199Introduction

7

Environmental Consequences

Photos (clockwise): 1. Puente-Chino Hills. NPS Photo. 2. Mount Baldy. Photo © Tim McCaig. 3. Fish Canyon in Azusa. Photo © 

S. Greg Panosian.
200 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Introduction 201

Chapter 7: Environmental 

Consequences

Introduction

Before taking an action, the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies identify 

a range of alternatives for that action and to 

analyze the potential environmental impacts 

of that action, including any potential adverse 

environmental effects that cannot be avoided if 

the proposed action is implemented. This chapter 

describes the potential environmental impacts of 

implementing each of the alternatives (i.e., the no 

action alternative and the three action alternatives) 

on the socioeconomic environment, land use, 

visitor experience and recreational resources, water 

resources, biological resources, and cultural and 

historic resources.

The fi rst part of the chapter discusses the 

methodology used to identify impacts and includes 

defi nitions of terms. The impact topics are then 

analyzed with reference to each of the three 

alternatives. The discussion of each impact topic 

includes a description of the positive (benefi cial) 

and negative (adverse) effects of the alternatives, 

a discussion of cumulative effects, if any, and a 

conclusion. The conclusion includes a discussion of 

whether, and to what extent, the alternatives would 

impair study area resources and values.

Methods and Assumptions

Consequences are determined by comparing likely 

future conditions under each alternative with 

the existing baseline conditions as described in 

the no action alternative. The analysis includes 

consideration of the context, intensity, and duration 

of direct and indirect effects of the alternatives. 

The NPS based this analysis and its conclusions on 

a review of existing literature, information provided 

by experts within the NPS, as well as outside 

organizations, analysis of case studies of existing 

programs in other locations, and the professional 

judgment of the study team members. 

Ordinarily in a NEPA document, the environmental 

consequences for a given topic are presented in the 

context of its affected environment. The affected 

environment conveys the current condition of the 

resource and represents a baseline against which 

the effects of the proposed action are compared. 

Much of the affected environment for each 

impact topic is discussed in Chapter 2, Resource 

Description, and will merely be referenced here 

to avoid duplication. The affected environment 

sections included in this chapter provide 

supplementary information relevant to the impact 

analysis.

In a typical environmental document, proposed 

actions are activities whose physical impacts can 

be estimated, modeled or projected. In this study, 

proposed actions are more in the nature of policy 

alterations and plans having no immediate physical 

impact on the land or its resources. Without specifi c 

information regarding the type and location of new 

facilities, or prescriptive measures to be applied, 

the NPS has no ability to project specifi c impacts of 

those activities either individually or cumulatively. 

Similarly, as alternatives call for the formation of 

partnerships and agreements whose terms are yet 

to be spelled out, it would be speculative to assess 

the environmental outcomes, except to describe the 

objectives and benefi ts the agencies wish to achieve 

in working with other entities. These are largely 

described in the alternatives themselves. 

Given the broad nature of the study, the impact 

analysis must also be broad, by necessity, and avoid 

speculation as to site-specifi c types of impacts. The 

outcome of the study will be a recommendation 

to Congress. If Congress takes action, then new 

environmental analysis would be undertaken 

prior to specifi c implementation actions. This 

new analysis would propose specifi c actions, and 

alternatives to them, whose site or area specifi c 

impacts would be assessed prior to implementation 

of the plan. 

Analysis Assumptions

Given the level of analysis as described here, it is 

meaningful to discuss impacts in relative terms. That 

is, the general impacts of each alternative are found 

in the differences between the alternatives and the 

existing condition (no action). The key elements 

of this analysis address the following often related 

factors:

1. new and coordinated management

2. new land designations

3. the amount of newly designated lands 

4. additional funding for management

5. the effects of new educational opportunities

6. the effect of ongoing partnerships between 

federal agencies and local stakeholders 

7. new land use designation to recognize 

signifi cant resources

8. the amount and type of recreation 

opportunities that are accessible to the public
202 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

9. the effects of visitors on local infrastructure, 

social services, resources and the quality of 

visitor experience

Factors 1 through 6 are generally assumed to be 

positive infl uences and approaches to meeting the 

legislative challenge to improve recreation access, 

protect resources, and enhance the quality of life 

regionally and locally. These features are included 

in the action alternatives to change the existing 

condition for the better. Factors 7 and 8 have both 

benefi cial and adverse effects. Benefi cial when 

the outcomes meet identifi ed needs of the study 

area and adverse when they result in resource 

degradation as a function of factor 9. 

The action alternatives seek primarily to enhance 

the quality of life for local residents through 

increased access to outdoor recreation and 

protection of their signifi cant natural and cultural 

resources. The alternatives attempt to improve 

the amount of, and access to, healthful recreation 

activities. As recreation use grows, however, there 

is a concomitant amount of stress placed upon 

natural resources. There is also a tension between 

the availability and accessibility of recreation 

opportunities and the quality of the experience 

provided in a public land setting. As use increases, 

particularly in previously unused or lightly used 

areas, the impacts of crowding, sound, visual 

intrusions, and the like tend to erode the quality 

of the experience for some users. Similarly, as 

recreation is emphasized, use expands and increases 

the potential for impacts on natural resources. 

What may be expected as a benefi t to recreationists 

is balanced by the potential for adverse impacts on 

natural resources and their qualities. The resultant 

impacts may be mitigated by educating recreation 

users, partnering with user groups, providing 

appropriate facilities, continually monitoring and 

assessing impacts, distributing use, and employing 

regulatory and interpretive staff, among other 

strategies. 

The key assumptions that grow from this logic, and 

are applied to the analysis of alternatives, are these: 

• The benefi cial impacts associated with factors 

1, 2, 3, 7 and 8, above, may be indexed to the 

amount of newly designated and protected 

lands in each alternative. That is, the relative 

benefi t increases proportionally to the amount 

of newly protected lands. 

• Additional funding is applied to new and 

appropriate recreation and visitor facilities, 

ongoing facility maintenance, suffi cient 

management and administrative staff, and 

monitoring of resource conditions over time. 

Increased amounts of funding are associated 

with relatively increased benefi cial impacts. 

• Partnerships between federal agencies with 

jurisdiction and state and local stakeholders 

result in appropriate actions on the ground 

to the benefi t of both visitors and resources. 

Greater encouragement of such partnerships 

yields relatively greater benefi ts in the areas of 

recreation opportunity, resource quality, and 

employment. 

• Visitors and local communities will become 

more knowledgeable, appreciative, and 

understanding of resource values through 

enhanced education and interpretation 

afforded in each alternative. Greater efforts 

in this regard are functions of funding, 

partnerships, and management agency staffi ng. 

• New designations could increase non-local 

visitor use. While benefi tting the local economy 

through the infl ux of new dollars, this could 

adversely impact local infrastructure and 

support services. 

• Adverse impacts on recreation visitor experience 

and resource quality could result as a function 

of increased use and inappropriate user 

behaviors. Increased use, when concentrated, 

may overburden local resources and damage 

those that are sensitive, such as critical wildlife 

habitats, wetlands or perennial water courses. 

Such impacts may be mitigated by other 

factors in the analysis including restoration, 

education, and more staffi ng for on-site visitor 

management. 

With the preceding in mind, NPS notes that 

potential environmental effects for this study 

are meaningful if placed in the context of public 

concerns articulated thus far in the process. Analysis 

methods are mostly subjective. Impacts are deduced 

from management actions and proposed policy 

changes as described in any given alternative. 

NPS policy also requires potential impacts to be 

compared to criteria that are more applicable 

to site-specifi c types of impact, rather than 

broad, non-specifi c statements of consequences. 

Nonetheless, these criteria are set out below and 

used to the extent possible. 

Regarding the implementation of any alternative 

being considered, compliance with federal and state 

natural and cultural resource laws and regulations, 

as well as local zoning and permitting regulations 

and processes would be required. While the intent 

of each alternative is to improve or enhance 

resource quality, in accordance with the purpose 

and need for action, it is intended that any need for 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Impact Criteria 203

mitigation for social or economic impacts be applied 

at implementation.

Impact Criteria

The following defi nitions, standards, and guidelines 

will be used in describing consequences: 

• Context: Impacts are considered at their local, 

regional, or national context as appropriate.

• Intensity: For the purposes of this analysis, 

intensity or severity of the impact is defi ned as: 

• Negligible - Impact to the resource or 

socioeconomic environment is at the lower 

level of detection; no discernible effect

• Minor - Impact is slight, but detectable; 

impacts present, but localized, and not 

expected to have an overall effect.

• Moderate - Impact is readily apparent; 

clearly detectable and could have 

appreciable effect on the resource or 

socioeconomic environment

• Major - Impact is severely adverse or 

exceptionally benefi cial; would have a 

substantial, highly noticeable infl uence on 

the resource or socioeconomic environment

• Duration: 

• Temporary – Impact is temporary or 

transitional, associated with a specifi c 

action or with a predictable endpoint.

• Near term – Impact will begin within the 

next 1-10 years, and will continue in the 

long-term or have permanent effects

• Long-term – Impact will not likely begin 

until after the next 1-10 years, but will 

likely have permanent effects on the 

resource or socioeconomic environment.

• Incidence: (Note: in a NEPA analysis it is not 

necessary to distinguish between direct and 

indirect impacts)

• Direct effects - Impact is caused by the 

action and occurs at same time and in the 

same place as the action.

• Indirect effects- Impact is caused by 

the action, occurs later in time and at 

some distance from the action, but must 

be reasonably foreseeable. Indirect 

effects may include changes in ecological 

processes that result in a change to the 

environment.

• Timing: It is impossible to predict when any 

specifi c actions within either of the alternatives 

would be implemented. Hence the specifi c 

timing of impacts is not addressed in this 

environmental assessment. The timing of 

impacts would need to be addressed during 

future planning processes. For the purposes 

of this EA, the time frame in which impacts 

are analyzed is roughly the next three decades, 

except where different time frames are 

specifi ed.

Cumulative Impacts

The Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ) 

regulations require assessment of cumulative 

impacts in the decision-making process for federal 

projects. Cumulative impacts are defi ned as “the 

impact on the environment which results from the 

incremental impact of the action when added to 

other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

future actions regardless of what agency (federal 

or non-federal) or person undertakes such other 

actions” (40 CFR 1508.7). 

Cumulative impacts are determined by combining 

the impacts of the alternatives actions with other 

past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future 

actions. For each resource topic, an area of concern 

is identifi ed. For example, cumulative impacts on 

wildlife may occur within an area identifi ed as 

a crucial wildlife corridor, and all activities that 

might affect the viability of the corridor would be 

examined collectively along with the additional 

activities that are being proposed. Or, cumulative 

impacts on water quality would be examined 

by identifying a watershed and reviewing all the 

actions that might be expected to impact water 

quality along with aspects of the proposed action 

that could have the same effect. Generally, in 

accordance with CEQ guidelines for cumulative 

effects analysis, only natural resources (physical and 

biological) or ecological processes are subject to this 

kind of analysis. 

In this case, no specifi c actions are being proposed 

in a way that their site-specifi c effects can be 

determined. This being the case, it is diffi cult to 

assess the overall impact by adding them to a 

body of other actions. It is more appropriate (and 

possible) to gauge cumulative impacts in future 

environmental analysis, looking at specifi c plans and 

actions to be taken. 

Conceptually, it can be said that the purpose of this 

study is to evaluate the means whereby resource 

conditions can be enhanced to the benefi t of the 

land and the communities they serve. If the overall 

current condition is considered as a baseline for 

cumulative effects, each of the action alternatives 
204 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

seeks to maintain or improve the condition. Hence, 

the overall level of cumulative impact would either 

be arrested or it would decline as compared to the 

no action alternative. 

Potential Environmental Impact 

Topics

Potential impact topics are reviewed here as to 

their applicability in this analysis. The rationale for 

this review stems from the essential purpose of an 

environmental assessment, to determine whether 

there would be signifi cant impacts requiring the 

preparation of an environmental impact statement 

to proceed with the action. The dismissal of topics, 

with rationale, demonstrates there is no concern at 

least in those areas.

Table 12: Potential Environmental Impact Topics

Mandatory Topic Discussion and Rationale Disposition

Possible confl icts between the 

proposal and land use plans, 

policies or controls (local, state or 

Indian tribe) for the area 

Any potential confl ict of this nature will be broadly 

noted and explored under the socioeconomic impact 

topic. 

See Effects on Land 

Use

Energy requirements and 

conservation potential

The proposed action does not affect the production, 

conservation or demand for energy-related resources. 

This topic is dismissed 

from analysis

Natural or depletable resource 

requirements and conservation 

potential

There are a variety of natural resources within the 

project area that require conservation pursuant to 

USFS or NPS law and policy. Of these, several were of 

specifi c concern to the public and other agencies during 

scoping. Water, wildlife and native plants are generally 

discussed. 

See Effects on 

Biological and Water 

Resources

Intrinsic natural resource values 

that would be conserved for 

future generations in a national 

park

A multiplicity of outstanding natural resources exist 

within the study area, beyond water, wildlife and 

native plants. Among these are air quality, geology, 

lightscapes, soundscapes, non-sensitive wildlife species. 

Geology in the area is unique, contributing to the 

eligibility of the study area for special recognition. 

However, there is no potential for geology to be 

affected by this action. Regarding other potential 

resource topics, analysis of impacts would be 

speculative and premature until such time as specifi c 

proposed actions are made. 

Resources other 

than the above 

are dismissed from 

analysis in this 

document. General 

impacts might 

be inferred from 

discussion of water, 

wildlife and plants.

Urban quality, historic and 

cultural resources, and design of 

the built environment

Quality of open spaces is a key adjunct to urban quality 

and quality of life issues. Urban qualities located within 

the study area are broadly evaluated in this chapter.

See Effects on 

Socioeconomics and 

Land Use

Socially or economically 

disadvantaged populations: 

environmental justice

The public and several stakeholder groups have raised 

concerns about inequities in access to parks and open 

space for socially and economically disadvantaged 

populations. This is primarily addressed in the 

socioeconomics impact topic.

See Effects on 

Socioeconomics and 

Land Use and Effects 

Recreation Use and 

Visitor Experience 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Potential Environmental Impact Topics 205

Table 12: Potential Environmental Impact Topics

Mandatory Topic Discussion and Rationale Disposition

Wetlands and Floodplains The broader discussion of water resources is presented 

in this document. Wetland and fl oodplain protection 

and enhancement is an important component in 

preserving water quality and conserving water supply. 

Wetlands and fl oodplains also provide habitat to an 

abundance of wildlife including rare, threatened, and 

endangered species.

See Effects on Water 

Resources 

Prime and unique agricultural 

lands

There are 16 small areas, constituting 548 acres, 

within the study area categorized as prime and unique 

farmlands. These areas are primarily in the Antelope 

Valley. 

See Effects on 

Socioeconomics and 

Land Use

Endangered or threatened plants 

and animals and their habitats

The potential effects on these species are broadly 

discussed in this chapter. 

See Effects on 

Biological Resources

Important scientifi c, 

archeological, and other cultural 

resources, including historic 

properties listed or eligible for 

the National Register of Historic 

Places

Potential impacts are broadly discussed in this chapter. See Effects on 

Cultural Resources 

Ecologically critical, specially 

designated areas, or unique 

resources

Potential impacts are discussed in this chapter. Any 

existing specially designated areas will remain 

unaffected by this proposed action. 

See Effects on 

Biological Resources

Public health and safety This topic is an underlying, fundamental need in action 

proposed for this study. However, it does not lend 

itself to separate analysis, at least at this level of study. 

Indirect effects on public health are described where 

appropriate under the impact topics, recreation use and 

visitor experience and water resources. 

See Effects Recreation 

Use and Visitor 

Experience and Water 

Resources

Sacred sites As noted, the level of analysis in this document is broad. 

Discussion of this topic is incorporated generally into 

cultural and historic resources, at the policy level. 

See Effects on 

Cultural Resources 

Indian Trust resources There are no Indian Trust resources within or near the 

project area.

This topic is dismissed 

from further analysis
206 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

Effects on Biological Resources

Aff ected Environment

Consequences of the alternatives could potentially 

affect plant and animal species habitat, resulting in 

changes in their populations or overall well-being. 

Various features of the alternatives could also affect 

specifi c plant communities that are of rare and 

limited size and distribution. A complete listing and 

description of species and rare habitat is provided 

in Chapter 2, Resource Description and Appendix 

B. The section below describes current trends and 

threats related to biological resources.

SPECIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN

The Southern California region is recognized as one 

of the world’s hotspots of biological diversity and is 

home to a total of 476 vertebrate animal species, 

approximately 38 percent of all the vertebrate 

species found in California. This region has also 

experienced tremendous population growth and 

related urban development that has signifi cantly 

transformed the landscape since the 1940s. This 

intersection of biological resources and urbanization 

has made the South Coast the most threatened 

biologically diverse area in the continental U.S. 

(CDFG 2007). 

Within the study area, there are threatened and 

endangered plant and animal species listed by state 

and federal agencies, 2 species listed as candidate 

for federally threatened or endangered listing 

status, and another 189 species considered rare 

or of special concern. A description of rare and 

listed species is included in Chapter2, Resource 

Description and listed in Appendix B. Table 13 

includes a summary of threats and trends affecting 

federally- or state-listed species within the study 

area. 

RARE OR UNUSUAL HABITAT

Many of the study area native habitat types are 

endangered or severely reduced from their former 

range. This includes riparian areas, wetlands, 

fl oodplains, coastal sage scrub, and California 

Walnut Woodlands. Bigcone Douglas-fi r, relict 

juniper communities, and subalpine habitat are 

rare habitats of limited extent. Many of the rare, 

threatened, and endangered species within the 

study area depend on these habitats for their 

survival. Impacts are primarily from the threats listed 

above. 

TRENDS

Despite the region’s rapid growth and subsequent 

loss of habitat, Southern California retains some 

large and valuable natural areas, including the 

national forests, which form an interconnected 

system of wildlands and important wildlife corridors 

through metropolitan areas (CDFG 2007). 

With the expansion of the urban wildland interface, 

remaining natural lands become more vulnerable to 

the incursion of invasive plants and animals, air and 

water pollution, and altered fi re regimes. Developed 

areas, roads, and utility corridors fragment 

landscapes and sever connections between habitat 

areas. The effects of climate change will also cause 

additional stressors on rare species and habitat. The 

section below further describes the most common 

threats affecting species and habitat within the 

study area. 

Urban Development. Urban development is 

cited as one of the primary threats to almost every 

threatened and endangered species listed in Table 

13. Southern California’s wetlands and fl oodplains 

have been particularly affected by urbanization. 

California has lost 91% of its historical wetlands 

over the past century. Wetlands have been fi lled, 

dammed, diverted, channelized, and polluted, 

primarily as result of urban development. 

Within the study area, urbanization has altered or 

removed much of the palustrine (94%) and riverine 

(75%) wetlands that historically existed. However, 

remnants and opportunities for restoration exist 

in places such as Whittier Narrows and the San 

Gabriel Mountain foothills. In some instances there 

are also historic signatures (existing moist/wet areas 

that could be restored to functioning wetlands) 

throughout the fl oodplain (Stein et.al 2008). 

Urbanization also affects other rare habitat such as 

coastal sage scrub and walnut woodlands. Much of 

this habitat is located at lower elevations, at sites 

that are easily developed. The Puente-Chino Hills 

in particular are threatened by future development 

that could further fragment habitat in this wildlife 

corridor, affecting species like the federally 

threatened Coastal California gnatcatcher. 

Invasive Species. Invasive species problems in the 

study area and throughout Southern California are 

tied to regional land use and management issues. A 

number of highly aggressive nonnative plant species 

invade grasslands and scrub communities, including 

yellow star thistle, artichoke thistle, medusahead, 

Pampas grass, fennel, pepper weed, black mustard, 

and castor bean. These species lower habitat quality 

for sensitive wildlife species such as the Quino 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Eff ects On Biological Resources 207

checkerspot butterfl y and the Coastal California 

gnatcatcher. Some of these species dry out earlier in 

the summer than native species and contribute to 

increased wildfi re frequencies. 

Access roads and rights-of-way for infrastructure 

and power line maintenance, as well as recreational 

use of natural areas, can facilitate the spread of 

nonnative species. For example, in the PuenteChino Hills, nest parasitism by brown-headed 

cowbirds threatens sensitive bird species such as the 

least Bell’s vireo, southwestern willow fl ycatcher, 

and California gnatcatcher. Cowbirds thrive in many 

human-altered habitats, including suburban areas 

and agricultural and grazing lands, where they are 

attracted to livestock droppings and feed. With the 

expansion of these land uses over the last century, 

cowbirds have thrived, greatly expanding both their 

range and population across California. 

In aquatic systems, the most problematic nonnative 

plant species is arundo, or giant reed. Arundo 

is widespread along major coastal river basins. 

Tamarisk is less widespread but also invades regional 

riparian habitats. Tamarisk is distributed in coastal 

and desert drainages (Stephenson and Calcarone 

1999). Both species choke waterways, increase fl ash 

fl ood risks, crowd out native plants, and provide 

inferior habitat for riparian species. Tamarisk also 

consumes prodigious amounts of water, reducing 

available surface water, and arundo provides limited 

shade, resulting in higher water temperatures and 

lower dissolved oxygen levels.

Among nonnative wildlife species, bullfrogs, African 

clawed frogs, nonnative crayfi sh, mosquito fi sh 

(which are sometimes introduced for mosquito 

control), and introduced sport and bait fi sh 

(including sunfi sh, bass, and bluegill) all pose 

predatory or competitive threats to native fi sh 

and amphibians. Many of these species are well 

adapted to the deep water conditions in ponded 

areas above dams, and dam releases can introduce 

them to downstream habitats. Most voracious and 

widespread are bullfrogs, which are documented 

predators of California red-legged frogs, arroyo 

toads, Western pond turtles, and two-striped 

garter snakes (Stephenson and Calcarone 1999). 

A broad diet and an extended breeding season 

give bullfrogs a competitive advantage over native 

amphibians. Bullfrogs are also favored by humanmodifi ed habitats. They can tolerate elevated water 

temperatures and, unlike native amphibians, make 

use of standing pools resulting from urban runoff to 

complete their two year life cycle (CDFG 2007).

Altered Fire Regimes. Wildfi re is a natural and 

important ecological process in the Southern 

California region, particularly in the native 

chaparral communities that dominate the study 

area. Widespread forest management practices, as 

well as increases in human-caused wildfi res, have 

altered fi re regimes, in some cases causing dramatic 

changes in regional habitats. 

The expansion of residential development into rural 

and natural areas has increased the incidences of 

human caused fi re, altering natural fi re regimes. 

Natural fi re regimes, or fi re intervals, have been 

changed dramatically by human land management 

efforts and urbanization. More frequent fi re regimes 

can result in the conversion of chaparral and other 

native habitat to nonnative grasslands. Efforts to 

establish fi re regimes that approximate historical fi re 

patterns and frequencies, while also minimizing loss 

of property and life, are important to maintain and 

restore wildlife habitat (Halsey 2008).

The causes and ecological consequences of 

wildfi res differ among the region’s ecological 

communities. In coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and 

grassland systems, lightning-induced fi res are fairly 

infrequent. The natural fi re regime for chaparraltype habitat, which would have primarily occurred 

from lightening strikes, would have been 30-100 

years. With adequate rainfall, chaparral habitat can 

recover from fi re within 15-20 years. Human-caused 

fi res, however, have resulted in unnaturally high 

fi re frequencies, especially along roads and near 

the urban-wildland interface, with some locations 

experiencing three fi res within a period of 15 to 20 

years (CDFG 2007). 

Increased fi re frequencies favor the Mediterranean 

grasses that were introduced to the region with 

the arrival of European settlers and livestock. 

Once established, the nonnative grasses grow 

in a dense thatch pattern that chokes out native 

vegetation and lowers habitat quality for wildlife. 

The dense grass also provides ample fuel for the 

cycle of frequent burning. Spread of nonnative 

species during fi re recovery is one of the major 

threats to full recovery of habitat on the forest. 

Fire management issues in forest communities 

are different than those in scrub, chaparral, and 

grasslands. Lightning-induced wildfi res are a more 

regular part of the ecology of the area’s coniferous 

forests and oak woodlands and do not result in the 

same threat of conversion to nonnative grasslands 

(CDFG 2007).

Climate is also a primary determinant of fi re 

patterns. Climate change will add a signifi cant 

variable to efforts to understand historical fi re 

regimes and to fi nd management measures that 

can maintain the region’s habitats. Additionally, 
208 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

the expansion of residential communities into 

fi re-dependent forest ecosystems creates a confl ict 

between maintaining ecological integrity and 

protecting property (Halsey 2008 and CDFG 2007).

Recreational Pressures. With nearly 20 million 

people living within driving distance of Southern 

California’s national forests and other public lands, 

recreational access can impact biological resources. 

Recreational off-road vehicle use can have adverse 

effects on natural communities and sensitive 

species. On public lands, off-road vehicle trails often 

open relatively undisturbed areas to increased use. 

The vehicles can disturb or run over wildlife, crush 

and uproot plants, spread seeds of invasive plants, 

and disturb soils, contributing to erosion and the 

sedimentation of aquatic habitats. Off-road vehicle 

use also increases the risk of human-caused fi res 

(CDFG 2007).

Concentrated recreational use of streams and 

riparian areas also impacts biological resources. Not 

only off-road vehicles, but hikers, picnickers, and 

equestrians, in large numbers, can damage these 

systems, reducing vegetative cover and disturbing 

sensitive species. Some recreational users build rock 

dams on streams to create ponds for swimming. 

The San Gabriel River, for example, has been altered 

by extensive ponded areas, as well as other effects 

of heavy recreational use, such as the deposition 

of trash and human waste. Particularly vulnerable 

riparian species include the two-striped garter 

snake, mountain yellow-legged frog, and arroyo 

toad (CDFG 2007).

Climate Change. Based on some climate projection 

models, it is predicted that annual temperature 

increases will nearly double before 2100. By the 

end of the century, heat waves and extreme heat 

in Los Angeles may also increase in frequency. 

Throughout California, ecological diversity on the 

whole would change little. However, certain rare 

habitats, particularly in warm and dry areas, would 

be more affected. Coastal sage scrub could be 

reduced up to 20% and alpine/subalpine forests 

could be reduced by over 50% (Hayhoe, et.al. 

2004).

Impact Analysis – Wildlife Resources

PUBLIC CONCERNS

During review of the preliminary alternatives, the 

public expressed concern about the potential 

for increased visitation and subsequent impacts 

on wildlife. Specifi cally, some felt that increased 

visitation would disrupt wildlife and affect the 

abundance of game species. This general concern 

would apply not only to wildlife in general, but 

from the U.S. Forest Service and NPS standpoints, it 

could apply to threatened or endangered species, 

sensitive species listed by both agencies, and other 

species that do not fall into the category of hunted 

populations. 

It is the intent of all alternatives being considered 

to improve the relationship between recreation 

users and the habitats that are and can be affected. 

With more staff and funding available for visitor 

management and education, impacts to wildlife 

from visitation would be expected to decrease. It is 

expected that better visitor management through 

improved interpretative facilities, education, and 

administrative staffi ng would ameliorate impacts 

from the entire visitor population.

Management of biological resources, wildlife 

habitat and populations, is a joint concern. Both 

federal and state wildlife offi cials have this interest 

in mind, and it is part of each mission. In brief, 

NPS and the U.S. Forest Service manage habitat 

while state offi cials manage populations. This 

has always been accomplished in partnership 

and through joint agency planning. Nothing in 

any of the alternatives would contravene existing 

partnerships or plans, and if anything, the quality 

of partnerships, plan implementation, cooperation, 

and habitat management should be enhanced. 

Agency and academic research, and the means 

whereby it is accomplished, would be permitted as 

in the past. In all of the alternatives there would be 

more interagency collaboration and coordination to 

leverage funding for restoration. 

Some commenters suggested that greater 

protection is needed for the region’s threatened 

ecological communities, native habitats, wildlife 

corridors and habitat linkages. They suggest 

that the potential benefi cial effects of proposed 

designations be analyzed.

Each of the action alternatives emphasizes 

increased natural resource protection, particularly 

in regards to preserving habitat and wildlife 

corridors. The amount of available funding would 

be dependent on congressional appropriations. 

In alternatives C and D, funding would also be 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Eff ects On Biological Resources 209

Table 13: Threats to Federal and State Listed Threatened and Endangered Plant and Animal Species

Species Status Threats

Plants

Astragalus brauntonii 

Braunton’s milk-vetch 

(endemic)

FE Altered fi re regimes, urban development, fragmentation of habitat, 

reduced capability for sustained ecologic processes, fragmented 

ownership populations, and extinction from natural occurring events due 

to small population sizes and low individual numbers.

Orcuttia californica

California Orcutt grass

FE, CE Urban development, grazing, disking, agriculture, off road, border patrol 

use, and roads.

Berberis nevinii 

Nevin’s barberry 

(endemic)

FE, CE Construction, urban development, off-road vehicles, horseback riding, 

invasive nonnative species, vandalism, and altered fi re regimes.

Dodecahema leptoceras 

slender-horned 

spinefl ower (endemic)

FE, CE Loss of habitat from urbanization and agriculture, nonnative annuals, 

sand and gravel mining, grazing, fl ood control, hydrological alteration, 

proposed reservoir construction, off road vehicles, and herbivory.

Brodiaea fi lifolia

thread-leaved brodiaea 

(endemic)

FT, CE Loss and degradation of habitat, invasive species which alter the 

vegetation composition and structure of its habitat, recreational use of the 

land, mowing, disking and sewage dumping.

Animals

Catostomus santaanae

Santa Ana sucker

FT Dams, water diversion, pollution (including gold mining wastes), 

channelization, gravel extraction, urbanization of watershed, heavy 

recreational use of habitat, introduced species, accidental high fl ows from 

Cogswell Reservoir; increased gold mining (suction dredging), drought.

Gasterosteus aculeatus 

williamsoni

Unarmored threespine 

stickleback

FE

CE

Stream channelization, urbanization (cause of extirpation in Los Angeles 

Basin), agricultural development, groundwater pumping, introduction of 

predators and competitors, off-road vehicle use, and chemical spills.

Oncorhynchus mykiss

Southern steelhead

FE Water development, including impassable dams and dewatering, and 

urbanization, genetic introgression from past steelhead plants and from 

planting of rainbow trout, increased fi re intensity and duration.

Bufo californicus

Arroyo toad

FE Habitat degradation from urbanization, dam construction and ill-timed 

water releases, agriculture, road construction, off-road vehicle use, 

overgrazing, and mining activities, drought and wildfi res, recreational 

use of habitat, predation by introduced fi shes and bullfrogs, and small 

population sizes.

Rana aurora draytonii

California red-legged 

frog

FT Wetland destruction and degradation/fragmentation, urbanization, 

residential development, reservoir construction, stream channelization, 

livestock grazing of riparian vegetation, off-road vehicle activity, drought, 

overharvesting, and nonnative fi shes, conversion of habitat to more 

permanent ponds, global warming, UV-B radiation, airborne contaminants 

(pesticide drift), and disease.
210 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

Species Status Threats

Rana muscosa

mountain yellow-legged 

frog

FT (proposed 

endangered)

Introduced trout, recreational suction dredging for gold, human activities 

at campgrounds and day-use areas, and usual problems associated with 

small population size and population isolation (e.g., fi re, fl ood, or drought 

could extirpate small populations, with little chance of reestablishment 

due to poor connectivity of populations). 

Gopherus agassizii

Desert tortoise

FT, CT Declines have been due to habitat loss and degradation, through livestock 

grazing, invasion of nonnative annuals, energy and mineral development, 

off-road vehicle use, road traffi c collisions with tortoises, trail construction, 

disease, vandalism, and collecting. 

Buteo swainsoni

Swainson’s hawk

CT Threats include expansion of cropland unsuitable for foraging (see 

GHABCOM) and residential and commercial development in former 

agricultural and grassland areas.

Coccyzus americanus 

occidentalis

Western yellow-billed 

cuckoo

FC, CE The primary threat is the loss and degradation of habitat, particularly 

riparian forests

Empidonax traillii 

extimus

Southwestern willow 

fl ycatcher

FE Decline is due primarily to destruction and degradation of cottonwoodwillow and structurally similar riparian habitats. The causes of habitat loss 

and change are water impoundment, water diversion and groundwater 

pumping, channelization and bank stabilization, riparian vegetation 

control, livestock grazing, off-road vehicle and other recreational uses, 

increased fi res, urban and agricultural development, and hydrological 

changes resulting from these and other land uses. 

Falco peregrinus

American peregrine 

falcon

CE Primarily environmental toxins, habitat loss, human disturbance, and 

illegal take.

Gymnogyps 

californianus

California condor

FE, CE A large proportion of reintroduced condors and condor nestling have died 

from anthropogenic causes (e.g., collisions with power lines, ingestion 

of toxins). As of 2008, mortality from lead poisoning continued to be a 

signifi cant threat in California and Arizona. 

Haliaeetus leucocphalus

Bald eagle

FT, CE Major threats include habitat loss, disturbance by humans, biocide 

contamination, decreasing food supply, and illegal shooting.

Polioptila californica 

californica

Coastal California 

gnatcatcher

FT, None Urban development has destroyed much coastal sage scrub habitat. 

Intense housing development and construction or expansion of 

transportation corridors in Orange, Riverside, and San Diego counties, 

California, threaten remaining large tracts of habitat. Additional threats 

include parasitism by the brown-headed cowbirds and wildfi res which 

periodically eliminate (temporarily) signifi cant areas of gnatcatcher habitat.

Vireo bellii pusillus

Least Bell’s vireo

FE, CE Loss of breeding habitat (especially thick low riparian growth) attributable 

to agricultural, urban, and commercial developments, fl ood control 

and river channelization projects, livestock grazing, and other activities; 

reduced reproductive success due to nest parasitism by cowbirds has been 

a major factor in the decline.

Spermophilus 

mohavensis

Mohave ground squirrel

CT Primarily conversion of habitat to urban, suburban, agricultural, military, 

and other human uses, including livestock grazing, off-highway vehicle 

use, energy production, and transportation infrastructure.

Source: NatureServe. 2010. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. 

NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://www.natureserve.org/explorer (Accessed: November 24, 2010).
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Eff ects On Biological Resources 211

dependent on partnership efforts to leverage 

support.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

The Southern California region is recognized as one 

of the world’s hotspots of biological diversity. This 

region has also experienced tremendous population 

growth and related urban development that has 

signifi cantly transformed the landscape since the 

1940s. This intersection of biological resources 

and urbanization has made the South Coast the 

most-threatened biologically diverse area in the 

continental U.S. (CDFG 2007). With the expansion 

of the urban wildland interface, remaining natural 

lands has become more vulnerable to the incursion 

of invasive plants and animals, air and water 

pollution, and altered fi re regimes. Developed 

areas, roads, and utility corridors have fragmented 

landscapes and severed connections between 

habitat areas. The effects of climate change will 

also cause additional stressors on rare species and 

habitat.

Many of the study area native habitat types are 

endangered or severely reduced from their former 

range. This includes riparian areas, wetlands, 

fl oodplains, coastal sage scrub, and California 

walnut woodlands. Bigcone Douglas-fi r, relict 

juniper communities, and subalpine habitat are 

rare habitats of limited extent. Many of the rare, 

threatened, and endangered species within the 

study area depend on these habitats for their 

survival. 

Threats to wildlife resources such as habitat loss 

and fragmentation as a result of development, 

air pollution, water pollution, and altered fi re 

regimes would continue having minor to moderate 

adverse effects on the viability of many species and 

communities, including those that or threatened 

or endangered. Current efforts by local, state, and 

federal agencies to manage wildlife, restore habitat, 

and protect wildlife corridors would continue 

to have benefi cial effects, although regional 

coordination would limited. 

ALTERNATIVE A

In alternative A, the new proposed designation 

would bring more resources to the U.S. Forest 

Service for resource protection measures such 

as habitat restoration, conservation, research, 

and planning for wildlife corridors. Designation 

would prevent proposed new or future uses on 

the national forest that could impact signifi cant 

resources and watershed values. This would have 

an overall benefi cial effect in protecting natural 

resources within the proposed NRA. This alternative 

improves the ability of national forest staff to work 

across boundaries to establish and protect wildlife 

corridors.

ALTERNATIVE C

This alternative alleviates current conditions, 

as expressed in the no action alternative, to a 

greater degree. In alternative C, the new proposed 

designation would bring more resources to both 

the U.S. Forest Service and the San Gabriel River 

corridor for resource protection. Additionally, 

partnering entities would work to leverage greater 

funding for conservation (open space protection) 

along the San Gabriel River. Designation would 

prevent proposed new or future uses on portions 

of the ANF included in the NRA that could impact 

signifi cant resources and watershed values. 

However, this would be less benefi cial in terms 

of resource protection than in alternatives A or D 

because the NRA would be smaller. The potential 

for increased water and land-based recreation 

opportunities, and increased use, could result in a 

minor adverse effect on wildlife and wildlife habitat. 

This effect would likely be mitigated as previously 

described through more public education, 

monitoring, enhanced visitor management, and 

with careful siting and design of future facilities.

ALTERNATIVE D

This alternative alleviates current conditions, as 

expressed in the no action alternative, to a greater 

degree than either of the other action alternatives. 

Alternative D would contribute greater benefi cial 

effects as the NRA would be larger, including more 

signifi cant resources with more opportunities to 

work regionally to protect and connect wildlife 

corridors. This alternative provides the greatest 

potential for improving wildlife corridors. 

Partnerships would work together to protect 

wildlife corridors that connect the San Gabriel 

Mountains and the Puente Hills. The NPS would 

provide regional technical assistance in terms of 

planning and leveraged funding to protect wildlife 

corridors. The potential for increased water and 

land-based recreation opportunities, where use to 

date has been light or nonexistent, could result in a 

minor adverse effect on wildlife and wildlife habitat. 

This effect would likely be mitigated as previously 

described through more public education, 

monitoring, enhanced visitor management, and 

with careful siting and design of future facilities.
212 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Threats to wildlife such as spread of nonnative 

species, loss of habitat due to development, altered 

fi re regimes, air and water pollution, and climate 

change will continue to adversely impact wildlife 

and wildlife habitat as described in the affected 

environment. The study area alternatives seek to 

ameliorate these conditions to a greater or lesser 

degree. Therefore, the cumulative effect of growth 

and land use trends plus the benefi cial effects of 

the action alternatives would likely result in a net 

benefi cial condition in regard to wildlife resources 

within the study area as a whole. The identifi cation 

and protection of critical wildlife habitats and 

corridors would serve as a highly positive function 

in the analysis. However, a new emphasis on riverbased recreation and trail use over a broad area, 

where use is expected to increase, has the potential 

to add to existing impacts within the study area. 

Conclusions

The emphasis on new recreational opportunities 

in each of the action alternatives holds the 

potential for additional impacts on wildlife and 

ecological communities. The area that is generally 

protected differs among the alternatives, but actual 

abatement of impacts from recreation would be 

heavily dependent upon monitoring, education, 

and applied management. With appropriate applied 

management, a new stress on education, and 

enhanced monitoring, adverse impacts on wildlife 

and wildlife habitat would be minor. An important 

consideration is that user/wildlife impacts would 

be mitigated by increased emphasis on recreation 

planning and partnerships with wildlife agencies 

to resolve such confl icts. Each of the three action 

alternatives emphasize restoration and increased 

partnerships to protect and enhance wildlife 

corridors and native habitat. Alternative D has the 

greatest potential for improving wildlife corridors 

and habitat given that the NRA partnership would 

be authorized to engage in regional conservation 

planning efforts. 

Impact Analysis - Native Plants

PUBLIC CONCERNS

Public comments indicate a need for improved 

awareness, understanding and protection of 

native plants throughout the study area. This study 

recognizes that there are nationally signifi cant 

native plant habitats in the San Gabriel Mountains 

and Puente Hills. If no action is taken as a result 

of this study, specifi c restoration and improvement 

projects with a native plant focus would continue to 

improve awareness. However, these efforts would 

be limited to individual projects, and there would 

be no comprehensive, coordinated effort to protect 

and improve native plants awareness. A corollary 

concern is that of nonnative species and the need 

to control or eradicate them from the study area. 

With an emphasis on protection of native habitat 

and interpretation/education, each of the action 

alternatives would likely have a positive infl uence 

on the control of nonnative species.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

The affected environment section on page 188 

discusses current conditions relating to problems 

associated with invasive species. Invasive species 

problems in the study area and throughout 

Southern California are tied to regional land 

use and management issues. A number of 

highly aggressive nonnative plant species invade 

grasslands and scrub communities, including yellow 

star thistle, artichoke thistle, medusahead, Pampas 

grass, fennel, pepper weed, black mustard, and 

castor bean. These species lower habitat quality for 

sensitive wildlife species. Roads and infrastructure, 

along with recreational use, can facilitate the 

spread of nonnative species. Decreased wildlife 

habitat connectivity is a major threat to the spread 

of nonnative species. For example, the spread of 

nonnative species following the Station Fire is one 

of the greatest threats to the recovery of native 

ecosystems within the burn area.

In aquatic systems, several nonnative plant species 

(e.g. tamarisk and arundo) are widespread along 

major coastal river basins. These species choke 

waterways, increase fl ash fl ood risks, crowd out 

native plants, and provide inferior habitat for 

riparian species. Tamarisk also consumes prodigious 

amounts of water, reducing available surface water, 

and arundo provides limited shade, resulting in 

higher water temperatures and lower dissolved 

oxygen levels.

Existing threats to native plant habitat would 

continue to have minor to moderate adverse 

impacts on native plant communities. 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Eff ects On Biological Resources 213

ALTERNATIVE A

Alternative A would seek greater recognition, 

interpretation, and funding to protect native habitat 

in the San Gabriel Mountains unit of the Angeles 

National Forest. Within the San Gabriel Mountains 

there would be benefi cial effects on native 

plant protection and increased public awareness 

through enhanced interpretation and educational 

efforts due to the new designation. Along with 

a new emphasis and recognition of signifi cant 

habitat quality in this alternative, there would be 

opportunities for more staff and funding dedicated 

to the control of nonnative species. The U.S. Forest 

Service would have additional authorities to work 

with other land management agencies to protect 

important wildlife connections to the forest. Studies 

have shown that larger native habitat corridors 

have more species diversity and are more resilient 

to threats. Connected habitats are also expected to 

be more resilient to the adverse effects of climate 

change. Working at the larger landscape scale will 

provide long-term benefi cial effects on native plant 

communities. 

ALTERNATIVE C

Alternative C would provide benefi cial effects 

on native plant protection and education along 

the San Gabriel River and in the highly visited 

upper watershed. This would occur through 

coordinated interpretive efforts, new resources for 

conservation, and new agency partnerships focused 

on conservation of native plant communities. 

Information centers located throughout the study 

area could also provide an opportunity for greater 

awareness with regard to native plant protection 

throughout the San Gabriel River watershed. As 

in alternative A, a component of native plant 

protection would be a focus on the control of 

nonnative species. Coordination of conservation 

efforts and increased public awareness of habitat 

issues would lead to long-term benefi cial effects on 

native plant communities.

ALTERNATIVE D

Alternative D would have the greatest benefi t for 

native plant habitat as it recognizes and promotes 

protection of habitat in both the San Gabriel 

Mountains and the Puente Hills and allows the 

NPS to provide technical assistance on a voluntary 

basis to protection of habitat in surrounding 

communities. It is similar to alternative C, but 

with a larger NRA and greater technical assistance 

to surrounding communities, there would be an 

enhanced regional emphasis on protection and 

awareness of native plants and the control or 

eradication of nonnative species. The emphasis on 

restoration and protection of habitat and wildlife 

corridors in alternative D would provide the greatest 

benefi cial effect on native plant communities. 

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the means 

whereby resource conditions can be enhanced 

to the benefi t of the land and the communities it 

serves. Continuing development, a wide variety 

of human uses and decreased wildlife habitat 

connectivity have contributed over time to the 

current level of invasive species impacts on native 

plant communities. If the current condition is 

considered as a baseline for cumulative effects, 

however, each of the action alternatives seeks to 

maintain or improve the condition. Hence, the 

overall level of cumulative impact would either be 

arrested or would decline as compared to the no 

action alternative. 

Conclusions

Existing threats to native plant communities would 

continue to have cumulative adverse impacts. 

However, each of the action alternatives would 

provide improvements towards the protection 

of native plant communities, through increased 

restoration, interpretation and education, and 

increased inter-agency coordination for habitat 

protection efforts. The new emphasis on river-based 

recreation, and potentially on other recreation 

uses throughout the expanded NRA, may lead to 

additional infestations of invasive species in areas 

that are impacted by new visitation. This would 

likely be a negligible to minor adverse effect, locally. 

Expanded partnerships and technical assistance for 

the preservation of wildlife corridors in alternative 

D would provide the greatest benefi cial effect on 

native plant communities. 
214 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

Effects on Cultural Resources

Aff ected Environment

OVERVIEW

The study area contains many signifi cant cultural 

resources including archeological sites, historic 

structures, and cultural landscape features. The 

percentage of the study area that has been 

surveyed for cultural resources is unknown. Within 

the Angeles National Forest (both north and 

south units), 4.8% has been surveyed for cultural 

resources, including historical, archeological, 

ethnographic, and tribal. Within the acreage 

surveyed, 962 sites have been identifi ed (365 are 

prehistoric, 575 are historic, and 22 are multicomponent). Eight sites are listed on the National 

Register of Historic Places, 154 are eligible for 

listing, 95 have been determined to be ineligible for 

listing, and 705 have not yet been determined to 

be eligible or ineligible for listing. Surveys have been 

conducted in other parts of the study area, but 

the methodology for inventorying resources varies. 

The historical background of the study area and 

the physical prehistoric and historic resources are 

discussed in Chapter 2, Resource Description. 

Archeological sites and related artifacts consist of 

various forms of evidence of human activities that 

span at least the end of the Pleistocene through the 

early Holocene (13,000 to 8,500 B.P.). Archeological 

site types include large habitation Native American 

sites, domestic, trade, subsistence, sacred sites, 

circulation route sites, defense sites, and many 

others. Artifacts include pottery fragments, 

pictographs and petroglyphs, lithic scatters, 

and bedrock mortars. These sites may manifest 

themselves as a scatter of surface material or as 

subsurface or midden deposits. Sites often include 

surface and subsurface components. Archeological 

site distribution within the study area varies. For 

example, within the ANF, the Aliso-Arrastre Middle 

and North Special Interest Area includes many 

Native American archeological sites ranging from 

long-term occupation sites, seasonal encampments 

and special-use resource procurement, processing, 

and storage sites (USFS 2005). Other archeological 

sites within the study area have been disturbed 

throughout time by land use activities.

Historic buildings and structures within the study 

area include buildings, adobe ruins, and other 

historic landscape elements related to settlement, 

ranching, agriculture, mining, scientifi c study, 

recreation, and transportation. Within the ANF, 

historic resources include recreation camps, 

hotels, forest service administration facilities, 

trails, the Mount Wilson Observatory, the San 

Dimas Experimental Forest, and the Mount Lowe 

Railway. The foothill communities, urban areas, and 

communities north of the forest include historic 

resources related to missions, ranchos, mining, 

agriculture, transportation, water supply and fl ood 

control, religion, and civic activities. Signifi cant 

cultural resources are described in Chapter 3, 

Resource Signifi cance.

NATIONAL SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES

The Upton Sinclair House in Monrovia is a national 

historic landmark. Portions of two national historic 

trails – the Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic 

Trail and the Old Spanish National Historic Trail – 

and a portion of the Route 66 Corridor traverse 

the study area. The San Dimas Experimental Forest 

contains Civilian Conservation Corps constructed 

facilities that are excellent examples of Forest 

Service architecture. A National Historic Landmark 

nomination for the Mount Wilson Observatory 

was prepared, but it has not gone through the full 

nomination process. 

STATE AND LOCAL SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES

There are about 40 cultural resource sites listed on 

the National Register at the state or local level of 

signifi cance. These sites include adobes, historic 

homes, civic and commercial properties, the 

Mount Lowe Railway district, and other cultural 

landscape features. The state, counties, and other 

local governments also maintain other systems 

for recording important cultural resources. A 

preliminary inventory of these sites and structures is 

listed in Chapter 2, Resource Description.

Ethnographic resources are defi ned by the National 

Park Service as any “...site, structure, object, 

landscape, or natural resource feature assigned 

traditional, legendary, religious, subsistence, or 

other signifi cance of a group traditionally associated 

with it.” The study area was and is the home of 

many Native Americans, including the GabrielinoTongva, and their communities continue to grow, 

change, and adapt. The region is one of the most 

racially and culturally diverse areas of the world. 

There is no ethnographic study for the entire study 

area. 

Native American Interests. There are no federally 

recognized tribes associated with the Angeles 

National Forest. The Chumash, Tongva, Kitanemuk, 

Serrano, and Tataviam tribes had homelands 

associated with the Angeles National Forest area 

at the time of European contact. Non-federally 

recognized tribes within the forest’s sphere of 

infl uence includes: the Fernandeño Tataviam, 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Eff ects on Cultural Resources 215

Gabrielino-Tongva Tribal Council of San Gabriel, 

Gabrielino-Tongva Tribal Council of the Gabrielino 

Tongva Nation, Gabrielino Tongva Indians of 

California, Intertribal Council of Tongva, and the 

Tehatchapi Indian Tribe.

TRENDS

Within the study area, the level of protection of 

cultural resources varies. Because the Angeles 

National Forest portion of the study area has been 

protected over a century, many sites have been 

relatively undisturbed and may retain their integrity. 

Most research programs in the forest related to 

cultural resources have been funded under specifi c 

projects so that systematic and comprehensive 

investigations have not been carried out. Recent 

archeological work performed on the ANF consists 

of environmental and/or contract archeology.

Within the ANF, archeological and historical 

resources are threatened by erosion, fi re, fl ood, 

vandalism, looting, and land use practices. Some 

cultural resources were destroyed or damaged 

during the 2009 Station Fire. Following the fi re, 

additional areas within the forest were surveyed 

for cultural resources. Access to sites has remained 

closed for recovery of the lands and for safety 

purposes. The populated portion of the study area 

experienced a high degree of urban development in 

the last century. Cultural resources are threatened 

by continued development, including bulldozing, 

excavation, construction of buildings and other 

structures, as well as grading for roads and 

highways and expansion of transportation corridors 

and other infrastructure. Other threats throughout 

the study area include fl ooding, water erosion, 

off-road vehicle use, unauthorized collecting of 

artifacts, and industrial activities such as mining. 

Many cultural resources have been listed on the 

National Register of Historic Places while other 

resources that have been documented as eligible 

for listing have not yet been listed. The ANF has 

numerous eligible historic and archeological sites 

that could be listed. Some fl ood control structures, 

such as the Morris Dam has been determined 

eligible for listing on the National Register of 

Historic Places. More than 50 archeological sites 

throughout the study area have been determined 

eligible for listing and 135 historical sites within the 

study area appear eligible for listing on the National 

Register, California Register, or other local listing as 

individual sites and contributors to a district. 

Cultural landscapes within the study area continue 

to evolve. Many historic landscapes have been 

urbanized. The Soledad front country is rapidly 

converting from rural to urban due to the 

development of housing tracts along the national 

forest boundary.

Native American organizations such as the Tongva 

continue to use lands within the study area for 

cultural, social, and ceremonial purposes. These 

organizations have also been protecting cultural 

and sacred sites and archeological resources. 

The Haramokngna (Place Where People Gather) 

American Indian Cultural Center, located at the 

Red Box Fire Station and Visitor Center, offers 

opportunities to learn about regional Native 

American history. 

Cultural diversity has contributed important cultural 

and historical elements to the study area. Further 

studies would be needed to provide the appropriate 

context for the varied resources associated with the 

region.
216 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

Impact Analysis – Cultural Resources

Better documentation, research, protection and 

interpretation of cultural resources were identifi ed 

as core issues to address in this study. Therefore, 

each alternative suggests approaches to meet these 

needs. 

PUBLIC CONCERNS

Public comments indicate that there is a general 

concern regarding impacts on cultural, historic and 

ethnographic resources. A more specifi c concern 

was expressed in regard to the opportunities for 

Native Americans to engage in activities such as 

learning and practicing traditional plant gathering 

and use.

If no new federal land designations are enacted, 

cultural heritage programs provided by the 

ANF, including those involving traditional Native 

American activities would continue. The ANF 

would continue to lack resources to fully document 

cultural resources and develop protection plans. 

The integrity of cultural resources throughout 

the study area could be diminished as a result 

of uncoordinated and fragmented preservation 

efforts. There could be natural deterioration of 

some historic resources from lack of maintenance 

and preservation measures, and some sites could 

eventually be lost. There would continue to be a 

lack of coordinated research and interpretation 

programs for cultural resources within the study 

area. No dedicated federal funds would be available 

to document and interpret cultural resources in 

a comprehensive manner. Without action, public 

concerns about these resources would remain 

inadequately addressed. 

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Within the study area, the level of protection of 

cultural resources varies. Because the ANF portion 

of the study area has been protected for over a 

century, many sites have been relatively undisturbed 

and may retain their integrity. As explained in 

the preceding sections, however, comprehensive 

investigations throughout the study area have 

not been carried out, resources continue to be 

threatened by natural processes, development, 

crime, and land use practices. Existing threats to 

cultural resources would continue to have minor 

to moderate adverse effects on cultural resources 

within the study area.

ALTERNATIVE A

In alternative A, more resources would be available 

to the U.S. Forest Service for documentation and 

education and interpretation of cultural and historic 

resources within the ANF. The national forest would 

have the authority and resources to form new 

partnerships for the protection of cultural resources. 

However, beyond the national forest portion of 

the study area, there would likely be a continued 

natural deterioration of some historic resources due 

to lack of maintenance and preservation measures 

and some sites could eventually be lost. As in the 

no action alternative, there would continue to 

be a lack coordinated research and interpretation 

programs for cultural resources outside of the ANF. 

No dedicated federal funds would be available 

to document and interpret cultural resources in a 

comprehensive manner. 

Beyond the ANF, existing threats to cultural 

resources would continue to have minor to 

moderate adverse effects on cultural resources. 

ALTERNATIVE C

In alternative C, NPS fi nancial and technical 

assistance for cultural resource protection would 

reinforce best management practices for protecting 

structures, landscapes, archeological resources, 

and ethnographic resources within the proposed 

NRA. Coordinated protection of cultural resources 

would be enhanced through NRA partnership 

agreements. Coordinated interpretation and 

education would have benefi cial effects on the 

protection and understanding of cultural resources. 

An increase in coordinated land conservation efforts 

would likely enhance the protection of cultural and 

ethnographic resources on lands that are as yet 

undisturbed. 

ALTERNATIVE D

Alternative D would be fundamentally the same as 

alternative C, but it would expand the protective 

boundaries and cover more sites and cultural 

themes since the area includes the entire San 

Gabriel Mountains portion of the ANF and the 

Puente-Chino Hills. Alternative D would provide 

the most comprehensive and coordinated effort to 

protect cultural resources throughout the study area 

through:

• Comprehensive research and documentation of 

broader areas

• More comprehensive interpretation and 

education of broad cultural themes throughout 

the study area

• Expanded partnerships, coordination and 

consultation with stakeholder groups, including 

Native Americans
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Eff ects On Recreation Use And Visitor Experience 217

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Loss of sites from development, lack of 

documentation, and coordinated resource 

protection would continue to have an adverse 

cumulative effect on cultural resources within 

the study area. The study area alternatives seek 

to ameliorate these conditions to a greater or 

lesser degree. Cumulative effects from increased 

visitation over time could result in some amount of 

deterioration of historic structures or disturbance 

to archeological sites. This could be mitigated 

by better surveying and siting of recreational 

facilities. Therefore, the cumulative effect of 

current impacts to cultural resources, plus the 

effects of the proposed alternatives, would likely 

result in a net benefi cial condition in regard to 

cultural resource protection. However, this varies 

by alternative. Alternative D would provide the 

most comprehensive approach to management 

of cultural resources through the larger NRA 

designation and NPS technical assistance.

Conclusions

Without action, the study area will continue to 

experience minor to moderate adverse impacts to 

cultural resources. Under alternative A, the ANF 

would be better positioned to document and 

protect its resources. Alternative C and D increase 

opportunities for documentation and protection 

through coordination of planning efforts, with 

varying degrees of geographical extent. With 

full implementation of the action alternatives, 

adverse impacts on cultural resources would likely 

be mitigated with some level of benefi cial effect 

realized in each action alternative, from a modest 

amount in alternative A to a more pronounced 

benefi t in alternative D. 

Effects on Recreation Use and 

Visitor Experience 

Aff ected Environment

A description of study area recreational resources 

is discussed in Chapter 2, Resource Description. 

Various features of the alternatives, depending on 

the degree to which they encourage expansion of 

access and development of recreational facilities, 

could affect the scale and range of outdoor 

recreational opportunities offered to the public in 

the study area.

Future growth and development may also affect 

the quality of the recreational experience. Likewise, 

changes may occur in environmental amenities such 

as scenic quality and natural quiet which contribute 

to the enjoyment of recreational experiences. Visitor 

experiences may also be affected by the extent to 

which opportunities are provided for educational 

or interpretive enrichment. The following section 

describes existing trends related to recreational use 

and visitor experience.

TRENDS

The population of California is expected to grow 

from 30 million to 50 million people by 2020. 

Approximately 85% of the additional 20 million 

people are expected to live within two hours of the 

coast. Insuffi cient funding has led to diffi culties in 

meeting new public access demands from growth 

pressures (NOAA 1999).

National Forest Visitation Trends

With over three million annual visitors, the ANF has 

one of the highest levels of national forest visitation 

nationally. Approximately 75% of visitors to the 

ANF live within 25-50 miles of the forest boundary. 

Only 4% of visitors live over 500 miles from the 

ANF, indicating use is primarily local in nature. 

Recreational day use is the primary activity. The 

most commonly used facilities are trails, the scenic 

byway, the museum/visitor centers, and interpretive 

displays. Overnight use on the ANF is relatively low. 

Approximately 130,000 visitors stay at developed 

overnight areas. Another 95,000 attend special 

events and organized camps. Approximately 34,000 

visitors came to visit the wilderness areas in 2009. 

Visitation Trends for Special Area 

Designations

During public scoping and review of the preliminary 

alternatives, public concerns were raised regarding 

the effects of increased visitation resulting from 

the new congressional designations proposed 
218 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

in the study. Some commenters suggested that 

federal recognition would bring positive attention 

to the area and would help the local economy and 

tourism. Others worried that designation could 

bring about increased traffi c, noise, waste, and 

congestion associated with increased tourism. 

This was particularly a concern in the Antelope 

Valley area, where residents worried that increased 

recreation would require commercial development 

which could negatively impact rural communities. 

The impact of special designations on visitation 

at existing parks or recreation areas was studied 

to provide context for the impact analysis. Recent 

research conducted on eight changes in national 

park unit designation between 1979 and 2000 

shows that conversions have “substantial and 

persistent” effects on annual visitation. These 

changes appear to be more important to national 

visitors than to local or regional users. This 

particular research is limited to conversions of units 

already in the national park system, and its results 

are applicable in times of economic well-being. For 

the units studied, an immediate annual visitation 

increase of about 6 percent was experienced and 

then maintained over time (Weiler 2005). 

Adequacy of Park and Recreation Areas in 

the Study Area

The process of prescribing a standard for the level 

of service for park and recreation facilities has long 

been problematic. The U.S. Department of Housing 

and Urban Development (HUD) recommends 

2.5 acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents, 

although many consider this ratio to be low. The 

National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) 

gave acreage recommendations in Recreation, Park 

and Open Space Standards and Guidelines (1983) 

and Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway 

Guidelines (1996). The NRPA acknowledged that 

local condition and community desires should be 

considered in adopting local standards and stated a 

standard of 6-10 acres for every 1000 residents. 

As described in Chapter 2, Resource Description,

current studies on the adequacy of recreational 

areas in the Los Angeles Region show approximately 

9.1 of recreation acres per 1,000 residents (Trust 

for Public Land 2004). However, county averages 

can mask dramatic disparities in access to green 

space within the county (The City Project 2007). 

In 2004, the Los Angeles County Department 

of Parks and Recreation completed the Strategic 

Asset Management Plan for 2020. Based on the 

projected population growth, the county estimated 

Table 14: Visitation to Major Recreation 

Destinations within the Study Area

Facility Total

Frank G. Bonelli Regional 

Park

463,743

Santa Fe Dam Recreation 

Area

753,993

Whittier Narrows 

Recreation Area

1,727,841

Whittier Narrows Natural 

Area

44,520

Devils Punchbowl County 

Park

99,421

Pio Pico State Historic Park 7,500 (FY 2007/2008)

Angeles National Forest 3.5M (2010)

Sources: (Los Angeles County, Rupert, pers. comm, 

2010; USFS 2009; Friends of Pio Pico State Historic 

Park, Schoff, pers. comm. 2011)

Note: Annual visitation data was not available for the 

Puente Hills Landfi ll Native Habitat Preserve.
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Eff ects On Recreation Use And Visitor Experience 219

that it would not meet its standard of four acres of 

parkland per 1,000 residents by 2020 for four of 

its fi ve supervisorial districts. Only the rural north 

county area, which includes the Antelope Valley 

portion of the study area, would meet this goal (Los 

Angeles County 2008). 

Quantity and density, however, are not the only 

measures. If park, open space, and recreation 

amenities are not accessible to all residents, their 

benefi ts cannot be fully realized. Factors such 

as proximity to open space, safe and accessible 

transportation and walking routes, the presence 

of obstacles such as freeways, railroads and other 

physical barriers also affect access. Open space is 

also not often equitably distributed. Areas that 

fall well below meeting the standards for parks 

and recreation facilities are described as being 

“park-poor.”

In many park and recreation assessments, a 1⁄4 

mile to 1⁄2 mile radius is used to measure access 

to local parks. These distances are used because 

they represent areas that can be accessed by a 5 

to 10 minute walk. Three separate analysis of the 

adequacy and distribution of recreational areas 

in the Los Angeles Region have concluded that 

while some communities have ample parks and 

recreational areas, many are severely lacking. Those 

communities with adequate accessibility to parks 

and recreational areas tend to be more affl uent 

with a majority of non-Hispanic whites. 

Visiting regional areas such as the ANF and the 

Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area 

pose transportation challenges for many residents 

(Los Angeles County 2008). Recent studies have 

found that statewide, Los Angeles County is one 

of the most disadvantaged counties in terms of 

access to parks and open space for children and 

people of color (The City Project 2007, Trust for 

Public Land 2004). A study by the Trust for Public 

Lands found that with its high concentration of 

open space in areas far from its most densely 

populated communities, the Los Angeles area offers 

its children the worst access to parks among the 

cities evaluated nationally (see Table 16). A study on 

access to parks and park facilities conducted as part 

of the Green Visions Plan found that one third or 

less of parks in the San Gabriel Valley area appear 

to have transit (Sister, C., Wilson, J.P., and Wolch, J. 

2008).

The communities with the least amount of access 

to parks and open space tend to have higher 

rates of childhood diseases related to obesity 

such as diabetes. According to the Centers for 

Disease Control, Americans living closer to parks 

are more likely to exercise regularly, leading to 

weight loss, increased energy, and better overall 

health (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

2001). The California Center for Public Health 

Advocacy analyzed the 2004 California Physical 

Fitness Test of 5th, 7th, and 9th graders. The analysis 

shows that among students in Los Angeles County, 

31.3% are overweight. Overweight children face 

a greater risk of developing many health problems 

during childhood, including Type 2 diabetes, high 

blood pressure, asthma, orthopedic problems and 

gallstones, as well as low self-esteem, poor body 

image, and depression. Overweight children are 

more likely to be obese as adults, putting them at 

a much higher risk for heart disease, cancer, stroke, 

and diabetes later in life (California Center for 

Public Health and Advocacy 2006). 

People of color are less likely to have adequate 

access to parks in the Los Angeles area. Studies by 

the Green Visions Plan for a 21st Century Southern 

California and the City Project both found that 

Whites currently have disproportionately greater 

access to parks and open space, compared to 

Latinos and African-Americans. These ethnic 

groups are 12-15 times more likely to have less 

park acreage per capita when compared to Whites 

(Sister, C., Wilson, J.P., and Wolch, J. 2008, The City 

Project 2007). 

Los Angeles County trends for access to parks, as 

described previously, correlate with trends within 

the study area. Access to parks and open space is 

readily available to communities in the Antelope 

Valley, Soledad Basin, and wealthier communities 

in the San Gabriel Mountains foothills. The map 

“Park Acres Per 1,000 Residents,” on the following 

page, includes park and recreation acreages for 

study area cities and communities. The map conveys 

that foothill communities and communities in 

the northern portions of the study area have the 

largest amounts of parks and recreation space 

per 1,000 residents. Many of the more urban 

communities in the San Gabriel Valley have smaller 

park acreages per 1,000 residents and fall well 

below the Los Angeles County standard of 4 acres 

per 1,000 residents. Given the limited availability 

Table 15: Standards for Parks and Open Space 

Standard Acres/1,000 

Population 

HUD 2.5

National Recreation and Parks 

Association Park Acreage/ 

Population Standard 

6.25-10.5 

Los Angeles County 4
220 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

of land in these urban areas, integrating open 

space into redevelopment projects and planning 

for more biking, hiking and equestrian trails are 

recommended to incrementally increase open 

space.

Interpretation and Education

Throughout the study area, interpretation and 

educational programs are found at recreation 

areas, nature centers, historical parks, and local 

museums. Common themes at these sites include 

native plants, geology, natural history, wildlife, and 

California history. Many of these sites have high 

quality collections, interpretive displays, programs, 

and events. However, coordinated interpretation 

of the signifi cant themes described in Chapter 

3, Resource Signifi cance is lacking for the study 

area as a whole. Working in partnership with 

local agencies, NPS provides interpretation on 

the Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail 

which traverses the study area. Interpretation and 

programs related to the Old Spanish Trail are not 

known to exist within the study area.

Table 16: Children’s park access in seven major 

cities

City Percentage of 

children within 

one-quarter mile 

of a park 

Number of 

children without 

access to a park 

Boston 97% 2,900

New York 91% 178,500

San Francisco 85% 16,700

Seattle 79% 18,600

San Diego 65% 102,300

Dallas 42% 182,800

City of Los 

Angeles 33% 657,700

Los Angeles 

County 36% 1,694,400

Source: Trust for Public Land 2004

Impact Analysis – Recreation Use 

and Visitor Experience

Various features of the alternatives, depending on 

the degree to which they encourage expansion of 

access and development of recreational facilities, 

could affect the scale and range of outdoor 

recreational opportunities offered to the public in 

the study area.

Future growth and development may affect the 

quality of the recreational experience. Changes 

may occur in environmental amenities such as 

scenic quality and natural quiet which contribute 

to the enjoyment of recreational experiences. 

Recreational experience may also be affected by 

the extent to which opportunities are enriched 

through educational or interpretive activities. There 

is tension between the availability and accessibility 

of recreation opportunities and the quality of the 

experience in a national park unit setting. As use 

increases, particularly in hitherto unused or lightly 

used areas, the impacts of crowding, sound, 

visual intrusions tend to erode the quality of the 

experience for some users. Similarly, as recreation 

is emphasized and use fl uctuates, the potential for 

impacts on natural resources increases. What may 

be expected as a benefi t to people who recreate is 

balanced by the potential for adverse impacts on 

natural resources and the qualities associated with 

them.

There is considerable overlap between this issue 

(recreation) and that of visitation, as addressed 

under socioeconomic impacts. The reader is 

encouraged to view these as companion topics, 

wherein they are addressed by similar features 

of the alternatives being considered, resulting in 

similar impacts. 

PUBLIC CONCERNS

Throughout the study process local residents 

and stakeholder groups have expressed a need 

for better recreational access and improved 

opportunities for park-poor urban communities. 

Many commenters also expressed concern about 

the lack of resources available to U.S. Forest Service 

for recreational resources and visitor management. 

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 

If no action is taken as a result of this study, higher 

demands would be placed on existing recreation 

areas with increases in population growth. Current 

inequities in open space recreational opportunities 

would likely continue. New recreational 

opportunities and access would occur through 

existing agencies and local governments as funding 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Eff ects On Recreation Use And Visitor Experience 221
222 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

permits. Benefi ts would be incremental over time. 

Opportunities for recreational planning and open 

space connections on a regional level would likely 

not occur without additional funding or leadership 

from an existing agency. Lack of resources for 

recreation management would continue. Few 

on-site rangers would be available to manage visitor 

activities. 

Regarding the capability of the U.S. Forest Service 

to fund and manage recreation, lack of resources 

would continue unless changes are enacted as a 

result of this study. As stated above, few on-site 

rangers would be available to manage visitor 

activities. There would be a continued lack of 

educational staff to teach responsible use and a 

lack of funding for improving facilities. Coordinated 

interpretation for signifi cant resources in the 

study area would not occur. Interpretation and 

educational programs in the ANF would continue to 

be greatly limited by current funding and staffi ng, 

having a moderate adverse impact on visitor 

experience on the national forest. 

ALTERNATIVE A

Each of the alternatives proposes legislation 

that would authorize more funding, provide 

opportunities for fundraising, and work more 

cooperatively with partner agencies to improve 

visitor services. In alternative A, which would 

provide the least additional resources, more U.S. 

Forest Service staff would be available within 

the new NRA to manage visitors. The NPS would 

also be able to provide staff assistance and visitor 

management technical assistance on the ANF. 

Additional funding for improved facilities and more 

interpretive and educational programming would 

have a benefi cial effect on the visitor experience 

within the ANF. However, alternative A would 

do little to ameliorate the lack of recreational 

opportunities available to urban areas that are 

currently defi cient in parks and open space. 

Poor access to parks and open space for urban 

communities would continue to have a moderate 

adverse effect on recreational use and visitor 

experience in those areas.

ALTERNATIVE C

Alternative C addresses the lack of urban recreation 

opportunities through establishment of the NRA 

along the urban portions of the San Gabriel and 

Rio Hondo Rivers. There would be a targeted effort 

and leveraged funds to create more recreational 

areas within the NRA. Access would be improved 

by creating new transit options connecting 

communities to the NRA, building more trails, and 

connecting recreation areas and open spaces. 

In Alternative C, more funding would be made 

available to improve facilities and provide services 

in the NRA. Through cooperative agreements, 

additional staff may be available for visitor 

management, education, and interpretation. The 

NPS would also be able to provide staff and visitor 

management assistance within the NRA. 

The voluntary information network would provide 

more opportunities to provide interpretive and 

educational programs about the resources of the 

San Gabriel River watershed, having an overall 

benefi cial effect on the visitor experience. The 

information network would better inform residents 

of recreational opportunities throughout the 

watershed, potentially connecting visitors to more 

recreational opportunities. Actions to improve 

recreational opportunities in alternative C could also 

provide public health benefi ts to those communities 

near the San Gabriel River corridor.

ALTERNATIVE D

More recreational opportunities and educational 

programs would be available within the NRA than 

currently exist. There would be a targeted effort to 

create more recreational areas within the NRA and 

more trail connections to surrounding communities. 

The partnership would leverage funding to help 

provide more recreational opportunities within the 

NRA, create new transit options, build more trails, 

and connect recreation areas and open spaces. 

This alternative is the most likely among the 

action alternatives to create new open space and 

recreational opportunities for urban communities. 

More recreational opportunities and educational 

programs could be made available in areas beyond 

the NRA through technical assistance and new 

leveraged funding. This alternative would propose 

legislation to authorize more funding, provide 

opportunities for fundraising, and work more 

cooperatively with partner agencies to improve 

visitor services. 

Through cooperative agreements, additional staff 

may be available to the U.S. Forest Service for visitor 

management, education, and interpretation. The 

NPS would also be able to provide staff assistance 

and visitor management technical assistance over a 

much broader area than in alternatives A or C.

The larger NRA in this alternative would allow 

for coordinated interpretive and educational 

opportunities throughout the study area, providing 

the greatest benefi cial effects on the visitor 

experience. Additionally, all of the resources found 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Socioeconomic Eff ects 223

to be nationally signifi cant would be included 

in the NRA providing more opportunities for 

residents to learn about and appreciate these 

resources. Alternative D would have a greater 

benefi cial effect on public health for communities 

throughout the region, as comprehensive planning 

and technical assistance would provide the most 

new opportunities for outdoor recreation in local 

communities.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Population growth trends in the study area and 

the surrounding region would likely continue 

to increase pressure on available open space. 

Considering that public lands in this area are 

currently among the most heavily visited nationally, 

recreation opportunities and quality are likely 

to diminish if nothing is done. The study area 

alternatives seek to ameliorate the condition to a 

greater or lesser degree. Therefore, the cumulative 

effect of growth and development trends plus 

the effects of the alternatives would likely result 

in a net benefi cial condition in regard to visitation 

within the study area as a whole. However, the total 

cumulative effect is expected to at least as affected 

by economic conditions and population increases 

and distribution over time as by the actions taken as 

a result of this study.

Conclusions

Under the no action alternative, recreation 

opportunities and visitation would continue as 

current trends indicate. That is, there would be 

insuffi cient opportunities and access for local and 

non-local visitors which continue to degrade the 

recreation experience. Under each of the action 

alternatives, this trend would be arrested to some 

degree, and would be considered benefi cial. The 

size of the new unit and the capacity to manage 

the unit are important factors in assessing the 

potential benefi ts. With these considerations, all 

action alternatives would have a benefi cial effect, 

but alternative D would have the greatest benefi cial 

impact on recreation and visitation. Alternative 

A’s benefi ts could be considerable, but limited in 

geographical extent to the ANF. Alternative C would 

benefi t the San Gabriel River corridor, providing 

more opportunities for urban communities. Use, 

however, could increase along the river, further 

impacting already heavily visited areas. Finally, 

alternative D supports a comprehensive regional 

approach to addressing recreation and open space 

issues.

Socioeconomic Effects

Aff ected Environment

The study area lies predominately within Los 

Angeles County, with small portions found in 

San Bernardino County and Orange County. This 

section describes the socioeconomic conditions of 

these three counties, with more detail provided for 

Los Angeles County, particularly in the San Gabriel, 

Santa Clarita, and Antelope valleys.

POPULATION

According to census block data, approximately 1.5 

million people live within the boundary of the study 

area. Another 6.5 million live within 10 miles of 

the boundary. A total of 14.7 million live within 30 

miles, in six different counties (U.S. Census Bureau 

2000).

Los Angeles County

With approximately 10 million residents, Los 

Angeles County is the most populous county 

in the United States. The county is home to 88 

incorporated cities and many unincorporated areas. 

Over a quarter of all California residents live in Los 

Angeles County. The population density approaches 

2,500 people per square mile. Ninety-nine percent 

of the population lives in an urban area (U.S. 

Census Bureau 2000).

Most of the population lives in the southern 

portion of the county, along the coastline and 

in the inland basins and valleys. Approximately 

650,000 residents live along the San Gabriel River 

in adjoining cities from the mouth of San Gabriel 

Canyon to the southern extent of the this study’s 

boundary (LADPW 2006a). High population 

densities are found throughout this stretch, with 

a number of communities containing more than 

3,000 people per square mile and at least two (El 

Monte and Baldwin Park) containing over 10,000 

people per square mile (LADPW 2006a). 

San Bernardino and Orange counties

Approximately 2 million people live in San 

Bernardino County, one of the largest counties in 

the United States by area. The population density is 

comparatively low, with approximately 100 people 

per square mile. Orange County is the second 

most populous county in California, with a 2008 

population estimated at 3 million. The population is 

dense, with an estimated 3,800 people per square 

mile. Although characterized mostly by suburban 

communities, 34 incorporated cities are located in 

the county. 
224 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

TRENDS IN POPULATION GROWTH

Los Angeles County

Los Angeles County grew 5.9 percent from 1998 

to 2008 and is expected to continue growing, with 

one estimate projecting over 13 million residents 

by 2050 (California Department of Finance 2007a). 

The fasted growth rates, however, are found in the 

northern portions of the study area. For example, 

unincorporated portions of Los Angeles County 

in the Antelope Valley region are expected to 

double in population, from 100,000 in 2005 to 

215,000, by 2035. The same unincorporated areas 

have already tripled in population since mid-1985, 

contributing to the rapid growth of the valley as a 

bedroom community to the Greater Los Angeles 

area (RWMG 2007). Likewise, the Santa Clarita 

Valley population grew in the 1990s by over 39 

percent, reaching 212,611 by 2000 (Los Angeles 

County Dept. of Regional Planning 2010b). Along 

with Antelope Valley, Santa Clarita Valley continues 

to lead the county in population growth. The 

full build-out potential of Santa Clarita Valley, as 

described in city and county plans, would eventually 

allow 460,000 to 485,000 residents (Los Angeles 

County Dept. of Regional Planning 2010b).

San Bernardino and Orange Counties

San Bernardino County is one of the fastest 

growing counties in California, with a 22.4 percent 

change in population reported between 1998 and 

2008. San Bernardino is expected to maintain a 

similar growth rate from 2005 to 2025, with a 49.2 

percent increase in total number of people. 94.3 

percent of the population lives in an urban area. 

Orange County grew by 8.6 percent from 1998 to 

2008 and is expected to grow another 19.7 percent 

from 2005 to 2025 (NPS 2010).

SOCIAL AND CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS

Los Angeles County

Racial and ethnic diversity is comparatively high in 

Los Angeles County, with 25.9 percent of the total 

population reporting that they belong to a minority 

race group and nearly half of the population 

reporting a Hispanic origin (47.9%). Approximately 

75 percent identify themselves as white, while most 

others identify themselves as African American 

(8.4%) or Asian (13.2%) (California Department of 

Finance (2007b). 

Along the San Gabriel River corridor, those who 

identify themselves as Hispanic or Latino represent 

the majority of residents. Although only 37 percent 

of residents in communities adjacent to the river in 

the upper San Gabriel Valley identify themselves as 

Hispanic or Latino, in the lower San Gabriel Valley 

and upper coastal plain, the Hispanic or Latino 

populations are 75.9 percent and 68.7 percent 

respectively. Those identifying themselves as Asian 

constitute the second largest group in the lower 

San Gabriel Valley (14.5%) and a quarter (24.3%) 

of the upper San Gabriel Valley population (LADPW 

2006a). 

The northern part of the Los Angeles County 

presents less racial and ethnic diversity than 

the county as a whole. Among Antelope Valley 

residents, 34.4 percent identify as Hispanic or 

Latino, 13.2 percent as African American, and 

only 3.7 percent as Asian (Los Angeles County 

Department of Public Health 2009). The Santa 

Clarita area is even less diverse. Only 27 percent of 

the City of Santa Clarita’s population, for example, 

identifi es themselves as Hispanic or Latino (U.S. 

Census Bureau 2005.

Over 50 percent of adults in Los Angeles County 

have had some college education. The two primary 

languages are English (49.2% of households) and 

Spanish (32.3%).

San Bernardino and Orange Counties

Nearly 20 percent of the total population of San 

Bernardino County reports that they belong to a 

minority race group. Of this group, 47.5 percent 

reports a Hispanic origin. The majority of the San 

Bernardino County population, 80.3 percent, 

identify themselves as white. Most others identify 

themselves as African American (9.4%) or Asian 

(5.9%). Nearly half of the adults in San Bernardino 

County have had some college education. The two 

primary languages in the county are English (64.5 

percent of households) and Spanish (27.4 percent).

Approximately 22 percent of the total population 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Socioeconomic Eff ects 225

of Orange County reports that they belong 

to a minority race group. Of this group, 33.8 

percent reports a Hispanic origin. The majority 

of the Orange County population, 78.4 percent, 

identify themselves as white. Most others identify 

themselves as Asian (16.2%), African American 

(2%), or two or more races (2.2%). A relatively high 

percentage of adults in Orange County have had 

some college education (62%). The two primary 

languages in the county are English and Spanish, 

with 62.8 percent of households primarily speaking 

the former and 20 percent speaking the latter. Ten 

percent of households primarily speak an Asian or 

Pacifi c Island language.

TRENDS IN SOCIAL AND CULTURAL 

CHARACTERISTICS

Los Angeles County. The Hispanic composition of 

the county is expected to increase. One projection 

estimates that by the year 2050, the Hispanic and 

Asian populations will account for more than 80 

percent of the total county residents (California 

Department of Finance 2007a).

EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME

Los Angeles County

The median household income in Los Angeles 

County is approximately $53,494 per year. Nearly 

15 percent of the population lives in a household 

with income below the federally-determined 

poverty threshold (NPS 2010). Thirteen percent 

of the county’s labor force was unemployed in 

November 2010 (CEDD 2010). 

Within the study area, median household incomes 

ranged from $39,914 to $119,368 among census 

tracts north of the ANF. The highest incomes are 

reported in the tracts nearest Santa Clarita, while 

the lowest are found in the northernmost tracts 

near Palmdale. To the south of the ANF, median 

household incomes by census tract ranged from 

$19,885 to $110,555. Higher incomes tend to 

be associated with the foothill communities of 

the San Gabriel Mountains, the Puente Hills, and 

the San Jose Hills. Lower incomes tend to be 

associated with valley areas, especially around the El 

Monte and Pico Rivera areas (See fi gure 2, Median 

Household Incomes, U.S. Census Bureau 2000). 

In the San Gabriel Valley, education and health, 

professional and business services, retail trade, and 

government are the region’s largest employment 

sectors. The region has suffered a decline in 

international trade and manufacturing. However, 

the industrial vacancy rate remains at low levels 

(4.1% in 2010), and the valley seems poised to 

rebound from the recent economic recession 

(LACEDC 2010). 

In Antelope Valley, government, education and 

health, and professional business services are the 

largest employment sectors. The latter, along with 

retailing, has suffered the most through the recent 

economic downturn (LACEDC 2010). 

Throughout the county, manufacturing and 

construction jobs have suffered the largest 

employment losses since 2008. In addition, 

government jobs have been declining at an 

increasing rate as local governments respond to 

growing budget problems (LACEDC 2010).

Table 17: Population

County Total 

Population

Population Density 

(people per square 

mile)

Recent Population 

Change (1998-2008)

Projected 

Population Change 

(2005-2025)

Los Angeles County 9,862,049 2,428.6 5.9% 6.7%

San Bernardino County 2,015,355 100.5 22.4% 49.2%

Orange County 3,010,759 3,814.0 8.6% 19.7%

Source: NPS 2010
226 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

San Bernardino and Orange Counties. The 

median household income in San Bernardino 

County is approximately $55,995 per year. Twelve 

percent of the population lives in a household with 

income below the federally-determined poverty 

threshold (NPS 2010). Fourteen percent of the 

county’s labor force was unemployed in November 

2010 (CEDD 2010). The median household income 

in Orange County is approximately $73,107 per 

year. Nine percent of the population lives in 

a household with income below the federallydetermined poverty threshold (NPS 2010). Just 

over nine percent of the county’s labor force was 

unemployed in November 2010 (CEDD 2010).

TOURISM

Los Angeles County

In 2007, the ratio of tourism establishments (arts, 

entertainment, recreation, accommodation, and 

food services) to all economic sectors in Los Angeles 

County was 12.1 percent. Nearly 11 percent of the 

labor force was employed in this sector and 4.7 

percent of the county’s sales are directly related to 

tourism.

Since 2008, the tourism industry has been in 

slight decline. The number of jobs in hotel 

accommodations has fallen from 41,200 in 2008 to 

an estimated 38,500 in 2010. Jobs related to travel 

arrangement and reservations fell from 12,000 in 

2007 to 9,000 in the same year (LACEDC 2010). 

Total spending for Los Angeles County’s Park and 

Recreation Department in Fiscal Year 2009-2010 

Table 18: Social and Cultural Characteristics

County Racial Diversity (percent 

belonging to minority 

race groups)

Racial and 

Ethnic 

Composition

Educational Attainment 

(percent with some 

college)

Primary Household 

Language

Los Angeles County 25.9% W 74.1%*

B/AA 9.4%

AI/AN 1.0%

A 13.2%

NH/OP 0.3%

Two+ 1.9%

H 47.7%

51.1% Eng 49.2%**

Spa 32.3%

O/IE 6.8%

AsPac 10.3%

OTH 1.4%

San Bernardino County 19.7% W 80.3%

B/AA 9.4%

AI/AN 1.5%

A 5.9%

NH/OP 0.4%

Two+ 2.5%

H 47.5%

49.2% Eng 64.5%

Spa 27.4%

O/IE 3.2%

AsPac 4.1%

OTH 0.8%

Orange County 21.6% W 78.4%

B/AA 2.0%

AI/AN 0.9%

A 16.2%

NH/OP 0.4%

Two+ 2.2%

H 33.8%

62.0% Eng 62.8%

Spa 20.0%

O/IE 5.7%

AsPac 10.5%

OTH 1.0%

*W = White Alone, B/AA = Black or African American Alone, AI/AN = American Indian and Alaska Native Alone, A = Asian Alone, NH/

OPI = Native Hawaiian and Other Pacifi c Islander Alone, Two+ = Two or More Races, H = Hispanic origin (any race).

**Eng = English, Spa = Spanish, O/IE = Other Indo-European, AsPac = Asian and Pacifi c Island, OTH = Other

Source: NPS 2010
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Socioeconomic Eff ects 227

was $148 million. Los Angeles County administers 

94 local and regional parks, 337 miles of riding 

and hiking trails, and multiple gardens, centers, 

and golf courses (Los Angeles County 2009). The 

88 municipalities of Los Angeles County operate 

numerous other parks and recreational facilities, 

many scattered throughout the study area.

The Angeles National Forest draws most of its 

visitors from the local region and very few tourists 

from elsewhere. Those who do visit the forest tend 

to spend little. (See Recreational Use and Visitor 

Experience; Affected Environment). 

San Bernardino and Orange Counties

In San Bernardino County, the ratio of tourism 

establishments to all economic sectors in 2007 

was 10.1 percent. 11.2 percent of the labor force 

was employed in this sector and 3.8 percent of 

the county’s sales are directly related to tourism 

(NPS 2010). The ratio of tourism establishments in 

Orange County was 8.6 percent, with 12.2 percent 

of the labor force employed in this sector, and 3.3 

percent of the county’s sales directly related to 

tourism (NPS 2010).

Figure 2: Median Household Incomes

Table 19: Income and Unemployment

County Median Household 

Income*

Poverty (percent 

below the 

threshold)*

Unemployment (November 2010)**

Los Angeles County $53,494 14.6% 13.0%

San Bernardino County $55,995 12.1% 13.9%

Orange County $73,107 8.9% 9.3%

*Source: NPS 2010

**Source: CEDD 2010
228 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF SPECIAL 

DESIGNATIONS

Public comments on the preliminary alternatives 

requested that the NPS analyze 1) the economic 

value of an NRA to local communities, including 

job creation, tourism spending, and improved 

property values for adjacent communities, and 

2) the potential adverse effects of designation 

including the potential for new designations and 

increased tourism to bring about increased traffi c, 

noise, waste, and congestion associated with new 

designations and increased tourism. This section 

reviews literature on the economic impacts of 

national park units and other special designations.

Economic Impacts of National Park Units 

National park designation generally has a benefi cial 

effect on the local economy. The National Park 

System received 274.9 million recreation visits in 

2008. Park visitors spent $11.56 billion in local 

gateway regions (within roughly 50 miles of the 

park). Visitors staying outside the parks in motels, 

hotels, cabins, and bed and breakfasts accounted 

for 55% of the total spending (NPS 2009). Over half 

of the spending was for lodging and meals, 17% 

for gas and local transportation, 9% for groceries, 

and 14% for souvenirs. 

Local economic impacts are estimated after 

excluding spending by visitors from the local area 

(9.8% of the total). Combining local impacts across 

all parks yields a total impact, including direct and 

secondary effects, of 205,000 jobs, $4.4 billion in 

labor income, and $6.9 billion value added. The 

four economic sectors most directly affected by 

visitor spending are lodging, restaurants, retail 

trade, and amusements. Visitor spending supports 

over 50,000 jobs in each of the hotel and restaurant 

sectors, and over 23,000 jobs each in the retail 

trade and the amusements sectors (NPS 2009).

National park units also impact the local region 

through the NPS payroll. In FY 2008, the National 

Park Service employed 24,954 people with a total 

payroll of $1.2 billion in wages and salaries and 

$313 million in payroll benefi ts. Including the 

induced effects of the spending of NPS wages and 

salaries in the local region, the total local economic 

impact of park payrolls are $1.86 billion in labor 

income, $2.11 billion in value added, and 36,816 

jobs (including NPS jobs). The combined impacts 

of visitor spending and park payrolls, including 

secondary effects, are $6.3 billion in labor income, 

$9.0 billion in value added, and 241,442 local jobs. 

Visitor spending accounts for 85% of the total jobs 

and 77% of the total value added (NPS 2009). 

In the Los Angeles Region, the Santa Monica 

Mountains NRA economic impacts include 215 jobs 

and $5.3 million in labor income. Visitor spending 

for FY 2008 was $17.1 million for all visitors. Table 

21 contains visitor spending and economic impacts 

of partnership national parks such as Missouri River 

National Recreational River and Chattahoochee 

River NRA. While visitor counts were not available 

for the Boston Harbor Islands NRA, the Chesapeake 

Bay Gateways Network, or the Rosie the Riveter/

WWII Homefront National Historical Park, the 

employment benefi ts of the similar partnership 

parks is provided in Table 22(NPS 2009). 

In an area as diverse as the Los Angeles Region, 

local governments are less likely to become 

dependent economic activity generated by 

parks and recreation areas. However, adjacent 

communities will receive some economic benefi t 

from visitation. 

With its close proximity to downtown Los Angeles 

and other large cities such as Santa Monica, ample 

infrastructure is available to support visitation. 

Therefore, impacts associated with potential 

development like that which occurs in gateway 

communities to many national park units is also 

not likely to occur. Gateway communities typically 

develop more park supporting facilities in areas 

that are remote. Given the close proximity to the 

Los Angeles metropolitan area, there is already 

suffi cient existing infrastructure to provide services 

to visitors. Even the most remote areas of the San 

Gabriel Mountains are within a 90 minute drive of 

Los Angeles. 

Table 20: Tourism

County Tourism Establishments 

(Percent of all economic 

sectors)

Tourism Employment 

(Percent of total labor 

force)

Tourism Revenue (Percent 

of sales in the county)

Los Angeles County 12.1% 10.8% 4.7%

San Bernardino County 10.1% 11.2% 3.8%

Orange County 8.6% 12.2% 3.3%

Source: NPS 2010
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Socioeconomic Eff ects 229

Other Studies Documenting the 

Socioeconmic Impacts of Special 

Designations

Further review of the literature surrounding the 

economic impacts of special designations yields 

some broad concepts that apply, in addition to 

the projected increase in visitation demonstrated 

in the previous section, Recreation Use and Visitor 

Experience.

There have been some case studies following 

new federal designations such as wilderness and 

wild and scenic rivers. For example, information 

presented in the case of the South Yuba wild and 

scenic river designation, it is noted that property is 

more highly valued in the area due to the presence 

of the river. It is noted that local property owners 

favored designation because it would further 

enhance the value of their property. Also, protection 

of the river would not jeopardize water supplies; 

rather it would protect water quality and conserve 

water for future needs. In the case of the Yuba 

River designation, the local parks and recreation 

department concluded that it is good for the local 

economy. Visitors generate $10 per day, which is 

multiplied by a factor of three as spent in the local 

community. New visitors bring in more income that 

is available for services and offsetting costs. Further, 

it is noted, protection of the river resource prevents 

the impacts of development that might otherwise 

occur, and enhances recreation opportunities for 

the local population.

Table 21. Spending and Economic Impacts of Visitors to NPS Partnership Parks on Local Economies, 

2008

Public Use Data Visitor Spending 2008 

Impacts of Non-local 

Visitor Spending 

Park Unit 

2008 

Recreation 

Visits 

2008 

Overnight 

Stays 

All Visitors 

($000’s) 

Non-local 

Visitors 

($000’s) Jobs 

Labor 

Income 

($000’s) 

Value 

Added 

($000’s) 

Missouri National 

Recreational River 162,086 0 $7,866 $7,474 149 2,595 4,012 

Chattahoochee River NRA 2,826,171 0 $80,469 $54,097 1016 25,150 39,112

Santa Monica Mountains 

NRA 

419,374 144 $17,166 $11,443 215 5,320 8,273

Source: NPS 2009

Notes: Impacts of construction activity and park purchases of goods and services from local fi rms are not included. Local 

regions are defi ned as a 50-mile radius around each park.

Table 22. Payroll Impacts of National Park Partnership Parks without Visit Counts, FY 2008

Park Payroll Impacts of Park Payroll 

Park Unit 

Salary 

($000’s) 

Payroll 

Benefi ts 

($000’s) NPS Jobs Total Jobs 

Labor Income 

($000’s) 

Value Added 

($000’s) 

Boston Harbor Islands NRA 608 122 16 22 930 1,064 

Chesapeake Bay Program 

Offi ce 1,174 301 17 29 1,862 2,120 

Rosie The Riveter/WW II 

Homefront NHP 

339 85 7 10 536 610

Source: NPS 2009

Notes:

The number of employees is estimated as an annual average for each park, so that seasonal positions are converted to 

annual equivalents.

Value added is the sum of labor income, profi ts and rents, and indirect business taxes. It can also be defi ned as total 

sales net of the costs of all non-labor inputs. Value added is the preferred economic measure of the contribution of an 

industry or activity to the economy.
230 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

Impact Analysis - Socioeconomics

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

If none of the proposed alternatives are adopted, 

current social and economic trends as described in 

the affected environment section would continue in 

force. Trends in property values, economic activity, 

income, population, employment, recreation use 

and distribution, tourism, community relationships 

(as affected by local federal land use) would remain 

unchanged. This applies not only to those aspects 

of the local socioeconomic environment regarded 

as benefi cial, but also those where adverse 

impacts have been identifi ed. Areas identifi ed as 

experiencing recreational high use would continue 

to be congested and noisy, with negative impacts 

on visitor experience and infrastructure. As in 

many other cases, an activity may be regarded as 

positive to some, and negative to others. Because 

the local population is increasing, the effect 

on local economies and opportunities may be 

indistinguishable from increases in non-resident 

tourist activity resulting in changes in federal 

designation, as proposed in the other alternatives. 

ALTERNATIVE A

In alternative A, national forest lands in the San 

Gabriel Mountains would be redesignated by 

Congress as a U.S. Forest Service managed national 

recreation area. Considering the existing visitation is 

predominantly local, and that economic indicators 

are at a low point, it is reasonable to expect that 

visitation by non-residents would be small initially 

and then increase slowly over time. At its greatest, 

the increase would likely not exceed 5 or 6 percent 

over current visitation. 

Although greater recognition by a national 

audience may increase visitation in the short-term 

resulting in benefi cial tourism impacts, its impact 

would be minor. Long-term visitation would 

increase gradually. The ANF would continue to serve 

mostly local and regional visitors. There would likely 

be modest increases in jobs associated with new 

visitors, and new resources would be available for 

ANF to add staff, improve facilities, and maintain 

resource quality. This new designation could 

improve property values in adjacent communities 

(NPS 1995). 

Increased visitation would have modest benefi cial 

effects on surrounding local communities which 

would provide supplies and services to such visitors. 

Increased investment in the ANF to provide more 

staffi ng for visitor services, planning, and restoration 

could result in additional jobs for the region.

ALTERNATIVE C

The nature of impacts on socioeconomics expected 

under this alternative is similar to alternative 

A. However, there are differences between the 

alternatives that might be refl ected in the amount 

and type of visitation to be expected. 

This smaller, more urban NRA by its nature would 

be less of a recreation attraction for a national 

audience. As such, visitation from this source 

is expected to be lower than in alternative A. 

However, several factors would serve to improve 

and enhance close-to-home recreation, making 

such opportunities more accessible for local 

residents. The smaller NRA would better serve 

local residents by providing more recreational 

opportunities for urban communities along the river 

corridor. Increased visitation, although small, could 

have modest benefi cial effects on surrounding local 

communities which would provide supplies and 

services to visitors. The new designation would 

result in additional jobs for the region, particularly 

with the emphasis on job training in alternative C. 

However, such effects would be negligible in the 

regional context.

ALTERNATIVE D 

Because the NRA in alternative D would be of 

greater size than alternatives A and C, it is likely 

benefi ts that more jobs and associated economic 

benefi ts would result. 

The new designation of the forest and improved 

recreational opportunities throughout the study 

area would cause small increases in visitation over 

time that could have modest benefi cial economic 

effects on surrounding local communities. These 

benefi ts would be in the form of providing 

supplies and services to such visitors. With a larger 

designation, and a greater emphasis on education 

and job training, alternative D may provide slightly 

more benefi ts than alternative C in terms of 

creating jobs. However, such effects would be 

negligible in the regional context.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

The study area is a complex region with a long 

and storied socioeconomic history. Adverse and 

benefi cial impacts due to an NRA designation, 

whether on the ANF, the San Gabriel River, or a 

broader region are likely to contribute no more than 

a very small amount to the overall socioeconomic 

context of the area. Many other factors, particularly 

outcomes related to the recent economic downturn, 

are likely to have a much greater impact on the 

region’s socioeconomics. The cumulative effect of 

growth and development trends plus the benefi cial 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Socioeconomic Eff ects 231

effects of each alternative, however, could result 

in a small, net benefi cial condition to some local 

communities as a result of improved urban quality, 

land protection, and economic benefi ts from 

recreation and conservation. However, the total 

cumulative effect is expected to be more dependent 

upon regional economic conditions and population 

increases (and distribution) over time than on the 

actions taken as a result of this study.

Conclusions

The action alternatives positively address current 

and future recreation needs. In terms of economic 

benefi t associated with these objectives, the no 

action alternative would have the least benefi t 

and alternatives A, C, and D would have benefi cial 

effects to varying degrees. Alternative D, due to 

its geographic scope, particularly in urban areas, 

has the greatest potential for benefi cial impacts to 

quality of life and other socioeconomic indicators.

Increased visitation would represent an adverse 

impact on infrastructure and social systems. Since 

visitation might be expected to increase in each 

of the action alternatives, infrastructure impacts 

would likely increase proportionally. The adverse 

impact in alternative A would likely be negligible, 

increasing to minor in both C and D. With 

congressional action approving the implementation 

of any of the action alternatives, or variants thereof, 

further planning would be undertaken. Additional 

environmental analysis would be prepared to look 

at site and area-specifi c activities and alternatives. 

Through that analysis, more specifi c conclusions can 

be drawn regarding direct, indirect and cumulative 

impacts. Joint planning efforts among stakeholders, 

and subsequent agreements, would be designed to 

optimize between the economic benefi ts and social 

costs so that the former is maximized and the latter 

is mitigated. 

Impact Analysis - Socially or 

Economically Disadvantaged 

Populations Socioeconomic Impacts 

(Environmental Justice)

As the analysis in the Recreation Use and Visitor 

Experience; Affected Environment describes, 

economically disadvantaged populations in the 

study area lack access and the ability to partake of 

existing opportunities due to lack of close-to-home 

open space, lack of effective transportation, lack of 

culturally advantageous facilities or opportunities, 

and lack of knowledge about recreation and natural 

resources. Under current conditions, all contribute 

to an impact on these populations. As stated, each 

action alternative attempts to remedy these current 

conditions to provide a net benefi cial result. 

BACKGROUND ON ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

Environmental justice must be considered in every 

major federal action by assessing environmental 

factors that negatively or disproportionally affect 

minority populations. Pursuant to Executive 

Order 12898, promulgated by President Clinton 

in 1994, federal agencies “shall make achieving 

environmental justice part of its mission by 

identifying and addressing, as appropriate, 

disproportionately high and adverse human health 

or environmental effects of its programs, policies, 

and activities on minority populations and lowincome populations in the United States.” 

The NPS has numerous partnerships programs with 

youth corps and conservation organizations that 

serve as a means to introduce minority and low 

income children and young adults to environmental 

and conservation issues. 

Youth corps and job corps partnerships provide 

a solid environmental learning experience for the 

youth involved, while at the same time leaving a 

legacy of work which signifi cantly benefi ts the parks 

and community. 

The NPS also seeks to identify opportunities to 

develop partnerships with Tribal governments, 

consistent with mission needs to provide necessary 

technical assistance to enhance tribal capacity 

to address environmental, health, and welfare 

concerns. 

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

A portion of the local population can be 

categorized as socially or economically 

disadvantaged and potentially affected by each of 

the alternatives. Population growth trends over time 

will likely exacerbate the amount and intensity of 
232 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

this condition. This equates directly to socially and 

economically disadvantaged populations who lack 

the means of access, and the ability to partake of 

existing opportunities due to physical barriers (e.g 

adult and childhood obesity or other ailments). 

The existing defi ciencies in open space, lack of 

effective transportation connecting communities 

to recreation opportunities, lack of culturally 

advantageous facilities or opportunities, and lack of 

knowledge about recreation and natural resources, 

under current conditions, all contribute to moderate 

adverse impacts on these populations.

ALTERNATIVE A

Alternative A would have a generally benefi cial 

impact on socially and economically disadvantaged 

populations by providing an improved recreational 

experience at the ANF. However, it would 

likely represent only a minor improvement for 

communities that are currently underserved for 

recreation. Of all the alternatives, this one places 

the least emphasis on developing new effective 

partnerships and cooperative management efforts 

that have the best chance of providing a remedy 

for these populations. Also, it would do little to 

increase access to recreation from underserved 

populations or provide close-to-home opportunities 

in urban communities.

ALTERNATIVE C

Alternative C would have a greater benefi cial 

impact on these populations, with efforts applied 

specifi cally in urban areas close to the San Gabriel 

River where some communities are underserved 

and economically disadvantaged. The alternative 

potentially provides job training and opportunities 

within these communities that have the potential 

both to improve economic access for recreation, 

but also to build programs and provide awareness 

regarding opportunities. To the extent that 

recreation opportunities can be designed to fi t 

cultural preferences (for example, large group 

picnic and camping areas) for local disadvantaged 

populations, the greater will be the benefi cial 

results. The development of effective and diverse 

partnerships in this alternative would also serve to 

build programs and cooperative agreements with 

entities that represent disadvantaged groups so that 

the necessary results can be obtained. 

ALTERNATIVE D

Again, due its expanded geographic and 

programmatic scope, alternative D holds the 

greatest potential benefi t for socially and 

economically disadvantaged populations. Also, it 

presents the most opportunities for new close-tohome recreation opportunities for areas that are 

currently underserved. In short, this alternative 

provides the best framework for implementing NPS’ 

environmental justice policy as outlined above. 

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Population growth trends in the study area and 

the surrounding region are likely to put additional 

pressure on available open space. Considering that 

public lands in this area are currently among the 

most heavily visited within the system, recreation 

opportunities and qualities are likely to diminish if 

nothing is done. The study area alternatives seek 

to ameliorate the condition to a greater or lesser 

degree. Therefore, the cumulative effect of growth 

and development trends, plus the effects of each 

alternative, would likely result in a net benefi cial 

condition in regard to recreational opportunities for 

disadvantaged populations within the study area. 

The overall level of cumulative impact, considering 

factors that exacerbate issues for the socially and 

economically disadvantaged, would decline as 

compared to the no action alternative. 

Conclusions

In general, it is anticipated that each of the 

action alternatives is likely to improve conditions 

regarding health and well-being of disadvantaged 

populations. Clearly, it is the stated intent of this 

congressionally-mandated study to do so. To do 

nothing would leave these populations to current 

trends in development. The creation of new 

public land open spaces would be advantageous. 

At the same time, the proposed changes in land 

use on existing public lands is not likely to affect 

commercial or non-commercial resources and values 

that economically disadvantaged populations might 

be dependent upon under current conditions. 

The partnership program and stakeholder 

agreements set forth particularly in alternatives 

C and D would meet the intent of the U.S. 

Department of the Interior and NPS Environmental 

Justice strategy as outlined above. Nevertheless, 

it is important to seek effective involvement 

of potentially affected social and economically 

disadvantaged populations when a congressionally 

mandated plan goes forward.
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Land Use 233

Land Use

Aff ected Environment

The use, ownership, and regulation of land play 

important roles in the protection of resources in 

the study area. Many thousands of landowners 

are found within the study area, although about 

two-thirds of the area is owned and managed by 

one entity; the U.S. Forest Service. This section 

examines the current state and trends of land 

ownership, use, and development in the San 

Gabriel Mountains, the northern portions of the 

study area (Santa Clarita and Antelope valleys), and 

the urban areas to the south, including the San 

Gabriel Valley.

The San Gabriel Mountains. The U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, through the Angeles National Forest, 

owns and administers two-thirds of the study area, 

including the San Gabriel Mountains. The forest is 

managed for multiple direct use values, including 

watershed protection and recreation. It is assumed 

that this land will continue in public ownership 

indefi nitely and will not be subject to further 

residential or commercial development. 

North of the San Gabriel Mountains. The 

Antelope Valley region, which includes the study 

area lands north of the mountains and continues 

north into Kern County, was characterized by slow 

growth until the mid-1980s. By the 1990s, the 

growth rate had accelerated dramatically. Within 

15 years, the population had nearly quadrupled 

(RWMG 2007). The projected growth rate for 

unincorporated Los Angeles County lands north 

of the San Gabriel mountains will double the 

population, from 100,000 in 2005 to 215,000 in 

2035 (RWMG 2007). Much of the vacant land 

available for development lies in the southern 

end of the Antelope Valley region (RWMG 2007), 

portions of which are contained within the 

northernmost boundary of the study area. Because 

of this, these areas potentially face tremendous 

development pressure as the population rapidly 

expands. 

Antelope Valley also contains the largest amount of 

productive farmland in Los Angeles County, mostly 

in unincorporated territory and outside of the study 

area. Agricultural uses are declining as urbanization 

accelerates, but the value of Antelope Valley’s 

agricultural production was nearly $271 million in 

2006 and remains an important part of the Valley’s 

economy. 

The northwestern corner of the study area lies 

in the Santa Clarita Valley, which has its own 

land use challenges. The Los Angeles County 

Planning Department has identifi ed a list of needs 

for land use planning in this region including 

accommodation of growth to the area’s build-out 

capacity while preserving open space, particularly 

through retention and expansion of an open space 

greenbelt around the valley and discouraging urban 

sprawl into foothill areas. The City of Santa Clarita, 

in cooperation with partners such as the Santa 

Monica Mountains Conservancy, has worked to 

acquire lands or require developers to preserve open 

space in a greenbelt around the city through an 

acquisition plan adopted in 2002. Approximately 

50 percent of these acquisition objectives have 

been met to date. Some of these identifi ed lands 

are within the study area, along with ongoing and 

planned development projects (Los Angeles County 

2010b).

South of the San Gabriel Mountains. The 

primarily urbanized areas below the San Gabriel 

Mountains contain a variety of land uses. Open 

space is relatively sparse, with residential and 

commercial uses dominating. The most signifi cant 

open spaces within the urbanized areas are at the 

Santa Fe Dam Recreation Area, Whittier Narrows, 

the Puente Hills, and Frank G. Bonelli Regional Park. 

Public facilities and institutions are scattered among 

residential land uses, which dominate throughout 

the valley. Commercial uses are primarily found near 

freeway intersections and along other major eastwest corridors (LADPW 2006a). Areas characterized 

by industrial uses are found in the City of Industry 

and in wide swaths of the river corridor from Azusa 

to Baldwin Park, among other places.

Prime and Unique Farmland. Prime Farmland 

is land with the best combination of physical 

and chemical features able to sustain long-term 

production of agricultural crops. This land has the 

soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply 

needed to produce sustained high yields. In order 

to have the Prime designation, this land must have 

been used for production of irrigated crops at some 

time during the four years prior to the mapping 

date. Unique Farmland is of lesser quality soils 

used for the production of the state’s leading 

agricultural crops. This land is usually irrigated but 

may include non-irrigated orchards or vineyards as 

found in some climatic zones in California. In order 

to have the Unique Farmland designation, the land 

must have been cropped at some time during the 

four years prior to the mapping date.

The California Department of Conservation (CDC) 

Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program 

(FMMP) program has identifi ed approximately 200 

acres of prime and unique farmland in the study 
234 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

area. Most of which is located north of the San 

Gabriel Mountains in the Antelope Valley near 

Acton, Littlerock, and Valyermo. One small parcel 

of unique farmland is located in unincorporated 

Orange County near the City of Brea (FMMP 2008). 

As documented by the FMMP, the state’s important 

farmlands and grazing lands decreased by 170,982 

acres (267 square miles) between 2002 and 2004 

(FMMP 2008). The highest-quality agricultural soils, 

known as Prime Farmland, comprised 46 percent of 

the loss (78,575 acres). Within the study, over 300 

acres of prime and unique farmland were converted 

to other uses, primarily urban development 

between 2000-2008 (FMMP 2002, FMMP 2008). 

Most of the conversion occurred in the Orange 

County area near Brea. The majority of prime and 

unique farmland within the study area occurs along 

the 14-corridor in the Antelope Valley.

Retaining valuable farmland in Los Angeles 

County is expected to be diffi cult as projected 

growth in the County over the next 20 years is 

expected to continue. Increased population growth 

accompanying development may result in the 

conversion of farms and land with prime soil to 

non-agricultural uses. This scenario is especially 

likely in the North County area, which contains 

most of the Prime Farmland in Los Angeles County, 

and is also experiencing the most rapid population 

growth. Los Angeles County has designated areas 

surrounding agricultural lands as rural in an attempt 

to provide for rural development that is compatible 

with agricultural activities.

REGULATORY SETTING

Jurisdiction of lands inside the study area belongs 

to multiple federal, state, and local entities. This 

section describes these entities and their respective 

management, planning, or regulatory activities.

Federal Agencies 

United States Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 

The BLM manages small portions of the 

undeveloped or unused land in Antelope and Santa 

Clarita valleys. The California Desert Conservation 

Area Plan is used to manage BLM controlled areas. 

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 

The USFWS administers the Federal Endangered 

Species Act (FESA) and designates critical habitat for 

endangered species. 

United States Forest Service (USFS) 

The USFS manages approximately 420,000 acres of 

the Angeles National Forest. 

United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) 

Among its responsibilities, the USACOE administers 

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), which 

governs specifi ed activities in waters of the United 

States, including wetlands. In this role, the USACOE 

requires that a permit be obtained if a project 

would place structures, including dredged or fi lled 

materials, within navigable waters or wetlands, or 

result in alteration of such areas. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service (NRCS) 

The NRCS maps soils and farmland uses to 

provide comprehensive information necessary 

for understanding, managing, conserving and 

sustaining the nation’s limited soil resources. The 

NRCS also manages the Farmland Protection 

Program, which provides funds to help purchase 

development rights to keep productive farmland in 

agricultural uses. 

State Agencies 

California Department of Conservation [Prime and 

unique farmlands]

In 1982, the State of California created the 

Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program 

within the California Department of Conservation 

to carry on the mapping activity from the NRCS 

on a continuing basis. The California Department 

of Conservation administers the California Land 

Conservation Act of 1965, also known as the 

Williamson Act, for the conservation of farmland 

and other resource-oriented laws. 

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 

The Caltrans jurisdiction includes rights-of-way 

of state and interstate routes within California. 

Any work within the right-of-way of a federal or 

state transportation corridor is subject to Caltrans 

regulations governing allowable actions and 

modifi cations to the right-of-way. Caltrans includes 

the Division of Aeronautics, which is responsible for 

airport permitting and establishing a county Airport 

Land Use Commission (ALUC) for each county with 

one or more public airports. ALUCs are responsible 

for the preparation of land use plans for areas near 

aviation facilities. 

California Department of Forestry and Fire 

Protection (CDF)

The CDF reviews and approves plans for timber 

harvesting on private lands. In addition, through 

its responsibility for fi ghting wildland fi res, the CDF 

plays a role in planning development in forested 

areas. 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Land Use 235

California Department of Parks and Recreation 

(CDPR) 

The CDPR manages and provides sites for a variety 

of recreational and outdoor activities. The CDPR is 

a trustee agency that owns and operates all state 

parks and participates in land use planning that 

affects state parkland. 

Regional and Local Agencies

Southern California Association of Governments 

(SCAG) 

As related to land use, SCAG is authorized to 

undertake intergovernmental review for federal 

assistance and direct federal development pursuant 

to Presidential Executive Order 12,372. Pursuant 

to CEQA (Public Resource Code Sections 21083 

and 21087 and CEQA Guidelines Sections (15206 

and 15125(b)), SCAG reviews projects of regional 

signifi cance for consistency with regional plans. 

SCAG is also responsible for preparation of the 

Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), 

pursuant to California Government Code Section 

65584(a). SCAG’s RHNA provides a tool for 

providing local affordable housing development 

strategies. 

SCAG’s current Regional Comprehensive Plan 

and Guide (RCPG) 1996 is intended to provide a 

permissive framework for decision making by local 

governments regarding growth and development. 

The RCPG proposes strategies for local governments 

to use on a voluntary basis to reconcile local needs 

with state and federal planning requirements. 

Local Agency Formation Commissions 

The Local Agency Formation Commission 

(LAFCO) is the agency in each county that has the 

responsibility to create orderly local government 

boundaries, with the goal of encouraging “planned, 

well-ordered, effi cient urban development 

patterns,” the preservation of open-space lands, 

and the discouragement of urban sprawl. While 

LAFCOs have no direct land use authority, their 

actions determine which local government will 

be responsible for planning new areas. LAFCOs 

address a wide range of boundary actions, 

including creation of spheres of infl uence for cities, 

adjustments to boundaries of special districts, 

annexations, incorporations, detachments of areas 

from cities, and dissolution of cities. 

General Plans 

The most comprehensive land use planning for the 

area is provided by city and county general plans, 

which local governments are required by state 

law to prepare as a guide for future development. 

General plans contain goals and policies concerning 

topics that are mandated by state law or which the 

jurisdiction has chosen to include. Required topics 

are land use, circulation, housing, conservation, 

open space, noise, and safety. Other topics that 

local governments frequently choose to address 

include public facilities, parks and recreation, 

community design, sustainability and growth 

management, among others. These plans provide 

general defi nitions and implementation methods for 

each land use designation in the district. City and 

county general plans must be consistent with each 

other. County general plans must cover areas not 

included by city general plans (i.e., unincorporated 

areas). 

Specifi c and Master Plans 

A city or county may also provide land use planning 

by developing community or specifi c plans for 

smaller, more specifi c areas within their jurisdiction. 

These more localized plans provide for focused 

guidance for developing a specifi c area, with 

development standards tailored to the area, as well 

as systematic implementation of the general plan. 

Zoning and Land Use Permits 

City and county zoning codes are the set of detailed 

requirements that implement the general plan 

policies at the level of the individual parcel. The 

zoning code presents standards for different uses 

and identifi es which uses are allowed in the various 

zoning districts of the jurisdiction. Since 1971, 

state law has required the city or county zoning 

code to be consistent with the jurisdiction’s general 

plan. Cities and counties typically implement their 

zoning codes through highly individualized land 

use ordinances that differ from jurisdiction to 

jurisdiction.
236 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

Impact Analysis – Land Use

PUBLIC CONCERNS

Local Jurisdictions and Land Use

Concerns were raised during the scoping and 

public review of the preliminary alternative that the 

proposed actions could result in loss of local land 

use control by local governments and agencies. 

This concern was anticipated, and it would 

not be the intent of Congress and this region’s 

congressional representatives to contravene local 

land use plans and controls by virtue of proposed 

changes in federal land designation. Therefore, in 

actions common to all alternatives the NPS makes 

a commitment to putting forward alternatives that 

respect local land use control and private property 

rights. NPS laws and policies would only apply to 

lands that lie within NPS jurisdiction, and U.S. Forest 

Service laws and policies would similarly apply only 

to national forest lands. It is expected that any 

legislation produced from the outcome of this study 

would explicitly exclude use of eminent domain as a 

means of acquiring land. Local laws and ordinances 

would remain in force, and any actions undertaken 

through this effort would necessarily respect them. 

Use of Eminent Domain

The public expressed concerns about the use of 

eminent domain and the possibility of regulatory 

authority over surrounding landowners and local 

agencies in alternatives B and C. This concern does 

not apply to alternative A, because that alternative 

applies only to lands currently managed by the U.S. 

Forest Service. Alternative B has been dismissed. 

In alternatives C and D, this concern is addressed 

by statements provided in the actions common 

to all alternatives; it is proposed that authorizing 

legislation clearly state that eminent domain would 

not be used as a means of acquiring land. Purchase 

would be from willing sellers only. Additionally, 

given funding availability, any land acquisition 

would be small and take place incrementally over 

time.

Private Property Owners and Inholders

Concerns were expressed that new land use 

designations would impact cabin owners and 

inholders in the ANF. There are no proposals made 

among the alternatives that would impact existing 

cabin owners and inholders. The ANF lands in 

question would remain within U.S. Forest Service 

jurisdiction in all of the alternatives.

Urban Quality

As stated in the introductory material in this 

document, over fi fty communities and 1.5 million 

residents lie within the study area. Development 

and growth trends are such that loss of connection 

to land and resource values is of concern, and 

open spaces are diminishing. Local populations are 

trending towards less healthful conditions, with 

obesity, diabetes, and respiratory or other physical 

ailments exacerbated by urban pollution, being 

of chief concern. These concerns are, in part, the 

impetus behind this study as articulated by the 

sponsors of its enabling legislation and as presented 

in Chapter 1 under Purpose and Need. Therefore, 

the intent of each action alternative is to address 

these issues in a positive fashion by providing 

opportunities to counter these trends to a greater 

or lesser degree, thereby improving the quality of 

urban life and the built environment.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Existing efforts to protect and conserve land for 

recreation and open space would continue at 

current levels. Regional growth and development, 

and lack of regional or coordinated planning efforts 

would continue to challenge local agencies and 

organizations in their efforts to provide adequate 

access to recreation and open space.

Areas identifi ed as experiencing recreational 

high use would continue to be congested and 

noisy, with negative impacts on visitor experience 

and infrastructure. As in many other cases, an 

activity may be regarded as positive to some, and 

negative to others. Because the local population is 

increasing, any resulting effect on local recreation 

opportunities and experiences would likely be 

indistinguishable from increases due to non-resident 

visitor activity that could occur with changes in 

federal land use designation, as proposed in the 

other alternatives. 

Traffi c and congestion would continue to be 

affected by regional growth and development. 

Localized congestion at heavily used recreation sites 

would continue to have moderate adverse impacts 

on traffi c patterns in these areas.

Changes in federal land use designation would not 

occur in this alternative; hence the issue of impacts 

on local jurisdictions does not apply. 

ALTERNATIVE A

In alternative A, national forest lands in the San 

Gabriel Mountains would be redesignated by 

Congress as an U.S. Forest Service managed 

national recreation area. Improved recreation 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Land Use 237

opportunities and conservation within the Angeles 

National Forest would have an overall benefi cial 

effect on urban life and the built environment for 

surrounding communities. 

Although an increase in visitation would likely 

exacerbate crowding, noise, congestion and traffi c 

at heavily used sites, alternative A is designed to 

provide additional resources for more heavily used 

areas. More resources would be available for public 

education, improved facilities, and restoration. The 

ANF would also provide for improved administration 

and management, thereby mitigating the adverse 

impacts of heavy use. Activities that would likely 

result under the action alternatives are as follows:

• New recreational developments would be 

limited by terrain and sensitive resources. 

Changes would likely be made within the 

footprint of existing recreation areas. Minor 

expansions would be possible for increased 

parking and day use facilities. 

• Major new recreational destinations within the 

ANF would not be envisioned. It is more likely 

that newly increased funding would be applied 

to improving facilities and management at 

existing visitor areas.

When placed in the context of current 

transportation patterns, which are primarily affected 

by regional land use, growth and development, 

alternative A would have very little effect on traffi c 

patterns throughout the study area. However, with 

increases in visitation, alternative A could add a 

negligible adverse impact to local traffi c patterns 

associated with popular recreation areas.

As actions related to alternative A would apply only 

to national forest system lands, there would be no 

impact on local land use control.

ALTERNATIVE C

The nature of impacts on land use expected under 

this alternative is similar to alternative A. However, 

there are differences between the alternatives 

that might be refl ected in the amount and type of 

visitation to be expected. This smaller, more urban 

NRA by its nature would be less of a recreation 

attraction for a national audience. As such, 

visitation from this source is expected to be lower 

than in alternative A. However, several factors 

would serve to improve and enhance recreation 

opportunities that would be more accessible for 

local residents. The smaller NRA would better 

serve local residents by providing more recreational 

opportunities for urban communities along the 

river corridor. Because of a lack of remaining open 

space in the NRA, new recreational opportunities 

would arise out of redevelopment opportunities, 

restoration of vacant or abandoned lands with 

habitat potential as they become available. The 

NRA would also work to improve recreational 

opportunities along waterways where compatible 

with fl ood protection efforts, and would work in 

partnership with local communities to explore new 

opportunities for recreation and open space. This 

is basically a continuation of efforts made as part 

of the Emerald Necklace Partnership (the no action 

alternative describes this partnership). 

The potential for providing transportation 

improvements such as better transit connections to 

destinations within the NRA would, if implemented, 

make recreation opportunities more accessible for 

local communities thereby enhancing urban quality.

When placed in the context of current 

transportation patterns, which are primarily affected 

by regional land use, growth and development, 

alternative C would have very little effect. However, 

an emphasis on connecting people to recreation 

and improving transportation to major recreational 

destinations would help to relieve traffi c congestion 

associated with heavy use within the national 

recreation area such as San Gabriel Canyon.

By providing new recreation opportunities and 

restoring lands along the San Gabriel River, 

alternative C would have an overall benefi cial effect 

on urban life and the built environment.

NPS management policies would apply only to NPSowned lands. There would be no impact on existing 

local jurisdictions and agencies.

ALTERNATIVE D 

Due to the expanded geographical size of the NRA 

and potentially higher national visibility, alternative 

D has the greatest likelihood for increased visitation 

in the long-term. Expanding partnerships and 

NPS technical assistance to other agencies in this 

environment are likely to improve the marketing of 

recreation opportunities beyond the capabilities of 

the other alternatives. Recreational opportunities 

in rural areas would refl ect the types of existing 

uses (e.g. staging areas for equestrians, better 

trail connections, more trailheads and river access) 

such that the quality of the experience would be 

expected to improve.

When placed in the context of current 

transportation patterns which are primarily 

affected by land use, growth and development 

Alternative D would have very little effect. However, 

with a broader emphasis on connecting people 
238 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

to recreation, providing more close-to-home 

recreation opportunities for urban communities, 

and improving transportation to major recreational 

destinations, Alternative D could help to reduce 

traffi c congestion in heavily used recreation areas to 

a greater extent than alternative C.

By emphasizing and protecting interconnected 

ecosystems within and among urban zones, 

providing more recreational opportunities, and 

protecting open spaces, alternative D would have 

the greatest benefi cial effect on urban quality and 

the built environment. 

NPS management policies would apply only to NPSowned lands. There would be no impact on existing 

local jurisdictions and agencies.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Population growth trends in the study area and 

the surrounding region are likely to put additional 

pressure on available open space, thereby impacting 

urban quality and land use. Considering that 

public lands in this area are currently among the 

most heavily visited within the system, recreation 

opportunities and qualities are likely to diminish 

if nothing is done. The study area alternatives 

seek to ameliorate the condition to a greater or 

lesser degree. Therefore, the cumulative effect of 

growth and development trends plus the effects 

of each alternative would likely result in a net 

benefi cial condition to some local communities as 

a result of improved urban quality, land protection, 

and economic benefi ts from recreation and 

conservation. However, the total cumulative effect 

is expected to be more dependent upon regional 

economic conditions and population increases (and 

distribution) over time than on the actions taken as 

a result of this study.

Conclusions

The action alternatives positively address current 

and future recreation and open space needs. In 

terms of the economic and open space benefi ts 

associated with these objectives, the no action 

alternative would have the least benefi t and 

alternatives A, C and D would have benefi cial 

effects to varying degrees. 

Increased visitation would represent an adverse 

impact on infrastructure and social systems. Since 

visitation might be expected to increase in each 

of the action alternatives, infrastructure impacts 

would likely increase proportionally. The adverse 

impact in alternative A would likely be negligible, 

increasing to minor in both C and D. With 

congressional action approving the implementation 

of any of the action alternatives, or variants thereof, 

further planning would be undertaken. Additional 

environmental analysis would be prepared to look 

at site and area-specifi c activities and alternatives. 

Through that analysis, more specifi c conclusions can 

be drawn regarding direct, indirect and cumulative 

impacts. Joint planning efforts among stakeholders, 

and subsequent agreements, would be designed to 

optimize between the economic benefi ts and social 

costs so that the former is maximized and the latter 

is mitigated. None of the alternatives will adversely 

impact local land use control, as any proposed 

collaborative NRA designation would not have 

regulatory authority over its privately and publiclyowned lands. Finally, all of the action alternatives 

promote the additional protection of open space. 

Alternative A accomplishes this along the edges 

of the ANF by facilitating greater cooperation with 

outside land protection organizations. Alternatives 

C and D, go further to establish mechanisms for 

cooperation and coordination, with alternative D 

realizing the greatest benefi t due to its geographical 

scope.
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Eff ects On Water Resources 239

Effects on Water Resources

Aff ected Environment

A full description of the study area’s surface water, 

groundwater basins, fl ood protection systems, 

water rights, and supply is provided in Chapter 2,

Resource Description. An overview of the study 

area’s surface water quality and trends affecting 

water quality is provided below. 

SURFACE WATER QUALITY

While the geologic, hydrologic, climatic, and 

ecological characteristics for watersheds are 

unique in the nation, Southern California has 

also experienced one of the most dramatic 

environmental transformations due to rapid growth 

and development. For the past 150 years, the study 

area watersheds and wetlands have been impacted 

by agricultural and urban development (California 

Coastal Conservancy 2001).

Water quality varies greatly throughout the study 

area. The following section briefl y describes water 

quality within the study area and the primary 

factors that impact waters considered to be 

impaired. Generally, water quality in the mountains 

and headwaters is better than water quality in 

the lower, more urban portions of the study area 

watersheds. As described in Chapter 3, Signifi cance, 

several of the mountainous reaches are eligible for 

National Wild and Scenic River designation.

Sources of surface water pollution include 

agriculture, industry, wastewater, urban runoff, 

and widespread use of fertilizers, chemicals, 

solvents, and household products. Pollution comes 

from both point sources, such as industries and 

wastewater treatment plants, and non-point 

sources such as urban and agricultural runoff and 

trash. Major dischargers of wastewater in the study 

area include the San Jose, the Whittier Narrows, 

and the Pomona wastewater reclamation plants. 

Recreational use can also impact waterways. 

Surface water quality is regulated by the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency and the 

California State Regional Water Quality Control 

Boards (RWQCBs) which maintain and update lists 

of impaired water bodies that exceed state and 

federal water quality standards. Impaired reaches 

are river stretches that are offi cially recognized 

by the State of California as affected by specifi c 

pollutants derived from unknown or nonpoint 

sources. Table 23 describes California’s 2006 Clean 

Water Act, Section 303(d) List of Water Quality 

Limited River Segments and Lakes. Below is a 

description of the impairment categories/types of 

pollutants (LADPW 2006a and 2006b).

WATERWAY IMPAIRMENT CATEGORIES

Metals. Metals from stormwater runoff include 

lead, zinc, cadmium, copper, chromium, and nickel. 

Such metals can be toxic to aquatic animals and can 

bioaccumulate. Sources of metal in urban runoff 

include metal, paint, automobiles, brake pads, or 

preserved wood.

Nutrients. Nutrient pollutants including nitrogen 

and phosphorous are critical to the growth of 

plants. However, in high amounts, nutrients can 

result in excessive growth of vegetation such as 

algae, which results in water impairment. Common 

sources of nutrients include fertilizers used in 

landscaping and agriculture, human and animal 

waste, and effl uent from wastewater treatment 

facilities.

Pesticides and Other Organics. Other organic 

compounds, aside from nutrients, found in 

waterways include adhesives, cleaners, sealants, 

solvents, and pesticides. They enter water bodies 

through urban runoff and improper disposal. When 

these substances bioaccumulate in animals and 

aquatic life, they can have an adverse impact on the 

health of those species.

Pathogens (Bacteria). Bacteria and viruses 

are common contaminants in urban runoff and 

stormwater. High levels of indicator bacteria (such 

as Escherichia coli) in stormwater sometimes results 

in the closure of beaches to contact recreation. 

Sources include sanitary sewer leaks and spills, 

malfunctioning septic tanks, and fecal matter from 

humans and animals.

Trash. Trash pollutants include packaging and other 

products in urban environments, lawn clippings, 

animal excrement street litter and other organic 

matter. These substances can harbor bacteria, 

viruses, vectors, and depress the dissolved oxygen 

levels in water bodies (LADPW 2006b). 

GROUNDWATER QUALITY

Groundwater basin water quality is a concern in the 

study area and quality varies throughout the area 

based on naturally occurring conditions, historical 

land use patterns, and groundwater extraction 

patterns. In some areas groundwater quality has 

been affected by land use and production practices 

such as industrial discharges, seawater intrusion due 

to overdrafting, industrial discharges, agricultural 

chemical usage, livestock operations, urban runoff, 

and some naturally occurring constituents. The cost 

and effort of cleaning up some of the contaminated 

groundwater basins is extensive. Several sites in the 

San Gabriel Valley Basin are on the EPA’s National 

Priorities List for Remediation (LADPW 2006b). Table 
240 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

24 provides an overview of groundwater pollutants 

for study area groundwater basins

IMPACT ANALYSIS – WATER RESOURCES

Judging by the current condition, and as an 

accepted tenet in land management, as recreation 

use grows there is a concomitant amount of stress 

placed upon natural resources such as water 

quality. As shown in other discussions, the intent 

of this study is to fi nd a means whereby watershed 

resources and values can be conserved along with 

providing opportunities for people to appreciate 

and enjoy them. Current trends in land use and 

recreation include a diminishing availability of 

open spaces and a related deterioration in natural 

resource qualities associated with watershed values. 

The action alternatives represent incremental 

approaches to meet the intent of the study. 

Therefore, despite the projected increases in 

visitation that might be experienced under the 

alternatives, all contain measures that would, 

overall, improve and enhance watershed values. 

The major assumption to be made in this regard 

is that visitor populations and local communities 

will become more knowledgeable, appreciative, 

and understanding of watershed values through 

enhanced education and interpretation afforded in 

each alternative. Alternatives C and D, in particular, 

apply this assumption to water-based resources 

along the San Gabriel River System and represent 

affi rmative approaches to watershed management, 

riparian values, and wetland and fl oodplain 

protection.

The alternatives are oriented to policy rather 

than activity. No specifi c actions are proposed 

other than federal designation and partnership 

development. Therefore, as with other resources, 

analysis of specifi c impacts on water resources is 

not possible beyond the general statement above. 

Should Congress act to establish new designations, 

further environmental analysis would be necessary 

to plan their implementation. That analysis would 

likely propose specifi c types of actions that can be 

evaluated more specifi cally in terms of potential 

effects on water resources and values associated 

with them.
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Eff ects On Water Resources 241

Table 23: Impaired Surface Waters within the Study Area

Reach or Water body Pollutant Category/Type

Walnut Creek Wash 

(Drains from Puddingstone Reservoir)

Miscellaneous (pH)

Sawpit Creek Other Organics (Bis(2ethylhexyl)phthalate/DEHP)

Santa Clara River Reach 7 

(Bouquet Canyon Rd to above Lang Gaging Station)

Pathogens (Coliform Bacteria)

San Jose Creek Reach 2 

(Temple to I-10 at White Ave.)

Pathogens (Coliform Bacteria)

San Jose Creek Reach 1 

(San Gabriel River Confl uence to Temple St.)

Nutrients (Ammonia)

San Gabriel River, East Fork Trash

San Gabriel River Reach 2 

(Firestone Avenue to Whittier Narrows Dam

Pathogens (Coliform Bacteria)

Rio Hondo Reach 2 

(At Spreading Grounds)

Nutrients (Ammonia)

Rio Hondo Reach 1 

(Confl uence of the Los Angeles River to I-5)

Pathogens (Coliform Bacteria)

Monrovia Canyon Creek Metals/Metalloids (Lead)

Coyote Creek Nutrients (Ammonia)

Santa Fe Dam Park Lake Metals/Metalloids (Copper)

Puddingstone Reservoir Pesticides (Chlordane)

Peck Road Park Lake Pesticides (Chlordane)

Legg Lake Nutrients (Ammonia)

Crystal Lake Nutrients (Organic Enrichment/Low Dissolved Oxygen)

Source: State Water Quality Control Board, 2006 303(d) impairment status.

Table 24: Groundwater Basin Water Quality

Groundwater Basin Pollutants

Coastal Plain of Los Angeles, 

Central Subbasin 

Found in sample wells: Inorganics, radiological, nitrates, volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs) and semi-volatile organic sompound (SVOCs)

San Gabriel Valley Four areas are considered superfund sites (Whittier Narrows, Puente basin, Baldwin 

Park, and El Monte areas). Found in sample wells: Inorganics, radiological, nitrates, 

pesticides, VOCs and SVOCs

Raymond Found in sample wells: Inorganics, radiological, nitrates, VOCs and SVOCs

A Superfund site exits near the Jet Propulsion Laboratories.

Upper Santa Ana Valley, Chino 

Subbasin

Most serious problems are high concentrations of dissolved solids.

San Fernando Valley Found in sample wells: Inorganics, radiological, nitrates, pesticides, VOCs and SVOCs

Acton Valley Groundwater 

Basin

Found in sample wells: nitrates, inorganics

Antelope Valley Found in sample wells: Inorganics, radiological, nitrates, pesticides, VOCs and SVOCs

Source: California Department of Water Resources 2003
242 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

Public Concerns

WATER RIGHTS AND SUPPLY IMPACTS

The public indicated concern about the potential 

effects of a new federal designation or overlay on 

private water rights or the ability of state and local 

agencies to make decisions regarding water supply 

and quality. There would be no effect in this regard 

because all of the alternatives would respect and 

retain existing water rights (see Actions Common 

to All Alternatives, page 146). Water districts and 

agencies would continue to manage water supply 

and discharge. No change would be made to water 

rights.

However, there could be a benefi cial impact on 

water quality, in each of the action alternatives, 

from increased interpretation and education, 

enhanced visitor management and restoration 

activities. For example, it is anticipated that there 

would be more law enforcement, better facilities, 

and increased education and interpretation in high 

use areas along the San Gabriel River. 

It is the stated purpose of any alternative being 

considered in this study to improve watershed 

values for the dual purpose of providing quality 

water-based recreation and to protect or enhance 

the quality of water supplied to users downstream. 

These types of benefi cial effects are enhanced by 

increasing allocations of lands into protective status 

under the various alternatives. The alternatives 

would also provide new opportunities to restore 

and improve waterways where possible. This would 

be done in partnership with water agencies, the Los 

Angeles County Department of Public Works and 

the Army Corps of Engineers. 

Water rights and uses are expressly protected under 

any of the action alternatives. Similarly, since the 

redirection, reapportionment, or redistribution of 

water sources and supplies are not proposed in 

any alternative, there would be no impact on other 

resources or values from such actions. A concern 

was expressed in regard to the impact of water 

redistribution specifi cally on Native American sacred 

sites, to which it can be said there would be no 

effect. 

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 

Groundwater basin water quality and surface water 

pollution would continue to be managed as they 

are now. Water quality would vary greatly from 

location to location throughout the study area, 

depending primarily on the level of development 

and land uses. Limited funding for restoration, 

planning, and public education to address water 

quality impacts would result in continuing minor to 

moderate adverse impacts on water resources. The 

water quality of rivers and creeks in certain areas 

would continue to be a public health and safety 

concern. 

ALTERNATIVE A

If this alternative was selected, authorizing 

legislation would reaffi rm the original purpose of 

the ANF to protect watershed resources. Protection 

of watershed resources would take precedence 

in determining future uses of the forest. Within 

the ANF, impairments to waterways are from 

primarily from trash. Additional resources for visitor 

education, and more rangers on-site in heavily used 

recreation areas could reduce pollution caused by 

recreational use, having a benefi cial effect on water 

resources. 

Alternative A would also emphasize restoration, 

which could improve the overall water quality of 

rivers and streams within the ANF. Improved water 

quality would have an indirect benefi cial effect on 

public health and safety.

ALTERNATIVE C

Alternative C would do little immediately to 

ameliorate the current watershed conditions 

expressed in the affected environment section. The 

new emphasis on river-based recreation holds the 

potential for additional impacts on water resources 

as described above. However, Alternative C would 

provide additional resources for visitor education, 

and more rangers on-site in heavily used recreation 

areas. 

Alternative C would be focused only along the 

main corridors of the San Gabriel River within the 

NRA. Over time, restoration opportunities funded 

by the NRA partnership would also have a benefi cial 

effect on water quality within the San Gabriel River. 

Water quality improvements would be greatest in 

those areas where current impairments are a result 

of recreational use. Improved water quality would 

have an indirect benefi cial effect on public health 

and safety.

ALTERNATIVE D

Alternative D would do little immediately to 

ameliorate the conditions within the study area 

at large as described in the affected environment 

section. The new emphasis on river-based 

recreation, and potentially on other recreation 

uses throughout the expanded NRA, holds the 

potential for additional impacts on water resources 

as described above. However, this alternative 

proposes reaffi rmation of the original purpose 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Eff ects on Water Resources 243

for the area, to protect watershed resources. 

Protection of watershed resources would 

take precedence in determining future uses. 

Alternative D would have similar benefi cial effects 

to alternative C for water quality on rivers and 

creeks that are primarily impacted by recreational 

use. However, as alternative D would provide 

restoration opportunities throughout the San 

Gabriel Mountains and along the San Gabriel River 

and Puente Hills, the benefi cial effects would be 

greater than in alternative C. Additionally, the NRA 

would also be able to provide technical assistance 

for improved recreational planning and restoration 

opportunities outside of the study area, providing 

the opportunity to focus on broader restoration 

efforts. Improved water quality would have an 

indirect benefi cial effect on public health and safety.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Population growth and land use trends in the 

study area and the surrounding region are likely 

to continue to adversely impact water use and 

quality as described in the no action alternative. 

The study area alternatives seek to ameliorate 

these conditions to a greater or lesser degree. The 

total cumulative effect is expected to be more 

dependent upon local and regional land use over 

time than on the actions taken as a result of this 

study. However, restoration and improved public 

education and recreational facilities proposed in 

the alternatives would improve conditions to some 

degree. Alternative D would provide the greatest 

benefi cial effects as it would provide the most 

resources for restoration, education and recreational 

improvements. A new emphasis on river-based 

recreation and trail use over a broad area, where 

use is expected to increase, has the potential to add 

to existing impacts within the watershed for a net 

negative impact downstream. This effect would be 

negligible in the context of the benefi cial effects of 

watershed improvements that could result from the 

action alternatives.

Conclusions

Existing threats and impacts to area water resources 

would continue and the alternatives would not 

ameliorate the overall conditions within the study 

area that are expressed in the affected environment 

section, and in the no action alternative. However, 

with increased restoration activities, better public 

recreation, and improved recreational facilities 

and visitor management, the action alternatives 

would have a benefi cial effect on water resources. 

The new emphasis on river-based recreation, and 

potentially on other recreation uses throughout the 

expanded NRA, holds the potential for additional 

impacts on water resources downstream. With 

appropriate applied management and application 

of best management practices to mitigate nonpoint 

sources of sediment or other pollutants, adverse 

impacts would likely be only minor. The abatement 

of impacts from recreation would be heavily 

dependent upon monitoring, education, and 

applied management. 
244 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

Goals of the Alternatives

The following section compares the potential 

benefi cial and adverse impacts of the action 

alternatives based on the goals established for all 

alternatives. The goals were developed by the study 

team, based on the public input received. They 

represent values that appeared to be shared by 

many of the respondents in the various public input 

opportunities throughout the study process.

Address Current and Future 

Recreation and Open Space Needs

All three action alternatives (A,C, and D) seek to 

address recreation and open space needs within the 

study area. Alternative A would primarily improve 

the quality of recreation within the San Gabriel 

Mountains portion of the ANF. However, it would 

do little to address the needs of nearby urban 

communities that are currently defi cient in parks 

and open space. Without addressing this need, 

increasing demands on the ANF to provide local 

recreational opportunities could diminish the visitor 

experience over time. 

Alternative C would provide more recreation and 

open space opportunities for communities along 

the San Gabriel River corridor and would also 

provide resources to improve the recreational 

experience in the highly used San Gabriel Canyon 

area. Alternative D would provide the greatest 

ability to address current and future recreation 

and open space needs. A larger area is included in 

the NRA and technical assistance programs would 

allow the NRA assist local communities in making 

connections to NRA resources and in developing 

more close-to-home recreational opportunities. 

Alternative D would also provide more resources for 

regional open space conservation.

Protect or Restore Signifi cant 

Natural Resources and Important 

Habitats

Alternative A would provide improved protection 

of nationally signifi cant resources within the San 

Gabriel Mountains. Signifi cant native habitat would 

be improved by greater restoration efforts and 

improved planning and partnerships with other 

agencies to protect wildlife corridors. Alternative 

C would do the least in terms of protecting 

and restoring signifi cant natural resources and 

important habitats as it contains the smallest 

amount of nationally signifi cant resources and 

native habitat found within the study area. 

Restoration and protection would occur in the San 

Gabriel River upper watershed and along the river 

corridor to Santa Fe Springs. However, signifi cant 

resources located in other areas of the San Gabriel 

Mountains and Puente Hills would not benefi t. 

Alternative D provides the greatest opportunity to 

protect and restore natural resources and important 

habitats on a regional scale. The proposed NRA 

would contain most of the nationally signifi cant 

regions identifi ed in the resource analysis. 

Additionally, the NRA partnership would work 

regionally to protect and restore wildlife corridors 

and habitat. Studies have shown that protection of 

wildlife corridors enhances ecological diversity and 

provides additional protection from threats from 

nonnative species, altered fi re regimes, and the 

effects of climate change.

Preserve Historic and Cultural 

Resources

Most of the nationally signifi cant cultural resources 

in the study area are located in the San Gabriel 

Mountains. As such, alternatives A and D provide 

the most potential for protecting signifi cant cultural 

resources within the study area. Alternative C 

would allow for greater preservation of cultural and 

historical resources associated with the San Gabriel 

River, including historic mining sites, the site of 

the original San Gabriel Mission, and the Pio Pico 

State Historic Park. However, alternative C would 

preserve cultural resources to a lesser degree than 

alternatives A and D due to its narrower geographic 

focus. 

Maintain or improve water quality, 

water conservation and fl ood 

protection

All of the alternatives would respect existing 

management and structures necessary for 

fl ood protection. However, each of the action 

alternatives would have the potential to improve 

water quality. Alternative D would provide the 

most opportunities to improve water quality. 

Improved visitor education, visitor management, 

and restoration opportunities throughout the San 

Gabriel Mountains and along the San Gabriel River 

would provide numerous opportunities to improve 

water quality. 

Alternative A would also provide regional benefi ts 

to water quality and conservation. The early 

conservation of the San Gabriel Mountains was 

intended for watershed protection and this would 

be reaffi rmed in both Alternatives A and D. 

Protection of watershed resources and additional 

restoration throughout the mountains would 
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Environmentally Preferred Alternative 245

improve water quality both in the mountains and 

downstream. Alternative C would have benefi ts to 

the San Gabriel River watershed, through enhanced 

visitor management and education and restoration 

opportunities within the NRA. However, it would 

do nothing to improve the water quality of other 

watersheds located within the study area, such as 

the Los Angeles River, the Santa Clara River and 

rivers that drain into the Antelope Valley.

Environmentally Preferred 

Alternative

The “environmentally preferred” alternative is the 

one that best protects, preserves and enhances 

historic, cultural and natural resources, and 

that causes the least damage to the biological 

and physical environment. The environmentally 

preferred alternative is not the same as an agency’s 

“preferred” alternative. 

The environmentally preferable alternative is 

determined by applying criteria set forth in NEPA, 

as guided by direction from the CEQ. The CEQ has 

stated that the environmentally preferred alternative 

is the alternative that will promote the national 

environmental policy as expressed in Sections 101 

and 102 of NEPA. This includes alternatives that: 

 Fulfi ll the responsibilities of each generation 

as trustee of the environment for succeeding 

generations. 

 Ensure for all Americans safe, healthful, 

productive, and esthetically and culturally 

pleasing surroundings. 

 Attain the widest range of benefi cial uses of 

the environment without degradation, risk 

of health or safety, or other undesirable and 

unintended consequences. 

 Preserve important historic, cultural and 

natural aspects of our national heritage and 

maintain, wherever possible, an environment 

that supports diversity and variety of individual 

choice. 

 Achieve a balance between population and 

resource use that will permit high standards of 

living and a wide sharing of life’s amenities 

 Enhance the quality of renewable resources and 

approach the maximum attainable recycling of 

depletable resources. 

All alternatives except “no action” would achieve 

the requirements of Sections 101 and 102 of 

NEPA. By permanently protecting nationally 

signifi cant resources in the study area, all would 

(a) fulfi ll stewardship responsibilities to succeeding 

generations, (b) ensure culturally and aesthetically 

pleasing surroundings, (c) attain a wide range 

of benefi cial uses of the environment without 

degradation or undesirable consequences, (d) 

preserve important historic, cultural and natural 

aspects of our national heritage and maintain an 

environment that supports diversity and variety 

of individual choice, and (e) achieve a balance 

between population and resource use that will 

permit high standards of living and a wide sharing 

of life’s amenities. However, the alternatives meet 

these criteria to a signifi cantly different degree. 

The NPS has determined that alternative D would 

be the environmentally preferable alternative 

because it would protect natural and cultural 

resources over a signifi cantly larger area, provide 

greater opportunities for recreation and visitation, 

provide greater economic benefi ts, and foster a 

larger framework for cooperative management as 

compared to alternatives A and C.

The environmentally preferable alternative should 

not be viewed as the National Park Service’s 

preferred alternative. The Director of the National 

Park Service is required under law and policy 

to identify which alternative or combination of 

alternatives would be most effective and effi cient 

in protecting signifi cant resources and providing 

for visitor enjoyment. The Director will make this 

fi nding after the publication of the draft special 

resource study / environmental assessment, 

considering public and stakeholder comment. 

This fi nding will be included in the study package 

forwarded to the Secretary of the Interior.
246 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

Table 25: Summary of Environmental Consequences
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Environmentally Preferred Alternative 247

Table 25: Summary of Environmental Consequences
248 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

Table 25: Summary of Environmental Consequences
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Environmentally Preferred Alternative 249

Table 25: Summary of Environmental Consequences
250 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment 

Table 25: Summary of Environmental Consequences
 Chapter 7: Environmental Consequences Environmentally Preferred Alternative 251

Table 25: Summary of Environmental Consequences
252 Draft San Gabriel Watershed and Mountains Special Resource Study & Environmental Assessment