United States Department of the Interior 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 
 
 


Eagle Lake Field Office 
 
 


2950 Riverside Drive 
 
 


Susanville, CA 96130
 
 
 

(530) 277-0456
 
 
 

FAX: (530) 257-4831
 
 
 www.ca.blm.gov/eaglelake 
 
 


In Reply Refer to: April 1, 2008 

CA-350 1610 

Dear Interested Party: 

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

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

1,022,767 acres of lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in northeast California 

and northwest Nevada. 

The staff of the Eagle Lake Field Office of the BLM has prepared the attached Record of Decision (ROD) 

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

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

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

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

process. 

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

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

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

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

additional public review and protest. 

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

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

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

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

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

appeal process. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely, 

Dayne Barron 

Field Manager, Eagle Lake Field Office 

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Decision 

The decision is hereby made to adopt the Eagle Lake Resource Management Plan (RMP) 

as the land use plan for the public lands and resources managed by the Eagle Lake Field 

Office. The Eagle Lake RMP was developed under regulations implementing the Federal 

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

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

(NEPA) of 1969 to consider this decision. The Eagle Lake RMP adopted here is nearly 

identical to the Eagle Lake Proposed RMP presented for public review and protest on 

June 15, 2007. 

Introduction 

The Eagle Lake Field Office includes approximately 1,022,767 acres of BLM-managed 

surface acres in northeastern California and northwest Nevada. The geographic area 

includes BLM-administered lands within the counties of Lassen, Plumas, Sierra 

(California) and Washoe (Nevada). The BLM’s mission is to sustain the health, diversity, 

and productivity of the public lands it manages for the use and enjoyment of present and 

future generations. The Eagle Lake RMP was developed in coordination with the Alturas 

and Surprise Field Office RMPs to provide a consistent framework for managing public 

lands and resource uses in northeast California and northwest Nevada. 

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

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

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

implementing NEPA (40 Code of Federal Regulations 1500-1508), and the requirements 

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

The Eagle Lake RMP includes two levels of decisions in accordance with the NEPA and 

BLM regulations. These are land use planning decisions and implementation 

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

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

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

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

Department of Interior regulations at 43 CFR 4 and 43 CFR 2450. 

Alternatives Considered 

MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED IN THE RMP 

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

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

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

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

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

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

and regulations, and BLM planning policy. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 1 
 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

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

continuation of current management, and was developed from existing planning 

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

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

the BLM interdisciplinary planning team. 

Of the management alternatives, Alternative 2 represented less intense management 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

decisions from each of the management alternatives. See the Management 

Considerations section for more detail. 

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERABLE ALTERNATIVE 

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

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

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

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

the other alternatives analyzed, Alternative 2 and the Preferred Alternative best meet the 

national environmental goals identified above. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

management emphasis designed to protect native plant communities and restore 

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

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

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

within the Preferred Alternative. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

critical environmental concern (ACEC), one wild and scenic river (WSR) segment, and 

an increased emphasis on cultural resource protection and management would have 

beneficial impacts to these important and unique resources. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2 
 

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Management Considerations/ Decision Rationale 

The approved management actions defining the Eagle Lake RMP were selected by the 

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

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

public. The BLM considers the Approved Eagle Lake 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 Eagle Lake RMP draws from the alternatives analyzed in the Draft 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

undue degradation of the lands it manages. 

Changing Land Use Plan Decisions 

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

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

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

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

new or intensified interest in uses on public land. 

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

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

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

and encourages meaningful public participation. This process begins with the 

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

local newspapers. 

Changes Made To the Approved RMP 

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

the Approved Eagle Lake RMP, with a few minor clarifications to the decision, as listed 

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

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

the following modifications were made to the Approved RMP: 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 3 
 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

California. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Decisions. 

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

federal list of threatened and endangered (T&E) species. At the time of the BLM’s 

request to initiate formal consultation on T&E species with U. S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (USFWS) for the Draft and Proposed Eagle Lake RMP/EIS, the bald eagle 

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

announced that the bald eagle was being removed from the federal list of T&E 

species. The final rule delisting the bald eagle was published on July 9, 2007, and 

became effective on August 8, 2007 (USFWS, 2007). After delisting, bald eagles will 

continue to be protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act. 

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

the Biological Assessment (BLM 2007), which implements management actions from 

the Preferred Alternative in the Eagle Lake PRMP/FEIS (Biological Opinion on the 

Proposed Resource Management Plan for the Eagle Lake Field Office, Susanville, 

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

requested by USFWS, and according to management actions within the Eagle Lake 

PRMP/FEIS (Sec. 2.25.2.4, p. 2-147). However, the BLM will no longer consider the 

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

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

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

Agreement regarding cultural resources. The revised protocol suspends the 

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

categories”, as described in Section 2.2.5 (p. 2-7) of the Eagle Lake PRMP/FEIS. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 4 
 

RECORD OF DECISION 

The Approved RMP has been changed by deleting the following
 
 
 


paragraph:
 
 
 


“As specified in BLM Information Bulletin No. 2002-101, evaluate all currently 

recognized archaeological sites, as well all sites found in the future, for placement 

in one of six management categories (Table 2.2-1 below).” 

The Approved RMP now states: 

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

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

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

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

all lands in the Proposed RMP, Chapter 2.21 Visual Resources Management, as the 

official VRM Management Classes. 

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

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

Approved RMP will incorporate recommendations contained in this document, once 

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

encroachment of western juniper. 

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

Impact Statement and Programmatic Environmental Report, Vegetation Treatments 

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

Environmental Assessment, Integrated Weed Management Program and Record of 

Decision, BLM, Alturas, Eagle Lake, and Surprise Field Offices, EA # CA320-07-14, 

CA350-07-07, CA370-07-04, June 2007; and the Environmental Assessment, 

Integrated Weed Management Program and Record of Decision, BLM Nevada 

Lands Portion, Eagle Lake, and Surprise Field Offices, EA # CA350-04-05, CA370-

04-05, May 2004 and DNA #CA370-07-02, February 2007. 

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

complete corridor designation, and incorporate designated corridors into relevant 

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

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

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

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

Approved RMP Executive Summary 

The Eagle Lake RMP provides a detailed description of management actions for 25 

resource subjects. The desired future condition, goals, objectives, and management 

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

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

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

only an overview of some of the proposed management actions within the Eagle Lake 

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

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

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 5 
 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Air Quality 

• Manage prescribed fires and wildland fire use (0–4,500 acres/year) in a manner to reduce 

impacts to air quality. 

Cultural and Paleontological Resources 

•	 Designate and manage 17 important cultural sites as Cultural Resource Management Areas. 

•	 Designate Buffalo Creek Canyons and Lower Smoke Creek as archeological areas of critical 

environmental concern. 

Energy & Minerals 

•	 Manage 391,339 acres as ‘Open’ to mineral leasing under standard terms and conditions. 

•	 Manage 1,014,361 acres as ‘Open’ to locatable minerals. 

•	 Manage 634,002 acres as ‘Open’ to saleable minerals. 

•	 Manage 553,011 acres as ‘Open’ to renewable energy. Manage WSAs (380,359 acres) as 

renewable energy exclusion zones, according to the BLM Interim Management Policy (IMP) for 

Lands under Wilderness Review (July 1995). Designate seven areas of critical environmental 

concern (89,397 acres) as renewable energy avoidance areas. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fire Management 

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

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

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

achieved. 

•	 Under conditions of low fire intensity, a less aggressive AMR, such as containment/confinement, 

would be implemented in previously identified areas likely to benefit from wildland fire use. 

•	 Manage wildland fires using the Appropriate Management Response (AMR): 

o	 Full suppression AMR 282,304 acres 
 
 


o	 Full range of AMR suppression options 730,124 acres 
 
 


o	 Wildland Fire Use 10,339 acres 
 
 


Forestry Resources 

•	 Manage 11,020 acres as commercial forest using a mix of silvicultural methods. 

•	 Harvest trees and biomass from 1,100 forested acres per year. 

•	 Rehabilitate 773 forested acres burned in the Willow and Devil fires. 

•	 Manage 1,332 acres along the Biz Johnson Trail for wildfire defense by employing commercial 

and pre-commercial thinning. 

Implement fuels reduction in the Tunnison Wilderness Study Area (1,734 acres). 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 6 
 

 

 

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Forestry Resources (continued) 

• Manage commercial forests in Upper Murrer Meadows for preservation of wildlife habitat and late 

seral stages in addition to commercial harvest. 

Fuels Management 

•	 Implement fuels treatments through prescribed fire and mechanical, chemical, and biological 

methods to reduce build-up of hazardous fuels, provide fuel breaks, and create defensible space 

in communities at risk. 

o	 Prescribed fire 0 - 4,500 acres per year 
 
 


o	 Mechanical treatment 500 - 3,500 acres per year 
 
 


o	 Biological treatment 50 - 1,500 acres per year 
 
 


o	 Chemical treatment 50 - 500 acres per year 
 
 


Lands and Realty 

•	 Prioritize acquisition of lands with important resource values, to improve public access, and lands 

within or adjacent to special designations. 

•	 Prioritize disposal of lands with no significant resource values that are difficult to manage. 

•	 Corridor width would be a minimum of 2,000 feet unless adjacent to exclusion areas. 

Rights-of-Way 

•	 Wilderness study areas (380,359 acres) would be designated as rights-of-way exclusion zones. 

All proposals must meet non-impairment criteria which prohibit permanent facilities unless they 

are grandfathered, have valid existing rights, or provide access to private inholdings. 

•	 Avoid rights-of-way within areas of critical environmental concern (89,397 acres). 

•	 Establish new communications sites on Antelope, Shaffer, and Grasshopper Mountains, as 

needed. 

•	 Designate and prioritize the Alturas Transmission Line Route (Western Regional Corridor Study) 

and the Tuscarora Pipeline Empire Lateral as rights- of-way corridors. 

Livestock Grazing 

•	 Maintain livestock grazing within 54 allotments. Continue to implement rest or deferred grazing 

within 60%-80% of total allotments annually. 

•	 Authorize 52,250 Animal Unit Months annually. 

•	 Maintain 987,779 acres open to livestock grazing. Continue to implement rest or deferred grazing 

within 80%-90% of total grazing lands during some part of the grazing season. 

•	 Maintain and construct 2,000- 2,500 acres of exclosures to protect sensitive resources. 

•	 Manage and rehabilitate existing seedings for livestock forage on 3,000-4,000 acres and 

prioritize new seedings on a case by case basis. 

•	 Implement strategies to progress towards meeting land health standards. 

•	 Livestock salting will not be allowed within 1⁄4 mile of springs, meadows, streams, archaeological 

sites, and aspen areas. Location of salting stations would be determined by the BLM in 

consultation with livestock permittees. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 7 
 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Recreation and Visitor Services 

•	 Manage 848,620 acres of land outside of special recreation management areas as extensive 

recreation management areas. 

•	 Manage three existing special recreation management areas (totaling 65,570 acres) under the 

provisions of their current management plans. 

•	 Designate and manage the South Dry Valley Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA), 

(46,813 acres) in the Dry Valley - Sand Pass area, for recreational day use and motorcycle trail 

riding. 

•	 Designate and manage the Antelope/Schaffer/Bald Mountain SRMA (61,764 acres) in the Honey 

Lake Valley area, for non-motorized recreational day use. 

•	 Provide accessible camping opportunities for disabled visitors at all developed campgrounds in 

compliance with federal law. 

•	 Limit camping to 14 consecutive days and 28 days annually. 

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

Enforce additional buffers near guzzlers and near the following five Lassen County wells: Butte, 

Shaffer, Tableland, Table Mountain, and Belfast. 

•	 Designate seven additional scenic byways to promote recreational sightseeing. 

•	 Apply restrictions to energy and mineral development to protect recreation experiences. 

•	 Work with local governments and agencies to acquire the Modoc Line Railroad corridor for 

recreational use. 

•	 Develop a management plan for the Honey Lake Valley Rim Trail. Provide public access to the 

public shoreline of Honey Lake. 

•	 Develop hang glider launch areas in hills north of Wendel and at other sites subject to user 

demand. 

• Apply Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) classes to all lands to provide a diversity of 

recreational experiences: 

o ‘Backcountry’	 675,335 acres 

o ‘Roaded Natural’ 	 109,497 acres 

o ‘Primitive’ 	 237,953 acres 

Soil Resources 

•	 Implement practices to promote recovery of 113,236 acres of upland soils not meeting Standards 

for Rangeland Health. 

•	 Ensure all management activities result in “no net loss” of soil mass or productivity within the 

management area. 

•	 Developments and uses would be limited to soils which are considered unproductive or most 

suitable for construction purposes. 

•	 Minimize management activities within perennial and intermittent drainages where watershed 

function would be adversely affected. 

•	 Implement soil protection practices that emphasize mitigation, natural recovery, and bio ­

engineering. Use of additional restoration practices would be employed where natural recovery 

efforts are not sufficient. 

•	 Employ bio-engineering projects to improve soil condition and achieve proper functioning 

condition (PFC). 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 8 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Soil Resources (continued) 

• Apply sediment intrusion buffer zones greater than or equal to 50 feet around sensitive resources 

on a case-by-case basis. 

• Implement mitigation actions to offset soil and productivity losses within the same sixth-level 

watershed area (conceptually 10,000 – 40,000 acres). 

Special Designations 

• Designate seven new ACECs totaling 89,397 acres: 

o Eagle Lake Basin 34,320 acres 

o Susan River 2,495 acres 

o Pines Dunes Research Natural Area 2,887 acres 

o Willow Creek 2,130 acres 

o Lower Smoke Creek 894 acres 

o Buffalo Creek Canyons 36,515 acres 

o North Dry Valley 10,156 acres 

• All ACECs are rights-of-way avoidance areas. This means that any applications for new rights-ofway or utility corridors would undergo a site-specific NEPA review, and would only be granted if 

the BLM concurs 1) the only feasible location is within the ACEC, and 2) no relevant and 

important resources would be adversely affected. 

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

plans, and ACEC management plans. 

• Noxious weeds would be aggressively controlled in all ACECs. 

Special Designations 

• Develop a management plan for 38 miles of the Nobles Emigrant Trail to include inventory, 

interpretation, and protection. 

• Initiate inventory and interpretation of six additional historic trails. 

• Secure public title or access to abandoned railroad grades. 

• Designate Buffalo Creek Canyons and Lower Smoke Creek as scenic and historic ACECs. 

Special Designations 

• Recommend 10.6 miles of Upper Smoke Creek as suitable for designation as a Wild and Scenic 

River, with a ‘Wild’ classification. 

Special Designations 

• Prioritize acquisition of land parcels within all WSAs on a willing-seller basis. 

• Establish Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) ‘Primitive’ areas within all WSAs. 

• Close 45 miles of selected routes within ROS core ‘Primitive’ areas. 

• Construct 68 miles of non-motorized/non-mechanized routes within selected WSAs. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 9 

National Historic Trails 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 

Wild & Scenic Rivers (WSR) 

Wilderness Study Areas (WSA) 
 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Travel Management 

•	 Manage 1,656 miles of GPS-inventoried routes as the designated route network in the field office 

area. 

•	 Routes closed or not designated through this RMP or subsequent amendments would be closed 

and rehabilitated. 

•	 Implement designated route network modification criteria for changes in designation, new route 

construction, route realignment, route closures, rehabilitation, or obliteration. 

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

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

•	 Permanently close 59 miles of routes, and implement seasonal closures at Cleghorn Access 

Road, Tablelands, and Horse Lake Areas. 

•	 Assign off-highway vehicle (OHV) use area designations: 

o	 ‘Open’ 419 acres 

o	 ‘Limited to designated routes’ 760,837 acres 

o	 ‘Closed’ 261,511 acres 

•	 Construct up to 15 miles of new motorized routes. 

•	 Construct 264 miles of non-motorized routes in selected special management areas. 

•	 Close the Bizz Johnson Trail to snowmobile travel except for emergency and administrative use. 

Allow snowmobile crossing of the trail at Devil’s Corral area west of Highway 36. 

•	 In addition, approximately 45 miles of routes within the ROS ‘Primitive’ areas would be ‘Closed’ 

to snowmobiles. 

•	 Manage boating on Biscar Reservoir and the Susan River for human-powered watercraft only. 

•	 Manage boating on Round Corral and Buckhorn Reservoirs for human-powered watercraft and 

low speed trolling motors. 

Vegetation 

•	 Maintain 300,000 acres of vegetation alliances, associations, and ecological sites rated as 

‘Healthy’. Work toward restoring 335,000 acres rated as ‘Healthy/Lacking Key Attributes’ and 

146,000 to 197,000 acres rated as ‘Functioning at Risk’. 

•	 Use mechanical treatments, prescribed fire, integrated weed management, and reseeding of 

native species aimed at restoring 21,000 to 28,000 acres of vegetation alliances rated as 

‘Unhealthy’. 

•	 Vegetation communities encroached by invasive juniper would be treated using prescribed fire, 

mechanical, chemical, and manual treatments. Manage to conserve juniper on sites composed of 

woodland soils (21,000 acres). 

•	 Manage livestock grazing in quaking aspen, California black oak, and buffalo berry sites primarily 

by controlling the timing and season of use by livestock. Construct exclosures at selected sites. 

•	 Restore Wyoming and mountain big sagebrush ecosystems containing sage-grouse habitat by 

treating no more than 20% of the habitat acres during a 30-year period, to protect important 

habitat areas. 

•	 Use locally gathered native seed when re-seeding, where possible. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 10 
 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Noxious Weeds & Invasive Species 

•	 Implement Integrated Weed Management (IWM) procedures on all BLM lands. Review all project 

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

•	 Conduct inventory of noxious weeds. Monitor treatment sites to determine effectiveness and 

effects on non-target species. 

•	 Increase public understanding of noxious weeds and their effects through education. 

Riparian/Wetland Associations 

•	 Achieve measurable progress toward ‘Proper Functioning Condition’ (PFC) or ‘Desired Future 

Condition’ (DFC) on 35 miles of perennial and intermittent streams and 33 acres of 

riparian/wetland areas. 

•	 Continue riparian photo studies to document changes in vigor and function. 

•	 Protect riparian areas from grazing damage through riparian management which includes 

constructing exclosures, fencing, developing alternative water sources, and modifying grazing 

season of use. 

Special Status Plants 

•	 Manage all special status species habitats and populations so that BLM actions do not contribute 

to the need to federally list these species as threatened or endangered. 

•	 Reduce or eliminate impacts to special status species and their habitat when conducting ground 

disturbing activities. 

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

•	 Provide additional protection measures to ‘special interest’ species to prevent them from 

becoming listed as special status plants. 

Visual Resources 

•	 Manage all wilderness study areas (WSAs) as VRM Class I, unless released from designation by 

Congress, whereby the VRM designation would be converted to a VRM class based on the 

management prescriptions assigned below. 

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

these class requirements, to protect scenic quality: 

Acres Acres 

(All WSAs Managed as Class 1) (Should Congress release WSAs) 

VRM Class I 380,359 0 

VRM Class II 258,107 507,843 

VRM Class III 318,059 442,028 

VRM Class IV 66,242 72,896 

Water Resources 

•	 Implement restorative measures to improve water quality and progress toward meeting state 

standards. Emphasize natural recovery processes, grazing exclosures, planting of woody 

riparian vegetation and construction of in-stream structures. 

•	 Uses will not be restricted as long as they do not impede the restoration of state water quality 

standards or riparian health objectives. 

•	 Prioritize restoration efforts on Smoke, Shoals, Cottonwood, and Red Rock Creeks. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 11 
RECORD OF DECISION 

Water Resources (continued) 

•	 Maintain existing water sources and manage to promote wildlife habitat, improve distribution of 

livestock and wild horses, and provide for recreational uses. 

•	 Prioritize development of new water sources to extend seasonal water availability for wildlife, and 

to benefit desired ecosystems. 

•	 Withdraw state-appropriated water rights on waters that are not “waters of the state”. 

•	 Assert in-stream flow rights in Nevada and riparian rights in California on all perennial and 

important intermittent streams. 

•	 Projects that involve inter-basin transfer of water would be coordinated with local and regional 

governments. 

Wild Horses and Burros 

•	 Manage wild horses and burros on one established herd management area (HMA) and wild 

horses on two established HMAs on 828,596 acres covering 81% of Eagle Lake RMP area. 

•	 Conduct a regular aerial population census, at least every three years, in order to monitor habitat 

conditions and population levels. 

•	 Prioritize selection of animals returned to BLM-administered lands after gathers based on 

historical traits. 

•	 Maintain populations within established appropriate management levels (AMLs) by conducting 

regular gathers. 

•	 Consider fertility control research in some or all HMAs. 

•	 Develop facilities for public viewing, education, and wild horse adoptions. 

Wildlife and Fisheries 

Federally Listed Species 

Carson Wandering Skipper 

•	 Conduct surveys to determine habitat suitability and cooperate as a partner in recovery plans. 

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

•	 Conduct population surveys and implement seasonal protection measures. 

•	 Develop GIS information system for nesting, roosting, and foraging areas. 

•	 Manage suitable forest habitat to retain potential nest trees. 

Lahontan Cutthroat Trout 

•	 Cooperate with California Department of Fish and Game on local planting of hatchery stock and 

related habitat issues. 

Yellow-Billed Cuckoo 

•	 Contribute to survey efforts and develop action plan if populations are found on BLM 

administered lands. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 12 
RECORD OF DECISION 

State- and BLM-Listed Sensitive Species 

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

distribution. Develop a GIS database to document and track information. 

•	 Manage suitable habitat to retain forest characteristics for California spotted owls. 

•	 Implement seasonal protection measures and buffer zones, as appropriate, for permitted 

activities. 

Ungulates 

•	 Control cheatgrass, invasive juniper, and noxious weeds to improve habitat conditions. 

•	 Use plantings, seedings, willow thinning, and other vegetation treatments to maintain and 

improve terrestrial and aquatic habitats. 

•	 Develop a GIS system to manage information for habitat use areas, habitat management areas, 

and hunting zones. 

•	 If Rocky Mountain elk populations become established in the field office area, coordinate with 

state wildlife agencies and other partners, including livestock operators, to develop and 

implement management plans. 

•	 Voluntary changes or conversions of existing domestic sheep grazing permits from domestic 

sheep to cattle grazing permits would provide ELFO the opportunity to coordinate with state 

wildlife agencies and other cooperators in developing a reintroduction plan for California bighorn 

sheep prior to reintroduction efforts. 

Sagebrush Ecosystems and Sagebrush Obligate/Associated Species 

•	 Implement actions from the 2006 Conservation Strategy for Sage-Grouse and Sagebrush 

Ecosystems within the Buffalo-Skedaddle Population Management Unit. 

•	 Reduce the encroachment of western juniper and noxious weeds in sagebrush communities. 

•	 Implement seasonal protection measures and buffer zones for ground disturbing practices, to 

protect habitats. 

•	 Implement timber and fuels treatments to maintain and improve habitat. 

•	 Avoid practices that permanently convert sagebrush habitat to non-native grassland or 

agricultural land. 

Other Native Wildlife Species 

•	 Manage migratory birds in accordance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Executive Order 

13186, Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds. 

•	 Follow BLM policy, guidelines, current conservation plans, memorandums of understanding and 

best management practices in the management of species and habitats. 

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

wildlife agencies. 

•	 Build brush piles for upland game birds where cover is insufficient. 

•	 Develop opportunities for wildlife interpretive programs. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 13 
RECORD OF DECISION 

Native and Non-Native Fish and Aquatic Species 

•	 Improve streams and springs not in ‘Proper Functioning Condition’ and maintain native fishbearing streams in proper water quality and riparian function. 

•	 Restore and rehabilitate streams by maintaining or improving minimum pool depths, increasing 

clean spawning gravels, and stabilizing stream banks. 

•	 Coordinate with state agencies when implementing management actions, including the planting 

of fish in suitable waters. 

•	 Coordinate with local county fish and game commissions and sportsmen’s groups to determine 

management priorities and enhancement opportunities. 

Non-Native Terrestrial Species 

•	 Manage non-native species per BLM Manual 1745 and in cooperation with state plans and other 

applicable conservation plans. 

Protest and Appeal 

The Eagle Lake Proposed RMP decisions were available for protest to the BLM Director 

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

CFR 1610.5-2. Eleven protests were received. Resolutions to the protests did not result 

in the necessity for more analysis or repeat publication of the Eagle Lake Proposed RMP/ 

Final EIS, or for additional public review and protest. 

The decisions designating routes of travel for motorized vehicles, as described in Chapter 

2.16 Travel Management of the RMP, are implementation decisions and are 

appealable under 43 CFR Part 4. The appeal procedures are summarized below. These 

travel management decisions are effective upon issuance of this Record of Decision, 

unless a stay of the decision is granted. 

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

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

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

Eagle Lake Record of Decision and Approved RMP. 

APPEAL PROCEDURES 

Any party adversely affected by the proposed travel management 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 Chapter 2.16 Travel Management of the RMP, on which 

the decision is being appealed. The appeal must be filed with the Eagle Lake Field 

Manager, at the following address: 

Bureau of Land Management 

Eagle Lake Field Office 

2950 Riverside Drive 

Susanville, CA 96130 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 14 
 

 

 

 

 

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, 

CA, 95825. 

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

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

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

receipt requested. 

REQUEST FOR STAY 

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

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

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

CFR 4.21: 

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

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

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

4. Whether the public interest favors granting the stay. 

Mitigation and Monitoring 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

incorporated as necessary to reduce adverse impacts identified in the environmental 

analysis. 

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

resource values of the planning area. The BLM will monitor biological resources in order 

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

met as management actions are implemented. The Eagle Lake RMP Monitoring Plan is 

included in the ROD under Appendix A. 

Public Involvement 

SCOPING AND ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOPS 

The BLM officially initiated the planning process for the Eagle Lake Draft RMP with 

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

Number 140). The BLM hosted six public scoping meetings in August and September 

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

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

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 15 
 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

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

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

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

December 2003. 

Issues related to resource management in the Eagle Lake planning area were assembled 

during the scoping process, which consisted of public scoping meetings, field tours, 

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

collaborators. The scoping process generated 15 key issues to be addressed in the Eagle 

Lake RMP. These issues were used to develop alternatives and are addressed in other 

sections of the RMP (for example, effects on local economies). 

DRAFT RMP/DRAFT EIS AND PROPOSED RMP/FINAL EIS 

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

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

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

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

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

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

comment meetings. 

The public comment period generated approximately 7,253 submissions of one (nearly 

identical) form letter, 3 submissions of another form letter, and 49 additional unique 

comment letters from individuals and groups. The number of comments that the BLM 

analyzed and responded to was approximately 551. These comments and the BLM’s 

responses to them are summarized in Appendix O of the RMP. Based on the comments 

and feedback received, the BLM prepared the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. The BLM made 

several edits and clarifications regarding management decisions in the Proposed RMP. 

In addition, four substantive changes were made to management decisions: 

1.	 Removal of ‘no surface occupancy’ restrictions from North Dry valley ACEC 

(10,156 acres) to allow for exploration and development of geothermal resources. 

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

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

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

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

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

amendments. 

3.	 Designation of the Empire Lateral of the Tuscarora natural gas pipeline as a 

right-of-way utility corridor. 

4.	 Preferred Alternative has been changed to emphasize improvement of riparian 

conditions, as originally described in Alternative 2. 

Public notice was provided for the Eagle Lake Proposed RMP/FEIS through publication 

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

15, 2007). The NOA also described public protest procedures. The BLM distributed 

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

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

the Susanville public library. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 16 
 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

TRIBAL CONSULTATION 

The Eagle Lake Field Office interacts with 4 federally recognized tribes represented by 6 

tribal governments. Consultation with tribes regarding the Eagle Lake RMP began in 

July, 2003. On July 24, 2003, certified letters were sent to tribal offices containing a 

packet of information about resource management plans and the BLM planning process. 

The tribes were also formally invited to attend a scoping meeting set up especially to 

address their concerns and involvement with the Eagle Lake RMP. Consultation 

meetings were held during which the tribes provided input into plan development. 

Tribal consultation continued during the alternative formulation process in 2004 to 

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

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

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

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

consultation meetings. 

A briefing was held on the Eagle Lake Draft RMP/DEIS with the California State 

Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO) on April 5, 2006 and with the Nevada SHPO on 

March 30, 2006. Planning and process procedures were discussed in addition to 

discussions about outreach and coordination efforts of the Eagle Lake Field Office. Each 

of the tribes was also consulted with on the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. 

COUNTY, STATE, AND FEDERAL PARTICIPATION 

During the planning process Lassen and Washoe Counties requested more specific 

information regarding certain aspects of the RMP of interest to them, such as land 

tenure, special designations, recreation management, access, and energy development. 

In each instance, the Eagle Lake Field Manager and representatives from the Eagle Lake 

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

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

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

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

Game, California Department of Water Resources, and Nevada Department of Wildlife. 

The Eagle Lake Proposed RMP was submitted to the California Governor’s Office of 

Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse, for review by appropriate agencies. The 

Eagle Lake Field Manager received a notification of consistency with the State of 

California for the RMP on September 17, 2007. 

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

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

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT (ESA) CONSULTATION 

The BLM has determined that two federally listed threatened and endangered wildlife 

species, the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and the Carson Wandering skipper 

(Pseudocopaeodes eunus obscurus) are of concern in the Eagle Lake planning area. 

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

the Proposed RMP by submitting a Biological Assessment to the US Fish and Wildlife 

Service on these two species. The USFWS issued a Biological Opinion for the Eagle Lake 

Proposed RMP on August 21, 2007, which concurs with the BLM’s effects analysis. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 17 
 

 

 

RECORD OF DECISION 

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

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

Approved RMP. 

NORTHEAST CALIFORNIA RESOURCE ADVISORY COUNCIL (RAC) 

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

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

to gather and disseminate key information and data. 

ADVERTISEMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

the BLM. 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/st/en/fo/eaglelake.html has been 

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

information on the Eagle Lake Field Office, downloadable version of documents, 

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

PLANNING UPDATE MAILERS 

The BLM produced four special Planning Update mailers: one to announce public 

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

Draft RMP/DEIS. These were sent via direct mail to the Eagle Lake mailing list and were 

also distributed at public meetings. The Planning Updates included background 

information on the Eagle Lake 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. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 18 
RECORD OF DECISION 

APPENDIX A 
 
 
 

EAGLE LAKE FIELD 
 
 
 

OFFICE 
 
 
 

MONITORING PLAN
 
 
 


EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-1 
Eagle Lake Approved RMP –Monitoring Plan Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology Cultural and The BLM Eagle Lake Field Office would seek to Continue on-the-ground monitoring of identified sites to dete

Paleontological protect and preserve significant cultural and deterioration, and use of such sites. Priority for site monitoriResources paleontological resources and ensure that these resources are available to present and future generations for appropriate uses. Manage legitimate activities in a manner that will ensure preservation and provide public benefits through education, interpretation, research, public uses and conservation for future generations. Locate, evaluate and classify paleontological resources and protect them where appropriate. site significance or site’s potential to yield significant informat

eligibility to the National Register, 2) the severity of threat to of threat to a site. Visit cultural resource sites within the planning area on a periof 10 sites annually. Monitor the condition of the site and docdeterioration of the site, and enter information into the culturdisturbed site is considered eligible to the National Register oappropriate consultation to determine the appropriate action or apply mitigation measures. When able, coordinate with BLM Law Enforcement to monitor resource areas. Meet with communities, groups, and educational institutions tof educational and interpretive information. Inventory newly identified geographic areas for cultural and pRecord and document new sites and any disturbances. 

Fire Areas with a history of wildland fire-under Document wildland fire use areas; record event and monitor Management conditions showing little potential for spreading—should be considered for wildland 

fire use, monitoring, or a containment-andconfinement strategy. 

Fire Rehabilitation and Stabilization 

Wildland fire emergency stabilization and rehabilitation (ES&R) projects will be completed in a manner that ensures ecosystem health. Natural regeneration for site-rehabilitation will be used following fire—where this appears adequate and would not lead to proliferation of weeds. Where assessment shows a need, reseed with native vegetation, if possible. 

Monitoring is required on all Emergency Stabilization and RehMonitoring methods may include photo points, density, coverplots, ocular estimates, and soil erosion within each eco-regioThe elements of a defensible monitoring program applicable tprojects are objectives, stratification, control areas, random sand statistical analysis. 

Provide appropriate levels of rest or deferment Livestock are to be excluded from burned areas until monitor

from grazing after a wildfire to meet emergency in writing, show emergency stabilization and rehabilitation obstabilization and burned area rehabilitation Objectives must be clearly defined in the Emergency Stabiliza

goals and objectives. Rehabilitation Plan. 

Forestry Create healthy forest ecosystems in all seral 

stages that are ecologically stable, support natural watershed function, and supply the needs of wildlife. Conditions would be such that wildfires are controllable (i.e. forests would 

Stand composition, productivity and structure will be documewithin the Forvis Database. Record accomplishments for providing wood products in the TSystem database and MIS reporting. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 

A-2
 
 
 
Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology approximate original, natural conditions) and human needs for recreation, wood products, and other objectives are adequately addressed. Fuels Fuels treatment projects would be prioritized in Measure density of fuel loads (biomass) before and after treaManagement the wildland urban interface of communities, in sagebrush-steppe ecosystems invaded by western juniper, important wildlife habitats, and areas with sensitive cultural resources. Long- range fuels treatment projects would be developed and implemented to improve forest and rangeland ecosystems, enhance the quality of recreation or improve opportunities, increase the quantity and quality of livestock forage. weight records or estimation of biomass. Conduct photo trend monitoring pretreatment, post treatmen

other methodologies after treatment. Livestock Grazing Provide a sustainable level of livestock forage that is consistent with achieving BLM land health standards, objectives for other resources, 

and multiple-use management of public lands. 

Collect actual use reports from grazing permittees (report incpasture use, turnout and gather dates) on intensively managrequired. Long-term monitoring will be conducted on priority allotmentsbe incorporated with compliance data and analyzed for use in effectiveness of current management and in the establishmenobjectives. Allotment management plans will be developed on identified based upon analysis of all monitoring data and future manageMonitor “I and M” category allotments as required or when isas when land health standards are not being met or progress 

Monitoring may include but not limited to trend, land health areassessment, photo studies, and any existing monitoring to goals and objectives are being met. On a periodic basis, evaluate allotments that have been identassessment and/or re-assessment using the “Healthy RangelaGuidelines” to determine if progress is being made. 

Allotments will be managed in compliance with standards set forth in the Approved Northeastern California and Northwestern Nevada Standards and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing (2000). 

Use the rangeland health assessment process prescribed in thof Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health (USDI-BLM, 20

Standards and Guidelines (USDI-BLM, 1997), and BLM Manua4180-1 guiding implementation of the rangeland health stand

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-3 
Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology Livestock Work cooperatively with ranchers and other Conduct periodic measurements of plant composition, vigor, aGrazing stakeholders to implement treatments to reduce as measurement of the amount and distribution of plant cove(continued) juniper encroachment in sagebrush/grassland communities, with the goal of restoring sagebrush communities to a healthy condition, and thereby maintaining (or potentially increasing) forage production of native grasses, forbs, and shrubs. herbaceous or woody utilization, actual use, and climatic cond

effectiveness of established tools in meeting objectives. Monicondition of vegetation may include (but is not limited to) idedetermining ecological status, determining soil types, vegetatinventory, and assembling existing basic information. Procedu

of use) would be primarily those in BLM Technical References 

Recreation and Visitor Services Provide and enhance public recreational opportunities, of a developed and undeveloped nature. Ensure that quality customer service is provided, resources are protected, and user conflicts minimized. Provide a full range of recreational experiences emphasizing self-sufficient exploration and recreation based on the recreation opportunity 

spectrum. 

Conduct regular patrols of developed recreation facilities (cam

improved day use areas, etc) and periodic patrols of popular where recreation use is concentrated. Patrols are to monitor and natural resource conditions, determine maintenance need

hosts where present and plan project work where needed. Claw enforcement rangers and local Sheriff deputies when and visitor compliance with rules and regulations. Focus field monitoring on visitation levels, compliance with rupermit stipulations for specific sites, dispersed uses, and presguidelines. Use visitor surveys, traffic counters, documentatio

photo documentation of the changes in resource conditions ovMonitoring may also include collection of data from visitor cominformation request calls or emails. Use monitoring data to m

develop plans and projects to reduce visitor impacts, and to pfacility or transportation system design. 

Use public education and environmental In areas where visitor use is causing or may lead to adverse awareness programs (e.g. “leave no trace” and cultural resources, determine if studies are needed to establ“tread lightly”) to reduce adverse impacts from observation points to determine current impacts from recreat

thoughtless or destructive camping practices. are needed, design and conduct studies that provide data nec

decisions to resolve problems caused by recreational use(s). 

In cooperation with Lassen, Modoc and Washoe Counties, designate and manage four Scenic or Backcountry Byways through public lands for scenic driving and sightseeing experiences on existing dirt and gravel roads managed by BLM, Lassen, Modoc and Washoe Counties. Also work with Lassen, Modoc and Washoe Counties to designate and manage three Scenic Byways on paved roads in conjunction with Lassen County and Caltrans. 

Annually, drive, ride or hike each Scenic Byway, Backcountry 

sightseeing route that becomes designated as a result of this assessments will include a review of road conditions, unauthoscenic routes, impacts to scenic values along the routes, and 

may be needed to meet the objectives of these routes. Docuresults in files established for monitoring of each byway. 

Monitor impacts to scenic resources along the byways by usinevaluate impacts of proposed projects on scenic Byways and 

ways to meet VRM objectives established in this RMP for publscenic travel routes and as viewed from those vista points. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-4 
Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology Soil Resources Soils would be protected where they meet land health standards. Site stability and/or soil productivity would be substantially improved where soils do not currently meet these standards. Use the rangeland health assessment process, particularly th

prescribed in the most current versions of Interpreting Indica(USDI-BLM, 2000b), Rangeland Health Standards and Guideliand BLM Manual 4180 and Handbook H-4180-1 guiding implerangeland health standards. Special Manage seven ACECs within the Eagle Lake Each ACEC will have a management plan prepared that will in

Designations – Field Office jurisdiction encompassing 89,397 component. Monitoring will be carried out using methods appArea of Critical acres. This includes 160 acres of the previously designated Pine Dunes Research Natural Area. the conditions of the relevant and important values that each 

protect and preserve. Monitoring results will be documented i

Environmental Concern Determine condition and trends of the “relevance and importance” values that served whether or not the ACEC management objectives are being m

protecting an ACEC’s relevant and important values are not b

(ACEC) as the basis for designation of each ACEC. actions will be evaluated to determine which actions are need

management objectives for that ACEC. Appropriate actions w

protect the ACEC’s relevant and important values. ACEC monitoring will occur at a minimum once every two yeadetermined necessary in the individual management plans debe completed following final completion of this RMP. For the Pine Dune Research Natural Area, monitor to determi

objectives established in the existing Pine Dunes Managemenobjectives and planned actions specified in this new RMP are 

Special Manage the Nobles Emigrant Trail to preserve Monitor site specific locations on the Nobles Emigrant Trail to Designations – and protect trail traces and trail settings. the trail traces. If adverse impacts are occurring, implement Historic trails Protect other historic trail traces and settings to retain their historic value for present and future 

generations to experience and enjoy. 

traces where feasible. Review all projects proposed along the Nobles Trail to assure for public lands seen along the trail are met (most foregroundwithin 3 to 5 miles of the trail are VRM Class II). Monitor condition of all other historic trails within the Eagle Laon the Historic Trails Map in the RMP. If new information sho

alignments not identified in the RMP, take actions to identify trails segments. Monitor progress in developing and distributing interpretive in

trails within the Eagle Lake Field Office. 

Special Manage Upper Smoke Creek (10.6 miles) and Develop and implement a monitoring plan to assure that UppDesignations – its associated uplands, so as not to impair the outstandingly remarkable values are protected through BLM mWild and creek’s suitability for WSR designation. If designated, ensure that future planning, monitoring with all resource specialists responsible for manag

outstandingly remarkable values within the WSR corridor. Mo

Scenic Rivers projects, and management actions maintain the periodic patrols to check conditions of natural and cultural res(WSR) free-flowing character and outstandingly 

remarkable values of this recommended suitable WSR. Provide reasonable public access and encourage low-impact recreation. 

exclosure fences, signing, and visitor use levels. Review all pWSR’s outstandingly remarkable values in compliance with prScenic River’s Act. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 

A-5
 
 
 
Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology Special Manage seven WSAs so as not to impair their Follow direction within the existing policy for WSAs (USDI-BLDesignations – suitability for wilderness designation. 380,359 acres of WSAs during the months these areas are acWilderness more frequently if necessary because of potential use activitie

conflicts. Use aerial surveillance, on-the-ground surveillance, 

Study Areas compliance checks, and other methods as appropriate. (WSA) Travel Management Routes would be maintained, modified, created, or obliterated in order to meet land health standards, water quality standards, wildlife habitat needs, and changing public needs and desires. Focus monitoring on: - compliance with travel designation requirements that all mo

designated roads and trails unless otherwise authorized, - meeting land health standards for Off Highway Vehicles as eNortheast CA Resource Advisory Council, - maintained travel routes to determine condition and identify - known problem areas where soil conditions, visitor use impacaused problems that require monitoring and/or corrective ac- reported problem areas that require field checks to determin- high use routes where impacts may occur from high use lev- areas where pioneering of new routes is reported or is likely 

Improve quality-of-life for local residents through a system of non-motorized trails. Trails would provide access to public lands for physical fitness, recreation, and environmental/cultural education. Create high-quality, trail-related recreational destinations that attracts visitors to the scenic landscapes of Lassen County and northwestern Washoe County. 

Hike or ride non-motorized trails to monitor trail conditions to maintenance needs, assess types and amounts of visitor use satisfaction with trails. Evaluate trail impacts on natural resouinspections, photo at problem areas (erosion, users short cutcounters where appropriate to determine visitor use levels. Iassist in trail monitoring where appropriate and feasible. Monitor implementation effectiveness to determine if propose

and if not, determine what is impeding implementation of the RMP and seek means to remedy that problem so that the traiis achieved. 

Vegetation – Vegetation would achieve and maintain its capacity to support natural function and biotic Measure trends in areas where issues have been identified or 

land health is not being made. Techniques and methods may 

Native Plant integrity within the context of normal variability. production, structure, and composition, soil/site stability, watCommunities Therefore, plant communities would be 

sufficiently resilient to resist loss of structure and function resulting from disturbance and adequately recover following such events. 

integrity of biotic community. Use the rangeland health assesin the most current versions of Interpreting Indicators of Ran

BLM, 2000b), Rangeland Health Standards and Guidelines (USManual 4180 and Handbook H-4180-1 guiding implementatiostandards. Conduct periodic measurements of plant composition, vigor, aas measurement of the amount and distribution of plant cove

herbaceous or woody utilization, actual use, and climatic condeffectiveness of established tools in meeting objectives. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-6 
Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology Vegetation – Native Plant Communities (continued) Monitoring of existing condition of vegetation would consist o

sites, determining ecological status, determining soil types, vbaseline inventory, and assembling existing basic informationfrequency of use) would be primarily those in BLM Technical R4400-5. Restoration of degraded or decadent shrub- steppe communities will be prioritized in areas that will quickly recover to the desired plant community, and in areas where restoration would enhance important wildlife habitat (i.e. riparian areas, pronghorn kidding grounds, and sage-grouse brood rearing sites). Conduct periodic measurements of plant composition, vigor, aas measurement of the amount and distribution of plant covehave been identified as needing further assessment or where prove useful. Monitor herbaceous or woody utilization, actual conditions to determine the effectiveness of established tools 

Assess the distribution and density of rare plant Monitor for seedling establishment, seedling and sapling survcommunities, including quaking aspen, curlleaf herbaceous plant diversity in areas identified as needing furthmountain mahogany, and black oak. These for effectiveness of treatments in rare plant communities that communities will be managed for a diversity of treatments or conifer removal. Effective monitoring methods 

species and for mixed age-classes. Sampling Vegetation Attributes Technical Reference TR-1734

2005, Monitoring Manual for Grassland, Shrubland, and Sava

Vegetation – Maintain, restore, or improve riparian vegetation, habitat diversity, and hydrologic Conduct Proper Functioning Condition Assessment TR 1737-9 

(assessment for streams) and TR 1737-11 and TR 1737-16 (a

Riparian/ stability to achieve healthy, productive riparian lakes/wetlands) to assess the functionality of riparian and weWetlands areas and wetlands. identified as needing further assessment. 

The primary monitoring technique will be reassessing conditioProper Functioning Condition (referenced in TR 1737-9 [BLM [Lentic Riparian-Wetland Area Proper Functioning Condition WOngoing riparian photo studies will be continued within grazindocument changes. Monitor the amount and distribution of plants across a channestreambank in areas with a downward trend or as identified u

document visual changes over time on the condition of the stphoto points. 

Special Status Protect habitats and populations of special Visual reconnaissance would be used to obtain general informPlants status plants and maintain their reproductive 

viability so that BLM actions do not contribute to the need for future “listing” under the Endangered Species Act. 

special status plants. Individual special status plant species pwould be monitored on a periodic basis and a CDFG native spfilled out. Conduct surveys to identify suspected and unknown populatio

Noxious Weeds Eliminate or control noxious weeds, invasive Known infestations will be evaluated annually and integrated and Invasive species, and poisonous plants to preserve or techniques will be applied as necessary. Species improve wildlife habitat, forest and rangeland productivity, and land health generally. Monitor treatment sites to determine effects on the target spe

target species, and assess recovery or invasion by other spec

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 

A-7
 
 
 
Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology Noxious Weeds Conduct annual monitoring for new noxious weeds, concentraand Invasive ground disturbing activities have occurred, and where the puSpecies (continued) have reported sightings. Visit known noxious weed sites whic

treatment, and evaluate for effectiveness of control (annuallyany newly discovered sites, record with a global positioning sphotograph, measure, and determine the need for future trea

Visual Designate (BLM) visual resource management Monitor compliance with meeting the objectives of the VRM CResource classes for all lands under the jurisdiction of the RMP by evaluating the visual impacts of all proposed projects Management Eagle Lake Field Office. Manage these lands according to their respective VRM class objectives. process. Where projects have potential for high visual contr

sensitive areas, use BLM’s visual contrast rating system as paevaluate visual impacts of proposed projects. Water Resources Ensure that the natural hydrologic function of uplands, springs, riparian areas, streams, and wetlands is achieved (or preserved) so that requirements of beneficial uses and state water 

quality standards are met. 

Use the rangeland health assessment process, particularly th(stream health), 3 (water quality) and 4 (riparian and wetlanmost current versions of Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland 2000b), Rangeland Health Standards and Guidelines (USDI-BManual 4180 and Handbook H-4180-1 guiding implementatiostandards. Water quality monitoring would be conducted at the establishsampling stations on a priority basis using the following indicabased on the standards contained in the Northeastern Califor

Nevada Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Li

Management (BLM 1999). These indicators are temperature, 

turbidity, sediment, dissolved oxygen, and stream channel cooutlined in the USDI - BLM National Field Manual for the Colle

Data and the Susanville District Bioregional Assessment WateStatement of Work. Best Management Practices are developed and implemented t

quality and beneficial uses of water at the project level. BMP

evaluated on implementation and effectiveness as part of the 

Determine in-stream flow requirements Conduct Proper Functioning Condition Assessment TR 1737-9 

necessary to support healthy aquatic and (assessment for lotic systems) and TR 1737-11 and TR 1737-

riparian habitats. Acquire and maintain water lentic systems) to assess the functionality of riparian and wet

rights needed to protect federal investments by Additional stream Habitat Condition Surveys and macro-inverensuring an adequate and reliable water supply be conducted as needed to assess functionality of streams for 

for BLM programs. resources. Completion of the Water Source Inventory and m

rights data base would provide needed information to assert especially Public Water Reserves to protect federal investmen

reliable water supply for beneficial uses of public lands. 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-8 
Resource RMP Goal/Objective Suggested Methodology Wild Horses Manage wild horses and burros within On a periodic basis, evaluate every herd management area uand Burros designated “herd management areas” at 

population levels that protect vegetation, wildlife, livestock, and other resources to ensure maintenance of a thriving ecological balance. 

Rangelands Standards and Guidelines”. Field data collection rangeland health and riparian functional assessment process, most current versions of Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland 2000b), Rangeland Health Standards and Guidelines (USDI-BManual 4180 and Handbook H-4180-1 guiding implementatiostandards. Currently, periodic evaluate is expected to occur a

years, or when changes in resource conditions are apparent. Herd population monitoring and distribution data collection w

Aerial census would be preferably completed at 3-year interv

Wildlife and Fisheries 

Habitats of federally listed (endangered, threatened, or candidate), state-listed and BLM sensitive wildlife will be protected, restored, and maintained so that species populations are maintained, or increased in size and stability, and occupy available habitats. The Eagle Lake Field Office will provide diverse and healthy habitats for native wildlife species. Habitats will conform to land health standards, guidelines for livestock grazing, and other BLM policies and guidelines. Habitat conditions will demonstrate fulfillment of life-cycle requirements for native species and their reproductive success. 

Monitor BLM proposed and authorized actions to ensure they Bureau’s Special Status Species Management Policy, BLM Manthey are consistent with the objectives and guidelines outlineIn conjunction with other federal, state, or private agencies, cwildlife populations in the planning area. Do this for individuaand golden eagles, sage-grouse, deer, and pronghorn; and gassociated with source habitats such as sagebrush-steppe, juforest. Periodically determine the adequacy of existing data (i.e. spesupporting management decisions. Periodically assess the effectiveness of a sampling of differenand disturbance actions to determine effectiveness of manage

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

Monitor riparian habitat condition on an allotment basis durinor during rangeland health assessments as part of determinincondition (PFC). 

EAGLE LAKE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN A-9 
UNITED STATES
 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Eagle Lake Field Office 2950 Riverside Drive 

Susanville, CA 96130 

OFFICIAL BUSINESS 

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE $300
 

Po

Burea