RECORD OF DECISION 

UKIAH RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 

MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION 

Having considered a full range of alternatives, associated effects, and public input, I recommend 

adoption and implementation of the attached Ukiah Resource Management Plan. This plan contains the 

decisions that will guide management of the lands and resources under the jurisdiction of the Ukiah Field 

Office. The plan addresses all relevant issues raised during the planning process. 

Rich Burns Date 

Ukiah Field Manager september 25, 2006

STATE DIRECTOR APPROVAL 

I approve the attached Ukiah Resource Management Plan. This document meets the requirement of the 

Federal Lands Policy and Management Act to develop a land use plan for public lands administered by the ukiah field office

Mike Pool ate 

California State Director september 25, 2006
RECORD OF DECISION

Decision

The decision is hereby made to adopt the attached resource management plan for the public lands and 

resources managed by the Ukiah Field Office. The Ukiah Resource Management Plan was developed 

under regulations implementing the Federal Land Policy and Management Act. An environmental 

impact statement was prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act to consider 

this decision. The Ukiah RMP adopted here is nearly identical to the Ukiah Proposed RMP presented for 

public review and protest on June 30, 2006. 

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 

MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED IN THE RMP 

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

options, and management tools that will achieve a balance between protection of the planning area’s 

natural character, and a variety of resource uses and management issues. Alternatives must: meet the 

project purpose and need; be viable and reasonable; provide a mix of resource protection, management 

use, and development; be responsive to issues identified in scoping; and meet the established planning 

criteria, federal laws and regulations, and BLM planning policy. 

Five alternatives were developed for detailed analysis. Alternative A was a continuation of current 

management as the “no action” alternative, and was developed from existing planning decisions, policies, 

and guidance. Alternatives B, C, and D were developed with input from public scoping, public 

workshops, and collaborative work among the BLM interdisciplinary planning team. 

Of the action alternatives, Alternative B represented less intense management and/or use, emphasizing a 

greater utilization of natural processes wherever possible, and minimizing human impacts. This would 

result in lower levels of active involvement in resource restoration and management, as well as limited 

recreation use. In the middle of the spectrum, Alternative C provided a greater diversity of uses and 

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

Alternative D took a more active approach, allowing more intense management and/or use while still 

maintaining and enhancing resource conditions. It included the widest application of management tools 

and actions, and provided the highest level of recreation use. The preferred alternative and proposed 

RMP was developed using decisions from each of the other alternatives. See the Management 

Considerations section for more detail. 

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 

Federal regulations (40CFR 1505.02(b)) require that an agency identify the “environmentally preferable” 

alternative(s) in the ROD. Table 1 below compares the approved RMP with the environmentally 

preferable alternative for each major resource program. Tables making this comparison by management 

area are provided in Appendix 1. The environmentally preferable alternative is the alternative that would 

result in the greatest beneficial impacts to the identified aspects of the environment. 
RECORD OF DECISION

Table 1 

Resource Program Adopted RMP Environmentally 

Preferable 

Alternative 

Visual Resources Management B + C B 

Wildlife and Fish C D 

Vegetation Management C C 

Riparian and Wetland Resources C D 

Cultural and Historic Resources C C 

Lands and Realty C C 

Special Designations C D 

Forest Management A A 

Livestock Grazing Management C B 

Fire Management C + D C + D 

Energy and Minerals C C 

Wind Energy D D 

Travel Management and Route Designation A + C B 

Recreation C C 

Interpretation and Education C C 

Soil Resources C D 

Water Resources C D 

Air Quality A A 

MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS/DECISION RATIONALE 

The approved RMP was selected by the BLM, with input from Tribes, state and county governments, 

other federal agencies, the Northwest California Resource Advisory Council (RAC), interested 

organizations, and the public. BLM considers the approved RMP as the best approach to meeting the 

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

of flexibility and balance in managing both resources and uses of the lands in the planning area. Factors 

considered during this selection process include: environmental impacts; issues raised throughout the 

planning process; specific environmental values, resources, and resource uses; conflict resolution; public 

input; and laws and regulations. 

The approved RMP draws from the alternatives analyzed in the Draft RMP/Draft EIS and is identical to 

the Proposed RMP. Based on input BLM received on the Draft RMP/Draft EIS, the following 

modifications were made to the RMP: 

a. Wind Energy Berryessa Peak – Changed from available for wind energy development to an 

avoidance area. 

b. Blue Ridge – Changed from multiple-use management to management for wilderness 

characteristics. 

c. Walker Ridge – The boundary for the ACEC designation is now based on the Rare Finds data 

base for serpentine endemic plant species as opposed to an elevation line west of the Lake County 

Boundary. 

d. Scattered Tracts – Various scattered tracts were changed from disposal to retention. 

UKIAH FIELD OFFICE 1-3 
RECORD OF DECISION

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) requires that BLM manage the public lands 

according to land use plans (43 U.S.C. 1702; 43 U.S.C. 1732) in a manner that will protect the quality of 

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

archeological values; that, where appropriate, will preserve and protect certain public lands in the natural 

condition; that will provide food and habitat for fish and wildlife and domestic animals; that will provide 

for outdoor recreation and human occupancy and use (43 U.S.C. 1701); and regulates the use, occupancy, 

and development of public lands (43 U.S.C. 1732). The RMP is the land use plan that provides the 

framework to accomplish these mandates. Through implementation of the RMP and other actions that 

may become necessary, BLM will prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the lands. 

The approved RMP focuses on the use of mostly moderate, sometimes targeted/opportunistic 

management interventions for most resource areas and management programs in the Ukiah Field Office. 

It also provides moderate levels of recreation use, with some new controls added to assure that neither 

resources nor recreation experiences suffer through overuse, while at the same time avoiding excessive 

restrictions. 

PROTEST AND APPEAL 

The Proposed RMP decisions were available for protest to the BLM Director for a 30 day period, in 

accordance with 43 CFR 1610.5-2. No protests were received. 

The decisions designating routes of travel for motorized vehicles are an implementation decisions and are 

appealable under 43 CFR Part 4. These decisions are contained in Appendix A of the RMP. The appeal 

procedures are summarized below. 

The route decisions, as described in Appendix A of the RMP, are effective upon issuance of this Record 

of Decision, unless a stay of the decision is granted. In accordance with 43 CFR 8342.3(b), public notice 

was provided with publication in the Federal Register of a Notice of Availability of the Proposed RMP and 

Final EIS and with a Notice of Availability of this Record of Decision and approved RMP. 

Appeal Procedures 

Any party adversely affected by the proposed route designations may appeal within 30 days of receipt of 

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

Availability of this ROD and approved RMP will be considered the date the decision is received. The 

appeal should state the specific route(s), as identified in Appendix A of the RMP, on which the decision 

is being appealed. The appeal must be filed with the Field Manager, at the following address: 

Bureau of Land Management 

Ukiah Field Office 

2550 N. State Street 

Ukiah, CA 95482 
RECORD OF DECISION

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

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

supporting documents must also be sent to the Solicitor, U.S. Department of the Interior, 2800 Cottage 

Way, Suite E-1712, Sacramento 95825. 

If the Statement of reasons is filed separately, it must be sent to the Interior Board of Land Appeals, 

Office of Hearings and Appeals, 801 N. Quincy Street, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22203. It is suggested 

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

Request for Stay 

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

be filed in the office of the authorized officer at the time the appeal is filed and must show sufficient 

justification based on the following standards under 43 CFR 4.21: 

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

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

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

4. Whether the public interest favors granting the stay. 

MITIGATION AND MONITORING 

Mitigation measures designed to avoid or reduce impacts were incorporated into the management 

alternatives analyzed in the EIS and the adopted RMP, so impacts identified are considered unavoidable 

and would result from implementing the management actions and mitigation. If impacts are not 

discussed, analysis has indicated either that none would occur or that their magnitude would be 

negligible. All practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental harm while still meeting the goals, 

purpose and need requirements of the RMP have been adopted. 

The ROD approves monitoring programs that aid in managing and protecting the resource values of the 

area. Monitoring of biological resources addresses species needs and will ensure BLM complies with the 

terms and conditions of the September 2006 Biological Opinions by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

and National Marine Fisheries Service. 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 

Scoping and Alternative Development Workshops 

BLM officially initiated the planning process for the Ukiah RMP with publication of a Notice of Intent in 

the Federal Register on June 21, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 118). Media releases requested public input 

and announced open houses for public scoping, held in eight cities during August and September 2004, 

and one field trip. The formal scoping period ended September 15, 2004, although additional comments 

were accepted after that date. A total of over 647 written comments were compiled during this period. 

These comments were recorded and categorized according to both source and topic, and were then 

compiled, reviewed, and assessed in a scoping report completed by the BLM in November 2004. 

UKIAH FIELD OFFICE 1-5 
RECORD OF DECISION

Following scoping, BLM held four public Alternative Development Workshops in February 2005. These 

workshops engaged the public, agencies, and tribes in the process of developing management alternatives 

for consideration in this Proposed RMP/Final EIS. 

Draft RMP and Draft EIS 

The public comment period for the Ukiah Draft RMP/Draft EIS opened with publication of the notice 

of availability (NOA) in the Federal Register on September 16, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 179). This NOA 

notified the public of the BLM’s publication of the Draft RMP and associated Draft EIS. The NOA also 

solicited public comments and participation. 

Five public comment meetings were held in October 2005 in local communities across the Ukiah Field 

Office’s planning area. By the end of the public comment period, 2,290 agency, individual, or 

organization comments were received. 

Tribal Consultation 

The Ukiah Field Office interacts with 28 federally recognized and two non-federally recognized tribes. 

Consultation with all 30 tribes regarding the Ukiah RMP began in June of 2004. On August 2, 2004, 

certified letters were sent to each tribal office containing a packet of information about resource 

management plans and the BLM planning process. The tribes were also formally invited to attend two 

scoping meetings set up especially to address their concerns and involvement with the Ukiah Plan. As a 

means of reaching out further to tribes for their input, representatives from the Ukiah Field Office visited 

3 Central Valley tribal offices on September 14, 2004. These tribes were interested in the process but had 

no means of attending the public meetings held earlier in their area. 

Tribal consultation continued during the alternative formulation process. The draft Ukiah RMP/EIS was 

made available for public review September of 2005, and copies of the document were sent to all 28 

federally recognized and the 2 non-federally recognized tribes along with a letter informing the tribes to 

provide their written comments to BLM by December 15, 2005. 

A Ukiah RMP/EIS briefing with the California State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) was held on 

May 8, 2006. Planning and process procedures were discussed in addition to discussions about 

comments received from the tribes. The SHPO appreciated the outreach and coordination efforts of the 

Ukiah Field Office in addition to our long term partnerships with the tribal communities in the area. 

County, State and Federal Participation 

Napa, Lake, Sonoma, Yolo, and Mendocino Counties requested more specific information regarding 

certain aspects of the RMP of interest to them such as land tenure, open space preservation, special area 

designation, recreation management, access, and energy development. In each instance, the Ukiah Field 

Manager and representatives from the Ukiah staff met personally and or talked by telephone with local 

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

The following state agencies have been provided with information on the RMP process and consultation 

is ongoing with: the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), California Department of Fish and 
RECORD OF DECISION

Game, California State Parks and California Coastal Commission. The Draft RMP was also submitted to 

the California Governor’s Clearing House for review by appropriate agencies. 

An RMP overview and its affect on the Lake Berryessa Visitor’s Services Plan was provided to 

representatives of the Bureau of Reclamation from Lake Berryessa. Consultation with the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has been ongoing 

throughout the planning process. BLM has initiated formal consultation on the Proposed RMP by 

submitting a Biological Assessment to these federal agencies. 

Organizations 

Briefings on the Ukiah RMP alternatives and proposed action were also provided to the representatives 

of the Blue Ridge Berryessa Natural Area Partnership, UC Davis Natural Area Reserve Managers, and 

Tuleyome. Special Interest Groups who also requested and were provided briefings on the Ukiah RMP 

included Back Country Horseman, Clear Lake Horsemen, Ukiah Valley Trails, and the Mendocino 4-

Wheel Drive Club. 

Northwest Resource Advisory Council 

The Northwest Resource Advisory Council (RAC) members were kept involved with the process 

through briefings provided during the regular council meetings, and through workshops designed to 

gather and disseminate key information and data. 

Advertisements and Announcements 

Newspaper advertisements, press releases, and informal flyers were issued or posted to notify the public 

of the project, to announce public meetings and workshops, to request public comments, and to provide 

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

meeting announcements were published in several local and regional newspapers including the Ukiah 

Daily Journal, Lake County Record Bee, Clearlake Observer, Press Democrat (Santa Rosa) Napa Register, Inter-Coastal 

Observer (Gualala) Colusa Sun Herald, and the Woodland Democrat. Press releases were not carried by 

Sacramento or San Francisco Bay Area newspapers. Stories were printed in at least two local newspapers 

on the RMP development at different points in the process. 

Project Website 

An informational website, http://www.blm.gov/ca/ukiah/rmp/index.html has been available to the 

public throughout the planning process. It provides background information on the Ukiah Field Office, 

downloadable version of documents including the Draft RMP/Draft EIS and Proposed RMP/Final EIS. 

Planning Update Mailers 

The BLM produced two special Planning Update mailers: one to announce a series of special public 

meetings focused on refining the plan’s alternatives, and one announcing the publication of the Draft 

RMP. These were sent via direct mail to the Ukiah mailing list and were also distributed at public 

meetings. The Planning Updates included background information on the Ukiah Field Office’s lands, a 

description and timeline for the upcoming planning process, dates and locations of the public scoping 

meetings, and contact information for getting public comments to the BLM. 

UKIAH FIELD OFFICE 1-7 
RECORD OF DECISION

Distribution of Proposed Plan/Final EIS 

The BLM distributed paper copies and CDs to interested parties and made the document available on the 

web, at BLM offices, and at the Ukiah public library. 
RECORD OF DECISION

APPENDIX 1 

Environmentally Preferable Alternative by Management Area 

Cow Mountain 

Resource Program Adopted RMP Environmentally Preferable Alternative 

Visual Resources Management B + C B 

Wildlife and Fish C D 

Vegetation Management C B 

Riparian and Wetland Resources C D 

Cultural and Historic Resources C C 

Lands and Realty C C 

Special Designations C + D C + D 

Forest Management A A 

Livestock Grazing Management A + B A + B 

Fire Management C + D C + D 

Energy and Minerals C C 

Wind Energy D A 

Travel Management and Route Designation C B 

Recreation C C 

Interpretation and Education C D 

Soil Resources C D 

Water Resources C D 

Air Quality A A 

Knoxville 

Resource Program Adopted RMP Environmentally Preferable Alternative 

Visual Resources Management B + C B + C 

Wildlife and Fish C B 

Vegetation Management C C 

Riparian and Wetland Resources C D 

Cultural and Historic Resources C + D C + D 

Lands and Realty C C 

Special Designations C D 

Forest Management A A 

Livestock Grazing Management C B 

Fire Management C + D C + D 

Energy and Minerals C C 

Wind Energy D B 

Travel Management and Route Designation C B 

Recreation A A 

Interpretation and Education C C 

Soil Resources C C 

Water Resources C D 

Air Quality A A 

UKIAH FIELD OFFICE 1-9 
RECORD OF DECISION

Indian Valley 

Resource Program Adopted RMP Environmentally Preferable Alternative 

Visual Resources Management C A 

Wildlife and Fish C D 

Vegetation Management C C 

Riparian and Wetland Resources C D 

Cultural and Historic Resources C C 

Lands and Realty C C 

Special Designations C D 

Forest Management A A 

Livestock Grazing Management B B 

Fire Management C + D C + D 

Energy and Minerals C C 

Wind Energy D B 

Travel Management and Route Designation C B 

Recreation A A 

Interpretation and Education C C 

Soil Resources C C 

Water Resources C D 

Air Quality A A 

Cache Creek 

Resource Program Adopted RMP Environmentally Preferable Alternative 

Visual Resources Management C B 

Wildlife and Fish B B 

Vegetation Management C C 

Riparian and Wetland Resources C D 

Cultural and Historic Resources C + D C + D 

Lands and Realty C C 

Special Designations C + D C + D 

Forest Management A A 

Livestock Grazing Management A A 

Fire Management C + D C + D 

Energy and Minerals C + D C + D 

Wind Energy D D 

Travel Management and Route Designation A A 

Recreation C B 

Interpretation and Education C C 

Soil Resources C D 

Water Resources C D 

Air Quality A A 
RECORD OF DECISION

Cedar Roughs 

Resource Program Adopted RMP Environmentally Preferable Alternative 

Visual Resources Management B + C B + C 

Wildlife and Fish C D 

Vegetation Management C C 

Riparian and Wetland Resources C C 

Cultural and Historic Resources C C 

Lands and Realty C C 

Special Designations B B 

Forest Management A A 

Livestock Grazing Management B B 

Fire Management C C 

Energy and Minerals C + D C + D 

Wind Energy D D 

Travel Management and Route Designation A A 

Recreation C C 

Interpretation and Education C C 

Soil Resources C C 

Water Resources C D 

Air Quality A A 

Berryessa 

Resource Program Adopted RMP Environmentally Preferable Alternative 

Visual Resources Management C C 

Wildlife and Fish C C 

Vegetation Management C + D C + D 

Riparian and Wetland Resources C D 

Cultural and Historic Resources C C 

Lands and Realty C C 

Special Designations A D 

Forest Management A A 

Livestock Grazing Management C B 

Fire Management C + D C + D 

Energy and Minerals C C 

Wind Energy D D 

Travel Management and Route Designation A B 

Recreation A A 

Interpretation and Education C C 

Soil Resources C C 

Water Resources C D 

Air Quality A A 

UKIAH FIELD OFFICE 1-11 
RECORD OF DECISION

Stornetta 

Resource Program Adopted RMP Environmentally Preferable Alternative 

Visual Resources Management B + C B + C 

Wildlife and Fish C C 

Vegetation Management C C 

Riparian and Wetland Resources C D 

Cultural and Historic Resources C + D C + D 

Lands and Realty C C 

Special Designations C C 

Forest Management A A 

Livestock Grazing Management C C 

Fire Management C C 

Energy and Minerals B B 

Wind Energy B B 

Travel Management and Route Designation A + B A 

Recreation C + D C + D 

Interpretation and Education C C 

Soil Resources C D 

Water Resources C D 

Air Quality A A 

The Geysers 

Resource Program Adopted RMP Environmentally Preferable Alternative 

Visual Resources Management C B 

Wildlife and Fish C + D C + D 

Vegetation Management C + D C + D 

Riparian and Wetland Resources C D 

Cultural and Historic Resources C + D C + D 

Lands and Realty C C 

Special Designations A A 

Forest Management A A 

Livestock Grazing Management A A 

Fire Management C C 

Energy and Minerals D D 

Wind Energy D D 

Travel Management and Route Designation C A 

Recreation C C 

Interpretation and Education C C 

Soil Resources C C 

Water Resources C D 

Air Quality A A 
RECORD OF DECISION

Scattered Tracts 

Resource Program Adopted RMP Environmentally Preferable Alternative 

Visual Resources Management C B 

Wildlife and Fish C + D C + D 

Vegetation Management C C 

Riparian and Wetland Resources C D 

Cultural and Historic Resources C + D C + D 

Lands and Realty C C 

Special Designations C D 

Forest Management A A 

Livestock Grazing Management C B 

Fire Management C C 

Energy and Minerals B B 

Wind Energy B B 

Travel Management and Route Designation C B 

Recreation C C 

Interpretation and Education C C 

Soil Resources C C 

Water Resources C D 

Air Quality A A 

UKIAH FIELD OFFICE 1-13