbs the soil and provides 

an opportunity for an increase in invasive non-native plants, it usually kills all species, and it may be 

expensive. In addition, plowing is usually not practical on steep (greater than a 35% to 45% slope) or 

rocky slopes. Plant species that sprout from roots may survive. 

Various tractor attachments are used for mowing, beating, crushing, chopping, or shredding vegetation 

depending on the nature of the vegetation and goals of the project. Mowing is effective in reducing plant 

height and usually does not kill vegetation. Mowing is more effective on herbaceous than woody 

vegetation. On the other hand, a rolling cutter may kill woody non-sprouting vegetation by breaking 

stems at ground level but leaving herbaceous vegetation. Generally, mowing, beating, crushing, 

chopping, or shredding disturbs the soil surface minimally. Rocky soil and steep slopes may limit use of 

this type of equipment. The advantage of using this type of equipment is that selective plants may be 

targeted to achieve specific goals. 

Chaining and cabling are used to remove non-sprouting woody vegetation such as small trees and shrubs 

by pulling them over. Vegetation removal is accomplished by dragging heavy anchor chains or steel 

cables, hooked behind two tractors, in a U-shaped manner. Vegetation is either left scattered or pushed 

into windrows or piles. The chains or cables can also be used to prepare the soil surface for seeding 

desirable species and to cover seed with soil to improve germination. Although herbaceous vegetation is 

not normally injured during the treatment, desirable shrubs may be damaged. The disadvantage of this 

treatment is soil disturbance and that non-desirable “weedy” herbaceous vegetation can survive this 

treatment. This vegetation treatment method is cost effective as large areas can be readily treated. 

Chemical 

Until the Draft Progammatic EIS on Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on BLM Lands in 17 

Western States (2005) is final, the BLM will use EPA-approved herbicides in accordance with EPA's 

Endangered Species Pesticide Program covered in the BLM’s Vegetation Treatment on BLM Lands in 

Thirteen Western States FEIS (May 1991) and to those approved for use by the Arizona Record of 

Decision (ROD, Page 3, 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 as listed on pages 1-19 through 1-32 and project design 

features listed on pages 1-33 through 1-37 of the FEIS. Once the ROD for this RMP is signed, the BLM 

will adhere to the standards and guidelines for each approved herbicide set forth in the Programmatic EIS 

on Vegetation Treatment on BLM Lands in Thirteen Western States referred to above. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix E 

E - 3 

Herbicide applications are designed to minimize potential impacts on non-target plants and animals, while 

achieving the objective of the vegetation treatment project. 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 herbicides may be applied aerially with helicopters or fixed-wing aircraft, or on the ground using 

vehicles or manual application devices. Helicopters are more expensive than fixed-wing aircraft, but they 

are more effective in irregular terrain and in treating specific target vegetation in areas with many 

vegetation types. Manual applications are generally used for treating small areas or those inaccessible by 

vehicle. 

The BLM will work closely with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to ensure that herbicide 

applications will not affect listed or proposed threatened or endangered species on a project-level basis. If 

adverse effects are anticipated during informal consultation, then the BLM will formally consult on these 

projects. If the USFWS develops herbicide guidance for particular species that improves protection 

beyond the current BLM design features, the BLM will consider and incorporate that guidance as it 

consults with the USFWS on a project-level basis. In order to protect listed, proposed, and candidate 

species, buffer strips may be used. 

Project design features may include buffer strips described in the Vegetation Treatment on BLM Lands in 

Thirteen Western States Programmatic EIS ROD (page 10), as follows: “Buffer strips will 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 for vehicle application and 10 

feet for hand application. Any deviations must be in accordance with the label for the herbicide. 

Herbicides could be wiped on individual plants within 10 feet of water where application is critical.” It 

should be noted that the Draft Vegetation Management EIS contains herbicides approved for application 

over water, and therefore, buffer strips may not always be necessary, once the new Programmatic 

Vegetation Management EIS is approved. 

The chemicals can be applied by many different methods and the selected technique depends on a number 

of variables. Some of these are: 

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; and 

6. meteorological and vegetative conditions of the treatment area at the time of treatment. 

The changes made here are not consistent with the format of the numbered items under the “Mechanical 

Section.” Chemical treatments are generally cost effective and can be species specific. The disadvantages 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix E 

E - 4 

are they are not always species specific and precautions may need to be taken to ensure attainment of 

treatment objectives. 

Biological 

Biological control (biocontrol) is the intentional use of living organisms to reduce the population of a 

pest. It may include the use of insects, nematodes, mite, plant pathogens, and vertebrates. The majority 

of the noxious weeds in the United States are introduced without their natural enemies. Biocontrol seeks 

to use some of the native land’s biotic factors to suppress populations of these undesirable plants 

(Biological Control of Weeds in the West, Western Society of Weed Management, 1996). The eventual 

impacts of a biocontrol agent on its target plant will be the result of the: 

1. density of weeds compared to the density of the agent; 

2. effect of the local biotic and abiotic conditions on the agent and on the weed; 

3. plant’s reproductive ability (seeds only or seeds and vegetative reproduction); 

4. agent’s ability to stress the plant each year and the plant’s ability to maintain and replace root 

reserves; 

5. plant’s ability to recover from the effects of the biocontrol agent, and; 

6. interactions of multiple biocontrol agents attacking a single weed species. 

The changes made here are not consistent with the format of the numbered items under the “Mechanical 

Section.” 

The advantages of biocontrol: 

1. Once a biocontrol agent becomes established, it usually will reproduce, increase its numbers, and 

continue to attack the target organism, generally without additional costs to the land manager. 

2. Biocontrol agents move to host plants anywhere within their climatic range, readily crossing 

ownership boundaries and some geographical barriers. 

3. Approved biocontrol agents are selective – host weeds are attacked without damage to the 

surrounding vegetation. 

4. Properly tested biocontrol agents are not a source of environmental contamination. 

The disadvantages of biocontrol: 

1. It often takes many years for the populations of the introduced agents to increase to levels that 

permanently decrease the pest plant population. 

2. Some biocontrol agents may be subject to predators. 

3. Environmental conditions (shade versus sun, low versus high rainfall, sandy versus clay soils) 

often exclude some biocontrol agents from certain locations. 

4. Biocontrol agents usually do not eradicate weed populations. 

Cattle, sheep, and goats are domestic animals that can be used as biological agents to control the top 

growth of certain noxious weeds. The use of grazing as a biological control agent will be conducted in 

accordance with BLM procedures in the Use of Biological Control Agents of Pests on Public Lands 

(BLM 1990). The following are some advantages of using domestic animals, mainly sheep or goats, for 

noxious weed control. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix E 

E - 5 

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 targeted species. 

3. Sheep or goats can be used in combination with herbicides. 

Some of the disadvantages of using domestic animals are: 

1. They also use non-target 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. Most weed species are less palatable than desirable vegetation. 

5. They may accelerate movement of nonnative plants through seed ingestion and excretion. 

6. They control few, if any, plant species. 

7. Domestic livestock may transmit parasites and/or pathogens to resident native wildlife species. 

Wildland Fire Use and Prescribed Fire 

Wildland Fire Use 

Wildland fire use is wildland fire used to protect, maintain, and enhance resources and, when possible, 

allowed to function in its natural ecological role. Use of fire will be based on approved Fire Management 

Plans and will follow specific prescriptions contained in operational plans. 

The Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation Operations (2004) will be followed. It includes the 

following incident management guidance for wildland fire use: 

1. Agencies may apply this strategy in managing wildland fires for resource benefit. 

2. An approved Fire Management Plan (FMP) is required. This plan identifies specific resource and 

fire management objectives, a predefined geographic area, and prescriptive criteria that must be 

met. 

3. A Wildland Fire Implementation Plan (WFIP) will be completed for all wildland fires that are 

managed for resource benefit. This is an operational plan for assessing, analyzing, and selecting 

strategies for wildland fire use. It is progressively developed and documents appropriate 

management responses for any wildland fire managed for resource benefits. The plan will be 

completed in compliance with the guidance found in the Wildland and Prescribed Fire 

Management Policy Implementation Procedures Reference Guide (August 1998). 

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. 

 

Prescribed Fire 

Prescribed fire is the planned application of fire to vegetation, under specific conditions of fuels, weather, 

and other variables, to ensure the fire remains in a predetermined area and achieves site-specific resource 

management objectives. Prescribed fire treatments will be implemented in accordance with BLM 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix E 

E - 6 

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 (amount of fuel, fuel moisture, temperatures, terrain, weather forecasts, etc.) and 

identifies people responsible for overseeing the fire. 

Seeding 

Following vegetation management treatments, seed may be applied. All seed will be tested and “state 

certified” free of weed seeds. Seed priming, covering, and other enhancement techniques may be used to 

increase germination rates. Seeding encourages development of a desired plant community, mitigates 

erosion, establishes effective ground cover, and/or encourages development of desirable wildlife habitat 

attributes. The disadvantages of seeding are that acquiring and applying seed is expensive and 

germination is not always successful. 
 

APPENDIX F 

CONSERVATION MEASURES FOR 

SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 1 

APPENDIX F: CONSERVATION MEASURES FOR SPECIAL STATUS 

SPECIES 

The following Conservation Measures will be implemented as part of the proposed action for all 

management activities authorized. These Conservation Measures are intended to provide 

District-wide consistency in reducing or eliminating the effects of management actions on 

federally endangered, threatened, proposed, and candidate species, as well as species included on 

the Wildlife Species of Concern in Arizona and BLM Arizona Sensitive Species lists. 

1.0 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 US Fish and Wildlife Service (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. 

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 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 2 

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 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 and Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD). Revise future fire 

suppression plans and tactical applications as needed and as practical. 

1.2 FUELS TREATMENTS, PRESCRIBED BURNING AND OTHER FUELS 

MANAGEMENT ACTIONS (FT) 

The following Conservation Measures are mandatory when implementing wildland fire use, 

prescribed fires, and proposed vegetation treatments using mechanical, chemical, and/or 

biological treatment methods: 

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 fuel breaks or site-access routes. If off-road travel is 

deemed necessary, any cross-country travel paths will be surveyed prior to use and will 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 3 

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 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 alien (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 fuel breaks created to enable the fire 

suppression, prescribed burn, or fuels treatment activities to occur. If off-road travel is 

deemed necessary, any cross-country travel paths will be surveyed prior to use and will 

be closed and rehabilitated after rehabilitation or restoration activities are completed. 

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 be 

rehabilitated (water bars, etc.), and 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 AGFD. 

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. 

1.4 CONSERVATION MEASURES FOR FIRE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES IN 

RIPARIAN AND AQUATIC HABITATS (RA) 

The following Conservation Measures be implemented during fire suppression and fuels 

treatment operations in riparian, wetland, or aquatic habitats, unless firefighter or public safety, 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 4 

or the protection of property, improvements, or natural resources, render them infeasible during a 

particular operation. Fuels treatment activities include prescribed fire and mechanical, chemical, 

and/or biological vegetation treatments in riparian, wetland, and aquatic habitats. 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. 

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.” 

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. 

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. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 5 

Monitor stream water quality and riparian ecosystem health to determine effects of 

wildfire and fire management activities. Coordinate efforts and results with the USFWS 

and AGFD. 

RA-12 Fire management treatments within or adjacent to riparian and aquatic habitats 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-13 For priority fire/fuels management areas (e.g., wildlife-urban interface (WUI) areas) with 

federally protected species or designated critical habitat downstream, BLM biologists and 

other resource specialists, as appropriate, in coordination with the USFWS and AGFD, 

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 deferments from grazing will only 

occur when necessary to protect streams from increased ash or sediment flow into 

streams.2

 

If agreement cannot be reached or treatment will not meet fuel reduction objectives, BLM reinitiate consultation. Our authority to make these types of changes is in the regulations at 43 CFR 

4110.3-3(b). 

2.0 SPECIES SPECIFIC CONSERVATION MEASURES 

In addition to the general Conservation Measures listed in Section 1.0, the following speciesspecific Conservation Measures will be applied to management actions in special status species 

habitats to the extent possible, and will be required during fuels and vegetation treatment 

activities. Necessary modifications of the Conservation Measures or impacts to federally 

protected species and habitat during implementation of management actions will be documented 

by the BLM or NPS biologist, and coordinated with the USFWS. 

2.1 Reptiles 

2.1.1 Desert tortoise, Mojave population (FT) 

DT-1. Minimize or eliminate effects to desert tortoise from authorized projects1

. DT-1.A. For each authorized project1

, BLM and/or NPS will designate a field contact 

representative (FCR) who will be responsible for overseeing compliance with these 

 

1

"Project" means any surface-disturbing activities proposed that may cause disturbance of desert tortoise habitat and/or death or 

injury of a desert tortoise, with the exception of grazing by livestock and activities associated with fire suppression. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 6 

conservation measures and for coordination on compliance with the USFWS. The 

FCR will be a qualified biologist approved by BLM and/or NPS, and will have the 

authority and the responsibility to halt all project activities that are in compliance 

with these conservation measures. These individuals will have a copy of these 

conservation measures while on the work site. 

DT-1.B. To the extent possible, project features will be located in previously-disturbed 

areas or outside of desert tortoise habitat. 

DT-1.C. To the extent possible, project activities will be scheduled when tortoises are 

inactive (October 15 through March 15). The following project activities will only be 

authorized between October 15 through March 15: surface disturbance associated 

with mineral leasing; organized, non-speed vehicular events; construction and nonemergency maintenance activities in rights-of-ways; and non-emergency maintenance 

of existing roads. 

DT-1.D. Pre-construction surveys will be conducted to locate desert tortoises that may be 

injured or killed as a result of proposed activities. Projects will be altered or tortoises 

in harm's way will be relocated to avoid lethal take of tortoises in project areas. Prior 

to any surface-disturbing activities associated with "projects,” work sites will be 

surveyed for desert tortoises by a qualified biologist approved by BLM and/or NPS. 

Areas of new disturbance will be surveyed with 100-percent coverage. 

DT-1.D.1. Between October 15 and March 15 any new disturbance will be preceded 

by 100-percent surveys conducted within one week of the proposed activities. 

During surveys, occupied desert tortoise burrows in or within 40 feet of areas to 

be disturbed will be excavated using hand tools under the supervision of an 

authorized biologist. Tortoises discovered in burrows will be relocated. Burrows 

will then be collapsed or blocked to prevent entry by tortoises. Desert tortoises 

and any desert tortoise eggs found in areas to be disturbed will be relocated in 

accordance with conservation measure DT-1.D.4. All handling of desert tortoises 

and their eggs will be in accordance with conservation measure DT-1.D.4. DT-1.D.2. For project activities occurring during the desert tortoise active season 

(March 15 through October 15), surveys will be conducted within 24 hours of 

initiation of surface-disturbing activities. For surface-disturbing activities 

conducted from March 15 to October 15 in desert tortoise habitat, construction 

and operation activities will be monitored by a qualified desert tortoise biologist 

approved by BLM and/or NPS. The biologist will be present during all activities 

in which encounters with tortoises may occur. The biologist will watch for 

tortoises wandering into construction areas, check under vehicles, check at least 

three times per day any excavations that might trap tortoises, and conduct other 

activities necessary to ensure that death or injury of tortoises is minimized. 

DT-1.D.3. Only biologists authorized and permitted by the USFWS and AGFD will 

handle desert tortoises. Additional biologists can be authorized if BLM and/or 

NPS submits the name(s) of the proposed authorized biologist(s) to the USFWS 

for review and approval at least 15 days prior to the onset of activities that can 

result in a take. Minimum requirements for authorized biologists include 

attending the Desert Tortoise Council's training course for handling desert 

tortoises and/or training by an authorized biologist. Authorized biologists must 

have all valid state and federal permits. 

DT-1.D.4. The authorized biologist will maintain a record of all desert tortoises 

encountered during project activities. This information will include for each 

desert tortoise: 

1. The locations and dates of observation 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 7 

2. General condition and health, including injuries and state of healing and 

whether animals voided their bladders 

3. Location moved from and location moved to 

4. Diagnostic markings (i.e. identification numbers of marked lateral scutes) 

Desert tortoises that are handled will be marked for future identification. An 

identification number (using the acrylic paint/epoxy technique) will be placed on 

the 4th costal scute (USFWS 1992). No notching of scutes or replacement of 

fluids with a syringe is authorized. 

DT-1.E. If a tortoise or clutch of tortoise eggs is found in a project area, to the extent 

practicable activities will be modified to avoid injuring or harming it. If activities 

cannot be modified, the tortoise/clutch will be moved from harm's way by an the 

authorized biologist the minimum distance possible within appropriate habitat to 

ensure its safety from death, injury, or collection associated with the project or other 

activities. The authorized biologist will have some discretion to ensure that survival 

of each relocated desert tortoise/clutch is likely. Desert tortoises/clutches will not be 

translocated to lands outside the administration of the Federal government without the 

written permission of the landowner. Handling procedures for desert tortoises and 

their eggs will adhere to protocols outlined in Desert Tortoise Council (1994 with 

1996 revisions). 

DT-1.F. Areas of new construction or disturbance will be flagged or marked on the 

ground prior to construction. All construction workers will strictly limit their 

activities and vehicles to areas that have been marked. Construction personnel will be 

trained to recognize markers and understand the equipment movement restrictions 

involved. 

DT-1.G. A desert tortoise education program will be presented to all project personnel 

that may encounter tortoises; such as employees, inspectors, supervisors, contractors, 

and subcontractors; prior to initiation of activities that may result in disturbance of 

desert tortoise habitat or death or injury of desert tortoises. The education program 

will include discussions of the following: 

1. legal protection of the desert tortoise and sensitivity of the species to human 

activities; 

2. a brief discussion of desert tortoise distribution and ecology; 

3. the terms and conditions of applicable biological opinions; 

4. project features designed to reduce adverse effects to desert tortoises and their 

habitat, and to promote the species' long-term survival; 

5. protocols during encounters with desert tortoises and associated reporting 

requirements; and 

6. the definition of take and penalties for violations of Federal and State laws. 

DT-1.H. During the tortoise active season (March 15 through October 15), project 

features that might trap or entangle desert tortoises such as open trenches, pits, open 

pipes, etc will be covered or modified to prevent entrapment. 

DT-1.I. Long-term or permanent project sites in which continued encounters with desert 

tortoises are expected, such as construction of schools under an R&PP lease, roads, 

power plants, office buildings, and other permanent or long-term projects will be 

enclosed with desert tortoise barrier fencing to prevent tortoises from wandering onto 

the project site where they may be subject to collection, death, or injury. Barrier 

fencing should consist of wire mesh with a maximum mesh size of 1-inch (horizontal) 

by 2-inch (vertical) fastened securely to posts. The wire mesh will extend at least 18 

inches above the ground and preferably 12 inches below the surface of the ground. 

Where burial is not possible, the lower 12 inches will be folded outward, away from 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 8 

the enclosed site, and fastened to the ground so as to prevent tortoise entry. Any 

gates or gaps in the fence will be constructed and operated to prevent desert tortoise 

entry (such as installing "tortoise guards" similar to cattle guards, and/or keeping 

gates closed). Specific measures for tortoise-proofing gates and gaps will be 

addressed project by project. Once fence construction is complete, all tortoises within 

the fence will be relocated outside the fence in accordance with conservation measure 

DT-1.D.4. If more than 20 tortoises be relocated from any one area enclosed by a 

fence, the Bureau or NPS will contact the USFWS in regard to disposition of the 

animals. After the area within the fence has been cleared of tortoises, construction 

and operation activities may occur within the fence without the presence and 

monitoring of a biologist (see conservation measure DT-1.D.). 

DT-1.J. Temporary fencing, such as snow fencing, chain link, and other suitable 

materials will be used in designated areas as determined by the Bureau to reduce 

encounters with tortoises from March 15 to October 15 on short-term projects, such 

as construction of power lines, burial of fiber optic cables, etc, where encounters with 

tortoises are likely. 

DT-1.K. Blading of work areas will be minimized to the extent possible. Disturbance to 

shrubs will be avoided if possible. If shrubs cannot be avoided during equipment 

operation or vehicle use, wherever possible they will be crushed rather than excavated 

or bladed. 

DT-1.L. Project vehicle use will be limited to designated routes (existing routes prior to 

designation) to the extent possible. 

DT-1.M. At no time will vehicle or equipment fluids be dumped on public lands. All 

accidental spills must be reported to BLM and NPS and cleaned up immediately, 

using the best available practices according to the requirements of the law. All spills 

of federally or State-listed hazardous materials that exceed reportable quantities will 

be promptly reported to the appropriate State agency and the BLM and NPS. 

DT-1.N. Vehicles associated with Bureau-authorized projects traveling on unpaved roads 

in desert tortoise habitat will not exceed speed limits established by the Bureau as 

necessary to protect desert tortoises. These speed limits will generally not exceed 40 

mph even on the best-unpaved roads but may be much less than this on some roads. 

DT-1.O. New paved roads and highways in desert tortoise habitat or major reconstruction 

or modifications of existing paved roads through desert tortoise habitat will be fenced 

with desert tortoise barrier fencing (see DT-1.I. and J.). Culverts, to allow safe 

passage of tortoises, will be constructed approximately every mile of new or 

reconstructed paved road (culverts can also serve the more typical purpose of 

conducting water under roads). The culvert diameter needed to encourage tortoise 

use is correlated with culvert length, but generally short culverts of large diameter are 

most likely to be used. The floor of the culvert will be covered with dirt and 

maintenance should be performed as necessary to maintain an open corridor for 

tortoise movement. Culvert design will be coordinated with and approved by the 

USFWS. 

DT-1.P. Unleashed dogs will be prohibited in project areas. 

DT-1.Q. Temporary access routes created during project construction will be modified as 

necessary to prevent further use. Closure of access routes can be achieved by ripping, 

barricading, posting the route as closed, and/or seeding and planting with native 

plants. 

DT-1.R. To reduce attraction of potential desert tortoise predators, project sites in desert 

tortoise habitat will be maintained in a sanitary condition at all times; waste materials 

at those sites will be placed in covered receptacles and disposed of promptly at an 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 9 

appropriate waste disposal site. "Waste" refers to all discarded matter, including, but 

not limited to, human waste, trash, garbage, refuse, oil drums, petroleum products, 

ashes, and equipment. All reasonable effort will also be taken to reduce or eliminate 

water sources associated with project activities that might attract ravens and other 

predators. 

DT-1.S. After completion of the project, trenches, pits, and other features in which 

tortoises can be entrapped or entangled, will be filled in, covered, or otherwise 

modified so they are no longer a hazard to desert tortoises. 

DT-1.T. After project completion, measures will be taken to facilitate restoration. 

Restoration techniques will be tailored to the characteristics of the site and the nature 

of project impacts. Techniques may include removal of equipment and debris, 

recontouring; and seeding, planting, transplanting of cacti and yuccas, etc. Only 

native plant species, preferably from a source on or near the project area, will be used 

in restoration. 

DT-2 Take appropriate action to suppress all wildfires in desert tortoise habitat. 

DT-2.A. 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-2.B. 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-2.C. 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. 

DT-2.D. 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 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 10 

authorized biologist. Should any treated desert tortoise survive, the USFWS should 

be contacted regarding final disposition of the animal. 

DT-2.E. 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-2.F. 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-1.E. 

DT-2.G. Off-road vehicle activity will be restricted to the minimum necessary to 

suppress wildfires. Off-road vehicle activity will not be permitted on NPS lands. 

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-2.H. Fire-related vehicles will drive slow enough to ensure that tortoises on roads can 

be identified and avoided. 

DT-2.I. 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-2.J. 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 or NPS, whenever feasible. Any tortoises found will be moved to 

a safe location in accordance with FS-2 and DT-1.E. All personnel located at these 

facilities will avoid disturbing active tortoise shelter sites. 

DT-2.K. Elevated predation by common ravens or other predators attributable to fire 

suppression activities will be reduced to the maximum extent possible. Work 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-2.L. 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-2.M. Use of foam or retardant is authorized within desert tortoise habitat. 

DT-2.N. Rehabilitation of vegetation in tortoise habitat will be considered, including 

seeding, planting of perennial species, etc. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 11 

DT-2.O. 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 AGFD. 

DT-2.P. The effectiveness of wildfire suppression activities and desert tortoise 

Conservation Measures will be evaluated after a wildfire. Procedures will be revised 

as needed. 

2.2 AMPHIBIANS (AM) (INCLUDES RELICT LEOPARD FROG (FC)) 

AM-1 Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in Riparian and 

Aquatic Habitats. 

AM-2 All personnel performing fire management activities at any creek crossing will be 

informed of the potential presence of aquatic amphibians and the need to perform their 

duties to avoid impacts to the habitat. 

2.3 BIRDS 

2.3.1 California Condor (FE and 10J) 

Conservation Measures for California Condor 

CC-1. Management Guidance for Projects Constructed or Implemented by Authorized or 

Permitted Members of the Public within the 10(j) Area 

CC-1.A. Immediately prior to the start of an authorized or permitted project, BLM/NPS 

will contact personnel monitoring California Condor locations and movements on 

the Arizona Strip to determine the locations and status of condors in or near the 

project area. 

CC-1.B. BLM/NPS will request that permit holders notify the BLM/NPS wildlife team 

lead or condor biologist if California Condors visit the worksite while permitted 

activities are underway. BLM/NPS may encourage permit holders to modify, 

relocate, or delay project activities where adverse affects to condors may result. 

CC-1.C. Where condor nesting activity is known within 0.5 miles of permitted or 

authorized activities that include operation of heavy machinery, BLM/NPS may 

encourage the operator to avoid use of the equipment during the active nesting 

season (February 1- November 30), or as long as the nest is viable. 

CC-1.D. Where condors occur within 1.0 mile of permitted or authorized activities that 

include blasting, BLM/NPS will encourages that blasting be postponed until the 

condors leave the area or are hazed away by personnel permitted to haze condors. 

Where condor nesting activity is known within 1.0 mile of the project area, 

BLM/NPS encourages that blasting activity be delayed until after the active 

nesting season (February 1- November 30), or as long as the nest is viable. These 

dates may be modified based on the most current information regarding condor 

nesting. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 12 

CC-2. Management Guidance for Projects Constructed or Implemented by BLM/NPS 

Employees or Contractors Within the 10(j) Area AND For All BLM/NPS-Authorized 

Actions, Regardless of Proponent, Outside the 10(j) Area on the Arizona Strip. 

CC-2.A. Immediately prior to the start of a permitted project, BLM/NPS will contact 

personnel monitoring California Condor locations and movement on the Arizona 

Strip to determine the locations and status of condors in or near the project area. 

CC-2.B. Where California Condors visit a worksite while activities are underway, the onsite supervisor will notify the BLM/NPS wildlife team lead or condor biologist. 

Project workers and supervisors will be instructed to avoid interaction with 

condors. Project activities will be modified, relocated, or delayed if those 

activities have adverse affects on condors. Operations will cease until the bird 

leaves on its own or until techniques are employed by permitted personnel that 

results in the individual condor leaving the area. 

CC-2.C. Where condor nesting activity is known within 0.5 miles of activities that 

include operation of heavy machinery, BLM/NPS will direct the operator to cease 

equipment use during the active nesting season (February 1- November 30), or as 

long as the nest is viable. Where feasible and consistent with NEPA, BLM/NPS 

may relocate operations to a site greater than 0.5 miles from the condor nest site. 

CC-2.D. Where condors occur within 1.0 miles of activities that include blasting, 

BLM/NPS will require that blasting be postponed until the condors leave the area 

or are hazed away by personnel permitted to haze condors. Where condor nesting 

activity is known within 1.0 miles of the project area, BLM/NPS will cease 

blasting during the active nesting season (February 1- November 30), or as long 

as the nest is viable. These dates may be modified based on the most current 

information regarding condor nesting. 

CC-3. Management Guidance for All BLM/NPS-Authorized Actions, Regardless of Proponent 

or location Within the Arizona Strip FO. 

CC-3.A. The project site will be cleaned up at the end of each day the work is being 

conducted (e.g., trash removed, scrap materials picked up) to minimize the 

likelihood of condors visiting the site. BLM/NPS staff may conduct site visits to 

the area to ensure adequate clean-up measures are taken. 

CC-3.B. For projects where potential exists for leakage or spill of hazardous materials, a 

spill plan will be developed and implemented to prevent water contamination and 

potential poisoning of condors. The plan will include provisions for immediate 

clean up of any hazardous substance, and will define how each hazardous 

substance will be treated in case of leakage or spill. The plan will be reviewed by 

the BLM condor lead biologist to ensure condors are adequately addressed. 

CC-3.C BLM/NPS will implement the protective measures for California Condors that 

are contained in the March 2004 “Recommended Protection Measures for 

Pesticide Applications in The Southwest Region of the USFWS.” 

CC-3.D. Use of non-lead ammunition is strongly encouraged for activities involving the 

discharge of firearms. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 13 

CC-4. Management Guidance for All Actions Involving Use of Aircraft, Regardless of 

Proponent or location Within the Arizona Strip FO. 

CC-4.A. Aircraft use along the Vermilion Cliffs, Paria Plateau, or any sites where 

condors are actively breeding or roosting will be minimized to the extent possible. 

Known active nest sites will be avoided. 

CC-4.B. The BLM condor biologist or Wildlife Program Lead will contact the Peregrine 

Fund, as appropriate, immediately before operations involving aviation begin to 

check on possible locations of condors in the subject area. 

CC-4.C. All BLM/NPS-authorized aviation personnel will be provided literature and/or 

instructed regarding condor concerns prior to conducting aerial operations. 

CC-4.D. Aircraft will maintain and maximize safe flying separation distances 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. Aircraft will keep a 

minimum of 0.25 miles away from condors located on the ground. 

CC-5. Management Guidance for Fire Suppression, Fire Use, Prescribed Fire, and Related 

Actions Within the Arizona Strip FO. 

CC-5.A. 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-5.B. Any presence of condors in the general area of an active fire will be reported 

immediately to the Resource Advisor, who will in turn advise the BLM condor 

biologist, as appropriate. The BLM condor biologist or the AZ Strip F.O wildlife 

team lead will be the primary contacts with the USFWS and the Peregrine Fund 

when such contacts are needed regarding condor concerns. 

CC-5.C. Fire dispatch will immediately notify the Peregrine Fund at either (208) 362-

3811 or (928) 355-2270 whenever a fire or other event on the Paria Plateau is 

reported which may conceivably threaten the condor holding pens and facilities 

atop the Vermilion Cliffs. 

CC-5.D. 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-5.E. All District BLM/NPS fire personnel, including helicopter pilots, will be 

provided literature or instructed regarding condor concerns. Normally this will be 

done by the BLM condor biologist when the fire crews first come on and are 

trained on various subjects, including desert tortoise concerns. If additional pilots 

come on during the summer, fire dispatch will notify the BLM condor biologist 

(435 688-3224) so that they can also be briefed. 

CC-5.F. All helicopter dip tanks containing water will be covered when not in use or 

personnel will be stationed nearby until a cover is in place. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 14 

CC-5.G. If any fire retardant chemicals must be used in areas where condors are in the 

vicinity, 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-5.H. Smoke from prescribed fire projects will be prevented from negatively affecting 

condor holding pens and breeding, nesting, and chick rearing sites. A proposed 

prescribed fire will not be initiated, or an existing fire use event will be modified 

or terminated, in order 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 held or attempting to breed, nest, or 

rear chicks. 

CC-5.I. BLM will adhere to the air quality standards set by the Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality. 

CC-5.J. All camp areas will be kept free from trash. 

2.3.2 Southwestern willow flycatcher (FE) 

Conservation Measures for Southwestern Willow Flycatcher 

WF-1. Management Guidance for Fire Suppression and Related Actions 

WF-1.A. Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats. 

WF-1.B. Except where fires are active in occupied habitat, minimize unnecessary lowlevel 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-1.C. 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 otherwise be burned. 

WF-1.D. 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-1.E. Avoid developing access roads that result in fragmentation or a reduction in 

habitat quality. Close and rehabilitate all roads that were necessary for project 

implementation. 

WF-1.F. 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 – 

September 30). 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 15 

WF-1.G. Vegetation treatment projects adjacent to occupied or unsurveyed suitable 

habitat will only be conducted when willow flycatchers are not present (October 1 

– March 31). 

WF-1.H. Continue to implement the riparian fire management plan to minimize fire 

damage in riparian areas, especially those with suitable or potential flycatcher 

habitat. 

2.3.3. Yuma clapper rail (FE) 

Conservation Measures for Yuma Clapper Rail 

CR-1. Management Guidance for Fire Suppression and Related Actions 

CR-1.A. Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats. 

CR-1.B. Any prescribed fire or vegetation treatment project in occupied or suitable 

marsh habitat only occur between September 1 and March 15 to avoid the Yuma 

clapper rail breeding and molting seasons. 

CR-1.C. Mechanical removal of overstory habitat (e.g. tamarisk) can occur as early as 

August 15, after the breeding season for Yuma clapper rails. 

CR-1.D. Herbicide application will not occur in Yuma clapper rail habitat and driftinhibiting agents will be used to assure that the herbicide does not enter adjacent 

marsh areas. 

CR-1.E. Evaluate past surveys for Yuma clapper rails as part of the planning for 

prescribed fire projects. Post-project surveys should also be conducted to 

document the re-growth of cattail habitats and occupancy by clapper rails. 

CR-1.F. After fire suppression is completed in Yuma clapper rail habitat, review any 

available survey records of the burn site and record in the fire report the number 

of rails recorded from the vicinity during these surveys. 

2.3.4. Bald eagle (FT) 

Conservation Measures for Bald Eagle 

BE-1. Management Guidance for Fire Suppression and Related Actions 

BE-1.A. No human activity associated with fire management will be authorized within 1⁄2 

mile of known bald eagle nest sites between December 1 and June 30. 

BE-1.B. No tree cutting will be authorized within 1⁄4 mile of known bald eagle nest trees. 

BE-1.C. No human activity associated with fire management will be authorized within 1⁄4 

mile of known bald eagle winter roost areas between October 15 and April 15. 

BE-1.D. No tree cutting will be authorized within the area immediately around winter 

roost sites as determined by BLM biologists. 

BE-1.E. No helicopter or aircraft activity or aerial retardant application associated with 

fire management activities will be authorized within 1⁄2 mile of bald eagle nest 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 16 

sites between December 1 and June 30 or winter roost sites between October 15 

and April 15. 

BE-1.F. Prescribed burn activities outside of nesting season will be conducted in a 

manner to ensure nest and winter roost sites are more than 1⁄2 mile from downwind 

smoke effects. 

BE-1.G. 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. 

BE-1.H. Prepare and implement BAER plans for burned areas that have the potential to 

cause future erosion problems in the watershed, riparian, or aquatic areas. 

Objectives of these plans, within watersheds containing bald eagle breeding areas 

and/or potential habitat, will be to reduce erosion and sedimentation into these 

habitats. 

2.3.5 Mexican spotted owl (FT) 

Conservation Measures for Mexican Spotted Owl 

SO-3. Management Guidance for Grazing Management 

SO-3.A. Determine the effectiveness of current grazing standards and guidelines as they 

relate to the owl’s needs, and devise grazing strategies that can benefit the owl 

and its prey. 

SO-3.B. Monitor grazing use by livestock to determine any changes in the relative 

composition of herbaceous and woody plants to maintain habitat for owls and 

their prey. 

SO-3.C. Minimize or eliminate disturbance, injury, mortality, or other forms of take of 

Mexican spotted owls resulting from grazing by livestock. 

SO-1. Management Guidance for Fire Suppression and Related Actions

SO-1.A. BLM wildlife biologists will be involved early in the decision-making process 

for fuels management treatments (wildland fire use, prescribed fires, vegetation 

treatments) that are planned within suitable habitat for Mexican spotted owls. 

SO-1.B. Suitable habitat for Mexican spotted owls will be surveyed prior to 

implementing prescribed fire or vegetation treatment activities on BLMadministered lands to determine if owls are present and their breeding status. 

These fire management activities will only be implemented within suitable habitat 

if birds are not present. 

SO-1.C. If a spotted owl 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 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 17 

location, date, and time of observation and the general condition of the owl. The 

Resource Advisor or biologist will contact the appropriate USFWS office. 

SO-1.D. The following measures will be followed in suitable habitat (occupied or 

unoccupied) whenever consistent with objectives to reduce hazardous fuels: 

1. Incorporate natural variation, such as irregular tree spacing and various 

stand/patch sizes, into management prescriptions and attempt to mimic natural 

disturbance patterns. 

2. Maintain all species of native vegetation in the landscape, including early seral 

species. To allow for variation in existing stand structures and provide species 

diversity, both uneven-aged and even-aged systems may be used as appropriate. 

3. Allow natural canopy gap processes to occur, thus producing horizontal variation 

in stand structure. 

4. Retain hardwoods, large down logs, large trees, and snags. 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-1.E. The effects of fire suppression and fuels treatment activities on Mexican spotted 

owls 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. Prescriptions 

for wildland fire use, prescribed fires, and vegetation treatments will be adjusted, 

if necessary. 

2.3.6. Yellow-billed cuckoo (FC) 

Conservation Measures for Yellow-billed Cuckoo 

YC-1. Management Guidance for Fire Suppression and Related Actions 

YC-1.A. Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats. 

YC-1.B. Any prescribed fire or vegetation treatment project in occupied or suitable 

marsh habitat only occur between September 1 and March 15 to avoid adverse 

affects to breeding birds. 

YC-1.C. Mechanical removal of overstory habitat (e.g. tamarisk) can occur as early as 

September 1, after the breeding season for yellow-billed cuckoos. 

YC-1.D. Evaluate past surveys for yellow-billed cuckoos as part of the planning for 

prescribed fire projects. Post-project surveys shall also be conducted to document 

the re-growth of mature cottonwood-willow gallery forests and occupancy by 

cuckoos. 

YC-1.E. After fire suppression is completed in yellow-billed cuckoo habitat, review any 

available survey records of the burn site and record in the fire report the number 

of cuckoos recorded from the vicinity during these surveys. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 18 

YC-1.F. Continue to implement the riparian fire management plan to minimize fire 

damage in riparian areas, especially those with suitable or potential flycatcher 

habitat. 

2.3.7. Peregrine Falcon (BLM Sensitive) 

Conservation Measures for Peregrine Falcon 

Continue post-delisting recovery monitoring of selected peregrine falcon nest sites in 

cooperation with the AGFD and the USFWS. The monitoring plan calls for five sampling 

periods at three-year intervals throughout the life of this RMP. Monitoring protocol requires a 

minimum of two, four-hour visits to a site unless a nest is located sooner. 

PF-1. Management Guidance for Fire Suppression and Related Actions

PF-1.A. BLM wildlife biologists will be involved early in the decision-making process 

for fuels management treatments (wildland fire use, prescribed fires, vegetation 

treatments) that are planned within 1⁄2 mile of active nest sites of peregrine falcon. 

PF-1.B. Prior to implementing prescribed fire or vegetation treatment activities on BLMadministered lands, areas within 1⁄2 mile of cliff faces that contain suitable habitat 

for peregrine falcon will be surveyed. Fire management activities will only be 

implemented when peregrine falcons are not present. 

PF-1.C. If a peregrine falcon 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, assess potential 

harm to the falcon, and advise the Incident Commander or project crew boss of 

methods to prevent harm. 

2.4. VIRGIN RIVER FISHES (VF) 

2.4.1. Virgin River chub (FE, CH) and Woundfin Minnow (FE, CH) 

Conservation Measures for Virgin River Fishes 

VF-1. Management Guidance for Fire Suppression and Related Actions 

VF-1.A. Implement the Conservation Measures for Fire Management Activities in 

Riparian and Aquatic Habitats. 

VF-1.B. Minimize fire damage in riparian by giving riparian habitat the highest priority 

for fire response and suppression efforts (second only to human life and property). 

Focus attention on minimizing fire damage to stands of native vegetation areas. 

VF-1.C. Using natural barriers or openings in riparian vegetation is the easiest, safest 

method to manage a riparian wildfire. Where possible and practical, use wet fire 

breaks in developing or sandy overflow channels rather than dry breaks. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix F 

F - 19 

VF-1.D. Where possible, avoid use chainsaws and/or bulldozers to construct fireline 

through habitat. When necessary to do so, weigh the potential impacts of such an 

action against the habitat losses likely to result. Consider are firefighter safety 

and potential gains in managing the fire. 

VF-1.E. Avoid use of backfires during fire suppression activities except where doing so 

reduces the overall in these areas except where necessary to reduce or eliminate 

severe fire risk. 

VF-1.F. Avoid use of chemical foams or retardants in riparian areas. 

VF-1.G. Avoid developing access roads that result in fragmentation or a reduction in 

habitat quality. Close and rehabilitate all roads that were necessary for project 

implementation. 

VF-1.H. Cooperate with other agencies to develop emergency protocols to decrease the 

impacts of fire suppression and fuels treatment activities on Federally listed fish 

species. 

2.5. Flowering Plants 

Conservation Measures for Special Status Plants 

PL-1. Management Guidance for Fire Suppression and Related Actions 

PL-1.A. 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-1.B. Delineate buffer areas around plant populations prior to prescribed fire and 

vegetation treatment activities. Coordinate with the USFWS during any 

emergency response and wildland fire use activities to ensure protection of plant 

populations from fire and fire suppression activities. 

PL-1.C. No staging of equipment or personnel will be permitted within 100 meters of 

identified individuals or populations of special status plant species during fire 

suppression, wildland fire use, or prescribed fire. Off-road vehicles will not be 

allowed within the 100-meter buffer area, unless necessary for firefighter or 

public safety or the protection of property, improvements, or other resources. 

PL-1.D. No prescribed burning will be implemented within 100 meters of identified 

locations or unsurveyed suitable habitat of special status plant species unless 

specifically designed.
 

APPENDIX G 

ARIZONA STRIP FIELD OFFICE 

OIL AND GAS LEASE STIPULATIONS 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix G 

G - 1 

APPENDIX G: ARIZONA STRIP FIELD OFFICE OIL AND GAS LEASE 

STIPULATIONS 

Table G.1. Arizona Strip Field Office (FO) Oil and Gas Lease Stipulations 

Stipulation # Stipulations 

CONTROLLED SURFACE USE STIPULATIONS 

CRITICAL SOILS, MUNICIPAL WATERSHEDS, FLOODPLAINS. FISH & WILDLIFE, VISUAL AND 

CULTURAL RESOURCES, HISTORIC AND RECREATION TRAILS 

Surface occupancy or use is subject to the following special operating constraints. 

On the lands described below: 

For the purpose of: Preserving and protecting critical soils, floodplains, municipal watersheds, fish and wildlife, 

visual resources, cultural resources, and historic and recreation trail corridors from adverse impacts as described in 

the Resource Management Plan and EIS. The authorized officer of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) may 

specifically approve waivers, exceptions, or modifications to this limitation in writing if either the resource values 

change or the lessee/operator demonstrates that adverse impacts can be mitigated. Any changes to this stipulation 

will be made in accordance with the land use plan and/or the regulatory provisions for such changes (For guidance 

on the use of these stipulations, see BLM Manual 1624 and 3101 or FS Manual 1950 and 2820). 

ASFO 1 

CRITICAL SOILS: The area has critical soil erosion conditions. New roads will be 

constructed to avoid critical soils where possible. New roads will be constructed with water bars. 

Riprap may be required. Road grades in excess of 10 percent will not normally be allowed. In 

special circumstances, where a road grade of more than 10 percent is allowed, its maximum 

length will be 1,000 feet. Access grading, exploration, drilling or other activities will be 

prohibited during wet or muddy periods. Cross-country travel will be allowed only when soils 

are dry or frozen. BLM will determine what is wet, muddy, or frozen. The limitation does not 

apply to maintenance and operation of existing wells. 

Construction and development are to be avoided on slopes in excess of 6 percent. Operations will 

be located to reduce erosion and improve the opportunity for revegetation within critical soils 

areas. Reclamation on sites with critical soils will require grading using slopes of 5 percent or 

less where possible and grading the site to collect water for revegetation on-site. 

ASFO 2

SENSITIVE WATERSHEDS: In order to minimize watershed damage, exploration, drilling, 

and other development activity in the ___ will be allowed only during the period from April 30 to 

November 1. This limitation does not apply to maintenance and operation of producing wells. 

The authorized officer of the BLM may specifically approve exceptions to this limitation in any 

year in writing. 

The lessee is informed that the floodplain portions of the lease area require special attention to 

prevent damage to surface resources and contamination to the _____ watersheds. Any surface 

use within such areas will be strictly controlled or restricted where not essential for operations. 

Appropriate modifications to imposed restrictions will be made for maintenance and operations of 

producing oil and gas wells. 

Construction of access roads and drill pads on slopes in excess of 30 percent will require special 

design standards to minimize watershed damage in the ___. Drilling operations and any 

associated construction activities on slopes in excess of 50 percent may require directional 

drilling to prevent damage to the watershed. The authorized officer of the BLM may specifically 

approve exceptions to these limitations in writing. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix G 

G - 2 

Table G.1. Arizona Strip Field Office (FO) Oil and Gas Lease Stipulations 

Stipulation # Stipulations 

ASFO 3 

WATERSHED SLOPE RESTRICTIONS: No surface occupancy or other surface disturbance 

in the ___ will be allowed on slopes in excess of 30 percent without written permission from the 

authorized officer of the BLM. 

ASFO 4

FLOODPLAIN OCCUPANCY: No occupancy or other surface disturbance will be allowed 

within 330 feet of the centerline or within the 100-year recurrence interval floodplain, whichever 

is greater, of the perennial streams, or within 660 feet of springs, whether flowing or not, located 

in the __________. This distance may be modified when specifically approved in writing by the 

authorized officer of the BLM. 

In order to minimize watershed damage, exploration, and drilling and other development activity 

in the _______ will be allowed only during the period from April 30 to November 1. This 

limitation does not apply to maintenance and operation of producing wells. The authorized 

officer of the BLM may specifically approve exceptions to this limitation in any year in writing. 

Construction of access roads and drill pads on slopes in excess of 30 percent will require special 

design standards to minimize watershed damage in the ____. Drilling operations and any 

associated construction activities on slopes in excess of 50 percent may require directional 

drilling to prevent damage to the watershed. The authorized officer of the BLM may specifically 

approve exceptions to the limitations in writing. 

ASFO 5

RIPARIAN SPRINGS: No occupancy or other surface disturbance will be allowed within 0.25 

miles of springs, whether flowing or not, as described in ______. This distance may be modified 

when specifically approved in writing by the authorized officer of the BLM. 

In order to minimize watershed damage, exploration, and drilling and other development activity 

at these springs will be allowed only during the period from April 30 to November 1. This 

limitation does not apply to maintenance and operation of producing wells. The authorized 

officer of the BLM may specifically approve exceptions to this limitation in any year in writing. 

Construction of access roads and drill pads on slopes in excess of 30 percent will require special 

design standards to minimize watershed damage in the ____. Drilling operations and any 

associated construction activities on slopes in excess of 50 percent will not be allowed. The 

authorized officer of the BLM may specifically approve exceptions to the limitations in writing. 

ASFO 6

RIPARIAN WETLAND HABITAT: In order to protect riparian/wetland habitat and municipal 

and non-municipal watershed areas, no occupancy or other surface disturbance will be allowed 

within 1,200 feet of live water or within 1,200 feet of wetlands, as defined by the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (USFWS) in "Classification of Wetlands and Deep Water Habitats of the United 

States," 1979, page 3 located in the ____. This limitation does not apply to maintenance and 

operation of producing wells. If the lessee can demonstrate that operations can take place without 

impact to the resource being protected, an exemption to this stipulation may be granted if 

approved in writing by the authorized officer in consultation with the District's watershed 

specialist. For example, exemptions may be allowed where the riparian zone or the hydrologic 

influence area of phreatophytes exists less than 1,200 feet from live water. 

ASFO 7

FISHERIES / LIVE WATER RESTRICTIONS: In order to prevent fisheries degradation and 

water pollution, no drilling will be allowed within 1,200 feet of live water or the reservoirs 

located in the Virgin River drainage or Kanab Creek. This distance may be modified when 

specifically approved in writing by the authorized officer of the BLM. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix G 

G - 3 

Table G.1. Arizona Strip Field Office (FO) Oil and Gas Lease Stipulations 

Stipulation # Stipulations 

ASFO 8 LIVE WATER RESTRICTIONS No occupancy will be allowed within 1,200 feet of live water 

___. This distance may be modified when specifically approved in writing by the authorized 

officer of the BLM. 

ASFO 9

SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES HABITAT AREA: Exploration, drilling, and/or other 

development activity within a special status species ACEC or WHA/VHA may be restricted 

seasonally to a period when the species is not active. These limitations do not apply to 

maintenance and operation of producing wells. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) The species are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the species. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) 

and the USFWS will make this determination. 

ASFO 10

SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES HABITAT SURVEYS: Special status species habitat surveys 

will be required whenever surface disturbances and/or occupancy proposed in association with 

oil/gas exploration occur within an area of known or suspected occupancy by special status 

species. The lessee/operator as determined by the authorized officer of the BLM at the time of 

year when detection of the species is most likely to occur will conduct Field surveys. If protocols 

have been established for surveys of the species, these protocols will be used. When surveys are 

required of the lessee/operator, the consultant hired must be found acceptable to the authorized 

officer prior to the field survey being conducted. Based on the result of the field survey, the 

authorized officer will determine appropriate buffer zones. 

ASFO 11

DESERT TORTOISE HABITAT AREAS: Desert tortoise ACECs will remain open to leasing 

subject to seasonal restrictions and subject to a waivable no surface occupancy stipulation 

(WNSO). Surface disturbing activity will be limited to the period from October 15 to March 15 

under a seasonal restriction. A BLM authorized officer can allow surface occupancy after 

consultation with USFWS on the authorization. 

The authorized officer may waive this stipulation on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Desert tortoise are not present in a specific project location, 

(2) All operations and activities conducted in association with the action take place 

during the inactive season for desert tortoise (October 15 – March 15), 

(3) The activity can be conducted in a manner that has no affect on desert tortoise or 

their critical habitat, 

(4) The USFWS concurs with BLM’s determination that the proposed activity will not 

likely adversely affect desert tortoise or modify their habitat, or; 

(5) Following consultation with the USFWS, an incidental take statement is provided 

which will allow the project to proceed. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD and the USFWS will make this 

determination. 

ASFO 12

DESERT TORTOISE SURVEYS: Desert tortoise surveys will be required whenever surface 

disturbances and/or occupancy proposed in association with oil/gas exploration occur within an 

area known or suspected to be occupied by desert tortoise. The lessee/operator as determined by 

the authorized officer of the BLM at the time of year when detection of the species is most likely 

to occur will conduct Field surveys. If protocols have been established for surveys of the species, 

these protocols will be used. When surveys are required of the lessee/operator, the consultant 

hired must be found acceptable to the authorized officer prior to the field survey being conducted. 

Based on the result of the field survey, the authorized officer will determine appropriate buffer 

zones. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix G 

G - 4 

Table G.1. Arizona Strip Field Office (FO) Oil and Gas Lease Stipulations 

Stipulation # Stipulations 

ASFO 13 

CRUCIAL MULE DEER SUMMER HABITAT: Crucial mule deer summer habitat can be 

closed to surface use during the crucial summer use period, from May 15 through June 30. This 

seasonal condition will not affect maintenance, and operation activities for production. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) The animals are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the animals. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD will make this determination. Off-site 

mitigation may be required when unreclaimed disturbance caused by activity totals more than ten 

acres in two years. The off-site mitigation must be within the known habitat, but not necessarily 

within the crucial habitat area. Off-site mitigation will include seeding or planting vegetation 

favorable to deer. Revegetation must be established within five years after project completion. 

Revegetation must be with species palatable to deer and will be deemed successful when 

seedlings are established and tending towards the density that existed before the surface was 

disturbed. 

ASFO 14

CRUCIAL DEER WINTER RANGE: Crucial deer winter range can be closed to surface use 

during the winter, from December 15 to April 30. This seasonal condition will not affect 

maintenance and operation activities for production. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) The animals are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the animals. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD will make this determination. Off-site 

mitigation may be required when unreclaimed disturbance caused by activity totals more than ten 

acres in two years. The off-site mitigation must be within the known habitat, but not necessarily 

within the crucial habitat area. Off-site mitigation will include seeding or planting vegetation 

favorable to deer. Revegetation must be established within five years after project completion. 

Revegetation must be with species palatable to deer and will be deemed successful when 

seedlings are established and tending towards the density that existed before the surface was 

disturbed. 

ASFO 15 

CRUCIAL BIGHORN SHEEP HABITAT: Closed to surface use during bighorn sheep 

lambing (April 1 to July 15) and during the rutting period (October 15 to December 31). These 

seasonal conditions will not affect maintenance and operation activities for production. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) The animals are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the animals. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD will make this determination. Off-site 

mitigation may be required when unreclaimed disturbance caused by activity totals more than ten 

acres in two years. The off-site mitigation must be within the known habitat, but not necessarily 

within the crucial habitat area. Off-site mitigation will include seeding or planting vegetation 

favorable to bighorn sheep. Revegetation must be established within five years after project 

completion. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix G 

G - 5 

Table G.1. Arizona Strip Field Office (FO) Oil and Gas Lease Stipulations 

Stipulation # Stipulations 

ASFO 16

BIGHORN SHEEP LAMBING AREAS: In order to protect bighorn sheep lambing habitat, 

exploration, drilling, and other development activity will be allowed only during the period from 

July 1to March 15. This limitation does not apply to maintenance and operation of producing 

wells. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) The animals are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the animals. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD will make this determination. 

ASFO 17 

PRONGHORN ANTELOPE HABITAT: Antelope habitat will be closed during the fawning 

season (May 15 to June 15). This seasonal condition will not affect maintenance and operation 

activities for production. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) The animals are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the animals. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD will make this determination. Off-site 

mitigation may be required when unreclaimed disturbance totals more that ten acres in two years 

in crucial habitat. The off-site mitigation must be within the known habitat area but not 

necessarily within crucial habitat. Off-site mitigation can include seeding and planting favorable 

to antelope, or water can be developed to allow animals to use other parts of the habitat area. 

ASFO 18

PRONGHORN ANTELOPE FAWNING AREAS: In order to protect antelope fawning areas, 

exploration, drilling and other development activity in the ___ will be allowed only from July 1 to 

March 15. This limitation does not apply to maintenance and operation of producing wells. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) The animals are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the animals. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD will make this determination. Such a 

determination may result if fawning is completed early and the fawning area is abandoned earlier 

to allow for disturbing activities for fluid mineral leasing and exploration to start earlier than July 

1. 

ASFO 19

CALIFORNIA CONDOR NESTING SITES: Exploration, drilling, and/or other development 

activity within 0.5-mile radius of active condor nesting areas will be allowed only from July 1 to 

March 1 in order to protect these nests. No roost trees will be cut. These limitations do not apply 

to maintenance and operation of producing wells. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) The birds are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the birds. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD and the USFWS will make this 

determination. Such a determination may result if the nest site no longer exists or other nest sites 

are found to have taken over in importance to the condors present to allow for disturbing 

activities for fluid mineral leasing and exploration. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix G 

G - 6 

Table G.1. Arizona Strip Field Office (FO) Oil and Gas Lease Stipulations 

Stipulation # Stipulations 

ASFO 20 

BALD EAGLE ROOST SITES: Exploration, drilling, and/or other development activity within 

0.5 mile radius of active or historic bald eagle roost sites will be allowed only from March 15 to 

November 1 in order to protect these roosts. No roost trees will be cut. These limitations do not 

apply to maintenance and operation of producing wells. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) Bald eagles are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the eagles. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD and the USFWS will make this 

determination. Such a determination may result if the roost site no longer exists or other roost 

sites are found to have taken over in importance to the bald eagles present to allow for disturbing 

activities for fluid mineral leasing and exploration. 

ASFO 21

GOLDEN EAGLE NEST SITES: No surface occupancy or use is allowed (does not apply to 

casual use) within 1/2 mile of golden eagle nests which have been active within the past two 

years. This restriction will not apply to maintenance and operation of existing programs and 

facilities. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) Golden eagles are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the eagles. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD and the USFWS will make this 

determination. Such a determination may result if the nest site no longer exists or other nest sites 

are found to have taken over in importance to the eagles present to allow for disturbing activities 

for fluid mineral leasing and exploration. 

ASFO 22

FERRUGINOUS HAWK NEST SITES: No surface occupancy or use is allowed (does not 

apply to casual use) within 1/2 mile of known ferruginous hawk nests, unless it can be shown to 

the satisfaction of the authorized officer that the nest has not been active within the past 2 years. 

This restriction will not apply to maintenance and operation of existing programs and facilities. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) The birds are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the birds. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD and the USFWS will make this 

determination. Such a determination may result if the nest site no longer exists or other nest sites 

are found to have taken over in importance to the hawks present to allow for disturbing activities 

for fluid mineral leasing and exploration.
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix G 

G - 7 

Table G.1. Arizona Strip Field Office (FO) Oil and Gas Lease Stipulations 

Stipulation # Stipulations 

ASFO 23 

PEREGRINE FALCON NEST SITES: No surface occupancy or use is allowed (does not 

apply to casual use) within 1 mile of known peregrine falcon nests. This restriction will not apply 

to maintenance and operation of existing programs and facilities. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) Peregrine falcons are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the animals. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD and the USFWS will make this 

determination. Such a determination may result if the nest site no longer exists or other nest sites 

are found to have taken over in importance to the falcons present to allow for disturbing activities 

for fluid mineral leasing and exploration. 

ASFO 24

RAPTOR NESTING SITES: Exploration, drilling, and/or other development activity within 0.5 

mile radius of active or historic raptor nesting areas will be allowed only from July 1 to March 1 

in order to protect these roosts. No roost trees will be cut. These limitations do not apply to 

maintenance and operation of producing wells. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) The birds are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the birds. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD and the USFWS will make this 

determination. Such a determination may result if the nest site no longer exists or other nest sites 

are found to have taken over in importance to the raptors present to allow for disturbing activities 

for fluid mineral leasing and exploration. 

ASFO 25

RAPTOR HABITAT SURVEYS: Raptor surveys will be required whenever surface 

disturbances and/or occupancy proposed in association with oil/gas exploration occur within a 

known nesting complex for raptors. The lessee/operator as determined by the authorized officer 

of the BLM at the time of year when detection of the species is most likely to occur will conduct 

Field surveys. If protocols have been established for surveys of the species, these protocols will 

be used. When surveys are required of the lessee/operator, the consultant hired must be found 

acceptable to the authorized officer prior to the field survey being conducted. Based on the result 

of the field survey, the authorized officer will determine appropriate buffer zones. 

ASFO 26 

BURROWING OWL RELEASE SITE No occupancy or other surface disturbance will be 

allowed within 0.5 mile radius of active or historic burrowing owl nesting burrows. This 

restriction will not apply to maintenance and operation of existing programs and facilities. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) The animals are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the animals. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD and the USFWS will make this 

determination. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix G 

G - 8 

Table G.1. Arizona Strip Field Office (FO) Oil and Gas Lease Stipulations 

Stipulation # Stipulations 

ASFO 27

CRUCIAL WATERFOWL HABITAT: In order to protect crucial waterfowl habitat, 

exploration, drilling, and other development activity in the ___ will be allowed only during the 

period from July 15 to March 15. This restriction will not apply to maintenance and operation of 

existing programs and facilities. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) Waterfowl are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect waterfowl. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD and the USFWS will make this 

determination. 

ASFO 28

MIGRATORY BIRD HABITAT: In order to protect migratory habitat, exploration, drilling, 

and other development activity in the ___ will be allowed only during the period from July 15 to 

March 15. This restriction will not apply to maintenance and operation of existing programs and 

facilities. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) Migratory birds are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect migratory birds. 

A BLM wildlife biologist in coordination with the AGFD and the USFWS will make this 

determination. 

ASFO 29

MIGRATORY BIRD HABITAT SURVEYS: Migratory bird habitat surveys will be required 

whenever surface disturbances and/or occupancy proposed in association with oil/gas exploration 

occur within one mile of live water known or suspected to be used by migratory birds. The 

lessee/operator as determined by the authorized officer of the BLM at the time of year when 

detection of the species is most likely to occur will conduct field surveys. If protocols have been 

established for surveys of the species, these protocols will be used. When surveys are required of 

the lessee/operator, the consultant hired must be found acceptable to the authorized officer prior 

to the field survey being conducted. Based on the result of the field survey, the authorized officer 

will determine appropriate buffer zones. 

ASFO 30 

SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES

No surface occupancy or use is allowed on the lands containing special status plant species 

habitat (federally listed species only). This restriction will not apply to maintenance and 

operation of existing programs and facilities. 

The authorized officer may grant exception on a case-by-case basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) The plants are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be conducted so as not to adversely affect the plants.

ASFO 31

SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SURVEYS: Special status plant surveys will be required whenever 

surface disturbances and/or occupancy proposed in association with oil/gas exploration occur 

within an area known or suspected to be habitat for special status plant species. The 

lessee/operator as determined by the authorized officer of the BLM at the time of year when 

detection of the species is most likely to occur will conduct Field surveys. If protocols have been 

established for surveys of the species, these protocols will be used. When surveys are required of 

the lessee/operator, the consultant hired must be found acceptable to the authorized officer prior 

to the field survey being conducted. Based on the result of the field survey, the authorized officer 

will determine appropriate buffer zones. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix G 

G - 9 

Table G.1. Arizona Strip Field Office (FO) Oil and Gas Lease Stipulations 

Stipulation # Stipulations 

ASFO 32 

HISTORIC AND RECREATION TRAIL CORRIDORS: In order to reduce conflicts with 

recreation opportunities along historic and recreation trail corridors on the Arizona Strip, 

measures may be required of the lessee\operator by the surface management agency to reduce 

potential visual (including night sky conditions), audible, and recreation setting impacts 

associated with surface disturbing activities and construction of above ground structures. 

Exceptions to these measures may be specifically authorized through a permit issued by the 

federal surface management agency if it is shown to the satisfaction of the authorized officer that 

the proposed operations and occupancy will not adversely affect recreation opportunities in the 

vicinity of these trails.

ASFO 33 

CULTURAL RESOURCES: Cultural properties eligible for or listed on the National Register 

of Historic Places must be avoided by a sufficient distance to allow permanent protection. If 

avoidance is not possible, appropriate mitigation will apply, ranging from limited testing or 

detailed recording to extensive excavation. Any mitigation will be tailored to fit the specific 

circumstances and may be reviewed by the Arizona State Historic Preservation Officer and the 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. 

Cultural surveys will be required whenever surface disturbances and/or occupancy proposed in 

association with oil/gas exploration occur. The lessee/operator as determined by the authorized 

officer of the BLM will conduct Field surveys. Surveys will conform to the Secretary of 

Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation, including the 

Professional Qualifications Standards, and with BLM and AZ SHPO requirements and protocols. 

Cultural surveys must also be performed under a current Arizona BLM Cultural Resource Use 

Permit. Based on the results of the field survey, the authorized officer will determine appropriate 

mitigation. 

ASFO 34 

LEASE STIPULATION - CULTURAL RESOURCES ACEC 

In order to protect cultural resources in the _______ ACEC a waivable no surface occupancy 

(WNSO) stipulation will apply. Surface occupancy can be allowed when specifically approved in 

writing by the authorized officer. The authorized officer may waive this stipulation on a case-bycase basis if it can be shown that: 

(1) Legal rights would be curtailed; 

(2) Cultural properties listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places 

are not present in a specific project location, or; 

(3) The activity can be mitigated; appropriate mitigation will range from limited testing 

or detailed recording to extensive excavation. Any mitigation will be tailored to fit the 

specific circumstances and will be reviewed by the Arizona State Historic Preservation 

Officer and potentially by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. 

Cultural surveys will be required whenever surface disturbances and/or occupancy proposed in 

association with oil/gas exploration occur within an ACEC. The lessee/operator as determined by 

the authorized officer of the BLM will conduct Field surveys. Surveys will conform to the 

Secretary of Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation, 

including the Professional Qualifications Standards, and with BLM and AZ SHPO requirements 

and protocols. Cultural surveys must also be performed under a current Arizona BLM Cultural 

Resource Use Permit. Based on the results of the field survey, the authorized officer will 

determine appropriate mitigation. 
 

APPENDIX H 

AREA OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN 

SUMMARY TABLE: 

VALUES, RELEVANCE, AND IMPORTANCE CRITERIA 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix H 

 

H - 1 

APPENDIX H: AREA OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN 

SUMMARY TABLE: VALUES, RELEVANCE, AND IMPORTANCE 

CRITERIA 

Table H.1. Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) Summary Table: Values, Relevance, and 

Importance Criteria 

ACEC NAME VALUES RELEVANCE AND IMPORTANCE 

Beaver Dam Slope 

ACEC 

51,984 acres 

Desert Tortoise 

Mojave Desert 

Habitat essential for maintaining species diversity and critical 

habitat for threatened desert tortoise, of national worth and 

distinctiveness. Desert tortoises are fragile resources, rare, 

irreplaceable, unique, threatened, and vulnerable to adverse 

change. 

Threats include loss of habitat, mortality from vehicle and 

OHV use, collection, disease, and predation. 

Black Knolls ACEC 

428acres 

Holmgren Milkvetch 

This ACEC contains habitat essential for rare, endemic 

endangered plant species of national worth and 

distinctiveness. The Holmgren Milkvetch and its community 

are fragile, sensitive, rare, irreplaceable, unique, endangered, 

and vulnerable to adverse change. The direct threat is 

destruction from vehicle and OHV use. 

Fort Pearce ACEC 

5,724 acres Critical Watershed 

Siler Pincushion Cactus 

This ACEC contains critical watershed of regional importance 

for St. George, Utah area. 

This ACEC also contains habitat essential for rare, endemic 

threatened plant species of national worth and distinctiveness. 

The Siler Pincushion Cactus and its community are fragile, 

sensitive, rare, irreplaceable, unique, threatened, and 

vulnerable to adverse change. The direct threat is destruction 

from vehicle and OHV use. 

Johnson Spring 

ACEC 

3,444 acres 

Cultural 

Scenic 

Siler Pincushion Cactus 

This ACEC contains significant, regionally important cultural 

resources vulnerable to vandalism and impacts. 

Significant national and regional scenic values visible from 

Highway 89 and 89A, the Shinarump Cliffs provide a natural 

scenic area. 

This ACEC contains habitat essential for rare, endemic 

threatened plant species and their communities of national 

worth and distinctiveness. The pincushion cacti and their 

communities are fragile, sensitive, rare, irreplaceable, unique, 

threatened, and vulnerable to adverse change. The direct 

threat is destruction from OHV use. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix H 

 

H - 2 

Table H.1. Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) Summary Table: Values, Relevance, and 

Importance Criteria 

ACEC NAME VALUES RELEVANCE AND IMPORTANCE 

Kanab Creek ACEC 

13,148 acres 

Cultural 

Endangered Bird Species 

Riparian 

Scenic 

This ACEC contains significant, regionally important cultural 

resources vulnerable to vandalism and impacts. 

The riparian area is a natural system that includes rare, 

endemic plant communities and suitable unoccupied habitat 

for endangered SW willow flycatcher. It has regional 

significance. The riparian area is fragile, irreplaceable, and 

unique and is vulnerable to adverse change. Cause for 

concern is dewatering, loss of habitat due to development, 

flooding, and alteration of the stream channel. 

Significant lands of regional importance containing 

wilderness characteristics with a high degree of naturalness, 

outstanding opportunities for solitude, and opportunities for 

primitive and unconfined recreation. 

Little Black Mountain 

ACEC 

241 acres 

Cultural 

This ACEC contains significant regionally important cultural 

resources vulnerable to vandalism and impacts. It is a rare 

and significant interpretive site. 

Lone Butte ACEC 

1,762 acres 

Jones’ Cycladenia 

Scenic 

This ACEC contains essential habitat for threatened Jones’ 

cycladenia and associated communities. It is a rare, endemic 

terrestrial plant. This area exhibits natural processes and 

systems and has national worth and distinctiveness. Jones’ 

cycladenia is irreplaceable, unique, threatened, and vulnerable 

to adverse change. Threats include limited distribution and 

potential for destruction by vehicle and OHV use. 

This ACEC also contains significant national and regional 

scenic values of this portion of the Vermilion Cliffs along 

Highway 389. 

Lost Spring Mountain 

ACEC 

19,248 acres 

Cultural 

Siler Pincushion Cactus 

This ACEC contains significant, regionally important cultural 

resources vulnerable to vandalism, OHV damage, and 

impacts. 

This ACEC also contains habitat essential for rare, endemic 

threatened plant species and their communities of national 

worth and distinctiveness. The pincushion cacti and their 

communities are fragile, sensitive, rare, irreplaceable, unique, 

threatened, and vulnerable to adverse change. The direct 

threat is destruction from vehicle and OHV use. 

Significant lands of regional and national importance 

containing wilderness characteristics with a high degree of 

naturalness, outstanding opportunities for solitude, and 

opportunities for primitive and unconfined recreation. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix H 

 

H - 3 

Table H.1. Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) Summary Table: Values, Relevance, and 

Importance Criteria 

ACEC NAME VALUES RELEVANCE AND IMPORTANCE 

Marble Canyon 

ACEC 

11,797 acres 

Brady Pincushion Cactus 

Cultural 

Raptors 

Scenic 

This ACEC contains habitat essential for rare, endemic 

threatened plant species and their communities of national 

worth and distinctiveness. The pincushion cacti and their 

communities are fragile, sensitive, rare, irreplaceable, unique, 

threatened, and vulnerable to adverse change. The direct 

threat is destruction from OHV use. 

Raptors, particularly the California Condor, are known to 

frequent the ACEC during cooler months of the year. Threats 

include lead poisoning and human interference. 

This ACEC also contains significant regional important 

cultural resources vulnerable to vandalism, OHV damage, and 

impacts in Alt B. 

In addition, finally, this ACEC contains significant national 

and regional scenic values on the rim of the Colorado River at 

Marble Canyon. 

Moonshine Ridge 

ACEC 

9,310 acres 

Cultural 

Scenic 

Siler Pincushion Cactus 

This ACEC contains significant, regionally important cultural 

resources vulnerable to vandalism, OHV damage, and 

impacts. 

Significant regional scenic values of the Shinarump cap on 

Yellowstone Mesa, visible from Highway 389. 

This ACEC also contains habitat essential for rare, endemic 

threatened plant species and their communities of national 

worth and distinctiveness. The pincushion cacti and their 

communities are fragile, sensitive, rare, irreplaceable, unique, 

threatened, and vulnerable to adverse change. The direct 

threat is destruction from vehicle and OHV use. 

Shinarump ACEC 

3,237 acres 

Scenic 

Siler Pincushion Cactus 

Significant regional scenic values of this portion of the 

Shinarump cap on mesa tops east of Fredonia visible from 

Highway 89. 

This ACEC also contains habitat essential for rare, endemic 

threatened plant species and their communities of national 

worth and distinctiveness. The pincushion cacti and their 

communities are fragile, sensitive, rare, irreplaceable, unique, 

threatened, and vulnerable to adverse change. The direct 

threat is destruction from vehicle and OHV use. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix H 

 

H - 4 

Table H.1. Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) Summary Table: Values, Relevance, and 

Importance Criteria 

ACEC NAME VALUES RELEVANCE AND IMPORTANCE 

Virgin River 

Corridor ACEC 

2,065 acres 

Cultural 

Endangered Fish 

Riparian 

Scenic 

This ACEC contains significant regionally important cultural 

resources vulnerable to vandalism, and vehicle and OHV 

damage. 

This ACEC also contains essential habitat critical to the 

survival and recovery of the wildlife species including 

populations of endangered woundfin minnow and endangered 

Virgin River chub. 

Threats include loss of habitat, mortality from vehicle and 

OHV use, collection, disease, and predation. 

The riparian area is a natural system that includes rare, 

endemic plant communities and has regional significance. The 

riparian area is fragile, irreplaceable, and unique and is 

vulnerable to adverse change. Threats include dewatering, 

loss of habitat due to development, flooding, and alteration of 

stream channel. 

In addition, finally, this ACEC contains significant national 

and regional scenic values in the Virgin River Gorge. 

Virgin Slope ACEC 

39,514 acres 

Desert Tortoise 

This ACEC contains habitat essential for maintaining species 

diversity and critical habitat for threatened desert tortoise, of 

national worth and distinctiveness. Desert tortoises are a 

fragile resource, rare, irreplaceable, unique, threatened, and 

vulnerable to adverse change. 

Threats include loss of habitat, mortality from vehicle and 

OHV use, collection, disease, and predation. 

Significant lands of regional and national importance 

containing wilderness characteristics with a high degree of 

naturalness, outstanding opportunities for solitude, and 

opportunities for primitive and unconfined recreation. 
 

APPENDIX I 

VISUAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CLASSES 

AND OBJECTIVES FOR CLASSES 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix I 

 

I - 1 

APPENDIX I: VISUAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CLASSES AND 

OBJECTIVES FOR CLASSES 

A. INTRODUCTION 

The Visual Resource Management (VRM) system provides a means: to identify visual values; to 

establish objectives through the RMP process for managing these values; and to provide timely 

inputs into proposed surface disturbing projects to ensure that these objectives are met. The 

objectives also provide visual management standards for the design and development of future 

projects and for rehabilitation of existing projects. Assigning values to visual resources produces 

information that, once passed through the VRM system, is to be used as a guide during project 

development. The field manager makes the decision on the amount of visual change that is 

acceptable for a project or activity proposal. 

Following the update of the existing visual resource inventory, VRM classes were potentially 

designated for all Bureau of Land Management (BLM)-administered lands under all alternatives 

in the Arizona Strip Proposed Plan/FEIS. While VRM management classes may differ from 

VRM inventory classes, based on management priorities for land uses, the inventory did serve as 

the basis for considering and developing potential VRM designations. The potential for VRM 

classes to reflect and support resource allocation decisions significantly shaped the potential 

VRM designations in each alternative. If, for example, it was concluded that under the RMP 

resource allocation decisions that the "visual contrast rating scores would exceed the VRM class 

objectives" for a number of areas, the typical response will be to lower the VRM inventory rating 

for those areas to reflect the RMP's resource allocation decisions in those areas. 

As VRM class designations are established upon signing of the Record of Decision for the 

Approved RMP, it will be the responsibility of the manager to ensure that visual impacts are 

minimized in all resource development activities including non-BLM initiated projects. Once 

established, VRM class designations are more than merely guidelines. Rather, having been 

developed through the RMP process, meeting the objectives of each of the respective visual 

resource classes is as much a part of the RMP mandate as any other aspect of the resource 

allocation decisions made in the RMP. 

Since the overall VRM goal is to minimize visual impacts, mitigating measures should be 

prepared for all adverse contrasts that can be reduced, including the reduction of contrast in 

projects that have met the VRM objectives. This is done by incorporating visual design 

considerations into all surface disturbing projects regardless of size or potential impact. This 

does not mean that VRM will be used as a method to preclude all other resource development. It 

does mean that the visual values must be considered and those considerations documented in the 

decision-making process, and that if a proposed project or action is approved, a reasonable 

attempt must be made to meet the VRM objectives for the area in question and to minimize the 

visual impacts of the proposal. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix I 

 

I - 2 

To facilitate incorporating visual design considerations into surface disturbing projects to assist 

management in the minimization of potential visual impacts, the contrast rating process is used 

as a visual design tool in project design and as a project assessment tool during environmental 

review. Contrast ratings are required for proposed projects in highly sensitive areas or high 

impact projects, but may also be used for other projects where it would appear to be the most 

effective design or assessment tool. A brief narrative visual assessment will be completed for all 

other projects that require an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement. 

In its simplest form, the contrast rating process documents the existing form, line, color and 

texture aspects of landform, vegetation, and structures for a project area. It then documents the 

predicted form, line, color, and texture aspects the landform, vegetation and structures would 

display with the proposed project in place as observed from key observation points, such as 

overlooks or high-use travel corridors. The difference between the “before” and “after” 

represents the potential contrast produced by the project. If the overall level of contrast is within 

the standard or objective for the VRM class within which it lies, the project is considered to meet 

the VRM objective. If the contrast rating is outside the standard or objective, mitigation 

measures are considered and applied, in essence, redesigning the project to attempt to bring it 

into conformance with the VRM standard or objective. (For more information about contrast 

ratings, see BLM Handbook H-8431-1, Visual Resource Contrast Rating online at 

http://www.blm.gov/nstc/VRM/8431.html). 

In applying the VRM Class objectives in the Approved RMP, the following general criteria were 

considered: 

• Consider the overall management emphasis. 

• 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 the least restrictive class that still achieves objectives to attain desired future conditions. 

Setting VRM Class objectives that would make it difficult to achieve management activities or 

uses identified elsewhere within the Approved RMP was avoided during the designation process. 

VRM Class I was typically used only for those areas where congressional and administrative 

decisions have been or will be made to preserve a natural landscape. 

VRM Class objectives are set by Bureau policy and the critical concepts are summarized below 

in Table 1 (see VRM decisions in this Approved RMP): 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix I 

 

I - 3 

Table 1. VRM Class Objectives 

VRM Class I VRM Class II

Preserve existing character of the landscape Retain existing character of the landscape 

Natural ecological changes 

Changes repeat the basic elements of form, line, color, 

and texture found in the predominant natural features of 

the characteristic landscape 

Very limited management activity Management activities may be seen

Level of Change-very low Level of Change-low

Must not attract attention Should not attract attention of casual observer 

VRM Class III VRM Class IV

Partially retain existing character of the 

landscape 

Allow major modifications of existing character of the 

landscape 

Changes should repeat the basic elements

in the predominant natural features of the 

characteristic landscape 

Make every attempt to minimize the impact of 

activities through careful location, minimal disturbance, 

and repeating the basic elements 

(management activities not addressed) Provide for management activities which require major 

modifications of existing landscape character 

Level of Change-moderate Level of Change-major

May attract attention but should not 

dominate the casual observer’s view 

May dominate the view and be the major focus of viewer 

attention 

B. SPECIFIC CRITERIA FOR VRM CLASSES BY ALTERNATIVE 

The following specific criteria are used to define VRM classes for the Arizona Strip FO and are 

reflected on the GIS maps and in the acreage numbers in the Approved RMP. 

Class I

• Designated Wilderness 

Class II

• All ACECs 

• Areas “seen” from three different vantage points in St. George, Utah area 

• Selected areas where wilderness characteristics will be maintained (slopes greater than 30 

degrees, no potential for vegetation treatment or restoration) 

• 1⁄4 mile buffer off Historic and Recreation Trails outside Virgin River/I-15 corridor 

• Virgin Ridge Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA) 

• Virgin River Gorge Recreation Withdrawal 

Class III

• All remaining area in the Arizona Strip FO not already listed above or in Class IV below 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix I 

 

I - 4 

Class IV

• Utility Corridors 

• Mineral Material Sites 

o 100 ft buffer off of known Free Use Permit areas 

o 500 ft buffer off of Common Use or Community Pits 

o Boundary of Mineral Material Sale areas 

• Gypsum Mine outside St. George, Utah
 

 

APPENDIX J 

LANDS IDENTIFIED FOR DISPOSAL 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP 

J - 1 

APPENDIX J: LANDS IDENTIFIED FOR DISPOSAL Identification of lands for disposal in this Approved RMP makes these parcels available for further consideration, but does their ultimate transfer. It is unlikely that the full amount of land identified for disposal will be transferred during the life of 

disposal actions must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other applicable environmental lawuse planning decisions. Inventories must be completed for threatened or endangered species, significant cultural resources

hazardous materials, etc. The presence of any one of these values may preclude an action. The BLM’s ability to dispose oconstrained by other factors such as an area of critical environmental concern or withdrawal. 

LANDS IDENTIFIED FOR DISPOSAL 

Legal Description Acres Authority 

T. 39 N., R. 7 E., 0  sec. 7, that portion between the wilderness boundary, Hwy 89A, Vermilion Cliffs 

Lodge, and Badger Creek Subdivision (acres estimated); 44.00 FLPMA 203 & 2

sec. 18, NW1/4NW1/4NE1/4 (that portion NW of Hwy 89A). 1.61 FLPMA 203 

T. 41 N., R. 8 E., 0  sec. 21, N1/2N1/2. 160.00 RT. 39 N., R. 1 W., 0  sec. 22, N1/2NE1/4. 80.00 FLPMA 203 T. 39 N., R. 6 W., 0  sec. 3, lots 1 and 2, S1/2NE1/4, and SE1/4; 319.98 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 10, E1/2; 320.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 15, N1/2; 320.00 FLPMA 203  sec. 20, N1/2NE1/4. 80.00 FLPMA 203 & 2T. 39 N., R. 16 W., 0  sec. 3, SW1/4SE1/4; 40.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 4, lot 2; 39.97 FLPMA 203  sec. 5, lots 2 and 3, N1/2 of lot 6, and N1/2SW1/4SE1/4 (acres estimated); 118.21 FLPMA 203  sec. 8, lot 4 and S1/2SE1/4; 117.49 FLPMA 203  sec. 9, SW1/4NE1/4 and SE1/4; 200.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 9, SW1/4; 160.00 FLPMA 203  sec. 10, W1/2NE1/4, SE1/4NW1/4, and NE1/4SE1/4; 160.00 FLPMA 203 & 2
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP 

J - 2 

LANDS IDENTIFIED FOR DISPOSAL 

Legal Description Acres Authority 

 sec. 17, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, and W1/2E1/2 312.64 FLPMA 203 T. 40 N., R. 6 W., 0  sec. 1, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, SE1/4NE1/4, SW1/4NW1/4, and W1/2SW1/4; 270.36 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 3, lots 1 and 2, S1/2NE1/4, and SE1/4; 294.90 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 4, SW1/4 and W1/2SE1/4; 240.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 5, lots 3 and 4, S1/2NW1/4, E1/2SW1/4, and SE1/4; 375.29 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 6, lot 7, SE1/4SW1/4, and SE1/4; 237.55 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 7, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, E1/2, and E1/2W1/2; 630.16 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec, 8, NW1/4NW1/4; 40.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 9, all; 640.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 17, S1/2; 320.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 18, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, E1/2, and E1/2W1/2; 630.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 19, lots 1 and 2, NE1/4, and E1/2NW1/4; 314.98 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 20, all; 640.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 27, E1/2; 320.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 34, E1/2. 320.00 FLPMA 203 & 2T. 40 N., R. 7 W., 0  sec. 1, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, S1/2N1/2, and S1/2; 625.64 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 6, S1/2NE1/4; 80.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 12, all; 640.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 13, all. 640.00 FLPMA 203 & 2T. 40 N., R. 15 W., 0  sec. 4, lot 6; (1994 RMP Amendment) 18.31 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 4, S1/2SE1/4 above Virgin River rim only (acres estimated); 75.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 6, lots 1 to 7, inclusive, S1/2NE1/4, SE1/4NW1/4, and E1/2SW1/4; 462.88 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 18, SE1/4NE1/4 and NW1/4SE1/4, west of Virgin River and above rim only (acres 

estimated); 75.00 R

 sec. 19, lots 1, 2 (part), and 3 (part), W1/2NE1/4NW1/4, west of Virgin River and above 

rim only (acres estimated). 80.94 FLPMA 203 

T. 40 N., R. 16 W., 0  sec. 13, SE1/4NE1/4, S1/2SW1/4, and SE1/4 east of I-15 (acres estimated); 220.00 FLPMA 203  sec. 23, E1/2NE1/4, SE1/4, and SE1/4SW1/4 east of I-15 (acres estimated); 260.00 FLPMA 203  sec. 24, area between I-15 and west of Virgin River and above rim only; 635.00 FLPMA 203 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP 

J - 3 

LANDS IDENTIFIED FOR DISPOSAL 

Legal Description Acres Authority 

 sec. 26, area between I-15 and Highway 91 only (acres estimated); 320.00 FLPMA 203 T. 41 N., R. 2 W., 0  sec. 15, S1/2SW1/4; 80.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 16, N1/2 unnumbered lot #3 (Ag. Tract Road); 1.68 FLPMA  sec. 20, lots 2, 3, 4, 6, and 8 (Ag. Tract Roads); 12.88 FLPMA  sec. 21, S1/2 unnumbered lot #3 (Ag. Tract Road); 1.87 FLPMA  sec. 22, all; 640.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 26, all; 640.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 29, unnumbered lots #1 and #2 (Ag. Tract Roads); 6.13 FLPMA  sec. 35, N1/2N1/2. 160.00 FLPMA 203 & 2T. 41 N., R. 5 W., 0  sec. 17, N1/2N1/2N1/2N1/2NE1/4 and N1/2N1/2N1/2NE1/4NW1/4; 30.00 FLPMA T. 41 N., R. 6 W., 0  sec. 31, S1/2NE1/4, SE1/4NW1/4, NE1/4SW1/4, N1/2SE1/4, and SE1/4SE1/4; 280.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 33, S1/2; 320.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 34, S1/2; 320.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 35, NE1/4 and S1/2. 480.00 FLPMA 203 & 2T. 41 N., R. 7 W., 0  sec. 4, lots 3 and 4, SW1/4NE1/4, S1/2NW1/4, NE1/4SW1/4, N1/2SE1/4, SE1/4SE1/4; 360.39 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 10, SE1/4NE1/4 and NE1/4SE1/4; 80.00 A& sec. 13, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, NE1/4NW1/4, and W1/2SW1/4; 237.74 FLPMA 203 & 206, R sec. 14, lots 1 to 8, inclusive, S1/2NW1/4, NW1/4SW1/4, S1/2SW1/4, E1/2SE1/4; 451.84 FLPMA 203 & 206, R sec. 23, N1/2NE1/4 and NE1/4NW1/4; 120.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 26, S1/2NE1/4 and S1/2; 400.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 35, all. 640.00 FLPMA 203 & 2T. 41 N., R. 11 W., 0  sec. 6, lots 1 and 2, S1/2NE1/4, and SE1/4; 321.25 FLPMA 203  sec. 7, NE1/4. 160.00 FLPMA 203 T. 41 N., R. 12 W., 0  sec. 6, lots 4 and 5, and SE1/4NW1/4; 117.40 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 7, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, E1/2, and E1/2W1/2 east of 500 kV powerline only (acres 

estimated); 635.76 FLPMA 203 

 sec. 8, SW1/4NW1/4 and W1/2SW1/4; 120.00 FLPMA 203 & 2
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP 

J - 4 

LANDS IDENTIFIED FOR DISPOSAL 

Legal Description Acres Authority 

 sec. 18, NE1/4 and NE1/4NW1/4 only portion east of 500 kV powerline (acres 

estimated). 100.00 FLPMA 203 

T. 41 N., R. 13 W., 0  sec. 1, S1/2NE1/4, SE1/4NW1/4, and SE1/4 only portion east of 500 kV powerline; 

(acres estimated) 280.00 FLPMA 203 & 2

 sec. 12, NE1/4 and NE1/4SE1/4 only portions east of 500 kV powerline (acres 

estimated) 120.00 FLPMA 203 

T. 41 N., R. 15 W., 0  sec. 28, SW1/4SW1/4SW1/4 (triangle-acres estimated) (1994 RMP Amendment); 5.00 FLPMA 203 & 2 sec. 33, lot 7 and lots 9 to 13, inclusive, and E1/2E1/2SE1/4SW1/4; 64.76 FLPMA 203  sec. 34, S1/2NE1/4 above Virgin River rim (acres estimated); 60.00 FLPMA 203  sec. 35, SE1/4 all south of I-15 (acres estimated). 160.00 FLPMA 203 & 2T. 42 N., R. 6 W., 0  sec. 32, W1/2SW1/4SE1/4NE1/4SW1/4 and E1/2SE1/4SW1/4NE1/4SW1/4. 2.50 FLPMA 203 T. 42 N., R. 7 W., 0  sec. 33, lots 2, 3, and 4, and S1/2. 393.74 FLPMA 203 & 2T. 42 N., R. 11 W., 0  sec. 31, lots 1 and 2, and SE1/4. 202.46 FLPMA 203 TOTAL ACRES** 19,743 *Authority for Disposal:  FLPMA 203 – Federal Land Policy and Management Act, Section 203 – Sale Authority  FLPMA 206 – Federal Land Policy and Management Act, Section 206 – Exchange Authority  FLTFA – Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act – Sale Authority of Land and Interests in Land Identified for Disposal as of July  R&PP – Recreation and Public Purposes Act – Lease/Grant Authority  A&AIA – Airport and Airways Improvement Act – Lease/Grant Authority ** Acres derived from GIS data. 
APPENDIX K 

RECLAMATION STIPULATIONS 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix K 

K - 1 

APPENDIX K: RECLAMATION STIPULATIONS 

Appendix K is a list of general requirements for preserving and protecting the special 

environmental and unique resource values of the Arizona Strip Field Office. These requirements 

will guide the formulation of specific stipulations, construction, and/or operating standards, 

which will be applied to surface-disturbing activities. They are designed to provide public land 

users with a clear understanding of what constitutes prevention of unnecessary or undue 

degradation and what is required for reclamation. FLPMA and other environmental laws 

support these requirements. Suitable site-specific stipulations regarding construction and 

reclamation and the prevention of unnecessary or undue degradation will be developed by the 

authorized officer and applied to each authorization in order to minimize long-term impacts and 

ensure that sites are effectively reclaimed. 

UNNECESSARY OR UNDUE DEGRADATION 

1. All surface disturbance, including road construction and associated travel, shall be kept to the 

minimum necessary to accomplish the task. Road upgrade and realignment requests on BLM 

lands shall include plans for reclamation and a proposal for a post-operations final alignment. 

2. All new temporary or existing upgraded roads on BLM lands may require mitigation to reduce 

the potential adverse impact of fugitive dust as specified by the authorized officer. 

3. Where soil characteristics warrant, topsoil shall be stockpiled from a surface depth specified 

by the authorized officer. 

4. All surface-disturbing activities on slopes greater than 15 percent shall include measures to 

stabilize soils and control surface water runoff. 

5. During construction and operation of facilities or improvements, care shall be taken to 

minimize, to the extent practicable, impacts to the natural and human environments. This may be 

accomplished through the painting or screening of structures and facilities to blend with the 

surrounding environment; the suppression of dust and noise; the proper disposal of waste 

products; and provisions to safeguard public safety. 

6. Coloration products may be required along travel corridors and in VRM Class II areas to 

reduce color contrast and restore the natural color balance. 

7. Construction and reclamation activities shall be designed to minimize long-term impacts to 

natural lines, form, textures and color contrast. Reclamation methods shall avoid disturbing more 

area or exposing greater color contrast than resulted from the original operation. 

8. All facilities or improvements that are no longer needed must be removed. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix K 

K - 2 

9. In order to protect the wildlife, the public or other important values and discourage 

unnecessary public contact with authorized activities, the authorized officer may require 

improvements or facilities to be fenced, gated and locked. 

10. Mineral material disposal in VRM Class II areas shall not be allowed if reasonable 

alternative sources are available in other VRM classes. Any mineral material disposal sites 

authorized in VRM Class II shall not compromise the VRM class objectives. 

11. All powerlines on BLM lands shall be constructed to minimize visual impacts. This may 

include burying them along existing roads in VRM Class II areas or ACECs. 

12. Applicants shall supply, at the discretion of the authorized officer, pertinent information 

regarding Impacts from the proposal on surface and groundwater quality and quantity and 

anticipated impacts from 100-year, 24-hour storm events. 

13. All forms of residential occupancy are discouraged on public lands within the Arizona Strip 

District. Exceptions may occur on BLM lands for the protection of public health and safety, the 

protection of private property. With regard to locatable mineral development on Arizona Strip 

FO lands, occupants must be actively and diligently engaged in substantially continuous 

operations. Intermittent, part time, seasonal or recreational mining operations do not meet district 

occupancy standards. All plans for residential occupancy must be fully incorporated into 

submitted notices and plans. All proposals for residential occupancy shall be subject to the 

requirement to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation and shall comply with all applicable 

state and federal laws, regulations and permits. Residential occupancy not in conformance with 

applicable laws, Bureau guidelines and district policy will be subject to immediate trespass 

action by the Bureau. 

14. Applicants may be required by the authorized officer to provide inventories for threatened or 

endangered plants and/or animals and cultural resources. All Inventories shall be performed to 

Bureau standards. 

15. No surface disturbance shall be authorized which affects any cultural sites prior to 

consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and threatened or endangered 

species prior to compliance with the Endangered Species Act. 

16. No surface disturbance will be authorized which affects any cultural property that is allocated 

to Conservation Use in an approved Cultural Resource Management Plan. 

RECLAMATION 

1. Reclamation of all surface disturbances must be initiated immediately upon completion of 

activities, unless otherwise approved by the authorized officer. Reclamation of disturbed areas 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix K 

K - 3 

shall, to the extent practicable, include contouring disturbances to blend with the surrounding 

terrain, replacement of topsoil, smoothing and blending the original surface colors to minimize 

impacts to visual resources, and seed the disturbed areas with a mix specified by the authorized 

officer. 

2. All chemicals, trash, garbage or other foreign material must be removed completely from the 

project area by the applicant immediately upon completion of the project. All material must be 

properly disposed of in an approved disposal facility. Exceptions to this limitation shall be 

approved by the authorized officer. 

3. At no time shall vehicle or equipment fluids be dumped on public lands. All accidental spills 

must be reported to the BLM and be cleaned up immediately, using best available practices and 

requirements of the law. All spills of federally or state listed hazardous materials which exceed 

the reportable quantities shall be promptly reported to the appropriate state agency and the 

Arizona Strip District. 

4. Disturbed areas, where soil and rainfall are adequate for anticipated success, shall be 

revegetated. In all VRM Class II areas and ACECs, revegetation of native species shall be 

preferred. Rates and seed mixes shall be determined by the authorized officer. 

5. Revegetation efforts must establish a stable biological groundcover equal to or exceeding that 

which occurred prior to disturbance. Mulching may be appropriate for conserving moisture and 

holding seed on-site thus improving the chances for successful establishment. 

6. All unnecessary roads shall be reclaimed and closed immediately upon termination of the 

project. Recontouring all cut slopes to approximately the original contour shall be required. 

Reclaimed roads shall be barricaded or signed to protect them until reclamation is achieved. All 

existing roads that require upgrading shall be reclaimed to their original dimensions upon 

completion of the project. Exceptions must be approved in writing by the authorized officer. 
APPENDIX L 

MINERALS AND ASSOCIATED LAND CLASSIFICATIONS 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix L 

L - 1 

APPENDIX L: MINERALS AND ASSOCIATED LAND 

CLASSIFICATIONS 

A. Fluid Mineral Leasing Classifications 

The current leasing policy for fluid minerals employs four land classifications to protect natural 

and human resources while providing maximum opportunity for exploration and development. 

The classifications are: 

 Open to Leasing with Standard Stipulations; 

 Open to Leasing with Special Terms and Conditions or Seasonal Restrictions; 

 Open to Leasing with No Surface Occupancy; and 

 Closed to Leasing. 

Exploration, drilling and production will be subject to the applicable operation and reclamation 

standards. 

Areas Open to Lease Subject to Standard Lease Terms 

Standard lease terms can be found on BLM Form 3100-11, Offer to Lease and Lease for Oil and 

Gas and apply to lands that are not closed to oil and gas leasing. 

Areas Open to Leasing with Special Terms and Conditions or Seasonal Restrictions 

In order to protect bighorn sheep and their habitat, exploration, drilling and other surfacedisturbing activities will be allowed only during the period from June 1 through November 30. 

This limitation does not apply to the maintenance and operation of producing wells. The 

authorized officer of the federal surface management agency may specifically authorize 

exceptions to this limitation in any year in writing, if it is shown to the satisfaction of the 

authorized officer that adverse impacts to the bighorn sheep would not occur. 

Appendix G, Arizona Strip FO Oil and Gas Lease Stipulations, includes other seasonal 

restrictions that can apply on a case-by-case basis. 

Areas Open to Leasing with No Surface Occupancy 

In order to protect important scenic values, no surface occupancy or other surface disturbance 

will be allowed within the Virgin River Gorge scenic withdrawal. The authorized officer of the 

federal surface management agency may specifically authorize exceptions to this limitation in 

writing, if it is shown to the satisfaction of the authorized officer that the proposed disturbance or 

occupancy will not substantially impair the visual resources of the area. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix L 

L - 2 

In order to protect important scenic values, no surface occupancy or other surface disturbance 

will be allowed within Kanab Creek, Grama Canyon, or the Virgin River Gorge. The authorized 

officer of the federal surface management agency may specifically authorize exceptions to this 

limitation in writing, if it is shown to the satisfaction of the authorized officer that the proposed 

disturbance or occupancy will not substantially impair the visual resources of the area. 

In order to protect important scenic values, no surface occupancy or other surface disturbance 

will be allowed on slopes in excess of 30 percent. The authorized officer of the federal surface 

management agency may specifically authorize exceptions to this limitation in writing, if it is 

shown to the satisfaction of the authorized officer that the proposed disturbance or occupancy 

will not impair the visual resources of the area. 

Subject to waivable no surface occupancy stipulations to protect desert tortoise, exploration, 

drilling and other surface-disturbing activities will be allowed only during the period from 

October 15 through March 15. This limitation does not apply to the maintenance and operation 

of producing wells. The authorized officer can allow surface occupancy after consultation with 

the USFWS when authorizing a particular Application for a Permit to Drill. 

Areas Closed to Leasing 

In order to protect wilderness values, lands are withdrawn from minerals leasing within the 

Paiute Wilderness, the Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness, the Cottonwood Point Wilderness, 

and the BLM-administered portion of the Kanab Creek Wilderness. 

In addition to the fluid mineral leasing categories above, the following condition applies to 

special status species. 

The lease area may now or hereafter contain plants, animals, their habitats determined to be 

threatened, endangered, or other special status species. The BLM may recommend 

modifications to exploration and development proposals to further its conservation and 

management objective to avoid BLM-approved activity that will contribute to a need to list such 

a species or their habitat. The BLM may require modifications to or disapprove proposed activity 

that is likely to result in jeopardy to the continued existence of a proposed or listed threatened or 

endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of a designated or 

proposed critical habitat. The BLM will not approve any ground-disturbing activity that may 

affect any such species or critical habitat until it completes its obligations under applicable 

requirements of the Endangered Species Act as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq., including 

completion of any required procedure for conference or consultation. 

Appendix G, Arizona Strip FO Oil and Gas Lease Stipulations, includes other restrictions that 

can apply on a case-by-case basis. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix L 

L - 3 

B. Locatable Mineral Land Classifications 

Locatable mineral exploration and development work is governed by the 43 CFR 3809 

regulations. These regulations require the filing of a notice or a plan of operations prior to the 

start of operations, excluding casual use, on Federal lands. A notice is required to be filed at 

least 15 calendar days before commencing exploration causing a surface disturbance of 5 acres 

or less on which reclamation has not been completed. BLM approval is not required prior to the 

start of exploration conducted under a notice. Plan of operations are required to be submitted 

and approved for any bulk sampling that will remove 1,000 tons or more of presumed ore for 

testing and any mining operations causing surface disturbance in excess of casual use. Surface 

disturbing activities related to notices and plan of operations will be subject to the operation and 

reclamation standards contained in Appendix 2.O. Classification of public lands to operation of 

the mining laws is as follows: Areas Open; Areas Open with Restrictions; Areas Open with a 

Plan of Operation: and Areas Closed. 

Areas Open to the Mining Laws 

All public lands in the Arizona Strip FO with the exception of those lands identified below, are 

open to the operation of the mining laws. Wilderness areas and the Grand Canyon game 

preserve are closed to the operation of the mining laws. Valid existing rights, however, must be 

recognized. These rights must be supported by the discovery of a valuable mineral as of the date 

of designation. 

Areas Open to the Mining Laws with Restrictions 

Restricted areas are those lands where mining locations are subject to special requirements of 

law and regulation because of powersite withdrawals, public water reserves, and split-estate 

created under the Stockraising Homestead Act. Additional restrictions can apply in riparian 

areas or if threatened or endangered species are involved, as stated below. 

Areas along the Virgin River drainage, Beaver Dam Wash, Kanab Creek and all wetlands are 

protected by provisions on the Wetlands Executive Order (ED 11990, May 24, 1977) and the 

Floodplain Management Executive Order (EO 11988, May 24, 1977), to avoid or reduce adverse 

impacts. 

In accordance with U.S. Fish and Wildlife consultation requirements under Section 7 of the 

Endangered Species Act and the Bald Eagle Protection Act, actions necessary to prevent 

disturbance to threatened and endangered species or golden eagles are required. As such, 

exploration activities are not allowed to be conducted within certain sensitive periods or within 

influence zones. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix L 

L - 4 

Areas Open to the Mining Laws with a Plan of Operation 

Plan of operations are required to be submitted and approved prior to commencing operations in 

the following special status areas; areas in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, and 

areas designated for potential addition to the system; designated areas of critical environmental 

concern; areas designated as part of the National Wilderness Preservation System and 

administered by the BLM; areas designated as "closed" to off-road vehicle use; any lands or 

waters known to contain Federally proposed or listed threatened or endangered species or their 

proposed or designated critical habitat, unless the BLM allows for other action under a formal 

land-use plan or threatened or endangered species recovery plan. 

Areas Closed to the Mining Laws 

Subject to the valid existing rights, wilderness areas, the Virgin River Gorge scenic area, Grand 

Canyon game preserve, and acquired land not formally opened to the operation of the mining 

laws are closed to the operation of the mining law. 

C. Mineral Material Land Classification 

Mineral material disposal is discretionary and applications can be denied in cases where the 

disposal is not in the best public interest. Mineral material disposal sites will be subject to the 

operation and reclamation standards contained in Appendix - for surface disturbing activities. 

Classification of public lands for mineral material disposal is as follows: Areas Open Subject to 

Standard Terms and Conditions, Areas Open with Restrictions, and Areas Closed. 

Areas Open to Mineral Material Disposals Subject to Standard Terms and Conditions 

Areas Open to Mineral Material Disposals Subject to Restrictions 

Restricted areas are those lands where mineral material disposals are subject to special 

requirements of law and regulation because of unpatented mining claims, powersite withdrawals, 

split-estate created under the Stockraising Homestead Act and acquired lands under the Taylor 

Grazing Act. In addition, material disposal in VRM Class II areas will not be allowed, if 

reasonable alternative sources are available. 

Areas Closed to Mineral Material Disposal 

Areas closed to mineral material disposal are lands in wilderness areas, the Virgin River Gorge 

scenic withdrawal, designated areas of critical environmental concern, areas managed for 

wilderness characteristics, and where there are conflicting non-mineral applications or entries 

pending which involve title to the mineral estate, such as sales or exchanges. 
APPENDIX M 

EXISTING ARIZONA STRIP FIELD OFFICE 

MINERAL MATERIAL SITES 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix M 

M - 1 

APPENDIX M: EXISTING ARIZONA STRIP FIELD OFFICE MINERAL 

MATERIAL SITES 

Township Range Section Legal Description Authorization Type* Commodity 

34N 9W 19 S2SWNENW Cold Springs FUP Soil, Fill 

AZA-30993 

35N 8W 8 S2SESE Uinkaret FUP Cinders 

AZA-30994 

37N 7W 32 SWNW,NWSENW Black Canyon Wash FUP Sand, Gravel 

AZA-32475 

38N 4W 22 NESWSE Buffalo Ranch Rd FUP Sand, Gravel 

 NWSESE AZA-32808 

38N 16W 33 NWSESWSE Eye of Needle FUP Sand, Gravel 

AZA-28202 

39N 3E 27 SESESE North House Rock FUP Gravel 

39N 7E 18 NESW Badger Canyon CP Stone 

AZA-32841 

39N 7E 18 N2NESW,S2SENW Badger Canyon CU Flag Stone 

AZA-32923 

39N 2W 13 S2SWSW, SWSESW Little Cedar Knoll CP/FUP Gravel 

24 N2NWNW, NWNENW AZA-30563/32471 

39N 3W 6 SENENW Bitter Seeps CP/FUP Flag Stone 

AZA-30565/32005 

39W 4W 23 E2NWNE,W2NENE Bullrush Stone NS Flag Stone 

NESESW AZA-29441 

39N 6W 34 NENESW,E2NWNESW Yellowstone Mesa CP/FUP Sand, Gravel 

S2SWSWNE,SESENW AZA-30564/32004 

39N 12W 11 NWNWSE,NENESW CC Gravel Pit FUP Soil, Fill 

AZA-30992 

39N 12W 25 NWSWNW Wolfhole Valley FUP Soil, Fill 

AZA-31990 

39N 16W 4 NWNE Mesquite Vistas NS Sand, Gravel 

AZA-30880 

39N 16W 4 N2NWSW Flat Top Dam FUP Soil, Fill 

AZA-31100 

40N 3E 15 N2NWSE,S2SWNE West Valley Pit FUP Gravel 

40N 6W 5 SESENWSW Landfill Clay Pit FUP Clay 

AZA-30883 

40N 9W 26 NWNW Antelope Road FUP Soil, Fill 

AZA-32710 

40N 12W 26 NESENW Quail Flat Gravel Pit FUP Soil, Fill 

AZA-31985 

40N 16W 24 SW Big Bend Wash FUP Soil, Fill 

AZA-33012 

41N 3E 11 SENE Coyote Valley Gravel FUP Soil, Fill 

AZA-31989 

41N 7W 14 S2SESW,N2NENW Airport Pit CP/FUP Sand, Gravel 

AZA-27367/32006 

41N 9W 3 N2NESW,SWSENW Antelope Pit CP Flag Stone 

AZA-32388 

* Authorization Type: CP – community pit, CUA – common use area, FUP – free use permit, ROW – right-of-way
 

APPENDIX N 

RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREAS 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix N 

 

N - 1 

APPENDIX N: RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREAS 

OVERVIEW 

Two types of Recreation Management Areas (RMAs) are identified in the land use plan for BLM 

lands: Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) and Extensive Recreation Management 

Areas (ERMAs). 

SPECIAL RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREAS 

SRMAs are identified in the planning process as areas with a distinct primary recreation-tourism 

market (who are the targeted visitors and where do they come from) as well as a corresponding 

and distinguishing recreation management strategy; either Community, Destination, or 

Undeveloped. SRMA will undergo further activity-level planning following the completion of 

the land use plan in either Recreation Area Management Plans (RAMP) and/or project plans. 

In identifying SRMAs and prescribing the management regime for each, and to the extent 

feasible with the information on-hand, a benefits-based management (BBM) approach is used. 

BBM or “beneficial outcomes” planning focuses on the outcomes of recreation and leisure 

activities to determine how the experiences benefit the visitor and uses this information as the 

premise for the planning process. BBM focuses on “why” people visit an area and participate in 

a particular activity. Recent visitor surveys as well as public scoping comments and input from 

cooperating entities were used to develop the appropriate proposed recreation strategy for each 

SRMA. 

Recreation Management Strategies 

As stated previously, each SRMA identified will have a distinct, primary recreation-tourism 

market as well as a corresponding and distinguishing recreation management strategy. For each 

SRMA selected, that primary market-based strategy would be to manage for one of three 

possibilities: 

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. They are produced by maintaining prescribed 

natural resource and/or community setting character and by structuring and implementing 

management, marketing, monitoring, and administrative actions accordingly. 

Destination recreation-tourism market ~ national or regional recreation-tourism visitors and 

other constituents who value public lands as recreation-tourism destinations. Major investments 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix N 

 

N - 2 

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 

maintenance of prescribed natural resource setting character and by structuring and 

implementing management, marketing, monitoring, and administrative actions accordingly.

Undeveloped recreation-tourism market ~ national, regional, and/or local recreation-tourism 

visitors, communities, or other constituents who value public lands for the distinctive kinds of 

dispersed recreation produced by the vast size and largely open, undeveloped character of their 

recreation settings. Major investments in facilities are excluded within SRMAs where BLM’s 

strategy is to target demonstrated undeveloped recreation-tourism market demand. Here, 

recreation management actions are geared toward meeting primary recreation-tourism market 

demand to sustain distinctive recreation setting characteristics; however, major investments in 

visitor services are authorized both to sustain those distinctive setting characteristics and to 

maintain visitor freedom to choose where to go and what to do—all in response to demonstrated 

demand for undeveloped recreation. 

While Destination and Community SRMAs are targeting for demands that may require major 

facilities and visitor assistance as stated above, Undeveloped SRMAs target for a demand that 

may requires primarily visitor services, not major facilities, to sustain distinctive settings and 

maintain the unstructured, freedom to choose activities appropriate in undeveloped settings. It 

should be noted that “visitor freedom to choose where to go and what to do” does not mean 

freedom from rules, regulations, travel restrictions, etc., but refers to the visitors’ ability to 

choose from a variety of unstructured, dispersed recreation activities and locations, versus 

choosing more structured recreation opportunities tied to specific places and activities in the 

other two types of SRMAs. 

RECREATION MANAGEMENT ZONES 

Within each SRMA, one or more potential Recreation Management Zones (RMZs) were 

identified, with each zone providing a particular recreation niche within the larger targeted 

recreation-tourism market strategy. (See Maps 2.7, 2.16, 2.25, and 2.34 for SRMAs with RMZs 

in the Arizona Strip Proposed Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement [FEIS]). Each RMZ 

was characterized by a description of its desired outcomes (management objective(s), benefits, 

experiences, activities) and setting prescriptions (physical, social, and administrative conditions 

required to produce the outcomes [see Appendix 3.H, Recreation Opportunity Spectrum, in the 

Proposed Plan/FEIS]). Each RMZ within a SRMA is thus presented to show what the targeted 

activities would likely be, the potential experiences derived from participation, and the possible 

benefits to be realized. Additionally, an activity planning framework (see below) was described 

that addresses basic but broad types of recreation actions (management, marketing, monitoring, 

and administration) that will be needed to achieve desired outcomes. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix N 

 

N - 3 

EXTENSIVE RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREAS 

Areas not delineated as a SRMA are identified as one or more ERMAs, which will primarily 

provide for the wide variety of dispersed recreation activities. Only a custodial level of 

management will be performed to address visitor health and safety, user conflicts and resource 

protection issues; only project plans will be developed. Therefore, actions within ERMAs are 

generally implemented directly from land use plan decisions. Land use plan decisions identified 

in the various sections of Chapter 2, Table 2.1, for Recreation and Visitor Services include 

recreation management objectives for all ERMAs, while Table 2.4 includes custodial recreation 

management, marketing, monitoring, and administrative support actions.

ACTIVITY PLANNING FRAMEWORK 

The activity planning framework is intended to outline the essential conditions or actions needed 

to begin implementing the management of new SRMAs. This section addresses the framework 

for all actions to be taken by the BLM and its collaborating community recreation-tourism 

providers who affect both recreation setting character and the kinds of recreation opportunities 

being produced in SRMAs. The framework addresses recreation management, marketing, 

monitoring, and administrative support actions necessary to achieve the various explicitly stated 

recreation management objectives and setting prescriptions found in the tables below. 

Unless the essential conditions or structure are met, neither management objectives nor 

prescribed recreation setting character can be achieved because implementing actions are the 

engine that makes everything happen. In other words, “What are the primary types of actions to 

which the BLM and its collaborating providers must commit so that planned recreation 

management objectives and recreation setting prescriptions will, in fact, be achieved?” Much of 

this structure is found in the Chapter 2, Table 2.14a Recreation and Visitor Services under Part 

C, Actions to Achieve and Allowable Uses of the Proposed Plan/FEIS. Additionally, the 

following content supplements the Chapter 2 content. 

RECREATION-TOURISM SERVICE DELIVERY SYSTEM 

To implement land use plan decisions within the SRMAs, a recreation-tourism service delivery 

system must be in place and engaged. The delivery system is that combination of public lands 

and adjoining service communities, including local governments and service providing 

businesses through which recreation and visitor services are delivered for one or more SRMAs to 

both visitors and affected community residents. Because the BLM is not the only provider of 

essential recreation and visitor services for the Arizona Strip FO, the focus of the system must 

include other service providers within adjoining service communities upon whom visitors and 

community residents alike depend. 

The recreation-tourism delivery system for the Arizona Strip FO SRMAs involves more than just 

programs and activities provided on public lands. In addition to the BLM, the Forest Service and 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix N 

 

N - 4 

National Park Service, local counties, such as Mohave and Coconino counties in Arizona and 

Washington and Kane counties in Utah, as well as American Indian Tribes, such as the Southern 

Paiute and Navajo, also contribute to recreation-tourism delivery, primarily through the 

management of access to and through landscapes. State governments in Arizona and Utah also 

play important roles in various facets of recreation delivery, including the management of game 

and fish and recreation activities on state trust lands, creation and funding of grant programs that 

enhance OHV and non-motorized recreation opportunities, and providing state law concerning 

vehicle-related licensing. 

For the Arizona Strip FO SRMAs, local communities such as Littlefield, Scenic, Beaver Dam, 

Colorado City, Fredonia, Marble Canyon, Beaver Dam, and Page, Arizona; Mesquite, 

Bunkerville, and Overton, Nevada; and St. George, Hurricane, Washington, Santa Clara, Hildale, 

Big Water, and Kanab, Utah, will continue to contribute to the delivery of recreation-tourism 

opportunities to local, regional, national, and international visitors and residents. 

Non-government recreation providers also play an important role in delivering recreationtourism outcomes. Many local and regional businesses provide for a variety of direct recreation 

opportunities in the areas identified as SRMAs that enable customers to realize specific 

recreation experience outcomes via numerous commercial and competitive activities or events. 

Many other private sector businesses also provide indirectly, or ‘off-site’, to the recreationtourism delivery, such as local bike shops, OHV dealerships, outdoor equipment retailers, hotels, 

and restaurants. Taken all together, recreation-tourism opportunities on the Arizona Strip are 

influenced, guided, constrained, and managed by many providers.

In implementing land use plan decisions for SRMAs, collaborative efforts with other key 

providers will be essential to achieving desired outcomes. Various types of cooperating 

agreements will be developed to forge sustainable service partnerships with these providers. 

Additionally, other existing or new “opportunistic” partnerships with users, interest groups, and 

NGOs will be developed, restructured, expanded, or otherwise tailored to fit within these 

overarching agreements among all key affected providers. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF ESSENTIAL ACTIONS 

Following the completion of the land use plan, a RAMP can be developed for each SRMA 

through a public process. RAMP content will address the variety of specific actions that the 

BLM, the NPS and other key collaborating recreation-tourism providers within adjoining 

communities will undertake to achieve the production of recreation opportunities and resulting 

attainment of targeted experience and benefit outcomes. 

Through the development of RAMPs for SRMAs, the BLM will integrate and constrain all of the 

traditional recreation-related programs and initiatives (e.g., OHVs and transportation, rivers and 

trails, permits and fees, concessions management, accessibility, interpretation, facility 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix N 

 

N - 5 

management, VRM, etc.) to address only those essential functional actions required to achieve 

planned outcomes. 

Implementing actions, whether in RAMPs, developed directly from the RMP, or developed 

adaptively during implementation, will need to conform to the overall management framework 

established by the Plan. In other words, as sets of more specific management actions are 

developed during activity planning, each action will need to conform to the planning criteria, 

laws, regulations, policies, and planning allocations. Additionally specific management actions 

need to conform with State and local provider laws and policies that pertain to activities on 

public lands. 

To better focus on achieving integration and balance of the essential implementation actions, the 

BLM will shift the operational framework from the more traditional approach of managing 

individual recreation programs as discrete objects to the following four functional areas of 

recreation and visitor services. 

MANAGEMENT (of resources, visitors, and facilities [i.e., developed recreation sites, roads 

and trails, recreation concessions, etc.): 

Many of the recreation programs listed above involve recreation management actions, but, in a 

benefits-based SRMA, only those actions which, produce targeted outputs (i.e., maintain or 

enhance settings) and facilitate the attainment of targeted outcomes will be considered essential. 

Planned management programs and actions for SRMAs will be constrained by the management 

framework of the approved RMP, specifically the Recreation and Visitor Services section. 

Planned management programs and actions will be held accountable for how they affect 

recreation setting character and the ability of those settings to produce targeted recreation 

opportunities. 

Additionally, planned travel management actions, including route designation actions, will be 

constrained by recreation management objectives and setting prescriptions, as well as other 

management objectives related to sensitive resources. Likewise, planned travel-related 

engineering construction and maintenance actions will be guided in part by Travel Management 

Area setting prescriptions (Appendix 2.S Travel Management Areas, Part C, Route Construction 

and Maintenance Standards) that are integrated with RMZ setting prescriptions. 

MARKETING (including outreach, information and education, promotion, interpretation, 

environmental education, and other visitor services): 

Marketing actions must support and compliment planned management actions. Marketing seeks 

to connect a customer with a product. In the case of managing for beneficial outcomes on public 

lands, marketing will connect the visitor with a desired setting and set of activities that will 

facilitate the realization of desired experiences and benefits. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix N 

 

N - 6 

As part of marketing, definitive information about recreation setting character and activity, 

experience, and benefit opportunities will be integrated into the BLM’s own information and 

other outreach media. The BLM will also work more closely with industry media through 

collaborative efforts to add definitive content to existing and planned industry outreach media 

and messages to ensure that promotional pieces match customers with the opportunities they 

seek rather than sell them what media wants. It will be essential that all entities involved with 

marketing, both the BLM and industry media, know and understand the following: 

• how each SRMA is targeting a specific recreation-tourism market and who that market is 

and where it is located; 

• how each such market has one or more specific recreation niches that prescribe RMZspecific recreation setting characteristics critical to the production of specific outcomes of 

activity, experience, and benefits; and 

• what the ramifications of “off-target” promotional efforts can be; and 

• that only the marketing tools (e.g., information, promotion, education, interpretation, etc.) 

that are best suited for each locale will be selected as implementing actions. 

Monitoring (including social, environmental, and administrative indicators and standards 

(including outreach, information and education, promotion, interpretation, environmental 

education, and other visitor services) :

Various monitoring frameworks will be available for the BLM and its collaborating partners to 

implement specific planned monitoring actions. Monitoring recreation outcomes and prescribed 

recreation setting conditions is what will drive adaptive management. Monitoring will measure 

outcomes and settings indicators gauge if, when, and how to readjust management and marketing 

actions to achieve standards set for those indicators (i.e., monitoring indicators and standards will 

be extracted directly from the outcomes-based management objectives and setting prescriptions). 

 

Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) will be the primary framework used to clarify the identity 

of other indicators, inventory the indicators, evaluate data and set standards for the indicators, 

and monitor selected indicator sites over time to assess the condition and trend of various 

recreation settings. In addition to LAC, visitor satisfaction and preference surveys will be used 

to evaluate the success or failure achieving the objectives. The BLM will use standard, approved 

survey instruments while other providers may employ other methods to monitor conditions and 

achievement of objectives. 

In implementing specific monitoring actions, the BLM’s collaborating providers will be 

encouraged to assist by providing visitor and community assessments. A monitoring plan will 

facilitate achieving the essential conditions needed for coordinated, integrated, efficient 

monitoring actions to occur. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix N 

 

N - 7 

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT (regulations; permits and fees, including use restrictions 

where necessary and appropriate; recreation concessions; fiscal; data management; and 

customer liaison): 

Administrative actions, such as those listed above, will be implemented only if they ensure that 

they: 

• support rather than lead the management, marketing, and monitoring actions 

• do not thwart the attainment of targeted experience and beneficial outcomes, 

• fit within recreation setting prescriptions 

• are all complementary and balanced with each other, and 

• are limited to only those necessary to achieve all of the above. 
 

APPENDIX O 

TRAVEL MANAGEMENT AREAS, TRANSPORTATION 

PLAN CONTENTS, AND APPROPRIATE 

ROUTE CONSTRUCTION AND 

MAINTENANCE STANDARDS BY 

 TRAVEL MANAGEMENT AREA 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix O 

O - 1 

APPENDIX O: TRAVEL MANAGEMENT AREAS, TRANSPORTATION 

PLAN CONTENTS, AND APPROPRIATE ROUTE CONSTRUCTION AND 

MAINTENANCE STANDARDS BY TRAVEL MANAGEMENT AREA 

TRAVEL MANAGEMENT AREAS 

Comprehensive travel management planning addresses all resource use aspects (such as 

recreational, traditional, casual, agricultural, commercial, and educational) and accompanying 

modes and conditions of travel on the public lands. In the Approved Resource Management Plan 

(RMP), four Travel Management Areas (TMAs; polygons) are delineated. Acceptable modes of 

travel for each TMA (including over-land and fly-in access [remote airstrips]) are identified in 

the Approved RMP as Allowable Uses. In developing these areas, the following components 

were considered: 

a. Management units developed in the plan 

b. Consistency with all resource program goals and objectives; 

c. Primary travelers; 

d. Objectives for allowing travel in the area; 

e. Setting characteristics that are to be maintained (including recreation opportunity 

system and VRM settings); and 

f. Primary means of travel allowed to accomplish the objectives and to maintain the 

setting characteristics. 

A transportation plan will be developed within 3-5 years of issuance of the ROD that will 

coordinate the implementation of the Travel Management and Transportation Facilities decisions 

over the life of the Plan. The potential contents of the transportation plan are shown below. The 

transportation plan will also include Appropriate Route Construction and Maintenance Standards 

by TMA, also shown below. 

TRANSPORTATION PLAN CONTENTS 

DESIGNATED TRAVEL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 

Following issuance of the ROD, implementation and management of the defined travel 

management network (a system of areas, roads and/or trails available for public use, and the 

specific limitations placed on use) will be documented in the transportation plan including, at a 

minimum, the following components: 

a. A map that displays and describes the intended use of the individual geographic units 

within the field office and displays roads and trails for all travel modes. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP Appendix O 

O - 2 

b. A listing of specific road types and designations such as Federal, state, county, and 

Tribal roads, BLM administered/maintained roads, and BLM public roads. 

c. A listing of roads in congressionally designated conservation units, Presidential 

conservation designations, and administrative conservation designations such as areas 

of critical environmental concern (ACECs). 

d. Definitions and additional limitations for specific roads and trails (defined in 43 CFR 

8340.0-5(g)). 

e. Criteria to add new roads or trails and to specify limitations.

f. A set of guidelines for management, monitoring, and maintenance of the system. 

g. A set of indicators to guide future plan maintenance, amendments, or revisions related 

to travel management network. 

h. A list of needed easements and rights-of-way (to be issued to the BLM or others) to 

maintain the existing road and trail network providing public land access. 

i. A schedule for periodic review of travel management networks to ensure that current 

resource and travel management objectives are being met (see 43 CFR 8342.3). 

PRELIMINARY ROUTE NETWORK 

Where specific route designation decisions and a subsequent designated system were not 

practical to define or delineate during the land use planning process, a preliminary network 

identified during that effort will be documented and a process will be established to select a final 

travel management network following the issuance of the ROD and Approved RMP. As a 

separate section of the transportation plan, the following components, as a minimum, will be 

included for the preliminary route network (the uncompleted travel management network): 

a. A map of a preliminary road and trail network; 

b. Any land use plan-defined short-term management guidance for road and trail access 

and activities in areas or sub-areas not completed; 

c. An outline additional data needs, and a strategy to collect needed information; 

d. A clear planning sequence, including public collaboration, criteria and constraints for 

subsequent road and trail selection and identification; 

e. A schedule to complete the area or sub-area road and trail selection process within 5 

years of the signing of the ROD for the RMP; and 

f. A list of any easements and rights-of-ways (to be issued to the BLM or others) 

needed to maintain the preliminary or existing road and trail network. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP 

O - 3 

Table O.1. Route Construction and Maintenance Standards 

Appropriate Route Construction and Maintenance Standards by TMA 

Asset Type1 and Access Vehicle Type Route Type2 Route Width3 (ft) Maintenance Intensity4 Maintenance Frequency Speed (mph) Comments 

Rural TMA 

State, Federal Primary Paved, Secondary Paved Varies High standards 55-75 ADOT responsibility Road-all vehicle types Primary Unpaved, Secondary Unpaved 14-28 3, 5 Annually 20-50 Mainly County and BLM routes Primitive Road-high clearance or 4X4 Tertiary 10 or two-track 1 As needed 10-15 Maintenance is typically as needed, 

specific 

Trail-hiking, biking, motorcycle or equestrian 

Single Track 1.6 3 Annually ≤40 M ≤15 NM Use generally year-round 

Non-system Closed, Reclaiming, Abandoned -- 0 None -- Routes to be closed and rehabilitate

Backways TMA 

Road-all vehicle types Primary Unpaved, Secondary Unpaved 14-20 3, 5 Annually 40-50 Mainly County and BLM/NPS routePrimitive Road-high clearance or 4X4 Tertiary 10 or two-track 1 As needed 5-15 Maintenance is typically as needed, 

specific 

Trail-hiking, biking, motorcycle or equestrian 

Single Track 1.6 1, 3 As needed ≤40 M ≤15 NM Use generally year-round 

Non-system -- 0 None -- Routes to be closed and rehabilitate

Specialized TMA 

Road-all vehicle types Secondary Unpaved 14 3 Annually 20-30 Mainly BLM/NPS routes Primitive Road-high clearance or 4X4 Tertiary 10 or two-track 1 As needed 5-15 Maintenance is typically as needed a

site-specific 

Trail-hiking, biking, motorcycle or equestrian 

Single Track 1.6 1, 3 As needed ≤40 M ≤15 NM Use generally year-round 

Non-system Closed, Reclaiming, Abandoned -- 0 None -- Routes to be closed and rehabilitate
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP 

O - 4 

Table O.1. Route Construction and Maintenance Standards 

Appropriate Route Construction and Maintenance Standards by TMA 

Asset Type1 and Access Vehicle Type Route Type2 Route Width3 (ft) Maintenance Intensity4 Maintenance Frequency Speed (mph) Comments 

Primitive TMA 

Primitive Road-high clearance or 4X4 Tertiary 10 or two-track 1 As needed 5-15 Administrative motorized use and op

non-motorized public use. Maintenatypically as needed, site-specific 

Trail-hiking or equestrian Single Track 1.6 1, 3 As needed ≤40 M ≤15 NM Use generally year-round Non-system Closed, Reclaiming, Abandoned -- 0 None -- Routes to be closed and rehabilitate1. Asset type: From Instruction Memorandum No. 2006-173, Implementation of Roads and Trails Terminology Report: Road: A linear route declared a road by the owner, managed for use by low-clearance vehicles having four or more wheels, and mainta

continuous use. Primitive Road: A linear route managed for use by four-wheel drive or high-clearance vehicles. These routes do not normally meet an

standards. Trail: A trail is a linear route managed for human-powered, stock, or off-highway vehicle forms of transportation or for historical or henot generally managed for use by four-wheel drive or high-clearance vehicles. 2. Route Type: A route type is derived from formal route inventory, which uses these standard types for inventory on BLM and U.S. Foand for Arizona State Trust Lands. 3. Route Width: The width of travel surface only, which does not include associated ditches, bridges, culverts, route cut and fill areas, e

4. Route Maintenance Intensities : Level 0 - Maintenance Description: Existing routes that will no longer be maintained and no longer be declared a route. Routes identi

identified for removal from the Transportation System entirely. Maintenance Objectives: No planned annual maintenance; Meet iden

needs; No preventive maintenance or planned annual maintenance activities Level 1 - Maintenance Description: Routes where minimum (low intensity) maintenance is required to protect adjacent lands and reso

may be impassable for extended periods of time. Maintenance Objectives: Low (Minimal) maintenance intensity; Emphasis is given 

and runoff patterns as needed to protect adjacent lands. Grading, brushing, or slide removal is not performed unless route bed drainage affected, causing erosion; Meet identified resource management objectives; Perform maintenance as necessary to protect adjacent lands 

preventive maintenance; Planned maintenance activities limited to environmental and resource protection; Route surface and other phy
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP 

O - 5 

Table O.1. Route Construction and Maintenance Standards 

Appropriate Route Construction and Maintenance Standards by TMA 

Asset Type1 and Access Vehicle Type Route Type2 Route Width3 (ft) Maintenance Intensity4 Maintenance Frequency Speed (mph) Comments maintained for regular traffic Level 2 - RESERVED FOR POSSIBLE FUTURE USE 

Level 3 - Maintenance Description: Routes requiring moderate maintenance due to low volume use (e.g., seasonally or year-round fo

or administrative access). Maintenance Intensities may not provide year-round access but are intended to generally provide resources a

route in use for the majority of the year. Maintenance Objectives: Medium (Moderate) maintenance intensity; Drainage structures wi

needed. Surface maintenance will be conducted to provide a reasonable level of riding comfort at prudent speeds for the route condition

Brushing is conducted as needed to improve sight distance when appropriate for management uses. Landslides adversely affecting drain

for removal; otherwise, they will be removed on a scheduled basis; Meet identified environmental needs; Generally maintained for yea

annual maintenance necessary to protect adjacent lands and resource values; Perform preventive maintenance as required to generally k

acceptable condition; Planned maintenance activities should include environmental and resource protection efforts, annual route surfacphysical features are maintained for regular traffic Level 4 - RESERVED FOR POSSIBLE FUTURE USE 

Level 5 – Maintenance Description: Routes for high (Maximum) maintenance due to year-round needs, high volume traffic, or signifinclude routes identified through management objectives as requiring high Intensities of maintenance or to be maintained open on a yeaMaintenance Objectives: High (Maximum) maintenance intensity; the entire route will be maintained at least annually. Problems will 

These routes may be closed or have limited access due to weather conditions but are generally intended for year-round use; Meet identi

Generally maintained for year-round traffic; Perform annual maintenance necessary to protect adjacent lands and resource values; Perfo

maintenance as required to generally keep the route in acceptable condition; Planned maintenance activities should include environmen

protection efforts, annual route surface; Route surface and other physical features are maintained for regular traffic 
APPENDIX P 

LIST OF PREPARERS 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP 

P - 1 

APPENDIX P: LIST OF PREPARERS Those responsible for preparation of this Approved RMP are presented in the table below: 

LIST OF PREPARERS 

Name Title Agency Assignment Educatio

Michelle Bailey Recreation Planner BLM Recreation B.S., Parks and Recrea

Management 

Gloria Benson Native American 

Coordinator BLM Cultural Resources (American Indian Resources) 

Jonathan Boswell GIS, GPS Consultant GEO-MM&C

GIS Analysis and Data Development GPS Data Collection and Management Map/Graphics Development 

A.A., General Studies 

David Boyd Public Affairs Specialist BLM Outreach, Editing, Scoping Report, Planning Bulletins, Technical Coordinator B.S., Wildlife Biology M.A., Journalism Hilary Boyd Fire Ecologist BLM Fire Ecology (Occurrence, Risk) B.S., Wildlife Biology M.S., Wildlife Science Jeff Bradybaugh Superintendent, Parashant NPS Management Overview, NPS Planning M.S., Wildlife Science Paula Branstner Interpretive Specialist NPS Environmental Education and Interpretation A.S., General Studies/ Occupational Therapy Whit Bunting Rangeland Management Specialist BLM Livestock Grazing, Vegetation (Rangelands) B.S., Range Science Todd Calico GIS, GPS Consultant TLC-GIS 

GIS Analysis and Data Development GPS Data Collection and Management Map/Graphics Development 

A.S., General Studies B.S., Natural ResourcEnvironmental Studie

Lorraine Christian 

Field Manager, Arizona Strip Field Office BLM Management Overview, Planning Overview B.S., Wildlife and Fish

Biology 

Rody Cox 

Geologist, Lead for Minerals Program and Paleontological Resources 

BLM Geology, Paleontology, Minerals (Leasable and Locatable Minerals, Mineral Materials) B.A., Biology M.S., Geology 

Dennis Curtis Monument Manager, Parashant BLM Management Overview, Planning Overview M.S., Geography Tom Denniston Wildlife Biologist BLM Wildlife Biology B.S., Wildlife (Mgmt 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP 

P - 2 

LIST OF PREPARERS 

Name Title Agency Assignment Educatio

Conservation) 

William Dickinson 

Superintendent, Lake Mead NRA NPS Management Overview B.A., Landscape Arch

Timothy Duck Ecologist BLM Forest Products, Ecozones, Ecology, Restoration B.S., Ecology and Evo

Biology 

Scott Florence District Manager BLM Management Overview, Planning Overview B.S. Range and WildlTom Folks Recreation, Wilderness, Cultural Team Leader BLM 

Travel Management, Recreation, Visual Resources, Back Country Byways, National and Regional Trails, Wild and Scenic Rivers, Wilderness 

B.S., Recreation Park Resource Managemen

Laurie Ford Lands and Geological Sciences Team Lead BLM Management Overview, Lands and Realty, Utility and Communication Corridors Becky Hammond Manager, Arizona Strip FO BLM Management Overview, Geology B.S., Geology M.S., Geology Kathleen Harcksen 

Assistant Manager Parashant 

BLM Management Overview, Vegetation (Forests 

and Woodlands, Riparian and Wetlands) 

B.S., Natural ResourcManagement 

Diana Hawks Planning Coordinator BLM 

Planning Team Lead, Cultural Resources (Archaeological, Historic, and American Indian Resources), ACECs 

B.S., Archaeology M.A., Archaeology 

Michael Herder Wildlife Team Leader BLM Fish and Wildlife, Special Status Species (Animals), ACECs, Management Overview B.S., Wildlife Manage

B.A., Zoology M.A., Marine Biology 

John Herron Archaeologist BLM Cultural Resources (Archaeological and Historical Resources), ACECs B.A., Archaeology, Ec

Evolutionary Biology 

Jim Holland Management Assistant, Lake Mead NRA NPS Management Overview, Lands and Reality, Recreation, Planning Overview B.S., Zoology & Bota

M.S., Biology 

Lee Hughes Ecologist BLM Special Status Species (Plants), Vegetation (Riparian and Wetlands), ACECs A.S., Forestry B.S., Fishery and Ran

Management 

Lilian Jonas Writer/Editor EnviroSystems Management Document Writing and Editing B.S., Biology M.A., Applied Sociolo

Ph.D., Sociology 
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP 

P - 3 

LIST OF PREPARERS 

Name Title Agency Assignment Educatio

Dave Kiel GIS Specialist, Recreation Planner BLM GIS Data Development GIS Analysis Map/Graphics Development B.S., Geography Shirley Kodele Budget Technician NPS 

Comment Analysis Document Preparation GIS Assistance 

 

Marisa Monger GIS Specialist BLM 

GIS Data Development GIS Analysis Map/Graphics Development 

B.A., Psychology 

Kenneth Moore Lead Natural Resource Specialist BLM Access, Vegetation (Forests and Woodlands), Forest Products, Restoration B.S., Forest ManagemRosie Pepito Cultural Resource Manager, Lake Mead NRA NPS Cultural Resources (Archaeological, Historical, and American Indian Resources) Linda Price 

Standards and Guides Team Leader, Vermilion Manager 

BLM Standards for Rangeland Health, Management Overview B.S., Ecology 

Robert Sandberg Range Team Leader BLM Range and Vegetation, Management Overview B.S., Botany & ZooloKathy Seegmiller Information Technology Specialist BLM Comment Analysis Database Management Phillip Seegmiller Rangeland Management Specialist BLM Vegetation (Forests and Woodlands, Rangelands, Riparian and Wetlands) B.S., Outdoor Recreat

Management 

Darla Sidles Superintendent, Parashant NPS Lead Planner, Management Overview B.A., Business AdminRobert Smith 

Hazmat, Soil, Water and Air Programs Lead BLM 

Air Quality, Water (Ground and Surface Water) Soil Resources, Health and Safety (Hazardous Materials) 

B.S., Soil Science Graduate Certificate in Waste Land Managem

Richard Spotts Environmental Coordinator BLM NEPA Compliance Review B.A., Political Science J.D., Law Jo Starr GIS Specialist NPS GIS Data Development GIS Analysis B.S., Natural Resourc

Environmental Studie
Arizona Strip Field Office Approved RMP 

P - 4 

LIST OF PREPARERS 

Name Title Agency Assignment Educatio

Roger Taylor District Manager, Arizona Strip BLM Management overview B.S., Range ManagemKent Turner Resource Management Chief, Lake Mead NRA NPS Management overview B.S., Biology Ron Wadsworth Lead Law Enforcement Officer BLM Public Safety (Crime), Law Enforcement B.S., Wildlife Biology L.D. Walker Noxious Weed Coordinator BLM Vegetation (Noxious Weeds), Fish and Wildlife (Invasive Species), Wild Horses and Burros B.S., Zoology Gary Warshefski Assistant Superintendent, Lake Mead NRA NPS Management overview B.S., Forestry M.S., Public AdministLes Weeks Consultant, Route Evaluations ARS, Inc Transportation/Access B.A., Ecosystems Ana

M.A., Biogeography 

Aaron Wilkerson Forester BLM Restoration, Forestry B.S., Forestry Ericka Wilkerson Administrative Assistant Contractor Comment Analysis Document Preparation B.S., Criminal Justice Kari Yanskey Botanist NPS 

Vegetation (Forests and Woodlands, Rangelands, Riparian and Wetlands), Special Status Species (Plants) 

B.S., Biology 
GLOSSARY, REFERENCES CITED, INDEX, AND 

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

1

GLOSSARY

-AActivity Plan: A type of implementation plan (see Implementation plan); an activity plan usually describes multiple 

projects and applies best management practices to meet land use plan objectives. Examples of activity plans 

include interdisciplinary management plans, habitat management plans, recreation area management plans, and 

allotment management plans.

Administrative Use: Official use related to management and resources of the public lands by Federal, State or local 

governments or non-official use sanctioned by an appropriate authorization instrument, such as right-of-way, 

permit, lease, or maintenance agreement.

Administrative Route: routes that are limited to administrative (official or authorized) users only. 

Administrative Purposes: administrative use functions involving regular maintenance or operation of facilities or 

programs.

Air Quality: Refers to standards for various classes of land as designated by the Clean Air Act of 1978.

Air Quality Standards: The allowable concentrations of air pollutants in the ambient (public outdoor) air. National 

ambient air quality standards are based on the air quality criteria and divided into primary standards (allowing 

an adequate margin of safety to protect the public health) and secondary standards (allowing an adequate margin 

of safety to protect the public welfare). Welfare is defined as including (but not limited to) effects on soils, 

water, crops, vegetation, human-made materials, animals, wildlife, weather, visibility, climate, and hazards to 

transportation, as well as effects on economic values and on personal comfort and well-being.

All -Terrain Vehicle (ATV): A wheeled or tracked vehicle, other than a snowmobile or work vehicle, designed 

primarily for recreational use or for the transportation of property or equipment exclusively on undeveloped 

road rights of way, marshland, open country or other unprepared surfaces.

Allotment: An area of land where one or more livestock operators graze their livestock. Allotments generally 

consist of BLM lands but may also include other federally managed, state owned, and private lands. An 

allotment may include one or more separate pastures. Livestock numbers and periods of use are specified for 

each allotment.

Allotment Management Plan: A written program of livestock grazing management, including supportive measures 

if required, designed to attain specific management goals in a grazing allotment.

Amendment: The process for considering or making changes in the terms, conditions, and decisions of approved 

RMPs or MFPs. Usually only one or two issues are considered that involve only a portion of the planning area.

Animal Unit Month (AUM): A standardized measurement of the amount of forage necessary for the sustenance of 

one cow unit or its equivalent for 1 month, approximately 800 pounds of forage.

Appeal: Application for review of an implementation decision by a higher administrative level. 

Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC): Areas within the public lands where special management 

attention is required to: (1) protect and prevent irreparable damage to important historic, cultural, or scenic 

values, fish and wildlife resources, or other natural systems or processes, or (2) protect life and safety from 

natural hazards.

Aspect: (1) the visual first impression of vegetation at a particular time or seen from a specific point. (2) The 

predominant direction of the slope of the land.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

2

Assessment: The act of evaluating and interpreting data and information for a defined purpose.

Avoidance Areas: Areas with sensitive resource values where rights-of-way and Section 302 permits, leases, and 

easements would be strongly discouraged. Authorizations made in avoidance areas would have to be compatible

with the purpose for which the area was designated and not otherwise feasible on lands outside the avoidance 

area.

-BBack Country Byways: A component of the national scenic byway system which focuses primarily on corridors 

along back country roads which have high scenic, historic, archaeologic, 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.

Base Metal: A metal inferior in value to gold and silver, a term generally applied to the commercial metals such as 

copper and lead.

Basin and Range: Topography characterized by a series of tilted fault block mountain ranges and broad intervening 

basins.

Basin and Range Physiographic Province: A province in the southwestern United States characterized by a series 

of tilted fault blocks forming longitudinal ridges or mountains and broad intervening basins.

Beneficial Outcomes: Also referenced as “Recreation Benefits;” improved conditions, maintenance of desired 

conditions, prevention of worse conditions, and the realization of desired experiences. 

Biological Assessment: The gathering and evaluation of information on proposed endangered and threatened 

species and critical habitat and proposed critical habitat. Required when a management action potentially 

conflicts with endangered or threatened species, the biological assessment is the way federal agencies enter into 

formal consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service and describe a proposed action and the consequences to 

the species the action would affect.

Biotic Communities: The assemblage of native and exotic plants and of a particular site or landscape, including 

microorganisms, fungi, algae, vascular and herbaceous plants, invertebrates, and vertebrates. These 

assemblages and their biotic and abiotic relationships serve landscape and watershed functions by promoting 

soil properties supporting water infiltration, recycling and transfer, species survival, and sustainable population 

dynamics.

Biological Crusts (also known as microbiotic, microphytic, cryptogamic, or cryptobiotic crusts/soils): Biological 

communities that form a surface layer or thin crust on some soils. These communities consist of cyanobacteria 

(blue-green bacteria), microfungi, mosses, lichens, and green algae and perform many important functions, 

including fixing nitrogen and carbon, maintaining soil surface stability, and preventing erosion. These crusts are 

slow to recover after disturbance, requiring 40 years or more to recolonize small areas.

Browse: To browse (verb) is to graze a plant; also, browse (noun) is the tender shoots, twigs and leaves of trees and 

shrubs often used as food by livestock and wildlife.

-CCandidate species: Any species included in the Federal Register notice of review being considered for listing as 

threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Canopy: The uppermost layer consisting of the crowns of trees or shrubs in a forest or woodland.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

3

Casual Use: Mining activities that only negligibly disturb federal lands and resources. Casual use generally 

includes the collecting of geochemical, rock, soil, or mineral specimens using hand tools, hand panning, and 

nonmotorized sluicing. It also generally includes use of metal detectors, gold spears, and other battery-operated 

devices for sensing the presence of minerals, and hand and battery-operated drywashers. Casual use does not 

include use of mechanized earth-moving equipment, truck-mounted drilling equipment, suction dredges, 

motorized vehicles in areas designated as closed to off-road vehicles, chemicals, or explosives. It also does not 

include occupancy or operations where the cumulative effects of the activities result in more than negligible 

disturbance.

Categorical Exclusion: A category of actions (identified in agency guidance) that do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment, and for which neither an environmental 

assessment nor an Environmental Impact Statement is required.

Cave Resource: Any naturally occurring void, cavity, recess, or system of interconnected passages beneath the 

surface of the earth or within a cliff or ledge, including any cave resource therein, that is large enough to permit 

a person to enter, whether the entrance is excavated or naturally formed. Also included is any natural pit or 

sinkhole.

Channel: An open conduit either naturally or artificially created which periodically or continuously contains 

moving water or forms a connecting link between two bodies of water.

Chaparral: A vegetation community consisting of dense and often thorny shrubs and small trees.

Clean Air Act: Federal legislation governing air pollution. Prevention of Significant Deterioration above legally 

established levels.

Closed: Generally denotes that an area is not available for a particular use or uses; refer to specific definitions found 

in law, regulations, or policy guidance for application to individual programs. For example, 43 CFR 8340.0-5 

sets forth the specific meaning of “closed” as it relates to off-highway vehicle use, and 43 CFR 8364 defines 

“closed” as it relates to closure and restriction orders.

Closed OHV Area Designation: an area where off-road vehicle use is prohibited. Use of off-road vehicles in closed 

areas may be allowed for certain reasons; however, such use shall be made only with the approval of the 

authorized officer. (43 CFR 8340.0–5 (h))

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR): The official, legal tabulation or regulations directing federal government 

activities.

Collaboration : A cooperative process in which interested parties, often with widely varied interests, work together 

to seek solutions with broad support for managing public and other lands. This may or may not involve an 

agency as a cooperating agency.

Community: An assemblage of plant and animal populations in a common spatial arrangement.

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 structuring and 

implementing management, marketing, monitoring, and administrative actions accordingly.

Conformance: That a proposed action shall be specifically provided for in the land use plan or, if not specifically 

mentioned, shall be clearly consistent with the goals, objectives, or standards of the approved land use plan.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

4

Conservation Agreement: A formal signed agreement between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or National 

Marine Fisheries Service and other parties that implements specific actions, activities, or programs designed to 

eliminate or reduce threats or otherwise improve the status of a species. Conservation agreements can be 

developed at a State, regional, or national level and generally include multiple agencies at both the State and 

Federal level, as well as tribes. Depending on the types of commitments the BLM makes in a conservation 

agreement and the level of signatory authority, plan revisions or amendments may be required prior to signing 

the conservation agreement, or subsequently in order to implement the conservation agreement.

Conservation Strategy: A strategy outlining current activities or threats that are contributing to the decline of a 

species, along with the actions or strategies needed to reverse or eliminate such a decline or threats. 

Conservation strategies are generally developed for species of plants and animals that are designated as BLM 

Sensitive species or that have been determined by the Fish and Wildlife Service or National Marine Fisheries 

Service to be Federal candidates under the Endangered Species Act. 

Consistency: The proposed land use plan does not conflict with officially approved plans, programs, and policies of 

tribes, other Federal agencies, and state, and local governments to the extent practical within Federal law, 

regulation, and policy.

Cooperating Agency: Assists the lead Federal agency in developing an Environmental Analysis or Environmental 

Impact Statement. The Council on Environmental Quality regulations implementing NEPA define a cooperating 

agency as any agency that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise for proposals covered by NEPA (40 CFR 

1501.6). Any tribe or Federal, State, or local government jurisdiction with such qualifications may become a 

cooperating agency by agreement with the lead agency.

Corridor: A wide strip of land within which a proposed linear facility could be located.

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ): An advisory council to the President of the United States established by 

the national Environmental Policy Act of 1969. It reviews Federal programs for their effect on the environment, 

conducts environmental studies, and advises the president on environmental matters.

Cover: Any form of environmental protection that helps an animal stay alive (mainly shelter from weather and 

concealment from predators).

Critical Habitat: An area occupied by a threatened or endangered species on which are found those physical and 

biological features (1) essential to the conservation of the species, and (2) which may require special 

management considerations or protection@. 

Cultural Resources: Nonrenewable elements of the physical and human environment including archaeological 

remains (evidence of prehistoric or historic human activities) and sociocultural values traditionally held by 

ethnic groups (sacred places, traditionally used raw materials, etc.).

Cultural Site: Any location that includes prehistoric and/or historic evidence of human use, or that has important 

sociocultural value.

Cumulative Impact/Effect: The impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the action 

when added to other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal 

or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor 

but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time. 

-DDesignated Roads and Trails: Specific roads and trails identified by the BLM (or other agencies) where some type 

of motorized vehicle use is appropriate and allowed either seasonally or yearlong.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

5

Desired Condition: Description of those factors that should exist within ecosystems both to maintain their survival 

and to meet social and economic needs.

Desired Future Condition: A type of land use plan decision that is a broad statements of desired outcomes for a 

use.

Desired Outcomes: A type of land use plan decision expressed as a goal or objective.

Destination Recreation-Tourism Market: National or regional recreation-tourism visitors and other constituents 

who value public lands as recreation-tourism destinations. Major investments in facilities and visitor assistance 

are authorized within SRMAs where BLM‟s strategy is to target demonstrated destination recreation-tourism 

market demand. Here, recreation management actions are geared toward meeting primary recreation-tourism 

market demand for specific activity, experience, and benefit opportunities. These opportunities are produced 

through maintenance of prescribed natural resource setting character and by structuring and implementing 

management, marketing, monitoring, and administrative actions accordingly.

Director (BLM Director): The national Director of the BLM.

Discovery: The knowledge of the presence of valuable minerals within or close enough to a location to justify a 

reasonable belief in their existence. Discovery is an extremely important to public lands mining because the 

Mining Law of 1872 provides that mining claims can be located only after a discovery is made.

Dispersed/Extensive Recreation: Recreation activities of an unstructured type that are not confined to specific 

locations such as recreation sites. Example of these activities may be hunting, fishing, off-road vehicle use, 

hiking, and sightseeing.

Diversity: The relative abundance of wildlife species, plant species, communities, habitats, or habitat features per 

unit of area.

Drainage: The removal of excess water from land by surface or subsurface flow. 

Drilling: The operation of boring a hole in the earth, usually for the purpose of finding and removing subsurface

formation fluids such as oil and gas.

-EEasement: A right afforded a person or agency to make limited use of another‟s real property for access or other 

purposes.

Ecological Integrity: A measure of the health of the entire area or community based on how much of the original 

physical, biological, and chemical components of the area remain intact.

Ecological Site Inventory (ESI): The basic inventory of present and potential vegetation on BLM rangelands. 

Ecological site inventory uses soils, the existing plant community, and ecological site data to determine the 

appropriate ecological site for a specific area of rangeland.

Ecosystem: A complete, interacting system of living organisms and the land and water that make up their 

environment; the home places of all living things, including humans. 

Ecological Zone: A zone in which similarities in ecological functions and conditions allow for the classification of 

large areas into ecological zones, or geographic areas that may be managed similarly. Ecological zones are 

primarily based on the geology, soils, hydrology, plants, and animals of the area. In many areas, there is a 

gradual gradient between ecological zones. 

Emission: Effluent discharge into the atmosphere, usually specified by mass per unit time.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

6

Endangered Species: A plant or animal species whose prospects for survival and reproduction are in immediate 

jeopardy, as designated by the Secretary of the Interior, and as is further defined by the Endangered Species Act. 

Entry: An application to acquire title to public lands.

Environmental Assessment (EA): A concise public document that analyzes the environmental impacts of a 

proposed federal action and provides sufficient evidence to determine the level of significance of the impacts.

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): A detailed written statement required by the National Environmental 

Policy Act when an agency proposes a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human 

environment.

Ephemeral Stream: A stream that flows only after rains or during snowmelt.

Erosion: The wearing away of the land surface by running water, wind, ice, or other geological agents.

Evaluation (plan evaluation): The process of reviewing the land use plan and the periodic plan monitoring reports

to determine whether the land use plan decisions and NEPA analysis are still valid and whether the plan is being 

implemented.

Exclusion Area: Areas with sensitive resource values where rights-of-way and 302 permits, leases, and easements 

would not be authorized.

Exotic Plant/Vegetation: A plant species that is not native to the region in which it is found, whose introduction 

does or is likely to cause harm to the economy, environment, or human health. Executive Order 11987 more 

broadly defines “exotic” as any species not naturally occurring either presently or historically in an ecosystem in 

the United States. 

Exploration: The work of investigating a mineral deposit to determine by geological surveys, geophysical surveys, 

geochemical surveys, boreholes, pits, and underground workings if it is feasible to mine. 

Explicit Recreation Management Objective: Specifically targeted recreation activity, experience, and benefit 

opportunities (i.e., recreation opportunity outputs) and their attainment (i.e., recreation outcomes). 

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.

-FFederal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976: Public Law 94-579. October 21, 1976, often 

referred to as the BLM‟s Organic Act, which provides the majority of the BLM‟s legislated authority, direction, 

policy, and basic management guidance. 

Federal Register: A daily publication which reports Presidential and Federal Agency documents.

Fire Management Plan: A strategic plan that defines a program to manage wildland and prescribed fires and 

documents the fire management program in the approved land use plan; the plan is supplemented by operational 

procedures such as preparedness plans, preplanned dispatch plans, prescribed fire plans, and prevention plans.

Fire Return Intervals: Time between consecutive wildland fires in a given area; fire frequency. Often described as 

the typical range of years between fires in a healthy, functioning ecosystem.

Floodplain: The relatively flat area or lowlands adjoining a body of standing or flowing water which has been or 

might be covered by floodwater.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

7

Flow Regimes: Characteristics of stream discharge over time. The natural flow regime is the regime that occurred 

historically.

Fluid Minerals: Oil, gas, and geothermal resources.

Forage: All browse and herbaceous foods available to grazing animals, which may be grazed or harvested for 

feeding.

Forb: Herbaceous plant that is not a grass, sedge, or rush.

Formation: A body of rock identified by lithic characteristics and stratigraphic position; it is prevailingly, but not 

necessarily tabular, and is mappable at the earth‟s surface or traceable in the subsurface. 

Fossil: Mineralized or petrified form from a past geologic age, especially from previously living things. 

Free-flowing River: Existing or flowing in a natural condition without impoundment, diversion, straightening, 

rip-rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Fuel Loadings: The amount of fuel present expressed quantitatively in terms of weight of fuel per unit area. This 

may be available fuel (consumable fuel) or total fuel and is usually dry weight.

Fugitive Dust: Airborne particles emitted from any source other than through a stack or vent.

-GGeneral Management Plan: NPS general planning document giving broad guidance to the NPS units, comparable 

to the BLM Resource Management Plan (RMP).

Geographic Information System (GIS): A system of computer hardware, software, data, people and applications 

that capture, store, edit, analyze, and graphically display a potentially wide array of geospatial information.

Geographic Positioning System (GPS): Method of precise location using satellites.

Goal: A broad statement of a desired outcome. Goals are usually not quantifiable and may not have established time 

frames for achievement.

Grazing System: The manipulation of livestock grazing to accomplish a desired result. 

Ground Cover: Vegetation, mulch, litter, rock, etc.

Groundwater: Water contained in pore spaces of consolidated and unconsolidated surface material. 

Guidelines: Actions or management practices that may be used to achieve desired outcomes, sometimes expressed as 

best management practices. Guidelines may be identified during the land use planning process, but they are not 

considered a land use plan decision unless the plan specifies that they are mandatory.

Gully: A channel formed in the soil surface by ephemeral running water, usually considered to be more than 1 foot 

deep.

Gully Erosion: The removal of soil by the forming of relatively large gullies or channels cut into the soil by 

concentrated surface runoff.

-HHabitat: A specific set of physical conditions that surround a species, group of species, or a large community. In 

wildlife management, the major constituents of habitat are considered to be food, water, cover, and living space.

Habitat Improvements: See Vegetation Treatments
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

8

Habitat Manipulation: See Vegetation Manipulation

Herbaceous: Pertaining to or characteristic of an herb (fleshy-stem plant) as distinguished from the woody tissue of 

shrubs and trees.

Historic: Period of human occupation defined when the written record appeared (usually at the time of 

Euroamerican colonization or expansion in the Western Hemisphere), based primarily upon European roots.

Historic Property: Historic or archaeological site which qualifies for listing on the National Register of Historic 

Places.

-IIgneous Rock: Rock, such as granite and basalt, which has solidified from a molten or partially molten state.

Impact: A modification of the existing environment caused by an action (such as construction or operation of 

facilities).

Impacts (or Effects): Environmental consequences (the scientific and analytical basis for comparison of 

alternatives) as a result of a proposed action. Effects may be either direct, which are caused by the action and 

occur at the same time and place, or indirect, which are caused by the action and are later in time or farther 

removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable, or cumulative.

Implementation Decisions: Decisions that take action to implement land use plan decisions. They are generally 

appealable to Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) under 43 CFR 4.410.

Implementation Plan: An area or site-specific plan written to implement decisions made in a land use plan. 

Implementation plans include both activity plans and project plans (they are types of implementation plans). 

Examples of implementation plans include interdisciplinary management plans, habitat management plans, and 

allotment management plans.Increments: Maximum allowable increases over legally established baseline 

concentrations of pollutants covered by the Prevention of Significant Deterioration provisions designated as 

Class I, II, and III areas.

Indian Tribe: Any American Indian group in the United States that the Secretary of the Interior recognizes as 

possessing tribal status (listed periodically in the Federal Register).

Indicator Species: A species of animal or plant whose presence is a fairly certain indication of a particular set of 

environmental conditions. Indicator species serve to show the effects of development actions on the 

environment.

Indirect Impacts: Secondary effects that occur in locations other than the initial action or later in time.

Inholding: Private or state administered land surrounded by Federally administered lands.

Infiltration: The downward entry of water into the soil or other material.

Infrastructure: The facilities, services, and equipment needed for a community to function including roads, sewers, 

water lines, police and fire protection, and schools.

Interdisciplinary Team: A group of individuals with different training, representing the physical sciences, social 

sciences, and environmental design arts, assembled to solve a problem or perform a task. The members of the 

team proceed to a solution with frequent interaction so that each discipline may provide insights to any stage of 

the problem and disciplines may combine to provide new solutions. The number and disciplines of the members 

preparing the plan vary with circumstances. A member may represent one or more discipline or Bureau program 

interest. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

9

Interim Management Policy: Policy that guides management of existing Wilderness Study Areas. The policy 

balances the various uses of Wilderness Study Areas with the requirement to protect the lands wilderness values.

Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA): The Department of the Interior, Office of Hearings and Appeals board 

that acts for the Secretary of the Interior in responding to appeals of decisions on the use and disposition of 

public lands and resources. Because the Interior Board of Land Appeals acts for and on behalf of the Secretary 

of the Interior, its decisions usually represent the Department‟s final decision but are subject to the courts. 

Invasive Species: With respect to a particular ecosystem, any animal or plant that is not native to that ecosystem 

whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm, or harm to human health. 

Invertebrates: Animals without backbones or internal bony skeletons.

-JJurisdiction: The legal right to control or regulate use of a transportation facility. Jurisdiction requires authority, 

but not necessarily ownership.

-KKarst: A region with underground drainage and many cavities, underlain by limestone in which erosion has formed 

sinkholes, fissures, caverns, and underground streams.

-LLand 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 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 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 outlined in 43 CFR 1600, regardless of the scale at which the decisions were 

developed. The term includes both RMPs and MFPs.

Land Use Plan Decision: establishes desired outcomes and actions needed to achieve them. Decisions are reached 

using the BLM planning process in 43 CFR 1600. When they are presented to the public as proposed decisions, 

they can be protested to the BLM Director. They are not appealable to IBLA.

Leasable Minerals: Those minerals or materials designated as leasable under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. 

They include coal, phosphate, asphalt, sulphur, potassium, and sodium minerals, and oil, gas, and geothermal.

Lease: (1) A legal document that conveys to an operator the right to drill for oil and gas; (2) the tract of land, on 

which a lease has been obtained, where producing wells and production equipment are located.

Lease Notice: Provides more detailed information concerning limitations that already exist in law, lease terms, 

regulations, and operational orders. A Lease Notice also addresses special items the lessee would consider when 

planning operations, but does not impose new or additional restrictions

Lease Stipulation: A modification of the terms and conditions on a standard lease form at the time of the lease sale.

Lentic: Standing water habitats, as in lakes, ponds, bog, marshes, or meadows.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

10

Limited Area: 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.

Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC): A framework for establishing acceptable and appropriate resource and social 

conditions in recreation settings. A system of management planning. 

Litter: The uppermost layer of organic debris on the soil surface, essentially the freshly fallen or slightly 

decomposed vegetal material.

Livestock Operation: The management of a ranch or farm so that a significant portion of the income is derived 

from the production 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.

Location: The act of taking or appropriating a parcel of mineral land, including the posting of notices, the recording

thereof when required, and marking the boundaries so they can be readily traced; also the claim acquired by an 

act of location.

Lotic: Running water habitats such as rivers, streams, and springs.

-MMaintenance: The work required keeping a facility in such a condition that it may be continuously utilized at its 

original or designed capacity and efficiency, and for its intended purposes. (Road or trail maintenance actions 

include a) signage, b) minor repairs: e.g. correction of drainage, erosion, or vegetation interference problems. 

Upon condition assessment performance, maintenance could also be construed as c) allowing road or trail to 

remain in present state for regular and continuous use.)

Management Decision: A decision made by the BLM or NPS to manage public lands. Management decisions 

include both land use plan decisions and implementation decisions.

Management Practices: Any actions or practices that improve or maintain basic soil and vegetation resources, and 

better manage livestock. Management practices typically consist of Rangeland Improvements AMPs that 

establish and grazing systems: seasons-of-use, utilization levels, stocking rate etc., which allows the achievement 

of standards in conformance with the guidelines.

Metamorphic Rock: Any rock derived from preexisting rocks by mineralogical, chemical, and structural changes, 

essentially in the solid state, in response to marked changes in temperature, pressure, shearing stress, and 

chemical environment at depth in the earth‟s crust.

Mineral: Any solid or fluid inorganic substance that can be extracted from the earth for profit.

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 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.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

11

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) and development.

Minimize: To reduce the adverse impact of an operation to the lowest practical level.

Mining Claim: A parcel of land that a miner takes and holds for mining purposes, having acquired the right of 

possession by complying with the Mining Law and local laws and rules. A single mining claim may contain as 

many adjoining locations as the locator may make or buy. There are four categories of mining claims: lode, 

placer, millsite, and tunnel site.

Mining Location: A mining claim on public lands.

Mitigation Measures: Methods or procedures that reduce or lessen the impacts of an action. 

Monitoring: The periodic observation and orderly collection of data on 1) changing conditions of public land 

related to management actions and 2) the effects of implementing decisions.

Modification: A change in a Plan of Operations that requires some level of review by BLM because it exceeds what 

was described in the approved Plan of Operations. 

Monitoring (plan monitoring): The process of tracking the implementation of land use plan decisions and 

collecting and assessing data/information necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of land use planning decisions.

Mosaic Pattern: The intermingling of plant communities and their successional stages in such a manner as to give 

the impression of an interwoven design.

Multiple Use: The management of the public lands and their various resource values so that they are used in the 

combination that will best meet the present and future needs of the American people; the use of some lands for 

less than all of the resources; a combination of balanced and diverse resource uses that takes into account the 

long term needs of future generations for renewable and nonrenewable resources, including but not limited to, 

recreation, range, timber, minerals, watershed, wildlife and fish, and natural scenic, scientific and historical 

values; and harmonious and coordinated management of the various resources without permanent impairment of 

the productivity of the lands and the quality of the environment with consideration being given to the relative 

values of the resources and not necessarily to the combination of uses that will give the greatest economic return 

or greatest unit output.

-NNational Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969: An Act that encourages productive and enjoyable harmony 

between man and his environment and promotes efforts to prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and 

biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man; enriches the understanding or the ecological systems and 

natural resources important to the Nation, and establishes the Council on Environmental Quality.

National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS): A system of Congressional, Presidential, or other designated 

areas managed by the BLM, the components of which include National Monuments, National Conservation 

Areas, Wilderness Areas, Wilderness Study Areas, Wild and Scenic Rivers, National Historic Trails, National 

Scenic Trails, the California Desert Conservation Area, and the Headwaters Forest Reserve.

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP): A register of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects, 

significant in American history, architecture, archaeology and culture, established by the National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966 and maintained by the Secretary of the Interior. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

12

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, historic, 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, Plant or Vegetation: A species that, with respect to a particular ecosystem, historically occurred or 

currently occurs in that ecosystem. Executive Order 11987 more broadly defines “native” as any species 

naturally occurring either presently or historically in any ecosystem of the United States.

Naturalness: For designated wilderness character: An area which generally appears to have been affected primarily 

by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man‟s work substantially unnoticeable (From Section 2(c), 

Wilderness Act). For wilderness characteristics: 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. 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.

Negligible Impact: Impact that is small in magnitude and importance and is difficult or impossible to quantify 

relative to those occurring naturally or due to other actions.

No Surface Occupancy: A fluid minerals leasing constraint that prohibits occupancy or disturbance on all or part of 

the lease surface to protect special values or uses. Lessees may exploit the fluid mineral resources under the 

leases restricted by this constraint through use of directional drilling from sites outside the area.

No Surface Disturbance: In general, this applies to an area where an activity is allowed so long as it does not 

disturb the surface.

Non-native: A species that is not a part of the original flora or fauna of the area in question (synonymous with 

introduced flora or fauna).

Non-Native Invasive Species: Species that were not components of pre-European settlement vegetative 

communities: which have been introduced, either deliberately or inadvertently; which have the capacity to 

aggressively invade new habitats, displacing and out-competing native species, and; whose introduction does or 

is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health.

Notice: The notification a mining operator must submit to BLM of the intention to begin an operation that will 

disturb 5 acres or less a year within a mining claim or project area. The intent of a Notice is to permit operations 

with limited geographic disturbance to begin after a quick review for potential resource conflicts and to 

eliminate the need for federal action. A Notice requires no special forms, but an operator must submit specific 

information. BLM must complete its review of the Notice within 15 calendar days of its receipt unless more 

information is needed to determine if the operation would cause unnecessary or undue degradation.

Noxious Weeds: A plant species designated by Federal or State law as generally possessing one or more of the 

following characteristics: aggressive and difficult to manage; parasitic; a carrier or host of serious insects or 

disease; or nonnative, new, or not common to the United States. 
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

13

-OObjective: A description of a desired outcome for a resource. Objectives can be quantified and measured and, 

where possible, have established time frames for achievement.

Official Use: Use by an employee, agent, or designated representative of the Federal Government or one of its 

contractors, in the course of his employment, agency, or representation. Also, use by an employee of the State 

agency having lands or responsible for managing resources within the Planning Area after consultation, 

cooperation and coordination with the BLM and/or NPS. 

Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV)(off-road vehicle): Any motorized vehicle capable of, or designed for, travel on or 

immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain, excluding: (1) any nonamphibious registered motorboat; 

(2) any military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle while being used for emergency purposes; (3) any 

vehicle whose use is expressly authorized by the authorized officer, or otherwise officially approved; (4) 

vehicles in official use; and (5) any combat or combat support vehicle when used for national defense (43 CFR 

8340.0-5 (a)).

Off-target: Recreation actions that promote a different market than the specific targeted primary recreation-tourism 

market for a given SRMA and/or the specified recreation niche for a RMZ within an SRMA.

Open: Generally denotes that an area is available for a particular use or uses. Refer to specific program definitions 

found in law, regulations, or policy guidance for application to individual programs. 

Open OHV Area Designation: An area where all types of vehicle use is permitted at all times, anywhere in the area 

subject to the operating regulations and vehicle standards set forth in subparts 8341 and 8342 of title 43 CFR. 

(43 CFR 8340.0-5 (f))

Operator: Any person who has taken formal responsibility for the operations conducted on the leased lands.

Ore: A mineral deposit of high enough quality to be mined at a profit.

Outstanding Opportunities for Solitude: For designated wilderness: Superior or excellent condition favorable for 

avoiding the sights, sounds, and evidence of other people in the area or for attaining a state of being alone or 

remote from others. A lonely or secluded place. For manage for wilderness characteristics: when the sights, 

sounds, and evidence of other people are rare or infrequent (and) where visitors can be isolated, alone or 

secluded from others.

Outstanding Opportunities for Primitive/Unconfined Recreation: For designated wilderness: Superior or 

excellent situations favorable for non-motorized, non-mechanical (except as provided by law), and undeveloped 

types of recreation activities. Provides dispersed, undeveloped recreation, either through the diversity in the 

number of primitive and unconfined recreational activities possible in the area or the outstanding quality of one 

opportunity. For manage for wilderness characteristics: where the use of the area is through non-motorized, 

non-mechanical means, and where no or minimal developed recreation facilities are encountered.

Overstory: The layer of foliage in a forest canopy.

-PPaleontological Resources (Fossils): The physical remains of plants and animals preserved in soils and sedimentary 

rock formations. 

Paleontology: A science dealing with the life forms of past geological periods as known from fossil remains. 

Patent: The instrument by which the Federal Government conveys title to the public lands.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

14

Percentage of Use: Grazing use of current vegetation growth, usually expressed as a percentage of volume 

removed. 

Perennial Stream: A stream that flows continuously during all seasons of the year.

Perennial Vegetation: Plants that have a life cycle of 3 or more years.

Period of Use: The time of livestock grazing on a range area based on type of vegetation or stage of vegetative 

growth. 

Permitted Use: The forage allocated by, or under the guidance of, an applicable land use plan for livestock grazing 

in an allotment under a permit or lease; expressed in Animal Unit Months.

Phreatophyte: A plant that absorbs its water from a permanent supply in the ground. 

Physiographic Province: A region defined by a unified geologic history and a characteristic geologic structure and 

climate that differs from adjoining regions.

Plan: A document that contains a set of comprehensive, long range decisions concerning the use and management of 

Bureau and Park administered resources in a specific geographic area. 

Plan of Development: A mandatory plan, developed by an applicant of a mining operation or construction project 

that specifies the techniques and measures to be used during construction and operation of all project facilities 

on public land. The plan is submitted for approval to the appropriate Federal agency before any construction 

begins.

Plan of Operations: A plan for mining exploration and development that an operation must submit to BLM for 

approval when more than 5 acres a year will be disturbed or when an operator plans to work in an area of critical 

environmental concern or a wilderness area. A Plan of Operations must document in detail all actions that the 

operator plans to take from exploration through reclamation.

Planning Analysis: A process using appropriate resource data and NEPA analysis to provide a basis for decisions 

in areas not yet covered by an RMP.

Planning Area: A geographical area for which land use and resource management plans are developed and 

maintained.

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.

Population: Within a species, a distinct group of individuals that tend to mate only with members of the group. 

Because of generations of inbreeding, members of a population tend to have similar genetic characteristics.

Porosity: A rock, soil, or other material‟s property of containing interstices. Porosity is commonly expressed as a 

percentage of the bulk volume of a material occupied by interstices. 

Potential Wild and Scenic River: A flowing body of water or estuary or a section, portion, or tributary thereof, 

including rivers, streams, creeks, runs, kills, rills, and small lakes.

Prehistoric: Refers to the period wherein American Indian cultural activities took place before written records and 

not yet influenced by contact with nonnative culture(s).

Prescribed Fire: The introduction of fire to an area under regulated conditions for specific management purposes. 

Project Plan: Detailed survey and design plan.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

15

Project Area: The area of land upon which an operator conducts mining operations, including the area needed for 

building or maintaining of roads, transmission lines, pipelines, or other means of access.

Project Plan: A type of implementation plan (see implementation plan). A project plan typically addresses 

individual projects or several related projects. Examples of project plans include prescribed burn plans, trail 

plans, and recreation site plans.

Protest: Application for review of a land use plan decision by a higher administrative level.

Public Land: Land or interest in land owned by the United States and administered by the Secretary of the Interior 

through the BLM without regard to how the United States acquired ownership, except lands located on the Outer 

Continental Shelf, and land held for the benefit of Indians, Aleuts, and Eskimos.

Public Use Site: Any cultural property found to be appropriate for use as an interpretive exhibit in place, or for 

related educational and recreational uses by member of the general public.

-QQuarry: An open or surface working, usually for the extraction of stone, slate, limestone, etc.

-RRange Development: A structure, excavation, treatment or development to rehabilitate, protect, or improve public 

lands to advance range betterment.

Rangeland: Land used for grazing by livestock and big game animals on which vegetation is dominated by grasses, 

grass-like plants, forbs, or shrubs.

Range Improvements: Any activity or program, structural or nonstructural, on or relating to rangelands that is 

designed to improve forage production, change vegetation composition, control patterns of use, provide water, 

stabilize soil and water conditions, and enhance habitat for livestock, wildlife. Rangeland improvements include 

land treatments (e.g., chaining, seeding, burning, chemical, etc.), stockwater developments, fences, corrals, and 

trails etc.

Raptor: Bird of prey with sharp talons and strongly curved beaks such as hawks, owls, vultures, and eagles.

Reach: A specified length of a stream or channel.

Recharge Area: An area that absorbs water that eventually reaches the zone of saturation in one or more aquifers.

Reclamation: The process of stabilizing disturbed areas to protect both disturbed and adjacent undisturbed areas 

from unnecessary degradation and returning the disturbed area to a condition approximate or equal to that which 

existed prior to disturbance, or to a stable and productive condition compatible with the land use plan.

Record of Decision (ROD): A document signed by a responsible official recording a decision that was preceded by 

the preparing of an environmental impact statement.

Recreation Experiences: Psychological outcomes realized either by recreation-tourism participants as a direct 

result of their onsite leisure engagements and recreation-tourism activity participation or by non-participating 

community residents as a result of their interaction with visitors and guests within their community and/or 

interaction with the BLM and other public and private recreation-tourism providers and their actions.

Recreation Management Zones (RMZ): 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.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

16

Recreation Niche: The place or position within the strategically targeted recreation-tourism market for each SRMA 

that is most suitable (i.e., capable of producing certain specific kinds of recreation opportunities) and 

appropriate (i.e., most responsive to identified visitor or resident customers), given available supply and current 

demand, for the production of specific recreation opportunities and the sustainable maintenance of 

accompanying natural resource and/or community setting character.

Recreation Opportunities: Favorable circumstances enabling visitor‟s engagement in a leisure activity to realize 

immediate psychological experiences and attain more lasting, value-added beneficial outcomes. 

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS): One of the existing tools for classifying recreation environments 

(existing and desired) along a continuum ranging from primitive, low-use, and inconspicuous administration to 

urban, high-use, and a highly visible administrative presence. This continuum recognizes variation among 

various components of any landscape‟s physical, social and administrative attributes; and resulting descriptions 

(of existing conditions) and prescriptions (of desired future conditions) define recreation setting character.

Recreation River: 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

Recreation Setting Character Conditions: The distinguishing recreational qualities of any landscape, objectively 

defined along a continuum ranging from primitive to urban landscapes, expressed in terms of the nature of the 

component parts of its physical, social and administrative attributes. These recreational qualities can be both 

classified and mapped. This classification and mapping process should be based on variation that either exists 

(i.e., setting descriptions) or is desired (i.e., setting prescriptions) among component parts of the various 

physical, social, and administrative attributes of any landscape. The recreation opportunity spectrum is one of 

the existing tools for doing this.

Recreation Settings: The collective, distinguishing attributes of landscapes that influence, and 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 businesses, 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 use plans strategically identify primary recreation-tourism markets for each SRMA- destination, 

community, or undeveloped.

Recreation Use Permit: Recreation Use Permits (RUPs) are authorizations for the use of developed facilities which 

meet the fee criteria established by the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (LWCFA) of 1964, as amended 

or subsequent authority. RUPs are issued to ensure that the people of the United States receive a fair and 

equitable return for the use of these facilities to help recover the cost of construction, operation, maintenance, 

administration, and management of the permits.

Rehabilitation: Effort undertaken to repair or improve damaged lands (such as from wildfire) unlikely to recover 

naturally to management approved conditions, utilizing native and or nonnative plant species to obtain a stable 

plant community that will protect the burned area from erosion and invasion by weeds.

Research Natural Area: An area where natural processes predominate and which is preserved for research and 

education. Research Natural Areas must meet the relevance and importance criteria of Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern and are designated as Areas of Critical Environmental Concern.

Resource Advisory Council (RAC): A council established by the Secretary of the Interior to provide advice or 

recommendations to BLM management. In some states, provincial advisory councils (PACs) are functional 

equivalents of RACs.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

17

Resource Management Plan (RMP): A land use plan as prescribed by the Federal Land Policy and Management 

Act which establishes, for a given area of land, land-use allocations, coordination guidelines for multiple-use, 

objectives and actions to be achieved.

Restoration: The process of returning ecological integrity to the area, and to obtain a plant community that is 

similar in appearance and function to the historic community. 

Revision: The process of completely rewriting the land use plan due to changes in the planning area affecting major 

portions of the plan or the entire plan.

Right-of-way (ROW): A permit or an easement which authorizes the use of public lands for certain specified 

purposes, commonly for pipelines, roads, telephone lines, electric lines, reservoirs, etc.; also, the lands covered 

by such an easement or permit. 

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. 

Rill: A channel formed in the soil surface by ephemeral running water, usually considered to be less than 1 foot 

deep.

Riparian Area: A form of wetland transition between permanently saturated wetlands and upland areas. Riparian 

areas exhibit vegetation or physical characteristics that reflect the influence of permanent surface or subsurface 

water. Typical riparian areas include lands along, adjacent to, or contiguous with perennially and intermittently 

flowing rivers and streams, glacial potholes, and the shores of lakes and reservoirs with stable water levels. 

Excluded are ephemeral streams or washes that lack vegetation and depend on free water in the soil.

River Classification: The process whereby designated rivers are classified as wild, scenic and/or recreational 

according to criteria established in Section 2(b) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. 

River Designation: The process whereby rivers are added to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System by an act 

of Congress or by administrative action of the Secretary of the Interior with regard to state-designated rivers 

under Section 2(a)(ii) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.

River Eligibility: Qualification of a river for inclusion into the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System through the 

determination (professional judgment) that it is free-flowing and, with its adjacent land area, possesses at least 

one river-related value considered to be outstandingly remarkable.

River Suitability: Referring to a river's suitability for Congress to designate is as a National Wild and Scenic River.

Riverine: A system of wetlands that includes all wetland and deep-water habitats contained within a channel that 

lacks trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, and emergent mosses or lichens.

Road: As used herein, a transportation facility used primarily by vehicles having four or more wheels, documented 

as such by the owner, and maintained* for regular and continuous use. (*See “maintenance” definition)

Rock Art: Petroglyphs or pictographs; rock incisions, carvings, or paintings placed on rocks.

Rock shelter: Naturally-formed recess in a rock formation which provided shelter to prehistoric occupants. 

Rotation: A technique performed while cementing, whereby casing is rotated in the hole in order to move the 

cement slurry uniformly around the casing to eliminate channeling and provide an effective cement bond on the 

casing and formation walls.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

18

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.

Route Designation: an implementation level decision that determines a designation status for an inventoried route, 

resulting from the use of the Route Evaluation Tree© in the land use planning process. One of five designations 

are possible:

1) Close: A route that is permanently closed to all use. Physical closure includes restoring (by natural or 

mechanical means) the travelway to the degree possible to blend with surrounding landscape, as well as 

installation of physical barriers and signing at the original departure point, if necessary.

2) Mitigate Limit: A route that is limited to use by certain parties or entities with valid, vested, or implied 

rights of access, or to certain vehicle types, seasons of use, etc., in concert with mitigation action(s) 

aimed at reducing/eliminating certain estimated impacts identified during the route designation process.

3) Limit: A route that is limited to use by certain parties or entities with valid, vested, or implied rights of 

access, or to certain vehicle types, seasons of use, etc.

4) Mitigate Open: A route that is open for all uses, in concert with mitigation action(s) aimed at 

monitoring/reducing/eliminating certain estimated impacts identified during the route designation 

process.

5) Open: A route that is open for all uses.

Runoff: The water that flows on the land surface from an area in response to rainfall or snowmelt.

-SSalable Minerals: Common variety minerals on the public lands, such as sand and gravel, which are used mainly 

for construction and are disposed of by sales or special permits to local governments.

Salinity: A measure of the mineral substances dissolved in water. 

Scale: Refers to the geographic area and data resolution under examination in an assessment or planning effort.

Scenic Quality: Scenic quality is described as the visual appeal of an area. Scenery is classified as A, B, or C, with 

A being the highest scenic quality. The rating is based on seven key factors: landform, vegetation, water, color, 

adjacent scenery, scarcity, and cultural modifications.

Scenic River: A river or section of a river that is free of impoundments and whose shorelines are largely 

undeveloped but accessible in places by roads. 

Scoping: The process of identifying the range of issues, management concerns, preliminary alternatives, and other 

components of an environmental impact statement or land-use planning document. It involves both internal and 

public viewpoints. 

Season-long Use: Grazing throughout the growing period, with little or no effort to control the amount of 

distribution of livestock use in area/pasture/allotments.

Seasonal Grazing: Grazing use throughout a specific season. 

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.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

19

Section 106 Compliance: The requirement of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act that any project 

funded, licensed, permitted, or assisted by the Federal Government be reviewed for impacts to historic 

properties and that the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation be 

allowed to comment on a project.

Sediment: Soil, rock particles and organic or other debris carried from one place to another by wind, water or 

gravity. 

Sedimentary Rock: Rock resulting from consolidation of loose sediment that has accumulated in layers.

Sedimentation: The process or action of depositing sediment.

Segregation: Any act such as a withdrawal or exchange that suspends the operation of the public land laws.

Sensitive Species: All species that are under status review, have small or declining populations, live in unique 

habitats, or need special management. Sensitive species include threatened, endangered, and proposed species 

as classified by the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service. 

Seral: Pertaining to the successional stages of biotic communities.

Setting Character: The condition of any recreation system, objectively defined along a continuum ranging from 

primitive to urban in terms of variation of its component physical, social, and administrative attributes. 

Shrub: A low, woody plant, usually with several stems, that may provide food and/or cover for animals. 

Significant: An effect that is analyzed in the context of the proposed action to determine the degree or magnitude of 

importance of the effect, either beneficial or adverse. The degree of significance can be related to other actions 

with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts.

Slope: The degree of deviation of a surface from the horizontal.

Soil Compaction: Increasing the soil bulk density, and concomitantly decreasing the soil porosity, by the 

application of mechanical compression forces to the soil.

Soil Productivity: The capacity of a soil to produce a plant or sequence of plants under a system of management.

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.

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 marketdestination, community, or undeveloped.

Special Recreation Permit: Special Recreation Permits (SRPs) are authorizations which allow for recreational uses 

of the public lands and related waters. They are issued as a means to control visitor use, protect recreational and 

natural resources, provide for the health and safety of visitors. Commercial SRPs are also issued as a mechanism 

to provide a fair return for the commercial recreational use of public lands.

Special Status Species: Includes proposed species, listed species, and candidate species under the ESA; State-listed 

species; and BLM State Director-design. sensitive species (BLM Manual 6840, Special Status Species Policy).
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

20

Species Composition: A term relating the relative abundance of one plant species to another using a common 

measurement; the proportion (percentage) of various species in relation to the total on a given area.

Species Diversity: The number, different kinds of, and relative abundances of species present in a given area.

Split Estate: Land whose surface rights and mineral rights are owned by different entities. Such a condition 

commonly occurs when surface rights are owned by the Federal Government and the mineral rights are privately 

or state owned.

Standard: A description of the physical and biological conditions or degree of function required for healthy, 

sustainable lands (e.g., land health standards). To be expressed as a desired outcome (goal).

Standard Lease Terms and Conditions: Areas may be open to leasing with no specific management decisions 

defined in a Resource Management Plan.

Stipulations: Requirements that are part of the terms of a mineral lease. Some stipulations are standard on all 

Federal leases. Other stipulations may be applied to the lease at the discretion of the surface management agency 

to protect valuable surface resources and uses.

Strategic Plan: A plan that establishes the overall direction for the BLM. This plan is guided by the requirements of 

the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, covers a 5-year period, and is updated every 3 years. It 

is consistent with FLPMA and other laws affecting the public lands. 

Structural Characteristics: The vegetative structure of a group of plants, vegetative structure is the form or 

appearance of a stand and can include plant size (height and diameter), arrangement of plants in the landscape in 

both the horizontal and vertical dimensions, stem density, percent cover, and other measures of biomass 

quantity. 

Summer Range: Range that is grazed mainly during the summer growing season. 

Surface Erosion: Erosion that removes materials from the surface of the land as distinguished from gully, or channel 

erosion.

Sustained Yield: Maintenance of an annual or regular periodic output of a renewable resource from public land 

consistent with the principles of multiple use.

-TTake: 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.‟

Threatened Species: Any plant or animal species defined under the Endangered Species Act as likely to become 

endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range; listings are 

published in the Federal Register.

Traditional Cultural Property (TCP): A tangible place important to a community today and has been important to 

that community for at least 50 years. It has integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, 

feeling, and association and has definable boundaries. Not all TCPs are eligible or listed on the National 

Register of Historic Places.

Trail (interagency definition): Linear route managed for human powered, stock, or OHV forms of recreation or for 

historic or heritage values. Trails are not generally managed for use by four wheel drive or high clearance 

vehicles.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

21

Travel Management Areas (TMA): Polygons or delineated areas where a rational approach has been taken to 

classify areas open, closed, or limited, and have identified and/or designated network of roads, trails, ways, and 

other routes that provide for public access and travel across the planning area. All designated travel routes 

within travel management areas should have a clearly identified need and purpose as well as clearly defined 

activity types, modes of travel, and seasons or timeframes for allowable access or other limitations.

Travel Management Network: a system of areas, roads, trails and/or, ways that addresses all resource use aspects 

(recreational, traditional, casual, agricultural, industrial, educational etc.) and accompanying modes and 

conditions of travel on the public lands. 

Treatment: Any management practice or procedure applied to a resource to achieve desired results.

-UUndeveloped Recreation-Tourism Market: National, regional, and/or local recreation-tourism visitors, 

communities, or other constituents who value public lands for the distinctive kinds of dispersed recreation 

produced by the vast size and largely open, undeveloped character of their recreation settings. Major 

investments in facilities are excluded within SRMAs where BLM‟s strategy is to target demonstrated 

undeveloped recreation-tourism market demand. Here, recreation management actions are geared toward 

meeting primary recreation-tourism market demand to sustain distinctive recreation setting characteristics; 

however, major investments in visitor services are authorized both to sustain those distinctive setting 

characteristics and to maintain visitor freedom to choose where to go and what to do in response to 

demonstrated demand for undeveloped recreation. 

Uplands: Lands at higher elevations than alluvial plains or low stream terraces; all lands outside the riparianwetland and aquatic zones.

Utilization (rangeland): The proportion of the current year‟s forage production that is consumed or destroyed by 

grazing animals. Utilization is usually expressed as a percentage.

-VValid Existing Rights: Locatable mineral development rights that existed when the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act was enacted on October 21, 1976. Some areas are segregated from entry and location under 

the Mining Law to protect certain values or allow certain uses. Mining claims that existed as of the effective 

date of the segregation may still be valid if they can meet the test of discovery of a valuable mineral required 

under the Mining Law. Determining the validity of mining claims located in segregated lands requires BLM to 

conduct a validity examination and is called a „valid existing rights‟ determination.

Vegetation Community: An assemblage of plant populations in a common spatial arrangement.

Vegetation Treatments: Land treatment projects undertaken to alter the existing vegetation communities, designed 

to improve the production of species desired.

Vegetation Manipulation: Altering existing vegetation communities to ensure production of the species desired.

Vegetation Type: A plant community with distinguishable characteristics described by dominant vegetation present.

Vegetation Habitat Management Area (VHA) – priority vegetation areas, riparian, previously defined habitat 

management areas, ESA conservation/recovery areas

Viable: Capable of sustaining a healthy and reproducing population over a long period of time.

Visitor Day: 12 visitor hours, which may be aggregated continuously, intermittently, or simultaneously by one or 

more people.
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

22

Visual Resource Management (VRM) Classes: Categories assigned to public lands based on scenic quality, 

sensitivity level, and distance zones. There are four classes. Each class has an objective which prescribes the 

amount of change allowed in the characteristic landscape.

Visual Resources: The visible physical features of a landscape (topography, water, vegetation, animals, structures, 

and other features) that constitute the scenery of an area.

-WWaiver: Permanent exemption from a lease stipulation. The stipulation no longer applies anywhere within the 

leasehold.

Water Quality: The chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of water with respect to its suitability for a 

particular use.

Water Table: The surface in a groundwater body where the water pressure is atmospheric. It is the level at which 

water stands in a well that penetrates the water body just far enough to hold standing water.

Watershed: All lands enclosed by a continuous hydrologic drainage divide that lay upslope from a specific point on 

a stream.

Wetlands: Areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water often and long enough to support and 

under normal circumstances do support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted to saturated soil conditions.

Wild Horses and Burros: All unbranded and unclaimed horses and burros using public lands as all or part of their 

habitat.

Wild River: Those rivers or sections of rivers free of impoundments and generally inaccessible except by trail, with 

watershed or shorelines essentially primitive and waters unpolluted. They represent vestiges of primitive 

America.

Wild, Scenic, or Recreational River: Three classes that is traditionally referred to as a “Wild and Scenic River.” 

Designated river segments are classified as wild, scenic and/or recreational, the segments cannot overlap.

Wilderness: A congressionally designated area of undeveloped federal land retaining its primeval character and 

influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, that is protected and managed to preserve its 

natural conditions and that (1) generally appears to have been affected mainly by the forces of nature, with 

human imprints substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and 

unconfined type of recreation; (3) has at least 5,000 acres or is large enough to make practical its preservation 

and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of 

scientific, educational, scenic, or historic value.

Wilderness Character: Key qualities of a designated wilderness or wilderness study area are listed in section 2(c) 

of the “Wilderness Act of 1964” and were used by BLM in its original wilderness inventory. Those qualities 

include size, naturalness, outstanding opportunities for solitude, and outstanding opportunities for primitive and 

unconfined type of recreation. Other qualities may include ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, 

educational, scenic, or historic value.

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.” (BLM I.M. 

2003-275) These features are not part of designated wilderness areas (WA) or wilderness study areas (WSA).
Arizona Strip Field Office Glossary

Approved Resource Management Plan

23

Wilderness Study Area (WSA): A designation made during the official BLM wilderness review period and through 

the land use planning process of a roadless area found to have wilderness character as described in Section 2 (c) 

of the Wilderness Act of 1964.

Wildfire: A fire on wildlands not meeting management objectives and thus requiring a suppression response.

Wildland: An area is which development is essentially non-existent, except for roads, railroads, powerlines, and 

similar transportation facilities. Structures, if any, are widely scattered.

Wildland Fire: Any fire occurring on the wildlands, regardless of ignition source, damages, or benefits. 

Wildland Fire Situation Analysis: A decision-making process that evaluates alternative management strategies 

against selected safety, environmental, social, economical, political, and resource management objectives as 

selection criteria.

Wildland Fire Use: Wildland fire used to protect, maintain, and enhance resources and, when possible, allowed to 

function in its natural ecological role. Use of fire will be based on approved Fire Management Plans and will 

follow specific prescriptions contained in operational plans.

Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI): Wildland-Urban Interface is the line, area, or zone where structures and other 

human developments meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuels. 

Wildlife Habitat Management Areas (WHA) Bighorn sheep, antelope, priority wildlife areas, riparian, previously 

defined habitat man. areas, ESA conservation/recovery areas, desert tortoise, critical deer winter range, etc.

Winter Range: Range that is grazed during winter.

Withdrawal (Minerals): An action that restricts the use of public lands by removing them from the operation of 

some or all of the public land or mining laws.

Withdrawal (Water): The withholding of water from appropriation, usually to protect it for specific uses.

Woodland: A forest community occupied primarily by noncommercial species such as juniper, mountain 

mahogany, or quaking aspen; all western juniper forest lands are classified as woodlands, since juniper is 

classified as a noncommercial species.

-YYucca: Plant of the lily family having long often rigid fibrous leaves on a woody base and bearing a large panicle of 

white blossoms.
Arizona Strip Field Office References Cited

Approved Resource Management Plan

24

REFERENCES CITED

Altschul, Jeffrey H., and Helen C. Fairley. 1989. Man, Models and Management: An Overview of the Archaeology 

of the Arizona Strip and the Management of its Cultural Resources. Report prepared for USDA Forest Service 

and USDI Bureau of Land Management by Statistical Research, Plateau Archaeology, and Dames & Moore, 

Inc.

Arizona Game and Fish Department. 2006. Strategic Plan.

Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior. 1990c. Final Wilderness Management Plan: Paiute 

and Beaver Dam Mountains. Arizona Strip Field Office, St. George, Utah.

Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior. 1991a. Final Environmental Impact Statement: 

Vegetation Treatment on BLM Lands in Thirteen Western States.

Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior. 1991c. Wilderness Management Plan for the 

Cottonwood Point Wilderness. Arizona Strip Field Office, St. George, Utah.

Bureau of Land Management, U. S. Department of the Interior.1992a. Proposed Arizona Strip District Resource 

Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement. Arizona Strip Field Office, St. George, Utah.

Bureau of Land Management, U. S. Department of the Interior. 1992b. Vermilion Resource Area Implementation 

Plan for the Arizona Strip District Approved Resource Management Plan. Arizona Strip Field Office. St 

George, Utah.

Bureau of Land Management, U. S. Department of the Interior. 1992c. Shivwits Resource Area Implementation 

Plan for the Arizona Strip District Approved Resource Management Plan. Arizona Strip Field Office, St 

George, Utah.

Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior. 1994a. Final Arizona Statewide Wild and Scenic 

Rivers LEIS. Arizona State Office, Phoenix, Arizona. 

Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior. 1996. Statewide Plan Amendment of Land Use Plans 

in Arizona for Implementation of Arizona Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing 

Administration. Environmental Assessment, Arizona State Office, Phoenix, Arizona.

Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior. 1997. Parashant Resource Conservation Area Plan. 

Arizona Strip, District, St. George, Utah.

Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior. 1998a. Decision Record for the Mojave Amendment 

of the Arizona Strip Resource Management Plan. Arizona Strip Field Office, St. George, Utah

Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior. 1998b. Dixie Resource Area: Proposed RMP and 

FEIS. Dixie Resource Area, St. George, Utah.

Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior. 1998c. Proposed Las Vegas Resource Management 

Plan and FEIS. Las Vegas Field Office, Las Vegas, Nevada.

Bureau of Land Management, U. S. Department of the Interior. 2004a. Proposed Arizona Statewide Land Use Plan 

Amendment for Fire, Fuels, and Air Quality Management: Finding of No Significant Impact and 

Environmental Assessment. Arizona State Office, Phoenix, Arizona.

Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior, and Arizona Game and Fish Department. 2001. 

Arizona Strip Desert Bighorn Sheep Management Plan, as Amended. Arizona Strip Field Office, St. George, 

Utah and AGFD, Flagstaff, Arizona.
Arizona Strip Field Office References Cited

Approved Resource Management Plan

25

Coconino County. 2003. Coconino County Comprehensive Plan. Flagstaff, Arizona.

Fredonia Town. 1994. Fredonia’s General Plan. Fredonia, Arizona.

HDR, 2002. Town of Colorado City General Plan. Colorado City, Arizona.

Kane County. 1998. Kane County, Utah General Plan. Kanab, Utah.

Mesquite City. 1994, updated 2007. City of Mesquite Master Plan. Mesquite, Nevada.

Mohave County, 2003. Mohave County, Arizona Comprehensive Plan. Kingman, Arizona.

National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. 1995a. Grand Canyon National Park General Management 

Plan. Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona.

National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. 2006. ROD on the Final EIS: Colorado River Management 

Plan, Grand Canyon National Park. Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona.

St. George City. 2002. General Plan of St. George, Utah. St. George, Utah

Stoffle, Richard W., Fletcher P. Chmara-Huff, Kathleen A Van Vlack. 2005. Initial Findings from the Arizona 

Strip Cultural Landscape and Place Name Study. Ms. prepared for the Arizona Strip Field Office by the 

Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.

U.S. Department of the Interior. 2007. Adaptive Management: Technical Guide. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Desert Tortoise (Mojave Population) Recovery Plan. Desert Tortoise 

Recovery Team, Portland, OR. 73pp. 

U S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Recovery Plan for the California Condor. Prepared by L.F. Kiff, R.I. Mesta, 

and M.P. Wallace. 3rd Revision April 1996. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, OR. 74pp.

U S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Biological Opinion for the Arizona Strip Resource Management Plan –

Mojave Amendment (AESO 2-21-96-F-132). Phoenix, AZ. 128pp.

U S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. Virgin River Resource Management and Recovery Program. Denver, CO. 

124pp.

U S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) Final Recovery 

Plan. Prepared by the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Recovery Team, Technical Subgroup. Albuquerque, 

NM.

U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1996. Kaibab National Forest Land Management Plan, 

Amended. Williams, Arizona.

Washington County. 1994. Washington County General Plan. St. George, Utah.
Arizona Strip Field Office References Cited

Approved Resource Management Plan

26

INDEX

-AACCESS: See TRAVEL MANAGEMENT

ACQUISITION: 2-47, 50, 56, 70 to 71, 118

ADMINISTRATIVE ROUTES: 2-48, 104 to 106, 138

AIRSTRIPS:, see Back Country Airstrips

ANIMAL DAMAGE CONTROL: See PREDATOR CONTROL

ALLOTMENT: 2-9, 14, 45, 47 to 48, 58, 71, 75 to 77, 120, 122 to 123; 3-1; Appendices A, B,C, D

AMERICAN INDIAN: 1-9, 11, 15, 17; 2-62, 131

ANIMAL UNIT MONTH (AUM): Appendix D

ANTELOPE: See PRONGHORN ANTELOPE

ARCHAEOLOGY: See CULTURAL RESOURCES

AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (ACEC): 1-6, 17; 2-5, 117, 125, 134; 3-4; Appendix 

H

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (ADOT): 1-15; 2-48; 72, 87, 119, 137

ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT (AGFD): 1-10, 2-28 to 29, 31 to 36, 38 to 39, 42, 44, 49, 52 to 

53, 55, 127 to 129, 134, 137 to 138; Appendices A, F, G

ARIZONA STANDARDS FOR RANGELAND HEALTH AND GUIDELINES FOR GRAZING 

ADMINISTRATION (S&Gs): 1-11, 14; 2-50, 75, 94, 105, 127, 133; Appendices B, F, N

ATV: See OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE

-BBACK COUNTRY AIRSTRIPS: 2-132

BEAVER DAM MOUNTAINS WILDERNESS: 1-2, 10, 14; 2-17, 44, 48

BEAVER DAM SLOPE ACEC: 2-43 to 44, 49, 75 to 76, 117, 119, 121, 123, 134; Appendix H

BIGHORN SHEEP: 1-10, 14; 2-21 to 22, 29 to 30, 33, 75; Appendices G, L

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OR EVALUATION: See BIOLOGICAL OPINION

BIOLOGICAL OPINION: 1-10, 14; 2-38, 137; Appendices A, F

BLACK KNOLLS ACEC: 2-41, 118, 134; Appendix H

BLACK ROCK MOUNTAIN: 2-9, 72

BUCKSKIN MOUNTAIN: 2-29 to 30

-C

CALIFORNIA CONDOR: 1-14; 2-39, 52 to 54; Appendices A, F, G, H

CAMPING: 1-6, 19; 2-1, 3, 46, 57, 83, 87, 94, 102 to 103, 120; Appendix A

CAMPFIRES: 2-15, 118

CAVES: 2-10, 95; 3-5

CLOSED AREA: 2-45, 79, 104 to 105, 118 to 119, 121 to 122

COMMUNICATION SITES: 2-1, 48, 68, 72

CONSERVATION MEASURES: 1-10; 2-13, 38 to 39, 42 to 45, 49 to 50, 53 to 54, 56, 58, 119, 121 to 123;

Appendices A, F

COOPERATING AGENCY: 1-4, 10, 14 to 15; 2-137 to 138

COTTONWOOD POINT WILDERNESS: 1-2, 10, 14; Appendix L

CRITICAL HABITAT, DESIGNATED: 2-39 to 41, 43 to 44, 117 to 118, 137; Appendices H, L
Arizona Strip Field Office References Cited

Approved Resource Management Plan

27

CULTURAL RESOURCES: 1-6, 8, 10, 13, 16 to 17; 2-3, 5, 7, 13, 61, 94 to 96, 102 to 103, 107, 117 to 119, 122, 

126, 130 to 131, 134 to 136; 3-1, 4; Appendices H, J, K

-DDECISION RECORD: See RECORD OF DECISION

DESIRED PLANT COMMUNITY: 2-12, 14, 127; 3-9

DESERT TORTOISE: 1-14; 2-21 to 22, 38, 43 to 49, 71, 75 to 76, 78, 117, 119 to 122, 128 to 129; Appendices A, 

B, E, J, K, L

DESERT TORTOISE HABITAT: 2-21 to 22, 43 to 49, 71, 75 to 76, 117, 119, 120 to 121, 128; 3-8 to 9; 3-8, 

Appendices A, F, G

DESIGNATED ROADS AND TRAILS: 2-29, 40, 42, 46, 48, 104 to 108, 116, 119 to 121, 134; Appendix O

DESIGNATED WILDERNESS AREA: See WILDERNESS AREAS

DISPOSAL: 2-44, 47, 50, 56, 70 to 71, 78 to 79, 118, 121, 132, 135; Appendices A, F, J, K, L

-EENDANGERED SPECIES: Also see SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES 

ENERGY: 2-70, 72, 78, 132

EXOTIC SPECIES: 1-9; 2-13, 33, 45, 50, 57 to 59, 128, 138

-FFEDERAL LAND POLICY MANAGEMENT ACT (FLPMA): 1-5 to 6, 8, 9, 13, 17 to 18, 20; 2-61, 60, 78, 

127; Appendices J, K

FEES: 2-15, 62, 95, 131, 133

FISH: 1-17, 20; 2-18, 24 to 25, 28 to 29, 49, 94 to 95, 127 to 129, 134, 137 to 138

FIRE MANAGEMENT: 2-12 to 13, 44 to 45, 49, 55, 68, 114, 119, 122, 129; Appendices A, E, F

FORT PEARCE ACEC: 2-41, 117

FOSSILS: 2-10, 127

FUELWOOD: 1-1; 2-3 to 4, 15, 42, 102 to 103; 3-3

-GGAME BIRDS: 2-29, 34 to 35

GEOLOGY: 2-7, 10, 86 to 87, 127

GRAZING: See LIVESTOCK GRAZING

GROUP SIZE: 2- 84 to 92; 3-6

-HHABITAT MANAGEMENT AREA: 1-10; 2-29, 40

HONEYMOON TRAIL: 2-61, 106

HUNTING: 1-6, 11, 19; 2-1, 3 to 4, 29, 34 to 35, 83, 85, 89, 102 to 103, 138; Appendix A

-IIMPLEMENTATION PLAN: 1-10, 13; 2-6, 108, 133; Appendices E, F

INVASIVE SPECIES: 2-12, 15 to 18, 20 to 24, 45, 58, 128

-JJOHNSON SPRING ACEC: 2-41, 61, 117, 122, 131, 134 to 135
Arizona Strip Field Office References Cited

Approved Resource Management Plan

28

-KKAIBAB PAIUTE TRIBE: 1-15 to 16; 2-136

KANAB CREEK: 1-2; 2-29, 33, 54, 57 to 58, 61, 76, 114, 118, 122 to 123, 134 to 135; Appendix G

KANAB CREEK ACEC: 2-57, 61, 118, 122 to 123, 135; Appendix H

KANAB CREEK WILDERNESS: 1-2; 2-114; Appendix L

KARST: 2-10 to 11; 3-5

-LLAND TENURE: 2-68, 70

LEASABLE MINERALS: 2-68, 78

LITTLE BLACK MOUNTAIN ACEC: 2-61, 73, 117; Appendix H

LIVESTOCK GRAZING: 1-6, 16 to 17, 19; 2-6 to 7, 39, 47 to 48, 56, 58 to 59, 75 to 76, 120, 128; 3-9 to 10; 

Appendices A, B, C, D, P

LOCATABLE MINERALS: 2-78 to 79, 81, 118, 121

LOST SPRING MOUNTAIN ACEC: 2-41, 61, 118, 122, 134 to 135; Appendix H

-MMINERAL ENTRY: 2-48, 120, 122

MINERAL MATERIALS: 1-1; 2-3 to 4, 64, 68, 78 to 79, 102 to 103, 118, 121; Appendices I, K, L, M

MINERAL WITHDRAWAL: 2-63, 70, 72, 78, 83, 122, 132; Appendices I, J, L

MONITORING: 1-8, 10; 2-10, 29, 42, 54, 57, 62, 73, 75 to 76, 93 to 95, 105, 127 to 130, 134, 137, 139; 3-1 to 2, 

6 to 10; Appendices A, B, E, F, N, O

MT. TRUMBULL: 1-10

MULE DEER: 2- 18, 20, 23, 29, 30 to 31; Appendix G

MULTI-SPECIES CONSERVATION PLAN: 2-44, 122

-NNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (NEPA): 1-1 to 2, 8 to 9, 13 to 14; 2-6, 8, 30, 34, 47, 50, 56, 

65, 71 to 72, 107, 127, 132, 136, 138; 3-7 to 8; Appendices A, J

NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT OF 1966, AS AMENDED (NHPA): 1-9; 2-61, 104 to 105, 

107, 131, 136 to 137

NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL: See Old Spanish National Historic Trail

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE (NPS): 1-11, 15, 18; Appendices A, F, N, O

NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES (NRHP): 2-62, 116, 130

NATIVE SPECIES: 2-12, 14, 17 to 18, 39, 50; Appendices B, F, K

NIGHT SKIES: 2-65

NOISE: 2-67; Appendix K

NOXIOUS WEEDS: 2-14 to 15, 76, 95; Appendices A, E

-OOFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE (OHV): 1-6; 2-1, 3, 5 to 6, 42, 57, 83 to 84, 89 to 90, 104 to 105, 110

OHV DESIGNATION: 2-104 to 105

OIL AND GAS: 2-78, 80, 122; Appendices G, L

OLD SPANISH NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL (NHT): 2-7, 61, 63, 70 to 71, 106, 116, 134; 3-7

OPEN AREA: 2-104, 110
Arizona Strip Field Office References Cited

Approved Resource Management Plan

29

-PPAIUTE WILDERNESS: 1-2; 2-44, 106

PALEONTOLOGY: 1-2; 2-7, 10, 127

PERMITS: 1-1; 2-8, 15, 46, 68, 71, 78 to 79, 95, 102 to 103, 126, 132 to 133, 138; 3-3, 6; Appendices A, F, K, N

PLANNING CRITERIA: 1-9

PLANT COMMUNITY: 2-12, 14, 17 to 24, 127; 3-9; Appendices A, B, H

PONDEROSA PINE: 1-7, 19; 2-13, 17 to 18, 29, 34 to 35, 127

PREDATOR CONTROL: 2-30

PRESCRIBED FIRE (BURNING): 1-7; 2-12 to 14, 17, 19, 20 to 22, 25, 45, 114; 3-10; Appendices A, E, F

PRIMITIVE RECREATION: 1-6, 9; 2-4, 83, 104; 3-8

PRONGHORN ANTELOPE: 2-24 to 25, 29 to 30, 32, 41, 117; Appendix G

PROPER FUNCTIONING CONDITION (RIPARIAN WETLAND AREAS): 2-16, 51, 55, 122; Appendix B

-QQUIET: See SOUNDSCAPES

-RRANGELAND: 1-11, 14; 2-8 to 9, 12, 14, 16, 42, 45, 47, 75 to 76; Appendix B

RAPTOR: 2-18, 20, 34, 51 to 54, 95, 129; Appendices A, F

RECORD OF DECISION (ROD): 2-106; 3-1; Appendices E, I

RECREATION AND PUBLIC PURPOSE (R&PP): 2-47; Appendix J

RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREAS: 1-7; 2-63, 83 to 97; Appendix N

RECREATION MANAGEMENT ZONES (RMZ): 1-7; 2-83 to 98; Appendix N

RECREATION SETTINGS: 1-7; 2-84 to 101

RIGHT-OF-WAY (ROW): 2-64, 71, 104; Appendix M

RIPARIAN: 1-20; 2-7 to 8, 13, 16 to 18, 21, 29, 44, 49 to 51, 55 to 59, 70, to 71, 87, 115, 117 to 118, 122 to 123, 

129 to 131, 135, 138; 3-5, 9; Appendix F

ROAD: *See “maintenance” definition in Glossary above 2-46 to 47, 73, 90, 104, 106 to 107; Appendix O

ROAD CLOSURE: 2-48, 107, 120

ROUTE: “Roads” and/or “trails” are considered routes. 1-4 to 5, 7, 11, 16 to 17, 19; 2-1, 3 to 4, 9, 40, 42, 45 to 

48, 50, 52, 55, 57, 4, 71 to 73, 79, 83, 85 to 92, 103 to 108, 118 to 123, 133; 3-1, 4 to 5, 7 to 8; Appendices A, F, I, 

N, O

ROUTE EVALUATION: 1-5; 2-29, 104 to 105, 107

ROUTE INVENTORY: 1-11; 2-40, 106, 134; Appendix O

-SSALABLE MINERALS: 2-78 to 79

SCOPING: Appendices B, N, P

SEASONAL GRAZING: 2-39, 45 to 46, 76, 120

SECTION 106 CONSULTATION: 2-61, 104 to 105, 107, 136 to 137; 3-1, 5

SECTION 7 CONSULTATION: 2-121, 136 to 137; 3-1, 7; Appendices A, F

SENSITIVE SPECIES: 2-38; Appendices B, F

SHINARUMP ACEC: 2-41, 118, 123, 135; Appendix H

SOILS: 2-7 to 9, 12, 14; 3-2 to 3; Appendices B, E, F, G, K

SOUNDSCAPES: 2-7, 67

SOUTHWESTERN WILLOW FLYCATCHER: 1-14; 2-17, 39, 55 to 58, 76, 118, 122 to 123, 128 to 130, 134 to 

135; 3-9; Appendices A, F, H

SPECIAL RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREA (SRMA): 1-7; 2- 63, 83 to 97; Appendices I, N
Arizona Strip Field Office References Cited

Approved Resource Management Plan

30

SPECIAL RECREATION PERMIT (SRP): 2-95, 133

SPLIT ESTATE: 2-71; Appendix L

SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES: 1-17, 19, 21; 2-7, 13 to 17, 28, 30, 38 to 42, 47, 50, 56 to 57, 70 to 71, 76, 79, 93 

to 95, 108, 118, 128 to 130, 132; Appendices A, B, F, P

STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR RANGELAND HEALTH: See AZ Standards for Rangeland Health

SURFACE OCCUPANCY: 2-48, 78, 121; Appendices G, L

-TTHREATENED SPECIES: See Special Status Species

TRAIL: 2-5, 7, 48, 57, 61, 63, 94, 102, 105 to 107, 115 to 118, 120, 134; 3-5, 7; Appendix O

TRAVEL MANAGEMENT: 1-4 to 5, 11; 2-1, 3 to 4, 7, 40, 42, 46, 48, 57, 85 to 94, 102, 104, 108 to 109, 118 to 

119, 134; 3-7; Appendices A, N, O

TRAVEL MANAGEMENT AREA (TMA): 2-1, 3 to 4, 102, 104, 109

TURKEYS: See Game Birds

-UU.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS): 1-14; 2-29, 38 to 39, 42 to 44, 48 to 49, 53 to 54, 56, 78, 119, 

127, 129, 134, 136 to 138; Appendix A

-VVALID EXISTING RIGHTS: 2-79, 104, 117; Appendix L

VEGETATION TREATMENTS: 1-7, 14; 2-14 to 15, 17 to 25, 30, 42, 45, 68, 118, 127; Appendices A, E, F

VIRGIN RIVER: 1-14; 2-17, 38, 43 to 44, 47, 49 to 51, 56, 63, 71 to 72, 83, 86, 92 to 94, 106, 115, 117, 122 to 

124, 129, 132, 134; 3-2, 8

VIRGIN RIVER CORRIDOR ACEC: 2-43, 49 to 50, 115, 117, 122 to 123, 135; Appendix H

VIRGIN SLOPE ACEC: 2-43 to 44, 49, 79, 117, 119, 121, 123; Appendix H

VISITOR CENTER: 2-93, 133 to 134

VISUAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (VRM): 2-63, 66 to 67; 3-8; Appendix I

-WWATCHABLE WILDLIFE: 2-6, 30, 96

WATER QUALITY: 2-8, 16, 47 to 48, 50 to 51, 56, 71, 126; 3-2; Appendices B, F, K

WEEDS: 2-14 to 15, 76, 95; Appendices B, E

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS: 1-13; 2-7, 114, 124; 3-7; Appendix L

WILDERNESS AREAS: 1-2, 15, 20; 2-5, 13 to 14, 44, 107 to 108; Appendix L

WILDERNESS CHARACTERISTICS: 1-5 to 6, 9, 11; 2-17, 63, 67 to 71, 113 to 114, 107 to 108

WILDERNESS STUDY AREA: 1-2, 5 to 6, 9, 11; 2-67; 

WILDLIFE HABITAT AREA (WHA): 2-29, 33, 37, 40, 43; Appendix E

WILDLIFE TRANSPLANTS: 2-29 to 30

WITHDRAWAL: See MINERAL WITHDRAWAL 

-X,Y,ZYELLOWSTONE MESA: 2-106, 131; Appendices H, M
Arizona Strip Field Office Abbreviations and Acronyms

Approved Resource Management Plan

31

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

A Administrative Use

A&AIA Airport and Airway Improvement Act

ACEC Area of Critical Environmental Concern

ADOT Arizona Department of Transportation

AGFD Arizona Game and Fish Department

AMP Allotment Management Plan

AMR Appropriate Management Response

APD Application for Permit to Drill

APHIS-WS Animal and Plan Health Inspection Service - Wildlife Services (US Department of Agriculture)

ASDO Arizona Strip District Office

ATV All-Terrain Vehicle

AUM Animal Unit Month

BA Biological Assessment

BBM Benefits-based Management

BAER Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation

BLM United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management

C Closed

CBW Composition by Weight

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

DFC Desired Future Condition

DOI Department of Interior

DPC Desired Plant Composition

DWMA Desert Wildlife Management Area

EA Environmental Assessment

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

ERMA Extensive Recreation Management Area

ES Environmental Statement

ESA Endangered Species Act

FAA United States Federal Aviation Administration

FCR Field Contact Representative

FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act

FLTFA Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act

FO Field Office

GIS Geographic Information System

GPS Global Positioning System

HCP Habitat Conservation Plan

HMP Habitat Management Plan

IAT Interdisciplinary Assessment Team

IBLA Interior Board of Land Appeals

IM Instruction Memorandum
Arizona Strip Field Office Abbreviations and Acronyms

Approved Resource Management Plan

32

IMP Interim Management Policy

LAC Limits of Acceptable Change

LUP Land Use Plan

MIST Minimum Impact Suppression Tactics

ML, L Mitigate Limit, Limit

MO Mitigate Open

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

MSO Mexican Spotted Owl

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

NHT National Historic Trail

NLCS National Landscape Conservation System

NM Non-motorized

NOA Notice of Availability

NOI Notice of Intent

NPS United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service

NRA National Recreation Area

NRHP National Register of Historic Place

NSO No Surface Occupancy

O Open

OHV Off-highway Vehicle

PL Public Law

PLO Public Land Office

RAC Resource Advisory Council (BLM)

RAMP Recreation Area Management Plan

RMA Recreation Management Area

RMP Resource Management Plan

RMZ Recreation Management Zone

ROD Record of Decision

ROW Right-of-Way

R&PP Recreation and Public Purposes

RRT Rangeland Resource Team

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office

S&G Standards and Guides

SRMA Special Recreation Management Area

SRP Special Recreation Permit

SW Southwestern

SWWF Southwestern Willow Flycatcher

TCP Traditional Cultural Property

TMA Travel Management Area

USC United States Code

USFWS or FWS United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service

USFS United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

VHA Vegetation Habitat Management Area

VRM Visual Resource Management

WFIP Wildland Fire Implementation Plan

WHA Wildlife Habitat Management Area

WMP Wilderness Management Plan
Arizona Strip Field Office Abbreviations and Acronyms

Approved Resource Management Plan

33

WNSO Waivable No Surface Occupancy

WSA Wilderness Study Area

W&SR Wild and Scenic Rivers

WUI Wildlife-Urban Interface