149Introduction

5

Feasibility and Need for NPS Management

Photos (clockwise): 1. Dam, Angeles National Forest. Photo by Eric Lowenbach 2. San Gabriel Slender Salamander. Photo by 

David Wake. 3. Workman House. NPS Photo. 4. Canyon Road, Angeles National Forest. Photo by Eric Lowenbach. 
150 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 
 Chapter 5: Feasibility And Need For Nps Management Introduction 151

Chapter 5: Feasibility 

and Need for NPS 

Management

Introduction

Feasibility

To be feasible as a new unit of the national park 

system, an area must be (1) of suffi cient size and 

appropriate confi guration to ensure sustainable 

resource protection and visitor enjoyment (taking 

into account current and pote ntial impacts from 

sources beyond proposed park boundaries), and 

(2) capable of effi cient administration by the 

National Park Service (NPS) at a reasonable cost. In 

evaluating feasibility, the NPS considers a variety of 

factors for a study area, such as the following:

• size

• boundary confi gurations

• current and potential uses of the study area and 

surrounding lands

• landownership patterns

• public enjoyment potential

• costs associated with acquisition, development, 

restoration, and operation

• access

• current and potential threats to the resources

• existing degradation of resources

• staffi ng requirements

• local planning and zoning

• the level of local and general public support 

(including landowners)

• the economic/socioeconomic impacts of 

designation as a unit of the national park 

system

The feasibility evaluation also considers the ability 

of the NPS to undertake new management 

responsibilities in light of current and projected 

availability of funding and personnel.

An overall evaluation of feasibility is made after 

taking into account all of the above factors. 

However, evaluations may sometimes identify 

concerns or conditions, rather than simply reach 

a yes or no conclusion. For example, some new 

areas may be feasible additions to the national park 

system only if landowners are willing to sell, or the 

boundary encompasses specifi c areas necessary for 

visitor access, or state or local governments will 

provide appropriate assurances that adjacent land 

uses will remain compatible with the study area’s 

resources and values (NPS 2006).

Some management options are more feasible 

than others. The national park system includes 

many types of sites, and a range of ownership and 

management approaches.  When many people 

think of national parks, they think of the large and 

mostly natural parks like Yosemite and Yellowstone. 

However, the national park system includes many 

other types of sites, such as small historic sites, wild 

and scenic rivers, and long distance trails. Some 

NPS sites are small parks located in urban areas, 

relying on partnerships, with little, if any, federal 

landownership or management. Other NPS sites are 

large natural areas where multiple park agencies 

cooperate to conserve land and provide public 

services. The NPS also offers grant and technical 

assistance programs that help local communities 

achieve their goals for conservation and recreation. 

Evaluation of Feasibility Factors

The following evaluation explores the potential 

for a range of different types of national park sites 

and management roles, while acknowledging 

the existing ownership and uses of land within 

the study area.

Boundary Size and Confi guration 

An acceptable boundary for an envisioned unit of 

the national park system should provide for the 

inclusion and protection of its primary resources; 

suffi cient surrounding area to provide a proper 

setting for the resources or to interrelate a group of 

resources; and suffi cient land for appropriate use 

and development.

The study area covers more than 700,000 acres 

(1,000 square miles) in the greater Los Angeles 

metropolitan area, one of the most densely 

populated areas of the United States. The study 

area includes a large portion of the Angeles 

National Forest, plus rural agricultural areas, highly 

urbanized communities and large natural areas 

that contain nationally signifi cant resources. As 

described in Chapter 3, Resource Signifi cance, the 

nationally signifi cant areas are concentrated in the 

San Gabriel Mountains and foothills (approximately 

500,000 acres) and the Puente-Chino Hills 

(approximately 17,000 acres). These areas support 

native plant communities, rare and endangered 

species, and are large enough to connect multiple 

resource types, provide a natural setting for them, 

and provide regional habitat connectivity. The San 
152 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

Gabriel Mountains and Puente Hills also provide the 

region with recreation opportunities, fresh drinking 

water, and fl ood protection. 

CONCLUSION

The study area is of adequate size to include and 

protect the area’s nationally signifi cant resources. 

Land Use, Ownership Patterns, 

Planning and Zoning

Two-thirds of the study area is owned and managed 

by the United States Forest Service (USFS) as part of 

the Angeles National Forest (approximately 415,000 

acres). These lands are currently managed by the 

USFS for multiple uses, including public recreation, 

utility corridors and watershed management, with 

recreation as the primary use. Early in the study 

process, the NPS compared the size and scale of 

the Angeles NF to the NPS ability to take on new 

management responsibilities, and determined that 

continued USFS management would be necessary 

and desirable. 

Because of this determination, the NPS committed 

to consider in this study only those alternatives 

that retain USFS management of the Angeles NF. 

Appropriate roles for the NPS that complement 

USFS management and enhance resource 

protection and public enjoyment opportunities also 

exist. 

One third of the study area is primarily privately 

owned, consisting of urbanized land in the San 

Gabriel Valley and Los Angeles Basin, and rural/

agricultural areas north of the ANF. This land 

is spread among 57 communities, 38 of which 

are incorporated, with the remainder subject to 

area-specifi c planning and zoning regulated by 

Los Angeles County. Various parks, infrastructure 

and large land areas are owned and managed 

by individual municipalities, county, and state 

government agencies. 

The nationally signifi cant resources in this part of 

the study area include portions of the San Gabriel 

foothills and the Puente-Chino Hills and where 

land ownership in these areas is more scattered. 

Landowners in the eastern Puente Hills want to 

retain ownership of their land and have limited 

interest in cooperative management with the NPS. 

The Puente Hills Landfi ll Native Habitat Preservation 

Authority, the largest recreational open space in the 

urbanized part of the study area, has stated that the 

area could potentially benefi t from a non-traditional 

partnership with the NPS. The NPS is considering 

only management approaches that respect and 

retain the land use authority of jurisdictions within 

the study area, and would consider land acquisition 

or land management only in specifi c areas that are 

found to be nationally signifi cant, meet NPS criteria 

for suitability and feasibility and where there are 

supportive landowners. 

CONCLUSION

The complexity of existing land uses complicates 

designation of a large, traditional park unit. 

Designation of a collaborative national park unit 

that works with local, state, and federal managers 

to protect natural and cultural resources, provide 

recreation, public access, interpretation, education, 

and other compatible uses could, however, be 

compatible with existing ownership patterns and 

regulatory authorities. For example, there may be 

opportunities to provide habitat and recreational 

opportunities that could also improve water quality, 

provide water retention for fl ood protection or 

water conservation, and expand upon the ongoing 

efforts of local organizations. Given the size and 

scale of the Angeles National Forest, the NPS 

determined that continued USFS management 

would be necessary and desirable. Many potential 

collaborators, such as the Angeles National Forest, 

worked with the NPS in developing the alternatives 

presented in this document.

Access and Public Enjoyment 

Potential 

Approximately 1.5 million people live within 

the study area. Millions more in the greater Los 

Angeles metropolitan area use the open spaces and 

parklands of the study area. Publicly accessible open 

space includes the Angeles National Forest as well 

as state, regional and local parks. 

Comprising over 70% of Los Angeles County’s 

open space, the Angeles National Forest serves as a 

recreational day-use opportunity for local residents. 

Data from 2009 estimate almost 3.5 million visitors 

to the forest annually (USFS 2009). The forest 

offers river access and miles of trails through a 

wide array of landforms and habitats. Recreational 

activities on the forest include camping, hiking, 

climbing, horseback riding, off-highway vehicle use, 

fi shing and swimming. Approximately 1.1% of the 

forest lands within the study area have developed 

recreational opportunities (e.g. roads, parking areas, 

restrooms, etc.). The developed areas around the 

San Gabriel River are the most popular destinations 

in the forest. Visitors are attracted to this area for its 

water-based recreation opportunities.

Within the urbanized areas and rural communities 

there are numerous open spaces and parklands 
 Chapter 5: Feasibility And Need For Nps Management Evaluation Of Feasibility Factors 153

available for public recreation, such as local, 

regional, county and state parks, golf courses, 

wilderness parks, historical parks and cultural sites, 

equestrian areas and Bureau of Land Management 

lands. These sites make up approximately 2% of 

the study area. Although access to some rivers 

and creeks is restricted for water supply and 

fl ood protection purposes, many waterways have 

adjacent bike trails as well as nearby parks that 

provide recreational opportunities.

The largest recreational open space area in the 

urbanized portions of the study area is the land 

owned by the Puente Hills Landfi ll Native Habitat 

Preservation Authority (Preserve) which includes 

3,860 acres of land. The jurisdictional boundary 

for the Preserve includes a total of 20,000 acres in 

the eastern Puente Hills, extending from the San 

Gabriel River east to the Chino Hills. Over time the 

Preserve plans to continue to acquire key parcels 

of land within the jurisdictional boundary for 

conservation and recreational uses. Other major 

recreational open space areas include Whittier 

Narrows Recreation Area, Santa Fe Dam Recreation 

Area, Bonelli Regional Park, municipal wilderness 

parks in the San Gabriel foothills, and numerous city 

and county parks.

The study area contains seven trails designated 

under the National Trails System. Regional and local 

trails also provide recreational access.

Despite the considerable public open space and 

recreation opportunities in the area, there are many 

unmet needs and interests, including: 

• need for linkages between regional open 

spaces and local parklands to protect habitat 

and wildlife corridors and provide more 

recreational opportunities for the growing 

region;

• demand for additional recreation;

• limited or diffi cult access to recreational 

opportunities for people who do not have 

automobiles, and from urbanized communities 

with greater numbers of children, low income 

residents and people of color; 

• the need to plan for additional recreation 

opportunities to meet the demands of future 

population growth. 

CONCLUSION

There is considerable potential for public access 

and enjoyment within the study area. There are 

opportunities for a wide variety of recreational uses 

in the nationally signifi cant San Gabriel Mountains 

and Puente-Chino Hills, and there is ample 

potential for development of additional recreation 

opportunities and improved access elsewhere. 

Existing Resource Degradation and 

Threats to Resources 

The San Gabriel Mountains and Puente-Chino Hills 

contain signifi cant resources with a high degree 

of integrity. These areas make up over two-thirds 

of the study area. Isolated pockets of signifi cant 

resources exist within other portions of the study 

area where extensive urbanization has fragmented 

and impacted the integrity of the resources. 

The Angeles National Forest contains highly 

signifi cant resources, however, certain areas 

are impacted by a variety of factors, including 

infrastructure, private inholdings, concentrated 

visitor use, and recreational activities such as offhighway vehicle use. River-based recreation activities 

are extremely popular, and the San Gabriel Canyon 

often hits its capacity on warm summer weekends 

and the U.S. Forest Service has to close the area. 

High use visitor areas within the Angeles National 

Forest have higher incidences of litter, graffi ti and 

other types of vandalism. Some visitors alter river 

bed geomorphology by creating rock dams for 

swimming areas. 

Regional population growth and future 

development pose a threat to signifi cant resources 

within the study area. Existing and proposed urban 

development threatens coastal sage scrub habitat 

in the Montebello Hills and walnut woodlands and 

coastal sage scrub in the eastern Puente-Chino 

Hills. Proposals for transportation projects, including 

road widening and freeway development, water 

and sewer projects, and new housing development 

threaten signifi cant resources throughout the study 

area. Development proposals in the Puente-Chino 

Hills could degrade resource integrity and threaten 

the area’s important wildlife connection to the Santa 

Ana Mountains. Although areas of the Soledad 

Basin and Antelope Valley within the study area are 

relatively undeveloped with pockets of signifi cant 

habitat, these areas are also the fastest growing 

regions of Los Angeles County. Without careful 

planning and protection, important wildlife corridors 

to the San Gabriel Mountains could be lost. 

Impacts from climate change may threaten 

area water supply and wildlife habitat. Rising 

temperatures and altered rainfall may cause 

additional stress on native habitat and increase 

air pollution. Such changes may cause native and 

endemic plants to move northward and toward the 

coast, following the shifts in their preferred climate. 

Native and endemic plants in southern California 
154 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

could move up mountains into cooler but highly 

vulnerable refugia. The San Gabriel Mountains 

are predicted to be an area for native plants and 

animals seeking refuge when the climate change 

begins to impact their habitat. Enhanced protection 

of these areas and their connections to other 

signifi cant habitat areas in the region may help to 

offset future habitat stressors from global climate 

change. Protecting corridors through which plants 

and animals can move to such refugia, and assisting 

plants and animals in reestablishing themselves 

in new regions, may help conserve these species 

(University of California 2008).

CONCLUSION

Despite these resource impacts and threats, 

approximately two-thirds of the study area contains 

protected lands with signifi cant resources of high 

integrity. These areas are not subject to resource 

degradation or threats that would preclude 

management as a unit of the national park system.

Public Interest and Support

Extensive public involvement efforts, fi rst in 2005 

and 2006, and then again in late 2009, identifi ed 

strong interest in additional NPS involvement in 

the region to help protect signifi cant resources and 

provide additional recreation and public enjoyment 

opportunities. 

The NPS held numerous meetings with federal, 

state and county agencies that are responsible 

for conservation and recreation within the study 

area. These agencies have been supportive of a 

National Park Service management and/or technical 

assistance role in the study area. They also stressed 

the value of having another federal partner to 

leverage the funds necessary to conserve lands for 

open space and recreation.

In the public scoping period, public suggestions 

for an appropriate NPS role ranged from creating 

momentum in bringing communities together to 

address resource protection and recreational needs 

to providing park rangers along the San Gabriel 

River. It was also suggested that the NPS could play 

a role in coordinated or joint management with and 

among existing agencies and jurisdictions. Emphasis 

was placed on the potential for the NPS to leverage 

more resources for the region. 

Concerns about an NPS presence in the study area 

included the potential for duplication of efforts, 

the need to maintain local land use control, water 

rights and private property rights, and concern 

over unnecessary regulatory overlays. In response 

to these concerns, the NPS considered only those 

alternatives that respect and retain the local land 

use authority of jurisdictions within the study area, 

and considered limited land acquisition only in areas 

where there are willing sellers.

In 2009, when alternative management concepts 

were fi rst presented to the public, support for 

an expanded NPS role intensifi ed. Almost 5,000 

written comments were received, with the vast 

majority supporting more NPS involvement and 

designation of a larger park unit than previously 

proposed. While some cities and agencies, along 

with a number of individuals, expressed concerns 

about possible loss of local control or restrictions 

on their ability to carry out necessary functions, the 

majority of governmental and private respondents, 

including seven Congressional representatives, the 

U.S. Forest Service, and the San Gabriel and Lower 

Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy 

(RMC), supported an NPS-led, partnership-based 

national recreation area.

CONCLUSION

Public outreach for this study including numerous 

meetings with public offi cials and land management 

organizations, has demonstrated signifi cant 

public interest and support for the NPS to play a 

collaborative role in the area in partnership with 

other land management and resource protection 

organizations. 

Social and Economic Impact

Designation of a national park unit within some 

portion of the study area would likely have a 

number of economic and social impacts on the 

area. Most of these impacts would likely be 

benefi cial. Social and economic benefi ts could 

follow from improved public access to open space 

and recreational opportunities. Socioeconomic 

issues identifi ed during the public scoping process 

included requests for evaluating any potential 

impacts to property values and the local economy 

within and adjacent to the proposed area. It was 

also suggested that the NPS evaluate potential 

recreation opportunity effects on traditionally 

underserved communities. A more complete 

analysis of social and economic impacts is explored 

in Chapter 7, Environmental Consequences.

CONCLUSION

The social and economic impacts appear to be 

largely benefi cial and would support the feasibility 

of NPS designation.
 Chapter 5: Feasibility And Need For Nps Management Need For Nps Management 155

Costs Associated with Operation, 

Acquisition, Development and 

Restoration

Costs associated with a national park unit include 

annual operations costs and periodic costs of land 

acquisition, development of facilities, and resource 

restoration. 

Operations costs of national park units vary widely, 

depending on the amount and type of resources 

managed, number of visitors, level of programs 

offered, and many other factors. Operating costs 

for a partnership park unit or NPS technical/

administrative assistance would typically be lower 

than the operating expenses of a traditional 

national park. Chapter 6, Alternatives, explores 

potential operational costs in more detail for each 

management alternative. The tables in that chapter 

provide some comparative base budget numbers 

for various partnership-based park units. Budgets 

for park units with very little NPS landownership 

range from approximately $1.2 million to $3.5 

million. By comparison, a more traditional, larger 

national park unit (not recommended by this study) 

could require an annual operating budget of $2-15 

million. The smaller budgets for partnership parks 

typically provide funding for core staff to handle 

park coordination and outreach, assist partners with 

conservation planning, and provide interpretive and 

educational programs. Operational partnerships 

with other land management organizations, such 

as the Angeles National Forest and Los Angeles 

County Department of Public Works, would create 

more effi ciency in staffi ng across various agencies.

Land acquisition costs cannot be estimated without 

more specifi c proposals for acquisition of specifi c 

areas. NPS funds for land acquisition are very 

limited, and proposed acquisitions compete for 

funds nationally with many other worthy sites. 

Given the high cost of land in Los Angeles County, 

only acquisition of targeted sites would be feasible. 

Subject to available funds, the NPS would consider 

land acquisition or land management in specifi c 

areas that are found to be nationally signifi cant, 

meet NPS criteria for suitability and feasibility, and 

where there are interested and supportive sellers 

and landowners.

Collaborative management between the NPS 

and other land management agencies would 

provide greater advantages for obtaining land 

acquisition funding which is highly competitive and 

requires considerable public and political support. 

Partnerships with existing organizations such as 

the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy that have 

access to land acquisition funds would be essential. 

Funding could be obtained from multiple sources 

over time for targeted lands as those areas become 

available for acquisition.

Development costs of new national park units 

vary widely, depending on existing conditions and 

facilities and the types of conditions and facilities 

desired. New national park units frequently invest 

funds to inventory and document park resources, 

developing management or treatment plans for 

those resources, developing educational and 

interpretive materials, and developing or improving 

facilities for visitors and for park operations. Under 

partnership park scenarios, the NPS could share 

facilities with existing agencies or share costs for 

any new facilities deemed necessary. 

For the purposes of this study, the NPS has 

developed cost estimates that are based on 

very broad needs typically associated with the 

operational requirements of a new park unit. If a 

new unit is established, the NPS would prepare a 

general management plan that would guide future 

management of the area, and would include more 

detailed cost estimates for operations and facilities 

development.

CONCLUSION

Costs for establishment of a national park unit 

appear to be feasible, provided that partnership 

opportunities are pursued to support collaborative 

operations, land acquisition, and development. 

Given the high cost of land in Los Angeles County, 

only acquisition of targeted sites would be feasible, 

and only where there are supportive landowners.

Feasibility Summary 

The study team has found that a collaborative 

partnership-based park unit, which respects the 

complex mix of land use, ownership, and regulatory 

authority in the study area is feasible. Opportunities 

for collaborative management with local, state 

and federal managers to protect natural and 

cultural resources, provide recreation, public access, 

interpretation and educational opportunities, and 

other compatible uses in an NPS partnership-based 

park unit have been demonstrated to exist. A large 

traditional national park unit, owned and operated 

solely by the National Park Service, is determined to 

be infeasible.
156 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

Table 8: Feasibility Factors Issues and Conclusions

Boundary size and 

confi guration

The study area is of adequate size and confi guration to include and protect the 

area’s nationally signifi cant resources. 

Land use, ownership 

patterns, planning 

and zoning

Designation of a collaborative national park unit that works with local, state, 

and federal managers to protect natural and cultural resources, provide 

recreation, public access, interpretation, education, and other compatible uses 

could be compatible with existing ownership patterns and regulatory authorities.

Access and public 

enjoyment potential

There is considerable potential for public access and enjoyment within the 

study area. There are opportunities for a wide variety of recreational uses in the 

nationally signifi cant San Gabriel Mountains and Puente-Chino Hills, and there 

is ample potential for development of additional recreation opportunities and 

improved access elsewhere.

Existing resource 

degradation and 

threats to resources

Approximately two-thirds of the study area contains protected lands with 

signifi cant resources of high integrity. These areas are not subject to resource 

degradation or threats that would preclude management as a unit of the 

national park system.

Public interest and 

support

Outreach for this study including numerous meetings with public offi cials and 

land management organizations, has demonstrated signifi cant public interest 

and support for the NPS to play a collaborative role in the area in partnership 

with other land management and resource protection organizations.

Social and economic 

impact

The social and economic impacts appear to be largely benefi cial and would 

support the feasibility of NPS designation.

Costs associated 

with acquisition, 

development, 

restoration and 

operation

Costs for establishment of a national park unit appear to be feasible, provided 

that partnership opportunities are pursued to support collaborative operations, 

land acquisition, and development. Given the high cost of land in Los Angeles 

County, only acquisition of very targeted sites would be feasible, and only where 

there are supportive landowners.
 Chapter 5: Feasibility And Need For Nps Management Need For Nps Management 157

Need for NPS Management 

The need for direct NPS management is the fi nal 

criterion for a favorable recommendation for a 

proposed unit of the national park system. The 

criterion requires a fi nding that NPS management 

would be superior to other potential alternative 

management arrangements by other entities.

The study team has determined that a collaborative 

or partnership-based management approach which 

includes a leadership role for the national park 

service is a superior management option for meeting 

the complex conservation and recreation needs of 

the study area.

• The NPS has the ability to work in a coordinated 

fashion, on a regional basis, to address the 

current lack of equitable access to open space 

and to protect signifi cant resources. Existing 

land management agencies have not been able 

to address these issues and have specifi cally 

requested assistance from the NPS. 

• The NPS is well-known and respected for its 

expertise in interpretation and education, and can 

use this expertise in partnership with other land 

managers to increase the level of understanding of 

the area’s signifi cance. 

• Existing NPS assistance programs are currently 

insuffi cient to address these needs. 

COLLABORATIVE MANAGEMENT 

AND REGIONAL PLANNING

As identifi ed in the issues to be addressed in 

Chapter 2 of this study, the area’s natural, cultural, 

and recreation resources lack a comprehensive 

management plan and could benefi t from a regional 

planning structure. Regional planning needs include 

greater cooperation among regional land managers, 

governments, and other organizations to leverage 

resources for protection and public enjoyment, share 

scientifi c information, create a regional identity and 

public understanding about resource signifi cance, 

and to meet the needs of a complex social and 

ecological region. 

The NPS is well-suited to administer a partnership 

park in the greater Los Angeles metropolitan 

region. The nearby Santa Monica Mountains 

National Recreation Area, which has been working 

cooperatively with agencies and organizations to 

protect resources of the Santa Monica Mountains 

for over three decades, is a model for partnership 

management. There are many lessons learned and 

excellent cooperative management models to draw 

from. The Golden Gate National Recreation Area in 

the San Francisco Bay Area also provides an excellent 

model of partnership management in California.

NEED FOR COORDINATED 

INTERPRETATION AND 

EDUCATION

The study area lacks coordinated educational and 

interpretative opportunities about the signifi cance of 

the area’s resources. An improved understanding of 

resource signifi cance would help to expand people’s 

awareness of the natural systems, cultural heritage, 

and recreational opportunities in their communities, 

and increase the political and fi nancial viability 

of conservation and recreation-related projects. 

Increased education about resource signifi cance 

could also help to reduce visitor-related impacts in 

highly used recreation areas. 

NEED FOR ASSISTANCE BEYOND 

EXISTING NPS PROGRAMS

The NPS abillity to provide regional planning and 

coordinated management through existing technical 

assistance programs such as the Rivers, Trails, and 

Conservation Assistance Program (RTCA) is limited. 

The NPS RTCA program currently provides planning 

and conservation assistance to organizations and 

communities in the southern California region on a 

case-by-case basis, with assistance typically lasting 

no more than two years. The long term regional 

planning and assistance needed in the San Gabriel 

Mountains and Watershed goes beyond the function 

of this program. Coordinated interpretation and 

education about the area’s signifi cance is also lacking 

in the study area.

The study team held several workshops with 

primary land management and recreation agencies 

within the study area and southern Californiabased RTCA staff to assist in the development of 

preliminary alternatives for the special resource study. 

Agency representatives expressed that the National 

Park Service’s proven leadership in partnership/

collaborative management, interpretation, and 

education is needed to address the previously 

mentioned gaps in current management.

CONCLUSION

NPS management in partnership with existing 

agencies and organizations is the best option for 

enhancing protection of signifi cant resources, for 

improving access to recreational opportunities in the 

region, and for providing coordinated interpretation 

and education about signifi cant resources. 
158 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment