MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

The area was closed to mineral entry by the
Arizona Wilderness Act of August 28, 1984.

All claimants have been notified of the change
in status.

Assumptions

The existing gypsum operation will continue
and an expansion of aperations may be proposed.

No oil and gas activity is expected.

Management Policies

As of August 28, 1984, the Paiute and Beaver
Dam Mountains Wilderness Areas are closed to
all forms of appropriation under the mining laws
and laws pertaining to minerai leasing, subject to
valid existing rights.

Any mining operation, including assessment
work, which will cause surface disturbance
beyond the definition of casual use will require a
plan of operations. Casual use is defined as
operations that result in negligible surface dis-
turbance and do not require the use of motorized
vehicles or equipment, explosives or landing
of aircraft.

Submission of a plan of operations will require
a@ validity examination by a qualified BLM miner-
als examiner to determine if the claims were valid
as of the date of wilderness designation as well
as at the time of examination.

Operators must post a performance bond
before plans of operation will be approved.

Proposed expansion of operations at the
existing gypsum mine in the Beaver Dam
Mountains Wilderness will require an environ-
mental assessment which will be subject to public
review.

{f claimants with valid existing claims pursue
extralateral rights, they will be contested by the
BLM so that a proper determination of those
rights can be made.

15

Management Actions

Inactive claims will be monitored quarterly to
check for unauthorized surface disturbance.

The Cedar Pockets gypsum mine will be
monitored biweekly during periods of operation
to insure compliance with the approved plan of
operations.

Cultural Resources

Management Objective

The management objectives are to inventory,
evaluate, preserve and protect cultural resources
in compliance with state and federal laws and
BLM policy.

Current Situation and Assumptions

Current Situation

Numerous archaeological and historic cultural
sites are known to exist in the area, although
official inventories have been few. Two inven-
tories, one for the construction of I-15 and the
other for the highway rest area in 1967-1969, dis-
closed a total of 35 sites and indicated the area
may be rich in cultural resources. Predicted site
types include lithic and ceramic scatters from the
Archaic Period as well as more recent types such
as Anasazi and Basketmaker cultures. Evidence
of dwellings and other structures has also been
reported.

Historical sites are associated primarily with the
Mormon colonization of the area in the late 19th
and early 20th centuries. No inventory has been
conducted on these sites, although several, such
as the old sawmill in Hancock Canyon, are known
to exist.


APPE

TABLE 4 (

NDIX A

Continued)

COMPARISON CHART OF IMPACTS

Proposed Wilderness
Wilderness Quality Action Quality Maintenance
Wilderness Elements Emphasis Alternative Alternative
WILDLIFE (Cont.)
Improvement Same as proposed Same as described Same as proposed
Maintenance action. under ADMINISTRATION- _ action.
Motorized Vehicle/
Equipment.

New Improvements

MINERALS
Bonding

Monitoring

LANDS AND REALTY

Motorized Right-of-
Way Maintenance and
Inspection

Monitoring

Private Inholding

WATER
Water Rights

Solitude, naturalness,
and visual qualities
maintained. Some loss
of abundance or diver-
sity opportunity.

Same as proposed
action.

Higher degree of sur-
veillance give more
assurance of compliance
by claimants.

Same as proposed
action.

Same as described for
Minerals Monitoring.

Same as proposed
action.

All water sources
protected. Possible
negative social per-
ception re: federal
control and positive
ones on water source
protection.

Benefits to abundance
and diversity of wild-
life and resultant

visitor enjoyment or
hunting. Some losses.

in solitude and natural-
ness and visual values
compared to pre-wilder~
ness situation.

Slight potential for
negative economic
impact to operator.
Positive impact in
assurance of reclama-
tion of disturbed

sites and avoiding
risks of no reclama-
tion or delays in
reclamation.

Prevents undue, un-
necessary or inadver-
tent disturbances or
degradation of wilder-
ness character.

Sixty-day notice to
BLM with impacts eval-
uated in site-specific
EA.

Same as described for
Minerals Monitoring.

Positive impact to
wilderness. Positive
or neutral economic
impact to owner.

Important waters
Protected to maintain
wilderness character.
Potential for private
water use diminished.

36

Same as described by
proposed action except
of greater magnitude.

Beneficial impact to
operator. High risks
of delayed or non-
compliance with recia-
mation terms.

Same as proposed action
but to a lesser degree.
Potential for unauthor-
ized action and surface
disturbance wouid be
greater than proposed
action but less than pre-
wilderness situation.

Same as proposed
action.

Same as described for
Minerals Monitoring.

Same as proposed
action.

Selected waters pro-
tected. Some loss of
management options
through additional
Private control of
waters.


APPENDIX A

TABLE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON CHART OF ALTERNATIVES

Wilderness Elements

Wilderness Quality
Emphasis Alternative

Proposed
Action
Alternative

Wilderness
Quality Maintenance

WILDLIFE

Riparian Habitat
Monitoring

Motorized Improvement
Inspection and
Maintenance

New Improvements

MINERALS
Bonding

Monitoring

LANDS AND REALTY

Motorized Right-of-
Way Inspection and
Maintenance

Monitoring

Private and Utah
State Inholdings

Same as Proposed
Action.

Same as described under
ADMINISTRATION-Motor-
ized Vehicles.

No new improvements.

Same as Proposed
Action,

Maintain frequent con-
tact with claimants.
Visit dormant claims
monthly and operating
claims weekly to pre-
vent or detect unauth-
orized actions.

Same as Proposed
Action.

Maintain frequent con-
tact with ROW holders
and lessees. Visit
improvements monthly
to prevent or detect
unauthorized actions.

Same as Proposed
Action.

32

Selected key riparian
areas would be monitor-
ed and results used to
direct management
actions to improve
quality.

Same as described under
ADMINISTRATION-Motor-
ized Vehicles.

New improvements con-
sidered after EA review
that have clear poten-
tial for specific
wilderness quality
enhancement. New im-
provements would be
discouraged in Units
1, 2 and 4 or designed
to be compatible with
the unit’s major values.

Require bonding suffic-
ient to cover expected
reclamation prior to
commencement of oper-
ations.

Maintain periodic con-
tact with claimants.
Visit dormant claims
quarterly and operating
claims biweekly to
prevent or detect un-
authorized actions.

Non-emergency use of
motor vehicles may be
approved by the auth-
orized officer follow-
ing EA.

Maintain periodic con-
tact with ROW holders
and lessees. Visit
improvements quarterly
to detect or prevent
unauthorized actions.

Contact owners and the
State of Utah and pur-
sue acquisition through
voluntary purchase or
exchange.

No riparian monitoring
excepi as may result
from existing studies
or casual observations

Same as described under
ADMINISTRATION-Motor-
ized Vehicles.

Improvements considered
to implement HMPs and
improve wildlife quant-
ity or diversity
throughout both wilder-
ness areas. Proposals
must meet EA review and
minimum tool criteria.

Require bonding only
after prior notice of
non-compliance.

Visit dormant claims
annuaily and operating
claims quarterly to
Prevent or detect un-
authorized actions.

Same as Proposed
Action.

Visit improvements
annually to prevent

or detect unauthorized
actions.

Same as Proposed
Action.


APPENDIX A

Examples of possible abandonments could
include fences, stock reservoirs or jn the future,
the bighorn sheep enclosure.

All proposed abandonments would be analyzed
by an EA (see Appendix B) to identify site specific
impacts.

Wilderness Quality Emphasis Alternative

This alternative contemplates an accelerated
removal of abandoned man-made features {not
accelerated abandonment) with a higher level of
potential motorized equipment use balanced with
more long term naturainess.

All proposed abandonments would be analyzed
by an EA {see Appendix B} to identify site specific
impacts.

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Alternative

Implementing this alternative would allow nat-
ural improvement deterioration. It would not
require any use of motorized equipment, and thus
provide maximum solitude. The trade-off would
be offset by longer term existence of man-made
features.

Recreation

Trail Management

Proposed Action Altemative

Under this alternative existing trails would not
be maintained for recreation purposes and new
trails would not be constructed. This approach
would minimize impacts caused by human activ-
ity in developing new trail systems and maintain-
ing existing trails. Difficulties coutd arise in the fu-
ture by visitors attempting to utilize these existing
trails if they have deteriorated from lack of main-
tenance by flooding or regrowth of vegetation.

Wilderness Quality Emphasis Alternative

Under this alternative the existing trail system
would be abandoned with portions of the
abandoned trails recontoured and vegetated if
necessary to improve the quality of the wilder-
ness. This alternative would help preserve the
area's natural condition although the visitors may
have difficulty finding their way over some of the
rougher parts of the wilderness. In some cases
livestock utilize these trails to move around within

a4

their allotments. If portions of the trail system
were rehabilitated and made unusable, an
adverse impact to livestock grazing could result.

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Altemative

This alternative would continue with the past
trail system. Maintenance would be provided as
necessary and improvement of certain trails for
safety purposes would be allowed if warranted.
Naturainess could be adversely impacted on cer-
tain upgraded trails, especially if materials used
were not natural to the area such as steel posts
and wire. Solitude would be disrupted by the pres-
ence of crews working within the wilderness espe-
cially if motorized equipment such as chainsaws
or drills were used.

Trailheads/Parking

Proposed Action Alternative

Minimum parking would be provided outside
wilderness areas near traditional trailheads and
inside wilderness if necessary to protect wilder-
ness values. Minimum parking would consist
merely of clearing enough rocks and vegetation
from small areas, either by hand or by mechanical
means, to prevent damage to vehicles either enter-
ing or leaving the parking area. Parking areas
inside wilderness would result in slightly negative
impacts to naturainess and slightly positive social
impacts on visitors by providing easier access.

Wilderness Quality Emphasis Alternative

Under this alternative, designated trailheads or
improved parking on or adjacent to wilderness
would not be provided. For those individuals seek-
ing a wilderness experience totally free from
human influences, the alternative would be bene-
ficial. For visitors who would need or appreciate
a place to park and explore the wilderness using
designated trails and information available attrail-
heads, the lack of such facilities and services
would be a negative impact. These impacts are
Not significant and are no change from the prewil-
demess condition.

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Alternative

Under this alternative improved parking outside
the wilderness area or adjacent to open roads
within the wilderness areas would be provided
with continued formai trailhead designations.
Improved parking would consist of clearing areas


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

The fifetime lease in Elbow Canyon will be
allowed to terminate according to the terms of the
lease.

Proposed actions not covered in this plan will
be analyzed in environmenta! assessments and
will include detailed analyses of alternative
methods to the use of motorized vehicles and
equipment.

Management Actions

The Paiute and Beaver Dam Mountains Wilder-
ness Areas are currently monitored bimonthly. All
BLM personnel are instructed to report any activ-
ities or changes observed during field trips. A
patrol and monitoring record is being maintained
and includes documentation of monitoring trips
and all authorized or unauthorized activities.

The district will pursue funding of a volunteer,
temporary’ or WAE wilderness ranger position if
monitoring indicates significant and recurring vi-
olations of wilderness jaws.

The LAC monitoring plan will be developed
cooperatively by the Shivwits and Dixie resource
areas. Field studies will be done cooperatively by
the Shivwits and Dixie resource areas.

Administrative boundary signs or road closure
signs will be placed at appropriate locations.
Signs will be visible but unobtrusive.

BLM will take appropriate measures, which
could range from signs to physical barriers, to
eliminate vehicle access on roads and ways
closed by wilderness designation.

The Arizona Strip and Cedar City districts will
submit boundary mapsand descriptionstothe Ari-
zona and Utah BLM state offices for review and
approval. The maps and descriptions will be sub-
mitted with the final Wilderness Management
Plan.

Existing structures will be inventoried and, if
found to be abandoned and of no historical sig-
nificance, may be removed.

Recreation

Management Objective

The area will be managed to provide a spectrum
of opportunities for primitive recreation, solitude,
physica! and mental challenge, and inspiration
consistent with preservation of wilderness values.

Current Situation and Assumptions

Current Situation

Recreation use from all sources is estimated to
be 800-1,000 user days per year. This includes
such activities as hunting, hiking, backpacking,
sightseeing, river running and picnicking.

The old Paiute Primitive Area brochure indi-
cated seven trailheads around the edge of the
area, although none are improved or maintained.
While there are no developed recreation trails in
the wilderness, the Paiute contains several old
roads and jeep trails as well as cattle trails that
can be and are used for access, primarily on Black
Rock and along the Virgin Mountains. In the Bea-
ver Dam Mountains there is an existing jeep trail
in the Utah portion of the Cedar Pockets Wash
that could be used for foot access by recreation-
ists. This location may also be subject to motor
vehicle violations due to the increasing number
of all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) in the area.

Deer hunting has been a significant use along
the top of Black Rock Mountain and in the
Cottonwood Canyon area. Several trails branch-
ing off the “cherry-stemmed” Black Rock road
have been popular camping and parking spots in
the past. These are now closed to motor vehicles.
Problems of motor vehicles in the wilderness are
expected to be small in the near future because
of the reduction in deer permits, from 1,200 in
1981 to 200 in 1985. The area was closed to deer
hunting in 1986. This situation will change if the
deer herd and permits return to earlier levels.
These areas are currently signed with smail,
unobtrusive wilderness boundary signs that
advise the public of closure but do not physically
block vehicle access.

Commercial use in the Paiute-Beaver Dam
Mountains Wilderness has been infrequent, pri-
marily related to guided hunts for deer or lions.
Some violations of the closed-road rule have been
noted during the fal! hunting seasons.

The Virgin River Campground, while not in the
witderness, is surrounded by it and provides
thousands of visitors each year with a view of the
Virgin Gorge portion of the wilderness. An
interpretive site at the campground also provides
information on geology and cultural history.
Registration at the campground indicates an
annual use of about 2,600 visitor days (1 visitor
day = 12 hours}.

There is noncommercial kayaking and floating
activity in the Virgin River Gorge for a 4-6 week
period in April and May during the spring run-off
season. Estimated use is 40-70 persons per week


APPENDIX H

BIBLIOGRAPHY

HENDEE, John C., George H. Stankey, and Robert C. Lucas.

1978. Wilderness Management. U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture, Forest Service, Washington, DC.

MOORE, R. T.

1972. Geology of the Virgin and Beaver Dam Mountains,
Arizona: Arizona Bureau of Mines Bulletin 186.

U.S. CONGRESS.
1964, Wilderness Act. Public Law 88-577, 68th Congress.

4976, Federal and Policy and Management Act of 1976. Pub-
lic Law 94-579, 94th Congress.

1984, Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984. Public Law 98-406,
96th Congress.

U.S. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Vol. 130.
U.S, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

1984. Report: Designating Certain National Forest Lands
in the state of Arizona as Wilderness and For Other
Purposes. Report 98-643, Part |. 98th Congress.

1982. Report: Grazing in National Forest Wilderness
Areas. Report 96-1126, 86th Congress.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR.

1976, Bureau of Land Management, Black Rock Habitat Man-
agement Plan, St, George, UT.

1961. Bureau of Land Management. Wildemess Manage-
ment Policy, Washington, DC.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF tNTERIOR (Continued).

1962. Bureau of Land Management. Arizona Strip Wilder-
ness Study Areas: draft environmental impact state-
ment. Phoenix, AZ.

1983. Bureau of Land Management. Arizona Strip District;
Instant Study Areas; Wilderness Study Report. St.
George, UT.

1983. Bureau of Land Management. Virgin River-Pakoon
Basin Habilat Management Pian. St. George, UT.

1984, Bureau of Land Management. Arizona Strip Wilder-
ness; Preliminary Final Environmental impact State-
ment (unpublished). Phoenix, AZ.

4984, Bureau of Land Management. Bear Trap Canyon Wil-
derness Management Pian (Drait). Butte, MT.

4985. Bureau of Land Management. Bisti.

1865. Bureau of Land Management. Designated Wilderness
Areas; Procedures for Management; Final Rulemak-
ing. Washington, DC.

1986. Bureau of Land Management. Paria Canyon-Vermilion
Cliffs Wilderness Management Pian (Draft). St.
George, UT.

U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE.

1984. Recovery Plan for Woundfin, Plagopterus argentis-
simus Cope, U.S. Fish and Wildtlfe Service, Albu-
querque, NM.

¥



APPENDIX C

FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN

I. INTRODUCTION

The Paiute Wilderness Area lies about 18 miles
southwest of St. George Utah on the Arizona
Strip. Theadjacent Beaver Dam Mountains Wilder-
ness Area lies about 10 miles southwest of St.
George, Utah and straddles the Utah/Arizona
state line.

The Paiute Wilderness Area is 84,700 acres in
size and the Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness
is 19,600 acresin size. The Paiute and Beaver Dam
Wilderness Areas together cover 104,300 acres of
public land and dominate the northwest portion
of the Arizona Strip and southwest Utah. The two
Wilderness areas are separated by Interstate 15
which winds it’s way down the Virgin River Gorge.
The substantial elevation changes in the Paiute
has created a land of contrasts which includes
plant communities ranging from the hot Mohave
Desert through stands of pinyon-juniper on up to
ponderosa pine and Douglas fir on the cooler
north-facing slopes. See the Paiute and Beaver
Dam Mountains Wilderness Management Plan for
a more complete description of vegetation.

This pian will guide fire management in the Pai-
ute and Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness Areas.

Il. OBJECTIVES FOR FIRE
MANAGEMENT IN
WILDERNESS

Objectives relating fire management to other
resource programs, public safety, protection of
property and legislative and administrative poli-
cies will guide the fire management program in
the Paiute/ Beaver Dam Wilderness Areas.

The Wilderness Management Plan has divided
these wilderness areas into five Management
Units. The Management Objective for Fire Man-
agement in these Wilderness Areas is the same for
all five Management Units. The Management Ob-
jective in the Plan states:

Generally, fire will be allowed to play it’s
natural role in the wilderness ecosystem
subject to requirements for public safety
and protection of private property.

51

Management policies in the management plan
state that wildfire will be allowed to runit’s course
unless human life, private property or critical wil-
derness values are at risk. The decision to supress
human caused fires will be made on a case by
case basis by the authorized officer. A wilderness
resource advisor will be assigned to ail fires within
the wilderness areas. Suppression techniques will
be thase that result in the least impact to the wil-
derness resource. Hand tools will be used as the
minimum tool whenever possible.

il. FIRE HISTORY

Historically, the majority (over 90%) of fires
occurring in the Paiute and Beaver Dam Mountain
Wilderness areas have been caused by lightning.
Aggressive initial attack has kept fires from
becoming very large.

Since 1975 there have been 93 fires in the wil-
derness areas for a total of 2,530.76 acres burned.
Most of these fires have been less than .25 acres
in size but one fire in 1975 reached 700 acres in
size. Quite a few fires occur along the Interstate
going through the gorge. Most of these fires are
man caused but do not reach the wilderness areas
due to natural barriers.

IV. FIRE REGIME

A natural fire regime is the total pattern of fires
in vegetation, over time, characteristic of a natural
region or ecosystem, variations in ignition, fire
intensity and behavior, fire size, recurrence inter-
vals and ecological effects.

The ponderosa pine type in a natural condition
is classified as a (2) on the Heinselman Continen-
tal Fire Regime Scale—“Frequent light surface
fires (1 to 25 year return intervals).” The pinyon-
juniper woodlands really do not fit the scale due
to a lack of ground fuels. The Mountain Shrub
type is classified as a (3) on the scale—“In-
frequent severe surface fires { more than 25 yr.
return intervals}.” The Mohave Desert type is a (0}
on the scale—“No natural fire.”


APPENDIX B

MAJOR STEPS OF MOTORIZED VEHICLE/MECHANIZED
EQUIPMENT ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT PROCESS

Remove
Project Data patermine and Abend
Gatherin: locument Need |_ ___|Abandon |} Write
9 for the Project Project Not Needed Project EA/DR
T Not
Project Remove
Needed
Grouping on Project Reconstruction
Proposed Motorized will be a Separate
Equipment Need for Evaluation Process
Maintenance Beginning with this Step
Motorized Equipment Motorized Equipment Earth-Moving
Not Needed Needed Equipment Needed

-No Further Analysis

-Notify Permittee

~Condition of AMP or
Permit

-Monitoring

-Minimum Toot

Relocation
-Impacts
~Access Route

Environmental Analysis/
Decision Record

30-Day Public Review

Permittee Gives
6§0-Day Notification

Environmental Analysis/

30-Day Public Review

Decision Record

-Minimum Too!
Relocation
-tmpacts
No Motorized -Access Route
Motorized Vehicles
Vehicles Approved
Disapproved Approved
~Maintenance
Plan Prepared
-Condition of
AMP or Permit ~Permittee -Permittee
-Monitoring Notified Notified of
Terms
-BLM Onsite
Supervision



APPENDIX C

activity. If the fire escapes the 50 acre pe-
rimeter it will be declared a wildfire and sup-
pression costs will be charged to 4750.

c. The District Manager has the authority to
override this plan anytime the district's wild-
fire situation becomes so complex that ade-
quate suppression forces are not available to
safely manage a prescribed natural fire.

C. Monitoring and
Documentation

Monitoring and documenting the effects pre-
scribed natural fires have on the wilderness eco-
system will be very important in fetting us know
how good a job we are doing and will help us bet-
ter predict what fires will do the next time they
occur in the same area. Ground monitoring of pre-
scribed natural fires should attempt to secure the
following information:

* Estimate of fuel joading and fuel con-
sumption

Vegetation changes

Fire intensity and fire behavior

Fire weather

Fire effects

This information will be analyzed and placed in
a file for the fire. Photographs should also be
obtained if possible and made part of the fire file.

It will not be possible to obtain the information
above while monitoring fires from the air. Aerial
observers should try to ascertain as much infor-
mation as possible and write a narrative summary
of what was occurring with the fire while they
were over it. Notes on anything pertinent can be
kept in the aircraft and the narrative completed as
soon as the observer is back on the ground. Pho-
tographs or even video footage of the prescribed
fires would be extremely beneficial.

Vil. SMOKE MANAGEMENT

The predominant windflow during the time of
year that any prescribed natural fires would occur
is from the south. Smoke generated by any pre-
scribed natural fire will travel to the north. Smoke
accumulations will occur in drainages during the
night due to downslope winds and nocturnal in-
version layers. These areas should clear out very
well the following day as temperatures warm up
and winds pick up. There is a slight chance that
smoke from any prescribed natural fires in the Pai-
ute Wilderness Area could affect the city of St.
George, Utah.

55

The following steps will be taken to comply with
smoke mangement requirements:

A. The Logistics Coordinator will contact the
BLM Arizona State Office and advise them of
the prescribed naturalfirein progress. Theap-
propriate staff at the state office will notify the
Arizona State Land Department and obtain
the necessary clearance.

B. The District FMO will prepare a map showing
smoke plume projections. Using a red marker
for the daytime period, draw a line downwind
of the burn for a distance representing 60
mites. Draw a 30-degree vector on each side
of this centerline. For a distance reference,
strike an arc at the 20, 40 and 60-mile points.
Identify any major roads, communities, resi-
dences and other facitities inside this 60-mile
are.

Using a blue marker, designate the areas
where smoke would probably concentrate at
night. This should reflect the shift to down-
canyon winds experienced at night, and
could be a 180-degree turn from the daytime
smoke plume projection. Identity any major
roads, communities, residences and other fa-
cilities inside this area.

The Logistics Coordinator will plot smoke
plume projections on the District's land sta~
tus map.

In the case that the State of Arizona wants a
fire suppressed due to air stagnation condi-
tions suppression actions will be initiated.
Suppression actions within the 50 acre
perimeter will be charged to the benefitting
activity.

Vill. PRESCRIBED BURNING

Prescribed fires, ignited by BLM personnel, will
be considered on a case by case basis only if it
can be clearly shown that burning would correct
an unnatural situation caused by past fire suppres-
sion activities or would serve to reduce fire
danger. Asite specific plan, approved by the State
Director of Arizona, is required before a pre-
scribed burn.is conducted.

IX. REHABILITATION

Rehabilitation measures may be required on
some fires which occur in the wilderness areas.
If rehabilitation is desired on an area which was
burned as a prescribed natural fire, the benefitting


APPENDIX D

COST ESTIMATES

It is estimated that annual expenditures in the

wilderness area will total $34,600, with develop-
ment and additional planning totaling $37,100.
Specific expenditure components anticipated for
the wilderness area are identified below.

1.

Current annual expenditures for the Paiute
and Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness
Areas:

Workmonths $ 20,000
Vehicles 2,000
Sign & Blockade Maintenance 2,000
Clean up Undeveloped Campsites 2,000
Visitor Maps 5,000
Travel 1,000
Use Supervision and Monitoring 4,000
Annual Goordination with

Grazing Permittees 2,000
TOTAL $ 38,000

Nonrecurring expenditures resulting from wil-
derness management actions:

59

3.

Submit Boundary Maps and

Descriptions $ 5,000
inventory Springs, Improvements,

Trails and Trailneads 6,000
Revise Visitor Brochure 9,000
Update Virgin River Campground

Information 100
Develop LAG Monitoring Plan 16,000
TOTAL $ 36,100

Wildemess management actions funded by
other resource programs (no cost estimates
have been made for these actions):

Mining Claim Validity Examinations and Envi-
ronmental Assessments

Ailotment Management Plan Revisions
Habitat Management Plan Revisions
Rights-of-Way Revisions

Riparian Inventory

Water Filings



APPENDIX B

PROCESS FOR ADMINISTERING MOTORIZED
VEHICLE/MECHANIZED EQUIPMENT USES IN
LIVESTOCK GRAZING OPERATIONS AND
MAINTENANCE OF RANGE IMPROVEMENTS

Congressional guidance in House Report
96-1126 provides overall direction for manage-
ment of grazing including criteria for the possible
use of motorized vehicles in livestock manage-
ment or maintenance of range improvements.

The language of the house report is very clear
in its intent that livestock grazing and necessary
facilities to support a livestock grazing program
will be permitted to continue when established
prior to wilderness designation. The house report
further states that wilderness designation should
not prevent the maintenance of existing fences or
other livestock management improvements, nor
the construction and maintenance of new fences
or improvements which are consistent with allot-
ment management plans and/or which are neces-
sary for the protection of the range.

The house concluded that the general rule of
thumb on grazing management in wilderness
should be that activities or facilities established
prior to the date of an area's designation as wil-
derness should be allowed to remain in place and
may be replaced when necessary for the proper
administration of the grazing program.

As directed by Congressional intent and BLM’s
Wilderness Managemeni Policy, the following pro-
cess will be used in administering these noncon-
forming but accepted uses.

This process is depicted on the flow chart on
page 49,

A list of all of the range improvements known
to be located in the Paiute and Beaver Dam
Mountains Wilderness Areas has been compiled
and is summarized at the conclusion of this
appendix.

Available data from such sources as project
files, maintenance inspections, aerial photo-
graphs, employee and permittee knowledge,
water inventories and field inventories when nec-
essary will be compiled for each project. This data
will provide answers to these questions.

47

1. What is present use of the project and is it
needed with respecttothe future AMP orgraz-
ing programs?

2. 1s the project accessible by motorized vehi-
cle?

3. Was motorized access used in its mainte-
nance prior to wilderness designation?

4. Is motorized access necessary for present
and future maintenance?

5. Can part or all of the maintenance be done
by nonmotorized means?

Age of the project?
Condition of the project?

Frequency and duration of possible motor-
ized needs?

9. Type of motorized equipment (if any) that
may be appropriate or available?

Using this information and following the BLM
Wilderness Management Policy criteria (Chapter
11.H.1.d and e) the authorized officer will, after
consultation with the affected permittee, deter-
mine and document by individual project which
are needed to continue the allotments’ grazing
Management programs and which are not
needed.

Those not needed will no longer be maintained
and the party responsible for maintenance noti-
tied to discontinue maintenance. An Environmen-
tal Analysis (EA)/ Decision Record (DR) will be
prepared toanalyze impacts of removing the aban-
doned projects considering possible cultural
values, practicality, feasibility and use of motor-
ized vehicles in removal. A Decision Record will
then document by name those projects where
removal will be considered and those to be
allowed to naturally disintegrate.

Those developments which appear at this point
to be needed will be further analyzed relative to
the need for and type of motorized equipment that


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Several large old burns in the southwest portion
of the Paiute indicate a significant fire history but
only a few small fires have occurred in recent
years. There is a heliport in the wilderness with
a communications site, fire lookout and adminis-
trative site just outside the boundary. It is antic-
ipated that a helicopier willbe stationed atthe heli-
port from June 1 to September 15 during periods
of high fire danger.

Historically, suppression practices have varied.
Prior to 1981, full suppression methods were
required for all fires. The Modified Fire Suppres-
sion Plan, approved in 1981, divided the Shivwits
Resource Area into several suppression zones
with methods ranging from observation to full
suppression. Currently, fire control in the wilder-
ness is managed under an interim guidance plan
until more site-specific plans are written for each
wilderness. The interim plan calls for each fire to
be evaluated by a resource advisor and incident
commander (fire boss} to determine appropriate
suppression methods, taking into consideration
public safety and wilderness values.

Assumptions
Fire is a natural part of the ecosystem.

Natural and human-caused fires will occur in

the Paiute on an irreguiar and unpredictable
basis.

Fire occurrence in the Beaver Dam Mountains
Wilderness Area will be insignificant due to
sparse vegetation.

Management Policies

Wildfire will be allowed to run its course unless
human life, private and other nonfederai property
or critical witderness values are at risk.

The decision to suppress human-caused fires
will be done on a case-by-case basis by the autho-
rized officer.

Awilderness resource advisor will be assigned
toall fires within the wilderness. Suppression tech-
niques will be those that resuit in the least impact
to the wilderness resource. The minimum tool pol-
icy will be used to determine the type of equip-
ment used for fire suppression.

Helicopter operations from the Black Rock heli-
port will be carried out so as to minimize flying
over wilderness. However, at no time will safety
becompromised in order to avoid wilderness over-
flights.

19

Management Actions

A fire management plan has been written for
the Palute-Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness
Areas. See Appendix C for the Plan.

Insects, Disease and Noxious
Plants

Management Objective

The objective is to allow natural insect infesta-
tions, disease and noxious plants to play their nor-
mal roles in the ecosystem.

Current Situation and Assumptions

Current Situation

Insects, disease and noxious plants occur
naturally in ail forest types in endemic propor-
tions. in the Paiute-Beaver Dam Mountains Wilder-
ness Area these would include dwarf mistletoe in
the juniper and ponderosa pine, mountain pine
beetle in the ponderosa and pine needle scaie in
pinyon pine. There is an infestation of dwarf mis-
tletoe in a stringer of Ponderosa pine along the
top of the Virgin Mountains north of Mt. Bangs.
It is unlikely that this will spread to other pine
stands. These pests also contribute to the eco-
system positively by producing snags for cavity-
dwellers and raptors.

Tamerix {salt cedar) is the only known exotic
invader that could pose a significant threat to
existing resource values, It is a “naturalized” ex-
otic from Eurasia which has become widespread
in the southwest along streams and other water
sources. it grows along the Virgin River thraugh-
out the wilderness and around some of the
springs and seeps. Tamerix can be detrimental to
small water sources by overgrowing the area and
eliminating surface flow.

Assumptions

Need for contro] of insects or diseases will be
unlikely.

Tamerix wit! maintain its population along the
Virgin River and will probably spread to springs
in the wilderness.


APPENDIX A

TABLE 4 (Continued)
COMPARISON CHART OF IMPACTS

Wilderness Quality

Wilderness Elements Emphasis Alternative

Proposed
Action
Alternative

Wilderness
Quality Maintenance

WATER (Cont.)

Water Quality Added quality data to

Monitoring manage wilderness eco-
systems and for visitor
safety. Losses of
solitude by sample
collection process.

INFORMATION/EDUCATION

(Also see Signing}

Visitor safety risks
increased over pro-
posed action but
similar to pre-wilder~
ness conditions tend
to limit visitors

and thus human impacts.

Quality data on impor-
tant waters for use in

management improvement.

Some loss of solitude.

Insignificant effects
on wilderness. Pro-
tect wilderness values
from human traces.

Lack of information for
LAC uses in wilderness
management. Solitude

same as pre-wilderness
condition.

Greater visitor attrac-
tion than pre-wilder-
ness. Decreased risks

to wilderness visitors.
Provide some protec- :
tion for visitors con-
sistent with a degree
of reasonable visitor
tisk.

Source: Arizona Strip District

Wilderness Quality Emphasis
Alternative

The Wilderness Quality Emphasis Alternative
provides that where regulations and policies have
latitude for management discretion, decisions
would favor naturalness, pristine qualities,
increased available solitude and natural ecosys-
tem dynamics.

Wilderness area protection would take prece-
dence over other wilderness uses such as recre-
ation or nonconforming but acceptable uses. This
alternative would be the most restrictive on wilder-
Ness users and would require greater manage-
mentintensity toimplement. !mplementing this al-
ternative would result in achieving highest
reasonable improvement in wilderness quality
compared to prewilderness conditions.

Wilderness Quality Maintenance
Alternative
The Wilderness Quality Maintenance Alterna-

tive allows interpretation of wilderness regula-
tions and policies that have latitude for

37

management discretion to favor opportunities for
both conforming and nonconforming but accept-
able uses.

This alternative would maintain wilderness qual-
ity at or above the prewilderness condition, but
apply the least user restriction and envisions
lesser management intensity.

No Action Alternative

The No Action Alternative consists of a contin-
uation of management recommendations as
described in the Shivwits Management Frame-
work Plan (MFP). The consequences of this have
been analyzed in the Draft and Preliminary Final
Arizona Strip Instant Study Area EIS (1980 and
1984) and the Draft EIS on the Arizona Strip Wil-
derness Study Areas (1982).

The No Action Alternative is not a viable alter-
native because the area has been legislatively des-
ignated as wilderness and must be managed as
such. It will not be analyzed further.

Acomplete description of the Proposed Action
Alternative is presented in Part IV of the Wilder-
ness Management Plan.




TABLE OF CONTENTS

APPENDIX A - Environmental Assesement...................-..0005 29

APPENDIX B - Process for Administering Motorized Vehicte/
Mechanized Equipment Uses in Livestock Grazing Operations and

Maintenance of Range Improvements ..............seceeeeeceveeees 47
APPENDIX C - Fire Management Plan..............6...0ece eee ees 51
APPENDIX D - Cost Estimates ............0--:seeeeeeeeeeceeeeeeeee 59
APPENDIX E - Public Involvement Process ................:0-esee0e 61
APPENDIX F - List of Plan and EA Participants..................... 63
APPENDIX G - Glossary 65
APPENDIX H - Bibliography ...............02 0s ccc ceeeeee eer eeeeeee 69
TABLES
1 - Grazing Allotments in Paiute-Beaver Dam Wilderness Areas...... 11
2 - Threatened or Endangered Species . 13
3 - Comparison Chart of Alternatives . 30
4 - Comparison Chart of Impacts .... 34

MAPS

Location Map
Visitor Map



{ s/ J
Mf ae
' ot}
whe Ke ae

: Zo.
i SPEGAIULLER
\, s
(MRo Ne SUNTAN
USO! — Bureou of Land Management

Arizona Strip District

VISITOR MAP

BEAVER DAM PAIUTE
WILDERNESS WILDERNESS
(19,800 Acres) 184,790 Acres}
LEGEND
¢¢% + Management Unit Boundary
ommem> Wilderness Boundary (Approx.}

mee Improved Rood

———-~ 4 Wheei Drive Road
{ Q i 2 3 4 5
i i 4 £ Hi 4
£ t i c +
Scaie in Mites
BEAVER DAM

WILDERNESS , ST. GEORGE

Pyt

i ARIZONA STRIP

} PAIUTE
WILDERNESS

NORTH

LOCATION MAP





APPENDIX A

TABLE 3

COMPARISON CHART OF ALTERNATIVES
Bureau of Land Management, Arizona Strip District

Wildemess Elements

Wilderness Quality
Emphasis Alternative

Proposed
Action
Alternative

Wilderness
Quality Maintenance

ADMINISTRATION

Motorized vehicle or
equipment use in non-
emergency situations
for administration
Purposes

Limits of Acceptable
Change monitoring
process

Signing

Management Unit Con-
cept

Aircraft Use (BLM
and other agencies)

Abandoned !mprovements
and Disturbed Sites

Motorized vehicle or
equipment use for non-
emergency administra-
tive purposes would
not occur,

Same as Proposed
Action.

Same as Proposed
Action.

Same as Proposed
Action.

Non-emergency heli-
copter landings would
not be approved. Low
Jevel flights would not
be conducted by BLM
and discouraged by
other agencies.

Remove all abandoned
improvements that are
reasonably accessible.
Rehabilitate all dis-
turbed areas that may
occur or result from
improvement removal.

30

Motorized vehicles/
mechanized equipment
could be used for non-
emergency administra-
tive purposes where
used prior to wilder-
ness designation follow-
ing EA and minimum tool
criteria review.

interim monitoring
plan followed by LAC
would be used to
monitor change and
regulate management
actions.

Signing would include
boundaries and special
wilderness protection
applications.

Implement Management
Unit concept as de-
scribed in Part IV-B

of management pian.

BLM would evaluate pro-
posals for non-emer-
gency helicopter land-
ings and jow level

flights considering
minimum tool criteria
and impacts or bene-
fits to wilderness

values. Al! landings
require EA.

Remove selected aban-
doned improvements
based on accessibility
and degree of unnatural-
ness, Rehabilitate
selected disturbed

areas that may occur or
result from abandoned
improvement removal.

Same as Proposed
Action,

LAC would not be used.
Existing monitoring
techniques would be
continued.

Same as Proposed Action
with additional signing

to enhance uses such as
trailheads, trail

routes, water, etc.

added for public conven-
ience and safety.

No Management Unit con-
cept. Future decisions
On a case-by-case basis.

Low level flights and
helicopter landings

could be used for non-
emergency administrative
Purposes where used
prior to wilderness
designation following

EA and minimum tool
criteria review.

Allow abandoned im-
provements to deterior-
ate naturally.


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Cultural inventory for the area is a low priority
for the cultural resource program. The resource
does not appear to be immediately threatened
from destructive forces although illegal “pot
hunting” is being reported in the eastern portions
of the Arizona Strip and Cedar City districts.

Assumptions

There are significant cultural resources in the
wilderness that have yet to be inventoried.

if visitor use increases, there is increased prob-
ability that cultural sites will be disturbed.

Wilderness designation will afford some mea-
sure of protection for cultural resources over and
above prior protection.

Management Policies

Inventory will be permitted as needed to record
and evaluate cultural resources,

Intensive site study and/or site stabilization
involving surface disturbance will be analyzed
through the EA process.

Cultural sites will be accorded protection from
vandalism or inadvertent disturbance as pre-
scribed by the Archaeological Resources Protec-
tion Act of 1979 and the Wilderness Act.

Sites that meet the eligibility criteria will be nom-
inated to the National Register of Historic Places.

Management Actions

Information regarding jaws that protect cultural
resources will be included in wilderness bro-
chures.

Lands and Realty

Management Objective

The objective is to manage lands and realty
activities so as to prevent undue and unneces-
sary degradation of wilderness resources while
allowing valid existing rights to be exercised
accordingly.

16

Current Situation and Assumptions

Current Situation

No rights-of-way are authorized to be granted,
issued or renewed over, upon, under or through
designated wildernesses, per Section 501 (a) of
the Federal Lands Policy and Management Act of
1976.

Excluded from the Beaver Dam Mountains
Wilderness area by the congressional report
associated with the Arizona Wilderness Act is an
existing 30-foot overhead telephone and power-
line right-of-way (ROW) that services the rest stop
and campground atong I-15 in the Virgin River
Gorge.

The highway right-of-way plus 400’ on either
side serves as the north boundary for Paiute Wil-
derness and the southern boundary for the Bea-
ver Dam Mountains Wilderness.

There is a 40-acre private inholding of which
approximately 15 acres is on the northwest corner
of the Paiute Wilderness at the mouth of the Virgin
River Gorge (T41N R14W Sec. 30 SWYSW%).

The terrain is extremely rough and precipitous.
There have been no developments or access
routes constructed. An exchange proposal from
the owner is currently under consideration.

Ail Arizona state surface and subsurface hold-
ings were conveyed to the federal government on
April 11, 1985. There are approximately 1,083
acres of Utah state surface and subsurface in the
Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness Area. The
Utah state inholdings are located in T43S R18W
Sec. 36 and T43S R17W Secs, 32 and 36,

The Virgin River Gorge Recreation Area, with
21,790 acres in the Virgin River Gorge, most of
which is now designated wilderness, was with-
drawn from all forms of appropriation except min-
eral leasing by the Department of Transportation
{DOT) in 1959 to protect scenic values. This was
subsequently replaced by a BLM withdrawal in
1973. In a 1986 draft withdrawal review, the BLM
proposed to terminate the portion of the scenic
withdrawal now protected by wilderness designa-
tion. Those areas within the gorge not included
in wilderness would remain withdrawn while sev-
eral small parcels outside the gorge would be
returned to multiple use management.


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Desert tortoise habitat in the lower elevations
wilt be managed under the guidelines in the Virgin
River-Pakoon Basin HMP, consistent with wilder-
Ness management policies.

Use of motorized vehicles and equipment for
range and wildlife habitat improvement mainte-
nance will be minimized.

Any new wildlife water development proposals
will be analyzed through the EA process. Pro-
posed developments must be found to be compat-
ible with preservation of wilderness character.

Emphasis will be placed on accomplishing hab-
itat management activities through nonmotorized
means.

See Part IV, page 8, for aircraft use policies.

Management Actions

Selected riparian areas will be identified and
monitored to determine future management
actions that may be needed to prevent degrada-
tion or improve existing conditions.

The sheep enclosure will be reevaluated in FY
91 to determine its value and continued compat-
ibility with wilderness values. Recommendations
will be made at that time as to removal or contin-
uance. In the interim, proposed maintenance will
be subject to the minimum tool policy.

Virgin Gorge Unit

Management Objective and Rationale

The objective is to preserve and, where possi-
bie, enhance the visual resource while allowing
other wilderness-oriented as well as nonconform-
ing but accepted uses to continue.

The Virgin Gorge was formed by extreme geo-
logic faulting and folding, producing an area of
high quality scenery as well as recreational oppor-
tunities and excellent bighorn sheep habitat.
Thousands of travelers each year are able to take
advantage of this unique opportunity to view wil-
derness lands from an interstate highway.

The gypsum mine described in the minerals sec-
tion is found in this unit.

The unit's desert tortoise habitat is along the
lower slopes of the Beaver Dam Mountains. There
is also considerable evidence that tortoise inhabit
the Virgin River Gorge as well. The gorge is aiso
considered superior peregrine falcon habitat,
although none have been reported in the area, An-
nual surveys for this endangered species are pro-

22

posed in the Virgin River-Pakoon Basin HMP to
assess the rate of peregrine fatcon population re-
covery on the Arizona Strip.

An access road through the I-15 highway right-
of-way fence approximately % mile east of the
rest stop on the south side of the highway pro-
vides access to a livestock corrai used by three
grazing permittees. The gate in the highway fence
is normaliy locked but has been broken on numer-
ous occasions.

All of the Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness is
in this unit. Wildlife management in the Utah por-
tion is covered by the Beaver Dam Slope HMP.
No actions are currently proposed in the wilder-
ness under this HMP.

Management Policies

New improvements for livestock will be discour-
aged unless there is a clear benefit to the wilder-
ness resource.

Any new wildlife water development proposals
will be analyzed through the EA process. Pro-
posed developments must be found to be compat-
ible with preservation of wilderness character.

Bighorn sheep habitat maintenance or en-
hancement wil! be given consideration, subject to
preservation of the scenic resource.

Desert tortoise habitat will be managed in
accordance with the guidelines in the Virgin River-
Pakoon Basin HMP, consistent with wilderness
Management policy.

Peregrine falcon survey methods will be based
on the minimum tool policy.

The Virgin River is considered habitat for the
endangered woundfin minnow and Virgin River
chub. Maintaining the appropriate flow for these
species will receive priority.

T&E species monitoring and management
actions will be conducted as needed in accord-
ance with the Endangered Species Act and wilder-
ness management policies.

Regulations pertinent to mining operations (43
CFR 3809 and 8560) will be strictly enforced. An
appropriate bond will be required for afl approved
mining operations.

Hiking, backpacking, river running and other
appropriate recreational activities will be allowed
to continue unreguiated unless these activities
begin to impact negatively on the scenic and
other wilderness resources.

See Part IV, the Minerals section, for policies
and actions on the gypsum mine.


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

on water quality and quantity of all the waters is
currently being collected. There are several
known springs of acceptable quality which may
be used for human consumption if necessary. The
waters should be treated, preferably by boiling, to
reduce the risks resulting from possible contam-
ination.

Assumptions

Water is an important characteristic of wilder-
ness and vital for its use and enjoyment.

Water from the Virgin River, stockponds and
waterholes is generally unfit for human consump-
tion.

The use of the waters in the area for recreational
purposes will increase steadily as visitor use
increases,

Increased use may necessitate monitoring for
coliform contamination (at known points of use),
especially during drought periods when the users
would concentrate around the more dependable
springs.

Development in the upper Virgin watershed
from St. George to Zion National Park may even-
tually reduce the average intermittent flow in the
Virgin River by increased diversions and wells and
possibly reduce the perennial flows from the
springs within “The Narrows.”

Development south and east of Littlefield could
result in attempts at water rights filings on wilder-
ness springs to obtain better quality water than
wells outside the wilderness can produce.

Management Policies

Water rights and waters currently used for wild-
life and livestock watering purposes will be main-
tained. Additional development needs for water
will be considered according to wilderness man-
agement guidelines and policies of this plan.

New requests for uses within the wilderness for
unappropriated waters will be opposed by the
BLM where the use is inconsistent with wilder-
ness management policy or where the BLM has
a vested right to the water.

To achieve the purposes of this wilderness,
BLM may acquire water by appropriation for wil-
derness or related purposes under applicable
state law.

18

Management Actions

When fire occurs in areas where soils are sen-
sitive to erosion, grazing will be deferred until
vegetation has been reestablished to minimize
impacts on water quality.

Springs will be periodically monitored for con-
tamination and pollution. Special emphasis will
be placed on those springs thatare used by recrea-
tionists.

Selected spring sites will be monitored to pro-
tect from overuse by man or animals and prevent
erosion and riparian degradation.

Water quality and flow on the Virgin River will
be monitored by analyzing data from the Wound-
fin Recovery Plan and existing stream gauges.

Water filings will be made, where unapprop-
tiated water exists and state law permits, for rec-
reation, wildlife, stock water and wilderness
resources.

Virgin River instream flows will be quantified
and water filings made under Arizona Law to pro-
tect wilderness and other resource values.

Wildfire

Management Objective

Generally, fire will be allowed to play its natural
role in the wilderness ecosystem subject to
requirements for public safety and protection of
private and other nonfederal property. Critical wil-
derness values such as Joshua trees or desert tor-
toises habitat will be aggressively protected.

Current Situation and Assumptions

Current Situation

Vegetative types vary widely, from Mohave des-
ert scrub to ponderosa pine, with sagebrush,
mountain shrub and pinyon-juniper included
between the two extremes. Adding to the com-
plexity are slopes ranging from steep, almost ver-
tical canyons to relatively flat or gently roiling
hills.



APPENDIX A

TABLE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON CHART OF ALTERNATIVES

Wildemess Elements

Wilderness Quality
Emphasis Alternative

Proposed
Action
Alternative

Wilderness
Quality Maintenance

RECREATION
Trail Management

Trailheads/Parking

GRAZING MANAGEMENT
Management Planning

New improvements

Range Improvement
Inspection and
Maintenance

Abandon existing trail"
system. Conduct re-
habilitation on por-
tions (if necessary)

to improve wilderness.
quality.

Provide no designated
trailheads or improved
parking on or adjacent
to wilderness areas.

Incorporate wildemess
management techniques.
into present AMPs and
licenses. Do not pre-
pare new AMPs. Use
grazing management
techniques that do not
require intense systems
or new improvements on
present non-AMP aflot-
ments to improve natur-
al soil vegetation and
water values.

No new improvements.

No alternative.

31

Conduct no trail!
construction or main-
tenance of existing
system for recreation
Purposes except to
protect wilderness
values.

Provide minimum park-
ing outside wilderness
areas near traditional
traitheads, Provide

no trailhead improve-
ments or parking in
wilderness except io
protect wilderness
values.

Incorporate wilderness
management constraints
into existing or new
AMPs and into licenses
on non-AMP allotments.
Continue managing with
both AMP and non-AMP
grazing management
intensities to improve
wilderness values.

New range improvements
considered, after
appropriate EA review,
that have clear poten-

tial for specific

resource protection
resulting in wilderness
quality enhancement.
New improvements would

be discouraged in Msnage-

ment Uniis 1, 2, and 4.

Follow congressional
guidelines for inspec-
tion and maintenance as
outlined in Appendix B
of the management plan.
May involve motorized
vehicles/equipment.

Continue past designated
trail system. Provide
maintenance or improve-
ment for safety purposes
if use or demand war-
rants.

Provide improved park-
outside or within WAs
adjacent to cherry stem
roads with continued
formal trailhead desig-
nations.

Incorporate wilderness.
management constraints
into existing and new
AMPs. Complete AMPs for
present non-AMP allot
ments designed for
mum improvement imple-
mentation.

Improvements considered
to implement AMPs and
grazing management (but
not capacity) and main-
tain present wilderness
qualities over entire
wilderness areas after
appropriate EA review
and approval.

No alternative.


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

TABLE 2

THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES
Bureau of Land Management, Arizona Strip District

(The species fisted in the following categories do or may
occur within the wilderness in Arizona or Utah)

SPECIES LISTED UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
Animals

. Woundfin minnow (Plagopterus argentissimus}
. Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum)

. Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucecephalus}

. Desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizi/

. Virgin River chub (Gila robusta seminuda)

MPone

SPECIES THAT ARE CANDIDATES FOR FEDERAL LISTING
Animals

. Virgin River spinedace (Lepidomeda moitispinus moilispinus)
. White faced ibis (Piegadus chihi)

. Ferruginous hawk (8uteo regalis}

Western snowy plover (Charadrinus alexandrinus nivosus)

. Long-billed curlew (Numeicus americanus)

. Southern spotted owl (Sirix occidenialis lucida)

. Spotted bat (Euderma maculatum)

. Merriams kangaroo rat {Dipodomys merriami frenatus)

Plants

1. Camissonia exilis
2. Cirsium virginensis

PNOnhop-

ARIZONA STATE-LISTED SPECIES (NOT ON FEDERAL LIST)

1. Common black hawk (Buteogailus anihracinus anthracinus}
2. Great egret (Casmerodius albus egretia}

3. Snowy egret (fgreifa thula brewsteri)

4. Black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax hoactle)

13


UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF ‘(HE INTERIOR
Burcau of Land Management
Arizona Strip District Office
390 North 3050 East
St. George, Utah 84770
Return if not delivered in 10 days

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300

tl

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
‘U.S. OEPARTMENT
OF THE INTERIOR
INT 415


APPENDIX C

DECISION MATRIX (Fuel Model C)

Life or Property Threatened (YES) Supress
(NO)

Boundary Threatened (YES)

Supress
{NO}

Number of Prescribed Burns < 5 {NO}
(YES)

Supress.

Smoke Management Favorable (NO)
(YES)

Supress

Prescription Criteria Met*
Temperature < 75
Minimum Relative Humidity > 20%
10 Hr. Fuel Moisture > 15% (NO) Supress
1,000 Hr. Fuel Moisture > 20%
20 Ft. Windspeed < 10 mph
Live Fuel Moisture > 130%
(YES)

Current Weather Forecast Favorabie {NO}
{YES)

Supress

Current Fire Behavior Favorable (NO) Supress
(YES)

Ten Day Forecast Favorable {NO) Supress
(YES)

Equipment/Personnel Available {NO} Supress
(YES)

Fire Meeting Wilderness Objectives {NO}
(YES)

Supress

Fire is < 10 Days Old (NO) Supress
(YES)

Fire is < 50 Acres in Size {NO}
(YES)
MONITOR FIRE

Supress

*

Five of six prescription criteria must be met to be in prescription.

57


PART Ill

MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

The Paiute and Beaver Dam Mountains Wilder-
ness Areas are characterized by unique natural
features such as Ponderosa pine “islands” and the
rugged Virgin River Gorge. It is largely undis-
turbed but man’s influence is quite obvious in cer-
tain places-the designated open roads on Black
Rock and in Cedar Pockets, the large number of
range improvements in the area.

In examining the complex mixture of wilder-
ness resources and existing uses the BLM feels
the desired objectives can be achieved by zoning
the area into management units. Each unit would
emphasize management for one or more ele-
ments that would result in general enhancement
of the wilderness resource and would follow the
guidance set forth in the wilderness goal state-
ments. All elements are discussed first in a
general fashion in Part lV, the General Objectives
for All Elements section, and then some are more
specifically addressed under the management
program for each unit in the Specific Unit Manage-
ment Objective section.

In separating the wilderness into units, several
criteria were considered:

1. What elements are currently being managed
most intensively throughout the wilderness?

2. Can some or all of these elements be sepa-
rated into specific geographic units?

3. If so, is the management activity wilderness
compatible or wilderness enhancing?

4. Will managing a specific unit for certain ele-
ments cause conflicts with wilderness quali-
ties or other elements?

5. Can conflicts be resolved within the guide-
lines of this plan and the wilderness manage-
ment policy?

6. Can the allowed nonconforming uses, such
as grazing or valid mineral claims, be accom-
modated in these units without degrading wil-
derness values?

It should be noted here that while management
of certain elements will be emphasized, protec-
tion of the wilderness resource will receive prior-
ity in resolving conflicts.

After examination of the wilderness, five geo-
graphic units were considered appropriate,
emphasizing management of certain elements
that would maintain or enhance wilderness
values. These units are described below (see map
foldout, page 71):

West Virgin Slope Unit

Covers primarily the west slope of the Virgin
Mountains. This unit will be managed primarily
for protection and enhancement of desert big-
horn sheep habitat but also, in the lower eleva-
tions (below 3,500 feet), for protection of desert
tortoise habitat. Other recognized wilderness
resources as well as nonconforming but accepted
uses will also be managed as set forth in Part iV,
the Genera! Objectives for All Elements section,
of this pian, but emphasis will be on the bighorn
and tortoise habitat. The revised Virgin River/
Pakoon Basin and Biack Rock HMPs will be used
for guidance, subject to wilderness policy con-
straints.

Virgin Gorge Unit

This unit includes all of the Beaver Dam Moun-
tains Wilderness in Utah and Arizona as weil as
portions of the Paiute in the Gorge. A large part
of the unit can be seen from Interstate highway
15. The unprecedented situation of an interstate
highway flanked by designated wilderness
enables thousands of travelers to enjoy the
unique scenery each year. A rest stop and BLM
campground with an interpretive site adjacent to
the wilderness areas provide opportunities for fur-
ther enjoyment. Emphasis will be on preserving
the scenic resource, which will involve generally
maintaining the area as it exists today. Other ele-
ments to be specifically addressed will be wildlife
(especially bighorn sheep and tortoise habitat),
minerals (gyp mine) and recreation (hiking and
river running).

Black Rock Unit

Includes the top of Black Rock Mountain and
the area south of the Black Rock road as it winds


IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE

Management Action

Target Date

Responsibility

Maintenance plans for improvements within
wilderness will be incorporated into existing
and any new AMPs and made a part of each
grazing permit. See Part IV, Grazing Manage-
ment section.

Springs and seeps will be inventoried for
Tamarix invasion. See Part !\V, Insects,
Disease and Noxious Plants section.

An information brochure will be prepared based
on the oid Paiute Primitive Area brochure

and the temporary visitors map. Information
tegarding jaws that protect cultural resources
will be included. See Part IV, Information

and Education section and Cultural Resources
section.

A fire management plan has been written for
the Paiute-Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness
Areas. See Part lV, Wildfire section and
Appendix C.

An inventory of ail range improvements within
the witderness is being completed. Improve-

ments which have been abandoned or are deter-

mined to be unnecessary to the grazing
operation may be removed. See Part IV,
Grazing Management section.

The LAG monitoring plan will be developed
cooperatively by the Shivwits and Dixie
Resource Areas. Field studies will be done
cooperatively by the Shivwits and Dixie
Resource Areas. See Part lV, Administration
section.

The sheep enclosure will be reevaluated in
FY 91 to determine its value and continued
compatibility with wilderness values.
Recommendations will be made at that time
as to removal or continuance. See Part lV,

Specific Unit Management Objectives, West Virgin

Unit section.

Completed

9/30/92

9/30/82

Completed

Completed

9/30/84

9/30/91

Shivwits Resource Area
Range Conservationists

Shivwits Resource Area
Wildlife Biologist and
Range Conservationists

Shiywits Resource Area
Recreation Specialist

Arizona Strip District
Fire Management Officer
and Shivwits Resource
Area Recreation
Specialist

Shivwits Resource Area
Recreation Specialist and
Range Conservationists

Area Managers

Arizona Strip District
and Shivwits Resource
Area Biologists in Coop-
eration with AGFD.

28




APPENDIX G

MULTIPLE USE (Continued). combination of balanced and
diverse resource uses that takes into account the long-
term needs of future generations for renewable and non-
renewable resources, including, but not limited to, rec-
reation, range, timber, minerals, watershed, wildlife and
fish, and natural scenic, scientific and historical values,
andharmoniousand coordinated managementofthevar-
ious resources without permanent impairmentof the pro-
ductivity of the land and the quality of the environment
with consideration being given to the relative values of
the resources and not necessarily to the combination of
uses that will give the greatest economic return or the
greatest unit output.” (From Section 103, FLPMA).

NATURALNESS. Refers to an area which “generally appears
to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature,
with the imprint of man’s work substantially unnoticea-
ble.” (From Section 2(c}, Wilderness Act).

NONCONFORMING USES. Private rights and certain other
uses that were authorized prior to wilderness designa-
tion and that Congress has directed to be allowed to con-
tinue even though they generally do not conform to the
intent of wilderness designation.

OFF-ROAD VEHICLE (ORV). Any motorized vehicle
designed for or capable of crosscountry travel on or
immediately over land, water, sand, snow, ice, marsh,
swamplandor other natural terrain, excluding (a) any reg-
istered motorboat, (b) any fire, military, emergency, or
Jaw enforcement vehicie when used for emergencies and
any combat or combat support vehicle when used for na~
tional defense, and {c} any vehicle whose use is
expressly authorized by the respective agency head
under a permit, lease, license, or contract.

PERENNIAL STREAM. A stream that flows throughout the
year.

PETROGLYPH. An art figure or symbol cut, carved or pecked
into a stone surface.

PRIMITIVE AND UNCONFINED RECREATION. Nonmoto-
tized and nondeveloped types of outdoor recreation.

PRIMITIVE AREA. A natural, wild and undeveloped area, es-
sentially removed from the effects of civilization.

PUBLIC LAND. Formal name for lands administered by the
Bureau of Land Management.

RANGE IMPROVEMENT. A structure, development or treat-
ment used in concert with management to rehabilitate,
protect and improve public land and its resources to
arrest rangeland deterioration; and to improve forage
condition, fish and wildlife habitat, watershed protection
and livestock production, all consistent with land use
plans.

RAPTORS. Birds of prey.

RESOURCE AREA. An administrative division of a BLM Dis-
trict, which is headed by an area manager.

RIPARIAN. Situated on or pertaining to the bank of a river,
‘stream or other body of water. Riparian areas and asso-
ciated vegetation are otten found along intermittent
streams in the hot desert regions. Normally used to refer
to the plants of all types that grow along streams or
around springs.

ROADLESS. The absence of roads that have been improved
and maintained by mechanical means to insure relatively
regular and continuous use. A way maintained solely by
the passage of vehicles does not constitute a road.

68

SOLITUDE. The state of being alone or remote from habita-
tions; isolation in a fonely, unfrequented, or secluded
place.

SPECIAL RECREATION AREA. Recreation Areas where con-
gressionally recognized recreation values exist or where
significant public recreation issues or management con-
cerns occur, Special or more intensive types of manage-
ment are typically needed.

SUPPLEMENTAL VALUES. Resources not required for an
area to be designated a wilderness but that are consid-
ered in assessing the wilderness potential of an area.
Such values include ecological, geologic, and other fea-
tures of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical
value.

SUSPENDED GRAZING PREFERENCE. That portion of a
grazing preference which has been suspended and for
which active grazing use will not be reauthorized until
forage is available and allocated tor tivestock grazing use
on a sustained yield basis,

THREATENED ANIMAL SPECIES, Any animal species likely
to become endangered within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant part of its range. See
Endangered Animal Species.

THREATENED PLANT SPECIES. Species of plants that are
likely to become endangered within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of their
ranges, including species categorized as rare, very rare,
or depleted, See Endangered Plant Species.

UNNECESSARY OA UNDUE DEGRADATION. Surface dis-
turbance greater than what would normally result when
an activity is being accomplished by a prudent operator
in usual, customary, and proficient operations of similar
character and taking into consideration the effects of
‘operations on other resources and land uses, including
those resources and uses outside the area of operations.
Failure to initiate and compiete reasonable mitigation
measures, including reclamation of disturbed areas, or
creation ot a nuisance may constitute unnecessary or
undue degradation, Failure to comply with applicable
environmental protection statutes and regulations the-
reunder will constitute unnecessary or undue degrada-
tion.

VALID EXISTING RIGHTS. Private or other authorized rights
existing as of the date an area was designated as wilder-
ness, Examples are valid mining claims, rightsof-way,
and access to private land within the wilderness.

VIS{TOR USE. Visitor use of the wilderness resource for in-
Spiration, stimulation, solitude, relaxation, education,
pleasure or satisfaction.

VISUAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (VRM) CLASSES, Cias-
sification containing specitic objectives for maintaining
or enhancing visual resources, including the kinds of
structures and modifications acceptable to meet estab-
lished visual goals.

WILDERNESS, An uncultivated, uninhabited, and usually
roadtess area Set aside for preservation of natural con-
ditions. According to Section 2{c) of the Wilderness Act
of 1964,

Awilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and
his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recog-
nized as an area where the earth and its community of
life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a vis-
itor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is


APPENDIX G

WILDERNESS (Continued).

further defined to man in this Act an area of undeveloped
Federal tand retaining its primeval character and influ-
ence, without permanent improvements or human habi-
tation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve
its natural conditions and which (1) generally appears to
have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with
the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable; (2)
has outstanding opportunities for sofitude or a primitive
and unconfined type of recreation; (3} has at Seast tive
thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make
practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired con-
dition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geolagical,
or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or his-
torical value.

WILDERNESS CHARACTERISTICS. Key characteristics of a

wilderness listed in section 2(c) of the Wilderness Act of
1964 and used by BLM in its wilderness inventory. These
characteristics include size, naturainess, opportunities
forsolitude, opportunities for primitive or unconfined rec-
reation, supplemental values, and the possibility of an
area returning to a natural condition.

WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT PLAN. An officially approved

planning document for specific congressionally desig-
nated wilderness areas and in some cases lands imme-
diately adjacent to wilderness areas (e.g., trailheads).
The wilderness management planis the vehicle for imple-
mentation of the Bureau's Wilderness Management Policy
(BLM Manual Section 8580).

WITHDRAWAL. An action that restricts the use of public land
and segregates the lands from some or ail of the public
land or mineral laws.

67


PART V

IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE

Management Action

Target Date

Responsibility

A patrol and monitoring record is being
maintained and inciudes documentation of
monitoring trips and al! authorized or
unauthorized activities. See Part !V,
Administration section.

Administrative boundary signs or road closure
signs will be placed at appropriate locations.
Signs will be visible but unobtrusive.

See Part IV, Administration section.

River running will be monitored to prevent
any resource damage. See Part IV, Recreation
section,

Existing information and boundary signs
will be maintained and additional signs
installed where necessary. Signing will be
the minimum necessary. See Part IV, Infor-
mation and Education section.

Monitoring studies, including utilization,
trend, actual use, fivestock counts and
precipitation data gathering will be
continued. See Part IV, Grazing Management
section.

Inactive mining claims will be monitored
quarterly to check for unauthorized surface
disturbance. See Part [V, Minerals section.

The BLM will contact specific resource users
(e.g., grazing permittees, mining claimants)

to inform them of special considerations
required when operating in wilderness.

See Parf lV, Information and Education section.

The visual resource, including air quality,

in the Virgin Gorge will be monitored and
appropriate action taken to protect it.

See Part !V, Specific Unit Measurement Objec-
tives section, Virgin Gorge Unit.

Water quality and flow on the Virgin River
will be monitored by analyzing data from the
Woundfin Recovery Team and existing flow
gauges. See Part IV, Water section.

Quantification of instream flows and applica~
tion for Arizona instream water rights will be
completed for the Virgin River. See part lV,
Water section.

Springs will be periodicaily monitored for con-
tamination and pollution. Speciai emphasis
will be placed on those springs that are used
by recreationists. See part fv, Water section.

Ongoing

Ongoing

Ongoing

Ongoing

Ongoing

Ongoing

Ongoing

Beginning in
FY 89 and
continuing

Ongoing

9/30/92

Beginning in
FY 87 and
continuing

Ail BLM personnel

Dixie and Shivwits
Resource Area Recreation
Specialists

Dixie and Shivwits
Resource Area Recreation
Specialists

Dixie and Shivwits
Resource Area Recreation
Specialists

Shivwits Resource Area
Range Conservationists

Dixie and Shivwits
Resource Area Mineral
Specialists

Area Managers

Shivwits Resource Area
Recreation Specialist

Dixie and Shivwits
Resource Area Recreation
Specialists

Arizona Strip District
Manager

Shivwits Resource Area
Recreation Specialist


INTRODUCTION

The tower slopes of the Virgin Mountains are
home for a variety of desert creatures, notably the
threatened desert tortoise and the gila monster,
North America's only poisonous lizard. Moving
upslope into the rocky, sparsely vegetated can-
yons, desert bighorn sheep may be encountered,
the result of a recent reintroduction of this animal
to its native habitat. Bighorns can often be seen
from I-15 in the Virgin River Gorge. Air quality is
generally very good (Class 1! air quality rating)
and visibility is, therefore, quite good. Occa-
sional windblown dust reduces visibility for short
periods.

Moving higher on the Virgin Mountains, the
pinyon-juniper (P-J) community is the next major
ecotype. This woodland area is important mule
deer habitat as well as a home for a variety of
birds, small mammals and predators such as bob-
cats and mountain lions.

Above the P-J zone, the ponderosa pine forest
provides critical summer mule deer range and is
a favorite area for those seeking remote hunting
grounds.

The area has a long history of habitation and
use by Native Americans and European immi-
grants. Numerous archaeological sites have been
identified and there is evidence of early historical
use such as an old steam boiler rusting away in
Hancock Canyon, the remains of a shingle mill
begun around the turn of the century.

The Virgin River, which runs through portions
of both wilderness areas, is considered habitat for
the woundfin minnow and the virgin river chub,
which are both listed as endangered and threat-
ened respectively, and the spinedace which is
listed by the state of Arizona as endangered. The
river also offers limited river running for several
weeks during adequate spring run-off periods.

SIGNIFICANT HISTORY

A portion of the Paiute Wilderness (35,092
acres) was the former Paiute Primitive Area,
which was designated September 25, 1975. Aman-
agement plan for the area was approved in
December 1976. The Primitive Area designation
did not segregate the land from mineral entry but
did close it to off-road vehicle (ORV) travel. The
Virgin River Scenic Withdrawal of 1973 segre-
gated the area from mineral location but not min-
eral leasing. It also closed the area to ORV use
except on existing roads. Wilderness designation
has now closed the area to all forms of mineral
entry and vehicle travel except on specific roads
designated to remain open. With the passage of
the Federal Land Policy and Management Act
(FLPMA) in 1976, the Paiute Primitive Area

became an Instant Study Area for wilderness suit-
ability. It was recommended for inclusion in the
Wilderness Preservation System in a 1980 study
submitted to the Department of interior. The prim-
itive area is now completely encompassed by wil-
derness and the primitive designation was
removed by the Arizona Wilderness Act.

Portions of the Paiute and Beaver Dam Moun-
tains Wilderness Areas were also part of the Virgin
River Gorge Scenic Withdrawal of September 28,
1972. This withdrawal is currently under review
for retention or revocation. A partial revocation is
proposed with some areas in the gorge not
included in wilderness to remain withdrawn for
protection of the scenic resource.

On August 28, 1984, the Paiute and Beaver Dam
Mountains Wilderness Areas (WAs) were desig-
nated by the Arizona Wilderness Act, a bill that
was originated by a broad coalition of private cit-
izens and groups. The formation of this wilder-
ness bill by a coalition of interest groups and spon-
sored by the Arizona congressional delegation
makes it unique in wilderness legislation.

GENERAL MANAGEMENT
SITUATION

The Paiute Wilderness Area and the Arizona por-
tion of the Beaver Dam Mountains WA are man-
aged by the Shivwits Resource Area of the Ari-
zona Strip District. The Utah portion of the Beaver
Dam Mountains WA is managed by the Dixie
Resource Area of the Cedar City District. A com-
bined resource area office is located in St.
George, Utah.

Activities within the wilderness include most of
the multiple uses managed by the BLM. Grazing
allotments, some of which are under allotment
management plans (AMPs), cover the entire area.
Wildlife habitat management plans (HMPs) guide
wildlife management over the entire area, empha-
sizing deer, desert bighorn sheep, desert tortoise
and endangered fishes. Pending final rulemaking
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, some of
the area will be under a desert tortoise recovery
plan. There is also an operating gypsum mine in
the Beaver Dam Mountains WA. The area pro-
vides recreation opportunities ranging from
remote, backcountry experiences to motorized
sightseeing.

Proper management of these complex wilder-
ness areas will require careful consideration of
the wilderness resource in relation to the various
authorized activities, both wilderness-compatible
uses and the nonconforming but accepted uses.


PART |

INTRODUCTION

ORGANIZATION OF THE
PLAN

This plan is organized into four basic parts
which will explain the management strategy,
objectives, policies and prescribed actions to
achieve wilderness goals.

Part | introduces the reader to the Paiute and
Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness Areas and the
management plan itself-its purpose and organiza-
tion, area description, history and the general
management situation.

Part II provides broad management guidance in
the form of wilderness philosophy and national
wilderness goals.

Part Ii sets forth the management strategy for
the area by discussing the management unit con-
cept, the approach to proposed projects or
actions, and a brief explanation of the monitoring
process.

in Part IV the wilderness management program
is presented in two sections. The first section
establishes objectives, policies and prescribed
actions for each use or resource (called elements
in this plan) identified for the wilderness area.
Then, each Management Unit is discussed with
more specific objectives, policies and actions for
elements that play a prominent role in the
management of the unit. The appendices
supplement portions of the plan and include an
environmental assessment (EA) of the impacts of
the proposed actions and alternatives.

PURPOSE OF THE PLAN

The primary purpose of the pian is to provide
guidance for the administration of the Paiute and
Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness Areas in the
form of well-defined objectives, policies and
prescribed actions for the various uses and
resources within the wilderness. The plan also
fulfills the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
Manual 8560 requirement that management plans
be prepared for all BLM-administered wilderness.

The plan provides management direction for a
10-year period from 1990-1999. Evaluations will
be made at least every five years or as dictated
by significant changes in resource conditions or
national management direction. Major plan
revision will invotve the same review process as
the original plan. As this is designed to be a
working document, minor revisions such as
informational updates will be written into the
document, dated and initialed.

LOCATION AND
DESCRIPTION

The Paiute and Beaver Dam Mountains
Wilderness Areas cover 104,300 acres of public
jand and dominate the northwest portion of the
Arizona Strip and southwest Utah. The Virgin
Mountains form the backbone of this area, rising
more than a mile from the desert floor. Mt. Bangs,
the highest peak at 8,012 feet provides a
commanding view of the Basin and Range
province to the west and the Colorado Plateau to
the east. The Colorado Plateau and Basin and
Range geologic regions meet and mix in these
wilderness areas.

The two wilderness areas are separated by
Interstate 15 as it winds through the spectacular
Virgin River Gorge. Extreme faulting, folding and
natural erosion by the Virgin River has resulted
in a complex mixture of steep craggy cliffs,
sandstone buttes and alluvial fans in this area.
The various layers of sandstone, siltstone and
fossil-laden limestone reveal 500 million years of
geologic time.

The substantial elevation change in the Paiute
has created a land of contrasts which includes
several plant communities ranging from the hot
Mohave Desert through stands of pinyon-juniper
on up to ponderosa pine and Douglas fir on the
cooler north-facing slopes. In addition there is a
wide variety of smaller plant communities related
to soil type, moisture, slope aspect and other
factors.


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Proposed wildlife improvements will be ana-
lyzed through a site-specific EA.

Motorized vehicle or equipment use for wildlife
management or improvement maintenance will
be approved by the authorized officer only when
it is determined through the EA process io be the
only practical alternative and would not have a
significant adverse effect on the natural environ-
ment. The procedure wili be similar to the process
described for range improvements in Appendix B.

Management Actions

Those portions of the Black Rock and Virgin
River-Pakoon Basin HMPs dealing specifically
with objectives and actions within the wilderness
are being reviewed and amended, if necessary, to
accommodate BLM wilderness policy and the
objectives of this plan.

Riparian habitats will be inventoried to deter-
mine the condition of specific areas and, if neces-
sary, proposals for protection will be made.

Annual meetings with AGFD and BLM wildlife
and wilderness specialists will continue in order
to coordinate wildlife management functions in
the wilderness.

Additional policies and actions can be found in
the management unit portion (Part IV, the Spe-
cific Unit Managemeni Objectives section) of this
plan.

Minerals

Management Objective

The objective is to ensure the protection and/or
enhancement of wilderness values while allowing
valid existing mineral rights to be exercised in
accordance with the Wilderness Act of 1964 and
the mineral laws.

14

Current Situation and Assumptions

Current Situation

Mineral activities in the Paiute Wilderness have
been limited to sporadic exploration primarily
around Mt. Bangs, Sullivan Canyon and the west
slope of the Virgin Mountains. While some evi-
dence of copper, tungsten, beryllium and lead
have been found, the U.S. Bureau of Mines and
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) judged the area
to have “at best a low mineral potential.” The
USGS judged the oif and gas potential to be low
as well.

The Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness con-
tains @ fairly extensive deposit of high grade
gypsum along both sides of the Cedar Pockets
road. Sporadic mining operations over the past
two years, under a plan of operations approved
by the Arizona Strip District in March, 1984, have
caused about 7 acres of surface disturbance. An
October 1985 validity examination ona portion of
the gypsum claims found that 80 acres of claims
met BLM validity requirements.

The Apex Mine, a source of gallium and
germanium which are used in semi-conductor
and optical glass technology, is about 11% miles
from a section of the Beaver Dam Mountains
Wilderness. The operators, St. George Mining
Corporation, have stated that the mineral veins
they are now working may extend underground
into the wilderness and that they may pursue
development of these veins in the wilderness
under “extralateral rights” accorded them by 30
USC 26.

The Paiute-Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness
Areas contain the following ciaims and leases:

Arizona Utah
Lode Claims 32 6
Placer Claims 26 5
Oil and Gas Leases i) te)


MANAGEMENT DIRECTION

The fourth goal is to manage nonconforming
but accepted uses permitted by the Wilderness
Act and subsequent laws in a manner that wiil
prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of

the area's wilderness character. Noncon-
forming uses are the exception rather than the
rule, therefore, emphasis is placed on maintain-
ing wilderness character.



MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Control of Tamerix may be desirable if it invades
springs that are important wildlife, livestock or
human water sources.

Management Policies

Tamerix invasion of springs in the wilderness
will be controlied on an as-needed basis using the
minimum tools necessary. Controi projects will
be approved by the appropriate authorized offi-
cer.

infestations of native insects, disease and nox-
ious plants will be allowed to run their course
within the wiiderness as natural components of
the ecosystem.

Management Actions
Springs and seeps will be inventoried for Ta-
merix invasion.

Where control is deemed necessary, a controt
plan analyzed through the EA process will be
developed.

information and Education

Management Objective

The information and education objective is to:
1. Promote safety,

2. Promote the use of no-trace camping tech-
niques,

3. Provide wilderness information to afl persons
requesting it,

4, Promote understanding and appreciation of
wilderness, and

5. Obtain user information for guiding future
management actions.

Current Situation and Assumptions

Current Situation

Alt grazing permittees, mining claim holders
and rights-of-way permittees have been notified
ofthewilderness designation and resulting restric-
tions.

20

Visitors requesting information on the wilder-
ness areas are presently given a district map
{approximately 1:250,000 scale) and a brochure
of the old Paiute Primitive Area with an explana-
tion of the change in status. A larger scale
(1:62,500) map of the wilderness areas is avail-
able.

On-site information and education consists of
boundary signs along the outside boundary and
along the open roads as well as signs at each end
of these roads informing the visitor of the open
road with wilderness on both sides. In addition,
two displays at the Virgin River Campground
include maps of the wilderness and written infor-
mation. There are currently no signs designating
trajiheads.

Assumptions

Public requests for information about wilder-
ness will increase.

Conversion of the primitive area to a larger wil-
derness area will cause some misunderstanding
and noncompliance among visitors and other
user groups.

Information and education willbeimportant ele-
ments in promoting understanding of wilderness
and in encouraging appropriate conduct by visit-
ors and users.

Management Policies

BLM will provide information, through offsite
means, on wilderness areas, including appropri-
ate wilderness etiquette, no-trace camping tech-
niques and safety considerations.

While information will be madeavailable, wilder-
ness uses will not be advertised or promoted.

Management Actions

An information brochure will be prepared
based on the old Paiute Primitive Area brochure
and the temporary visitors map.

A sign plan will be written specifying existing
and needed signs, locations, and maintenance
cycles. Signing will be the minimum necessary to
protect the wilderness resource.

The BLM will contact specific resource users
{e.g., grazing permittees, mining claimants} to
inform them of special considerations required
when operating in wilderness.


United States Department of the Interior
Bureau of Land Management
Arizona State Otfice

Arizona — Utah June 1990

Final
Wilderness Management Plan
Paiute and Beaver Dam Mountains



APPENDIX A

Range Improvement Inspection and
Maintenance

The management plan establishes a procedure
for handling maintenance and inspection of range
improvements following congressional guide-
lines (Appendix B). There are no alternatives to
following these guidelines.

Entries of either motor vehicles or earthmoving
equipment into wilderness areas would be ana-
lyzed in site-specific EAs as outlined in the proce-
dures.

Wildlife Habitat
Riparian Habitat Monitoring

Proposed Action Alternative

Monitoring data on selected riparian areas
would provide significant data for use in the LAC
integrated network for use in directing manage-
ment actions.

As a result of the monitoring program, there
may be restrictions on livestock on riparian areas.
This would be a beneficial impact to the riparian
ecosystem, and may be a detrimental impact to
livestock operations.

Wildemess Quality Emphasis Alternative

Same as described for the Proposed Action
Alternative.

Wildemess Quality Maintenance Alternative

Foregoing riparian area data could resuit in for-
feiture of management decision data and in some
cases a negative impact of less than desirable
management of riparian ecosystems.

Motorized Improvement Maintenance

The same alternatives, analysis and potential
impacts as outlined in this Appendix, Administra-
tion section, Motorized Vehicles apply to the use
of vehicles or mechanized equipment in inspec-
tion and maintenance of wildlife improvements.

43

New Improvements

Proposed Action Alternative

This alternative considers the possibility of a
small number of wildlife improvements in addition
to those that presently exist to enhance wilder-
ness values through wildlife abundance or diver-
sity. An example would be additional water catch-
ments to expand deer or bighorn sheep habitat.
Each proposal would be reviewed in a separate
sitespecific EA including minimum tool consider-
ations.

Wilderness Quality Emphasis Alternative

No new improvements would avoid any further
negative impact of intrusion on naturalness, sce-
nic views or solitude and be a positive impact to
wilderness users.

The potential improvements to wildtife abun-~
dance and diversity would be foregone which
would negatively impact persons engaged in view-
ing or hunting.

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Alternative

This alternative would allow more opportunities
for wildlife improvements.

Each project proposal would be considered in
a separate EA, minimum tool determination and
decision record.

Minerals

Bonding

Proposed Action Alternative

Under this alternative sufficient bonding would
be required to cover expected reclamation efforts
prior to the commencement of operations. This
would be a beneficial impact by insuring the pro-
tection of wilderness values. The cost of purchas-
ing and maintaining such a bond during the life
ofa mining operation would create a negative eco-
nomic impact to the mining operator.

Wilderness Quality Emphasis Alternative
Same as the Proposed Action Afternative.


PART IV

WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

GENERAL OBJECTIVES FOR
ALL ELEMENTS

Administration

Management Objectives

The wilderness will be managed to preserve the
integrity of the wilderness resource whileconduct-
ing the necessary administrative functions.

Current Situation and Assumptions

Current Situation

The Paiute and Beaver Dam Mountains Wilder-
ness Areas are administered primarily by the Shiv-
wits Resource Area with a portion of the Beaver
Dam Mountains (3,788 acres} administered by the
Dixie Resource Area of Utah. Administrative
responsibilities are vested with the area managers
and carried out by natural resource specialists for
the two resource areas and the district wilderness
coordinators for the Arizona Strip District and
Cedar City District. The district wilderness coor-
dinators are also responsible for technical coordi-
nation of BLM policy and regulations for wilder-
ness management and serve as liaisons between
the district and resource areas.

The wilderness is administered under the
authority and provision of the Federal Land Policy
and Management Act of 1976, the Wilderness Act
of 1964, and the Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984.
Regulations and guidance are found in 43 CFR
8560, Management of Designated Wilderness
Areas, and BLM Manual 8560.

Administrative activity has, until now, been
related to the various multiple use programs such
as grazing, wildlife, fire control and minerals. Rec-
reation use has been light and unregulated, with
hunting, camping, hiking and backpacking the
most commen recreational activities with some
river running during years of adequate spring
runoff.

Fee permits or registration for recreation use
have not been required.

Communications are adequate to good in most
areas due to a BLM radio repeater on top of Black
Rock Mountain. Some locations, such as canyon
bottoms, make radio communication difficult
however.

There are approximately 15 acres of private
land and no state lands within the Arizona portion
of the wilderness areas. The Utah part of the
Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness has 1,083
acres of state land.

The two wilderness areas are separated in the
Virgin River Gorge by Interstate Highway 15
(I-15). Included in the area between the wilder-
nesses are a State-operated highway rest area and
a BLM improved campground.

Several areas are susceptible to off-road vehi-
cle violations due to ease of access along the
boundary and along designated open roads that
run through each wilderness. These roads
{known as the Cedar Pockets road, the Black
Rock road, and the Trails End road) will be main-
tained within the 60-foot corridor provided in the
legistation using standard road maintenance
equipment.

There is a lifetime lease of 4.8 acres in the Patute
Wilderness along the Elbow Canyon road withsev-
eral improvements, including a cabin, fenced
area, reservoir, improved spring and pipeline and
an old orchard.

There is a gypsum mine along the Cedar
Pockets road in the Beaver Dam Mountains Wil-
derness which has been operating sporadically
under a plan of operations which was approved
in March 1984.

A powerline that provides electricity and phone
service to the I-15 rest stop and campground
generally parallels the Cedar Pockets road
through the Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness.
Both the road and powerline are excluded from
the wilderness area.

A 700-acre enclosure was constructed on the
west slope of the Virgin Mountains under a coop-
erative agreement between the BLM and Arizona
Game and Fish Department (AGFD) to facilitate
the reestablishment of bighorn sheep as well as


MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

down Oak Canyon on the west side of Black Rock.
This area has been identified as critical mule deer
summer range. The open road through the unit
provides access for camping, sightseeing and
hunting. The unit atso provides traiiheads for
backpacking into the Sullivan Canyon area. The
unit will be managed primarily for wilderness rec-
reation and mule deer habitat.

Sullivan Canyon Unit

Includes Sullivan Canyon with its numerous
side canyons from the top of the Virgin Mountain
ridge east to the wilderness boundary. Portions
of an old road along the ridge north of Mt. Bangs
and spur trails into Sullivan Canyon provide
access for wilderness recreation. The unit will be
managed mainly to provide opportunities for
wilderness-oriented recreation.

The Coves Unit

Takes in Sand Cove, Pocum Cove and the area
between the Black Rock and Ide Valley roads east
of Pocum Cove. A large part of the unit is covered
by P-J stands, with mountain shrub and sage-
brush also plentiful. While opportunities for prim-
itive recreation exist in the unit, there is very tittle
use presently. The unit will be managed on a
general wilderness management basis as set forth
in Part IV, the General Objectives for All Elements
seciton, with none of the elements receiving
specific emphasis.

All actions proposed in wilderness will be ana-
lyzed through an EA following the National Envi-
ronmental Policy Act (NEPA) process and poli-
cies set by this plan. Analysis will include:

1. Application of the minimum tool policy,

2. Consideration of impacts, including potential
cumulative impacts, to the existing physical
and social setting,

3. Attention to the management focus for the
affected unit, and

4. Evaluation of viable alternatives. Emphasis
will be placed on maintaining or enhancing
wilderness character.

NEPA requirements will be accomplished in
two ways:

1. Actions proposed in this plan which may
impact the wilderness will be analyzed in an
EA accompanying this plan.

2. Actions that are not proposed in this plan or
are only mentioned as possibilities, such as
new livestock or wildlife waters or trailhead
parking facilities as well as improvement
maintenance will be addressed in site-
specific EAs that will be subject to the normal
public review. Additionally, major mainte-
Nance actions involving the use of heavy
equipment will be covered in the same
manner.

The primary tool for achieving and maintaining
the desired long term environmenta! conditions
within both wilderness areas will be the Limits of
Acceptable Change (LAC) process.

Because collecting baseline data, and imple-
menting the LAC process is complex and time
consuming, interim monitoring will be accom-
plished through an organized effort of ground and
aerial surveillance. Ongoing vegetation, grazing
and wildlife studies will also continue. The intent
is to maintain and, where possibie, enhance wil-
derness values during the time that the LAC plan
is being developed.

The LAC plan will identify conditions that signal
the start of undesirable changes in the physical
environment or on visitor's perceptions of the
physical and social environment. LAC seeks to
define existing conditions, establish desired stan-
dards and set up indicators to be monitored for
change. Indicators might include such things as
campsite condition and frequency, trailing and
erosion, cultural site vandalism or evidence of
unauthorized vehicle use. The LAC plan will be
developed by the end of FY 93.

Unwanted changes discovered by either
interim monitoring or LAC wiil result in a variety
of possible management changes that could
range from disseminating information to physica!
trail closure or grazing management changes.


APPENDIX C

activity will provide funding. Funding for rehabil-
itation on areas that are actively suppressed will
come from 4620.

Rehabilitation measures will be considered as
a part of the Escaped Fire Situation Analysis and
costs wil] be considered as a part of that analysis.

X. FIRE BEHAVIOR

The fire behavior by NFDRS fuel model is as fol-
lows:

A. Fuel Model C (Ponderosa pine)

Spotting potential = Moderate
Energy release = Moderate
Rate of spread = High
Resistance to control = Low

C. Fuel Model F (Pinyon-juniper
brush)

Spotting potential = Low

Energy release = Moderate to High
Rate of spread = Moderate
Resistance to control = Moderate

D. Unclassified (Pinyon-juniper
with no ground fuel)

Spotting potential = Low
Energy release = Moderate
Rate of spread = Low
Resistance to control = Low

56


APPENDIX A

with a slight potential for negative changes before
implementation can take place (see Part Ill, Man-
agement Strategy). Use of the additional baseline
data acquired over two years and subsequent
change determinations would provide long term
management information directed toward meet-
ing the stated goals and management actions.

Since changes are very slow and human uses
light, the potential for interim undetected impacts
is slight.

There would be a potential shori-term adverse
impact using this approach from either applying
the LAC indicator too broadly or not using the ap-
propriate standard to direct management ina spe-
cific setting.

Wildemess Quality Emphasis Alternative
Same as Proposed Action Alternative.

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Altemative

Under this alternative BLM would not develop
additional monitoring or use the LAC process, but
would continue to monitor those areas that were
established prior to wilderness designation.
Under this alternative many wilderness values
would not be monitored. There would be a poten-
tial negative impact from not having acomprehen-
sive wilderness monitoring plan. Adverse impacts
to wilderness values could occur without prior
knowledge. The current monitoring program is
activity driven (i.e. range utilization for AMP ob-
Jectives). This would adversely affect BLM's abil-
ity to manage wilderness.

Signing

Proposed Action Alternative

Under this alternative signs would be placed to
mark wilderness boundaries, including marking
roads and trails to be closed. Other signs would
be placed to provide protection to specific sites
or resources.

Most signs would be on or near boundaries and
access roads. There would be more signs than in
the prewilderness condition which would tend to
detract from naturalness and solitude in a wilder-
ness setting and serve as reminders of man’s influ-
ence creating a negative impact.

Wilderness Quality Emphasis Alternative
Same as Proposed Action Alternative.

39

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Alternative

This alternative would provide signs for wilder-
ness protection, human safety as well as markings
for used areas such as trail heads, trail routes,
parking areas, water locations. This would add to
public safety and convenience over the proposed
action. It would also reduce risks of using the wil-
derness area. There would be substantially more
signs than under the prewildemess condition and
these additional signs would detract from natural-
ness and the solitude feelings otherwise possible
creating a negative impact.

Additional signing may also tend to attract
more visitation than would otherwise occur.

Management Units

{Refer also to Part Ii!, Management Strategy.)

Proposed Action Alternative

The division of the wilderness areas into five
management units is proposed to recognize the
opportunity to tailor management a little ditfer-
ently from one part of the WA to another in
response to natural environmental features and
potentials.

The effect of this proposal would be to bring to
the managers’ and publics’ attention that certain
parts of the WA have different environments and
hence potentials for wilderness management
emphasis as described in the management plan.
For example: Unit 1, West Virgin is better suited
for improving the supplemental wilderness values
of bighorn sheep and desert tortoise habitat; Unit
2, Virgin Gorge is best suited forscenic values pro-
tection; or Unit 5, the Coves is suited for more
general wilderness management with no specific
element being emphasized.

The most obvious impact of this division would
be to predetermine to some degree if and where
new improvements might be considered.

It also gives present and future managers and
the public a clearer view of intended management
directions and avoids potentials for loss of man-
agement consistency.

Nosignificantimpactstoenvironmentalcompo-
nents are expected.

Wilderness Quality Emphasis Alternative
Same as the Proposed Action Alternative.


IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE

Management Action

Target Date

Responsibility

The gate for the corral access road east of the
rest stop will be reinforced to prevent un-
authorized motor vehicle use. See Part IV,
Specific Unit Measurement Objectives,

Virgin Gorge Unit section.

Campsites in the wilderness will be analyzed
to determine compatibility with wilderness.
See Part IV, Specific Unit Measurement Objec-
tives, Black Rock Unit section.

The BLM will contact the owner of the private
inholding to initiate exchange or purchase
proposals. See Part lV, Lands and Reaity sec~
ton.

The BLM will continue exchange proceedings
with the state of Utah. See Part IV, Lands
and Reaity section.

BEM will inventory spur roads and ways and
determine appropriate vehicle barriers.

See Part IV, Specific Unit Measurement Objec-
tives, Black Rock Unit section.

Existing structures will be inventoried
and, if found to be abandoned and of no
historical significance, may be removed.
See Part lV, Administration section.

Existing trails and trailheads will be in-
ventoried and monitored to determine the

need for traithead maintenance or improve-
ment. See Part IV, Recreation section and
Specific Unit Measurement Objectives, Sullivan
Canyon Unit section.

A sign pian will be done, specifying

existing and needed signs, locations and
maintenance cycles. See Part lV, Information
and Education section.

Selected riparian areas will be identified

and monitored to determine future management
actions that may be needed to prevent degra-
dation or improve existing conditions. See

Part IV, Specific Unit Measurement Objectives,
West Virgin Unit section.

Those portions of the revised Biack Rock and
Virgin River-Pakoon Basin HMPs dealing
specifically with proposed actions will be
reviewed and amended, if necessary, to be
consistent with wilderness goals. See Part

IV, Wildlife section and Specific Unit Measure-
ment Objectives, West Virgin Unit section.

Riparian habitats will be inventoried to deter-
mine the condition of specific areas and, if
necessary, proposais for protection will be
made. See Part IV, Wildlife section.

Existing allotment management plans (AMPs}
are being revised to reflect wilderness
management policies. See Part [V, Grazing
Management section.

27

Completed

9/30/92

Underway

Underway

Completed

9/30/83

Begin by
9/30/92

9/30/82

Begin by
9/30/92

Next
scheduled
HMP
revisions

9/30/91

9/30/90

Shivwits Resource Area
Recreation Specialist

Shivwits Resource Area
Recreation Specialist

Shivwits Area Manager

Cedar City District
Manager

Shivwits Resource Area
Recreation Specialist

Area Managers

Shivwits Resource Area
Recreation Specialist

Shivwits Resource Area
Recreation Specialist

Shivwits Resource Area
Wildlife Biologist and
Range Conservationists

Arizona Strip District
and Shivwits Resource
Area Wildlife Biologists

Shivwits Resource Area
Wildlife Biologist and
Range Conservationists.

Shivwits Resource Area
Range Conservationists


APPENDIX A

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Alternative

This alternative would require bonding only
after prior notice of noncompliance has been
shown for a mining operation. This could create
a serious negative impact to wilderness values by
allowing surface damage to occur without a bond
to cover reclamation expenses.

Monitoring

Proposed Action Alternative

Under this alternative periodic contact with
claimants would be maintained. Inactive claims
would be visited quarterly with operating claims
visited biweekly. This would help prevent the
Possible negative impact of unnecessary
degradation of the wilderness character by main-
taining close communication and coordination
with the claimant and in detecting unauthorized
actions early.

Wilderness Quality Emphasis Alternative

This alternative would maintain contact with
claimants even more frequently than the Pro-
posed Action Alternative. Dormant claims would
be visited monthly and operating claims would be
visited weekly to prevent or detect unauthorized
actions. Potential beneficial impacts of this alter-
native would be the same in nature as the Pro-
posed Action Alternative, but even greater with
the higher numbers of visits to each claim.

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Alternative

Under this alternative dormant claims would be
visited annually and operational claims visited
quarterly to help prevent or detect unauthorized
actions. The potential beneficial impacts of this
alternative would be similar to the Proposed
Action Alternative, but to a far lesser degree
because of the lower number of visits to each
claim. The potential for unauthorized actions and
negative impacts would be higher than for the
other alternatives.

Lands/Realty

Motorized Right-of-Way Inspection and
Maintenance
Under all alternatives, nonemergency use of

motorized vehicles or mechanized equipment to
enter wilderness lands for routine maintenance

would require a 60-day notice to BLM and EAwith
minimum tool review. For emergency needs
where a 60-day notice would not be possible, per-
mission to maintain (under certain conditions
including minimum tool determination) could be
granted by the authorized officer.

Monitoring

Under all alternatives, actions and impacts
would be the same as those described under this
Appendix, Minerals section, Monitoring. Magni-
tudes of certain impacts could vary depending on
variations in frequency of contacts with right-
of-way holders or the lessee. No contact
increases risks for unilateral actions on the part
of the holder that could affect wilderness values.

Nonfederal !nholdings

Under this alternative, acquisition of private
and Utah State inholdings would eliminate poten-
tial negative impacts to the wilderness due to de~
velopment and/or commercial use. There would
be a positive or neutral economic impact to the
owners since they would receive fair market value
or other land equal in value.

Water/Water Quality
Water Rights

Proposed Action Alternative

Under this alternative, BLM would file for water
sources importantto maintaining wilderness char-
acter as well as opposing private control requests.
This alternative would have the positive impact of
protecting waters that are important to maintain-
ing wilderness character. It may be detrimental to
potential users of unappropriated waters. Under
wilderness designation the only parties that could
make beneficial use of most springs would be live-
stock permittees who could continue to share in
the waters’ use under a BLM filing, thus making
the potential impact insignificant. Protecting
springs feeding the Virgin River would also avoid
potential impacts to the Virgin River scenery and
ecosystem.

Wilderness Quality Emphasis Alternative

This alternative is the same as the proposed
action above, except the BLM would file for rights
on ail unappropriated waters in the wilderness


IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE

Management Action Target Date Responsibility

BLM has notified all ROW permittees of the As needed Area Managers
change in land status and is coordinating

with these permittees on maintenance needs

and use of motorized vehicles or equipment.

See Part IV, Lands and Realty section.

Research proposals will be evaluated on a As needed Area Managers
case-by-case basis using the policies listed
above. See Part IV, Scientific Study section.

The Gedar Pockets gypsum mine will be monitored As needed Shivwits Resource Area
bi-weekly during periods of operatian to insure Minerals Specialist
compliance with the approved plan of operations.

See Part !V, Minerals section.

Annual coordination meetings will be held with Annuaily Area Managers
all affected permittees to review and update

the planned maintenance schedule. See Part !V,

Grazing Management section.

Annual meetings with AGFD and BLM wildlife and Annually Area Managers
wilderness specialists will continue in order

to coordinate wildlife management functions in

the wilderness. See Part IV, Wildlife section.

The Shivwits Resource Area will continue to set Annually Shivwits Resource Area
up a hunter information station prior to the Recreation and Wildlife
opening day of deer season to provide infor- Specialists

mation on wilderness. See Part IV, Recreation
section and Specific Unit Management Objectives,
Black Rock Unit section.

Validity examinations. See Part IV, Minerals When a plan District Managers
section (Management Policy). of operation

or patent

application

is received
Wilderness information will be posted on the Completed Shivwits Resource Area
display boards at the Virgin River Campground. Recreation Specialist

Information will include maps, general
descriptions, and minimum impact camping
techniques. See Part IV, Specific Unit Measure-
ment Objectives, Virgin Gorge Unit section.

Water treatment and other safety information Completed Shivwits Resource Area
will be posted on displays at the Virgin Recreation Specialist
River Campground. See Part IV, Specific Unit

Measurement Objectives, Sullivan

Canyon Unit section.

The Arizona Strip and Cedar City districts 9/30/90 District Managers
will submit boundary maps and descriptions to

the Arizona and Utah BLM state offices for

review and approval. This task wil! be done in

cooperation with the Cedar City District and

will be submitted with the final Wilderness

Management Plan. See Part lV, Administration

section.

BLM will take appropriate measures, which could Completed Area Managers
range from signs to physical barriers, to

eliminate access on roads and ways closed by

wilderness designation. See Part lV,

Administration section.

26


APPENDIX F

LIST OF PLAN AND EA PARTICIPANTS

NAME POSITION ROLE
Jacksen G. Johnson Natural Resource Specialist Plan writer
George W. Cropper Shivwits Area Manager EA writer
Kenneth C. Moore Planning and Environmental Coordinator EA writer
Willtam Booker Outdoor Recreation Planner Reviewer
Timothy A. Duck Wildlife Managemen Biologist Reviewer
Charles Pregler Wildlife Management Biologist Reviewer
Evelyn Booker Volunteer Art Work
Kenneth G. Beckstrom Supervisory Range Conservationist Reviewer
L.D. Walker Range Conservationist Reviewer
John Ash Range Conservationist Reviewer
Garl Gossard Range Conservationist Reviewer
Robert Abbey Outdoor Recreation Planner Reviewer
Jane Closson Writer-Editor Reviewer
Keith Pearson Sociologist/Planner Reviewer
Toni Gardner Secretary Typing
Von Swain Assistant District Manager for Resources Reviewer
Larry Royer Outdoor Recreation Specialist Reviewer
Frank Rowley Dixie Area Manager Reviewer
Ray Mapston Associate District Manager Reviewer
Larry Lee Outdoor Recreation Planner Reviewer
Julian Anderson Assistant District Manager for Resources Reviewer
Gurtis Warrick Wildlife Management Biologist Reviewer
Robert Smith Natural Resource Specialist Reviewer
Elved Williams Realty Specialist Reviewer
Richard Malcomson Archaeologist Reviewer
Dan McGlothlin Hydrologist Reviewer
George Ramey Range Conservationist Reviewer
vim Currivan Wildermess Program Leader Reviewer
Sue Richardson Wildermess Program Leader Reviewer



PART Il

WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT DIRECTION

WILDERNESS PHILOSOPHY

The plan‘s introduction describes an area of
marked elevation changes, resulting in several life
zones from Mohave desert to Ponderosa pine.

This largely undisturbed area provides numer-
ous opportunities for experiencing solitude, natu-
rainess and mental and physical challenge. Addi-
tionally, a variety of other uses from grazing and
mining toscientific study take place. This plan pro-
vides management objectives and policies that
seek to maintain or enhance existing wilderness
qualities while effectively managing the various
uses in conformance with the Wilderness Act of
1964, the Arizona Wilderness Act and the Federal
Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA).
These congressional mandates contain three con-
cepts which form the basis for the BLM’s Wilder-
ness Management Policy.

The Wilderness Preservation
Concept

Congress has directed the BLM to perpetuate
the wilderness resource by managing designated
wilderness areas so that their wilderness charac-
ter is preserved unimpaired.

The Wilderness Use Concept

Congress has directed the BLM to provide
opportunities for the public to use designated
wilderness areas for recreational, scenic, scien-
tific, educational, conservation and_ historical
purposes in a manner so as to leave the wilder-
ness area unimpaired for future use and enjoy-
ment as wilderness.

The Nonconforming Use Concept

Congress has directed the BLM to accom-
modate in wilderness areas certain activities,
existing uses and private rights which are gener-

ally nonconforming to wilderness preservation
and wilderness use. The BLM must manage these
uses so as to prevent or minimize impact to the
area’s wilderness qualities while allowing the hold-
ers to exercise their lega! rights. As on nonwilder-
ness public lands, some of the nonconforming but
accepted uses may be restricted or excluded
where particularly sensitive values occur or where
the public interest would be better served by res-
tricting or excluding them.

WILDERNESS GOALS

In addition, wilderness management goals have
been established to obtain bureauwide consis-
tency in the BLM wilderness management pro-
gram. The following goals apply to atl BLM-
administered wilderness areas (BLM Manual
8560):

The first goat is to provide for the longterm
protection and preservation of the area’s wilder-
nesscharacter undera principal of nondegrada-
tion. The area's natural condition, opportuni-
ties for solitude, opportunities for primitive and
unconfined types of recreation and any ecolog-
ical, geological or other features of scientific,
educational, scenic or historical value will be
managed so that they will remain unimpaired.

The second goal is to manage the wilderness
area for the use and enjoyment of visitors in a
manner that will leave the area unimpaired for
future use and enjoyment as a wilderness. The
wilderness resource will be dominantin all man-
agement decisions where a choice must be
made between preservation of wilderness char-
acter and visitor use.

The third goal is to manage the area using the
minimum tool, equipment or structures neces-
sary to successfully, safely and economically
accomplish the objective. The chosen tool,
equipment or structure should be the one that
least degrades wilderness values temporarily or
permanently. Management will seek to preserve
spontaneity of use and as much freedom from
regulation as possible.


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Assumptions

Routine inspections can be accomplished
either without motorized vehicles or by driving
along existing open roadways.

Some maintenance may require the entry of
motorized vehicles and/or equipment into the wil
derness atong the powerline right-of-way and
[-15,

if the Arizona Strip District recommendation on
the Virgin Gorge Scenic Withdrawal is accepted,
there will be no effect on wilderness.

Management Policies

Existing ROWs wil! be allowed to continue sub-
ject to mitigation to protect the wilderness
resource. BLM will monitor all ROWs to ensure
compliance with wilderness policies.

Use of motorized vehicles or equipmentfornon-
emergency maintenance in connection with
ROWs must be analyzed by an EA and approved
by the authorized officer prior to operations.

The BLM wil} negotiate acquisition of the pri-
vate inholding through direct purchase or land
exchange.

Acquisition of Utah state tand within wilderness
will be pursed through the exchange process.

Management Actions

The BLM has notified all ROW permittees of the
change in land status and is coordinating with
these permittees on maintenance needs and use
of motorized vehicles or equipment.

The BLM will contact the owner of the private
inholding to initiate exchange or purchase propos-
als.

BLM has contacted the state of Utah and an
exchange is in progress for state lands in wilder-
ness.

Water

Management Objective

Water resources and water rights will be mon-
itored and managed to preserve the present nat-
ural flow and quality and to prevent human-
caused contamination.

W

Current Situation and Assumptions

Current Situation

The known waters in this area are the Virgin
River, fifty-two springs or seeps, two wells and
three stockponds. All of them are on public land.
Seven springs and the three stockponds have Ari-
zona State water rights filings heid by individuai
users. The two wells, owned by the Arizona State
Department of Transportation, are not in wilder-
ness but are sources of drinking water for recrea-
tionists. One is presently unused and the other
provides water to the rest stop and the BLM camp-
ground.

The Virgin River is the primary drainage for the
area and is intermittent through part of the area
just above “The Narrows,” sometimes becoming
dry during the early summer months. Spring run-
off can result in flows of several hundred cubic
feet per second (cfs) for a short period in March
and April or after summer thunderstorms. Peren-
nial flow occurs within “The Narrows” duetoemer-
gence of severa! springs in or adjacent to the
riverbed. Some have been buried by the freeway
construction, but appear to provide subsurface
flow into the river. The Virgin River is normally tur-
bid with large amounts of suspended sediments
and high total dissoived solids. Continued normai
flow is considered to be an important wilderness
value.

Water Quality

Virgin River. Due to high total dissolved solids and
suspended sediments plus possible contami-
nants or pollutants from the upper inhabited
watershed, the water is unsafe for human con-
sumption.

Cedar Pockets Well. Located at and providing
water for the rest stop and BLM campground is
a good maintained potable water source available
to those entering the nearby wilderness areas.

Beaver Dam Area. There are no known seeps or
springs in this area.

Paiute Area. Ail of the seeps and springs are in
this portion of the wilderness area. Information


APPENDIX C

appropriate initial attack forces aHd suppression
costs will be charged to Fire Suppression Funds
(4620).

The Minimum Tool Concept will be used iH the
suppression of fires in the Wilderness Ateds.
Priority will be given to methods that least disturb
natural features. These include handcrews and
engines operating from wilderness boundary.
roads. If these resources can not handle the fire
the next resource consideration will be the use of
aircraft including both retardent planes and heli-
copters using water bucket drops. The use of mo-
torized vehicles and aircraft in the wilderness
areas requires approval by the District Manager
(except under urgent situations; in which the Inci-
dent Commander will make the decision), Power
saws may be used in the wilderness areas as
deemed necessary. Any suppression action
involving motorized equipment occuring in the
wilderness areas will be documented and made
part of the Wilderness Management File.

2. Declare the Fire a Prescribed
Natural Fire

If the decision is made to declare the fire a pre-
scribed natural fire the following actions will be
taken:

a. The District Manager will assign a Pre-
scribed Fire Manager for fires that are
approaching five acres in size. During the
months from May 1 to August 31 the initial
Job of the prescribed fire manager will be to
establish a perimeter of approximately 50
acres utilizing existing barriers wherever pos-
sible, Any remaining perimeter will be con-
structed using handtools. He/she will then
be responsible to monitor the fire as outlined
in the Monitoring and Documentation sec-
tion that follows. During the months from
Sept. 1 to April 30 no perimeter construction
will be required but may be used as condi-
tions dictate.

b. Fires smaller than five acres in size can be
monitored periodically from the air. Observa-
tions made from the air will be recorded each
time a fly-over is made of the fire. In the case
of multiple fires, observations will be docu-
mented for each specific fire.

c. The Logistics Coordinator will notify the Ari-
zona BLM State Office that we have a pre-
scribed natural fire in progress. Daily
updates of the fire will be submitted on the
daily fire situation report.

d. The Logistics Coordinator will notify the Ari-
zona State Land Department of the fire and

54

will implement the smoke management por-
tion of this plan.

e. Surrounding agencies will be notified of the
prescribed natural fire in progress. These
agencies include:

Kaibab National Forest
Grand Canyon National Park
Lake Mead National Recreation Area
Dixie National Forest

Cedar City District BLM
Truxton Canyon Agency BIA
Las Vegas District BLM
Washington County Sheriff
Mohave County Sheriff

St. George Police Dept.

Port of Entry

Mesquite Police Dept.

f. The District Public Affairs Officer will pre-
pare a news release on the prescribed natu-
ral fire in progress and release it to normal
news media channels.

g. The maximum number of prescribed natural
fires that will be allowed on the district at any
one time is limited to 5 fires larger than 10
acres in size. Totally, these prescribed natu-
ral fires will not exceed 500 acres at any one
time. The maximum fire size that will be
allowed in the Paiute or Beaver Dam Wilder-
ness areas will be 50 acres. No fire will be
allowed to burn for more than 10 days. Re-
gardless of size, any prescribed naturat fire
that is burning after 10 days will be con-
tained within a fireline and extinguished.

3. Management Constraints

a. The fire management officer will prepare a
contingency plan when there is prescribed
natural fire activity to assure the number or
area of live fire is within the District's capac-
ity to manage. The contingency plan will be
updated as changes in fire numbers or size
changes. The Arizona State Office will keep
the District notified of Regional! or National
fire situations that could draw suppression
forces from the district and impose con-
straints on prescribed natural fires.

b. Inthe event of a prescribed natural fire going
out of prescription the Prescribed Fire Man-
ager in conjunction with the District FMO
and the Shivwits Area Manager will evaluate
the situation and determine if the fire will be
allowed to burn to the 50 acre perimeter. If
the decision is made to suppress the fire
inside the 50 acre perimeter suppression
costs will be charged to the benefitting sub-


APPENDIX E

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROCESS

During theweek of October 7, 1985, publicscop-
ing meetings were held in St. George, Utah and
Kingman, Phoenixand Flagstaff, Arizona. Thepur-
pose of the meetings were to assist the BLM in
identifying issues and concerns about how the wil-
derness area should be managed. Other com-
ments were welcomed during the scoping period,
including personal contacts and letters.

A few of the major concerns and suggestions
were as follows:

1. Keep signs out of the wilderness area.

2. Establish a monitoring system to help deter-
mine impacts and overuse of the wilderness
early.

3. Allow wildfires to burn unless fife, private
property, or critical wilderness values are
threatened.

61

4. Allow reestablishment of native species that
have disappeared as a result of human
actions.

5. Allow use of motorized equipment for main-
tenance of nonconforming but accepted uses
only after this has been determined to be the
minimum tool.

The Arizona Strip District Advisory Council has
also provided valuable information.

The draft management plan was sent out for a
45-day review period to those on the District's
mailing list who have shown interest in manage-
ment of wilderness. After this comment period,
the final document was corrected and published.


APPENDIX A

TABLE 4

COMPARISON CHART OF IMPACTS
Bureau of Land Management, Arizona Strip District

Wilderness Elements

Wilderness Quality
Emphasis Alternative

Proposed
Action
Alternative

Wildemess
Quality Maintenance

ADMINISTRATION

Motorized vehicle or
equipment use in non-
emergency situations
for administrative
Purposes

Limits of Acceptable
Change Monitoring
Process

Signing

Management Unit
Concept

Aircraft Use (BLM and
Other Agencies)

Abandoned Improvements/
Disturbed Sites

No violations of soli-
tide. Soil and vege-
tation not subject to
compaction or distur-
bance. Natural heal-
ing of access routes
as fast as naturally
possibie,

Same as proposed
action.

Same as proposed
action.

Same as proposed
action,

No compromise of sol-
itude. Loss of
potential benefits
described in proposed
action.

Greater naturalness
over long term, but
also greater short
term losses of soli-
tude from motorized
equipment.

34

Number of trips and
access routes used sub-
stantially less than
pre-wilderness condi-
tion with commensurate
reduction in soil com-
paction, vegetation
damage, and improved
solitude, Natural
healing of used routes
at a moderate rate,

but never complete
healing. Unused

routes heal as fast as
naturally possible.

Protection and improve-
ment of natural values
accelerated from pre-
wilderness condition.

More signs than the
pre-wilderness con-
dition could detract
from naturalness and
solitude, but provide
Protection to wilder-
ness values.

More precision in
management direction
for different parts

of the wilderness
areas,

Some disturbance of
solitude and natural-
ness, but less than
pre-wilderness condi-
tion. Benefits to big-
horn sheep management,
wilderness value pro-
tection from wildfire

or improvement removal.

Long term benefits to
naturainess. Short
term loss of solitude
during removal! or re-
moval rehabilitation
operations.

Number of trips and
access routes used some-
what less than pre-wild-
erness with soil compac-
tion and vegetation
damage on used routes.
Healing on a few unused
routes as rapid as
naturally possible.

Some possible protec-
tion or improvement
forgone from lack of
monitoring plan and
attendant baseline and
trend information.

Substantially more
signs than the pre-
wilderness condition

to detract from solitude
and naturalness. Signs
could provide wilderness
protection, public

safety and convenience.

Benefits of more detail-
ed management direction
forgone. Latitude for
decision on 4 case-by-
case basis may cause
loss in management
consistency.

Less disturbance of
solitude than pre-
wilderness situation,
but more than proposed
action. Benefits to

fire control and bighorn
sheep management.

Stow improvement in
naturalness from pre-
wilderness. No loss

of solitude from removal
operations.


APPENDIX A

TABLE 4 (Continued)
COMPARISON CHART OF IMPACTS

Proposed Wiiderness
Wilderness Quality Action Quality Maintenance
Wilderness Elements Emphasis Alternative Alternative
RECREATION.

Trail Management

Trailheads/Parking

GRAZING MANAGEMENT
Management Planning

New Improvements

Range Improvement
Inspection and
Maintenance

WILDLIFE

Riparian Habitat
Monitoring

Accelerated improve-
ment in naturainess.
Possible negative
impacts to livestock
movements and visitor
convenience and safety.

Insignificant negative
impacts to visitor
convenience. Mainte-
nance of pre-wiiderness
natural condition.

Same as proposed
action except ecosystem
improvement over a
longer term, Greater
management efforts
and social/economic
impacts on ranchers
over pre-wilderness
condition.

No new improvements.
Solitude and naturai-
ness maintained,

Same as proposed
action.

Same as proposed
action.

Natural trail healing.
Less impacts to soli-
tude and naturainess.
Some risks in visitor
safety on unmaintained
trails,

Some negative impact
to wilderness areas

and some unnaturalness
on adjacent lands by
parking and trailhead
facilities. Visitor
convenience improved
slightly.

Overall improvement in
natural ecosystem over
pre-wilderness con-
ditions by improved
grazing management.

New improvements con-
sidered that meet
Congressional guide-
lines, No new grazing
management improvements
considered in Manage-
ment Units 1 and 2,
Some losses of solitude
and naturalness in
trade-off for improve-
ment in natural eco-
system conditions.

Site-specific EAs to
be prepared independ-
ently from this docu-
ment.

Data coliected used to
direct management
actions. Any resultant
management changes may
improve ecosystems and
could be to the detri-

ment of livestock

grazing.

35

Naturalness the same

as pre-wilderness con-
dition. Solitude dis-
rupted during mainte-
nance operations. Added
visitor safety.

Visitor convenience im-
proved Over pre-wilder-
ness condition. Some
loss of naturainess on
both wilderness and non-
wilderness lands.

More rapid and effective
improvement in ecosystem
over pre-wilderness con-
ditions. Would present
greater need for new
range improvements.

New improvements con-
sidered that meet Con-
gressional guidelines in
greater magnitude than
proposed action. No

new grazing management
improvements considered
in Management Units 1
and 2. Potentially more
rapid and significant
ecosystem improvements
in trade-off for greater
losses in solitude and
naturatness.

Same as proposed
action.

Possible forfeiture

of management decision
data with possible less
than desirable riparian
ecosystem management.


APPENDIX B

Atany point in this process, the authorized offi-
cer will consider ail information available at that
point to approve or deny proposals for emergency
motorized use to protect life or property. Consid-
erations will include validity of the emergency and
potential impacts to wilderness values.

Proposed use of vehicles for ali purposes (live-
stock management, improvement inspection or
maintenance) will be considered in totai prior to
approval and trips combined where practicable to
minimize the overall amount of vehicle use.

All inventories, lists analysis, EAs, DRs, moni-
toring and compliance files will be availabie for
public review on request.

The range improvements known to exist in the
Paiute and Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness

Areas and to be analyzed under these procedures
include:

Number of Spring Developments 31.0
Miles of Pipeline 7.0
Mile of Livestock Fence 59.3
Number of Reservoirs 12.0
Number of Corrals 11.0
Miles Livestock or Truck Trails 26.5
Number of Water Catchments 4.0
Number of Cabins 3.0
Acres of Land Treatment

(burning, chaining, seeding) 3,275.0
Miles of Diversion Ditch 1.0
Number of Water Hau! Tank Sites 4.0

50


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Management Actions

The visual resource, including air quality, in the
Virgin Gorge will be monitored and appropriate
action taken to protect it.

Wilderness information willbe posted on thedis-
play boardsatthe Virgin River Campground. infor-
mation will include maps, general descriptions,
and minimum impact camping techniques.

The gate for the corral access road east of the
rest stop will be reinforced and locked to prevent
unauthorized motor vehicle use. Uses will be
predetermined in accordance with Appendix 8
Procedures for maintenance plans.

Black Rock Unit

Management Objective and Rationale

The objectives for this unit are to maintain or
enhance opportunities for wilderness oriented
recreation and to provide good to excellent mule
deer habitat.

This area of mountain shrubs, gambel oak
thickets and ponderosa pine is important summer
mule deer range. The Black Rock road, desig-
nated to remain open, provides access for hunt-
ers, campers and sightseers. Some of the nu-
merous spur roads, now closed to vehicle travel,
can serve as trails but wil! need to be blocked off
to prevent vehicle violations. Existing unimproved
trailheads for getting into the Sullivan Canyon
area are also in this unit.

The Black Rock HMP calls for mule deer habitat
management through water catchments and
small prescribed burs to improve browse condi-
tions in the gambel oak and mountain shrub
areas. Three water catchments have been in-
stalled with another proposed along the crest of
the Virgin Mountains. Other catchments may be
proposed in the future.

Management Policies

All proposed activities must be consistent with
the intent of wilderness designation.

Existing roads or ways, now closed to vehicles,
will be blocked by appropriate means. Physical
barriers should be unobtrusive and the minimum
necessary to prevent access.

23

Wildlife habitat management proposals such as
catchmenis or prescribed burns will be analyzed
for wilderness compatibility or enhancement
through the EA process. Prescribed burning may
be done only for the following purposes:

- Itis needed to maintain the natural condition
of a fire-dependent ecosystem or to reintro-
duce fire where past strict wildfire contro!
measures have interfered with natural eco!og-
ical processes.

- It will sustain a primary value of a given wilder-
ness.

- It will promote the perpetuation of a threat-
ened or endangered species.

BLM will provide information to deer hunters
each year concerning wilderness boundaries,
closed roads and campsites. Camping outside the
wilderness will be emphasized.

Management Actions

Campsites in the wilderness will be analyzed to
determine if they are compatible with wilderness.

BLM wil! inventory spur roads and ways and
determine appropriate vehicle barriers.

A hunter information station will be set up each
year two days prior to opening day of the deer
hunt.

Sullivan Canyon Unit

Management Objective and Rationale

The unit objective is to provide opportunities
for solitude and primitive and unconfined recre-
ation with a minimum of regulation.

This area is the “inner core” of the Paiute Wil-
derness. Remote, with little evidence of human
intrusion, it provides excellent opportunities for
wilderness oriented recreation. Access is pro-
vided at the head of the canyon by an old bull-
dozer trail and at the bottom by hiking from the
Virgin River Campground. This tower access
point is limited to certain times of the year be-
cause of the necessity of fording the Virgin River.
A few springs in the upper part of the canyon pro-
vide water but the greater portion is quite dry.


APPENDIX C

2. NFDRS Fuel Model F

Fuel Model F represents mature closed chamise
stands and oakbrush fields of Arizona, Utah, and
Colorado. It also applies to young, closed stands
and mature, open stands of California mixed chap-
arral. Open stands of pinyon-juniper are repre-
sented; however, fire activity will be overrated at
low windspeeds and where there is sparse ground
fuels.

a. Prescription

The following prescription criteria will be
used for fuel Model F.

Temperature < 85
Minimum Relative Humidity > 10%

10 Hr. Fuel Moisture > 5%

20 Ft. Windspeed < 15 mph

Three of the four criteria must be met before
the fire is considered to be in prescription.
This information will be gathered from the
Tweedy RAWS station and corrected for ele-
vation. If ground monitors are dispatched to
a fire in this fuel type, weather observations
will be made on site.

3. Unclassified Pinyon-Juniper

This includes those areas of Pinyon-Juniper
where there is not enough of an understory to
carry surface fires. The prescription for these
areas is the same as for fuel model F.

4. Unclassified Mohave Desert Type

This includes the Mohave Desert Shrub type.
There are not enough fine fuels present to carry
a fire. This type will have to be watched closely
overtime to determine if annual grasses are invad-
ing the area. These grasses can produce in
enough abundance to provide a fuel source for
fires. If this happens, it will be necessary to
reevaluate the suppression strategy for this type.
The suppression strategy for fires in this vegeta-
tion type will be observation.

B. Action Following the Report of
an Ignition
immediately following the report of a lightning

fire within either of the wilderness areas the Area
Manager or his designated Wilderness Resource

Advisor along with the District Fire Management
Officer or Fire Control Officer will fly aerial recon-
naisance over the fire and make a recommenda-
tion as to the type of action to be taken. The Dis-
trict Logistics Coordinator will advise the
reconnaisance personnel of the current weather
conditions and will assign a fire number to be
used until a decision is made on the type of action
to be taken. The District Manager, or his desig-
nated representative, will make the decision as to
what action will be followed. If a fire appears that
it will be of significance a Wilderness Resource
Advisor will be immediately dispatched to the fire
to provide guideance to the Incident Commander
on Wilderness considerations in the supression
effort. A decision matrix {attached} will be used
to help make this decision. The decision matrix
will be reviewed daily to ensure that alt items are
considered on a daily basis. The Decision Matrix
is set up so that the first decision that must be
made is the fuel type that is burning and which
matrix to follow. This decision will be made as fol-
lows:

—Fuel Model C— This is the model used for the
Ponderosa Pine stands on top of Black Rock
Mountain. The principal fuel carrying a fire in this
type fs grass and needie cast. Under the prescrip-
tion outlined above, the fire will not involve the
trees for the most part. if a fire is determined to
be located in this fuel type page 57 of the decision
matrix will be used as a guide as to whether to
call the fire a prescribed natural fire or to supress
the fire.

—Fuel Model F— Fuei mode! F applies to the
stands of oakbrush and other chapparal vegeta-
tion as well as the more dense stands of Pinon-
Juniper. Ifa fire is determined to be located in this
type page 58 of the decision matrix will be used
as a guide as to whether to call the fire a pre-
scribed natural fire or supress it.

—Unclassified Pinon-Juniper and Mohave Desert
Types— There are not enough ground fuels in
these types to carry fire. If a fire is determined to
be located in these fuel types it will be observed
until it goes out on it’s own. For the most part fires
in these types will be limited to individual trees or
shrubs with no potential for spread.

1. Suppress the Fire

Should the fire appear to need suppression
action the Logistics Coordinator will dispatch the


Pat ee



TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART 1. - INTRODUCTION
Organization of the Plan .
Purpose of the Plan....
Location and Description.
Significant History ...
General Management Situation

PART Il. - WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT DIRECTION .
Wilderness Philosophy .
Wilderness Goals ....

PART Hl. - MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

PART iV. - WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM .
Genera! Objectives for All Elements
Administration
Recreation ....
Grazing Management
Wildlife ...
Minerals ..
Cultural Resources
Lands and Realty

Wildfire 2.0... ee cece cence eee eens
Insects, Disease and Noxious Plants
Information and Education........
Scientific Study ............
Specific Unit Management Objectives
West Virgin Unit............006+
Virgin Gorge Unit
Black Rock Unit....
Sullivan Canyon Unit.
Coves Unit... cece cece eee reeee

PART V. - IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCE...................00000e

NKHABA A

won


APPENDIX A

of rocks and vegetation, leveling, and if neces-
sary, graveling. By providing parking areas at des-
ignated trailneads outside the wilderness impacts
would be negligible. This alternative is not justi-
fied by current levels of trailhead or parking use.

Grazing Management
Management Planning

Proposed Action Alternative

Incorporating wilderness constraints into
AMPs (existing or new) and licenses would
effectively manage grazing and notify users of
what may and may not be aitowed in wilderness
areas in connection with their grazing operation.
This would result in beneficial impacts to wilder-
ness character over prewilderness conditions by
avoiding improper grazing or vehicle use activi-
ties.

Continuing to upgrade grazing management
intensities would slowly improve naturalness with
trends toward more natural ecosystems with a
minimum of impacts caused by new improve-
ments. Any new improvements, although .min-
imal, would intrude on naturalness, solitude and
pristine conditions.

Wildemess Quality Emphasis Alternative

Impacts would be the same as the Proposed
Action Alternative except that this scenario relies
on less intensive management techniques than
normally expected inan AMP. Newimprovements.
would not be constructed to implement more
intense grazing systems. Techniques would
require greater livestock control with existing
improvements, adjusting seasons of use or
numbers of livestock to effect improvements in
ecological conditions.

This aiternative would require significantly
greater management effort from livestock users
and require a longer term than the proposed
action to show significant environmental
changes.

There would be less intrusion on wilderness
values from construction and existence of
improvements creating a beneficial impact.

42

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Alternative

incorporating wilderness management con-
straints into existing or new AMPs {and licenses
pending new AMPs) would prevent inadvertent
misuse of wilderness by grazing operators.

New AMPs envisioned under this alternative
would require expenditures and management
effort of permittees and require additional range
improvements to implement. These range
improvements would create negative impacts on
wilderness values and detract from naturalness
and pristine conditions.

The ecosystems in these WAs are largely shrub,
brush and pinyon-juniper dominated. More
intense grazing management would provide pos-
itive impacts by slightly improving diversity in spe-
cies and overall vegetation abundance. These
changes would be slow and wouid not be signif-
icant in the short term.

New Range improvements

Proposed Action Alternative

This alternative would allow a few new improve-
ments to enhance resource protection and also
wilderness quality values. An example would be
fencing off riparian areas or other grazing concen-
trations to enhance wildlife or visitor uses.

Each proposal would be evaiuated in a site-
specific EA and minimum tool review on a case-
by-case basis.

Wilderness Quality Emphasis Alternative

By not allowing new improvements there would
not be any additional man-made intrusions on
naturalness or solitude. Some opportunities for
positive impacts to ecological conditions, water
and wildlife would be foregone if no improve-
ments were implemented.

Wildemess Quality Maintenance Alternative

This alternative would provide opportunities to
consider more new improvements than the Pro-
posed Action Alternative. Each proposal would be
reviewed by a site-specific EA and minimum tool
review.


, APPENDIX A

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Alternative

This alternative does not propose a manage-
ment unit concept. Management would have the
same direction throughout both WAs foregoing
the benefits of more detailed management direc-
tion.

No significant impacts to environmental com-
ponents are expected.

Aircraft Use (Nonemergency)

Proposed Action Alternative

The AGFD uses aircraft in managing bighorn °

sheep and mule deer herds to determine popula-
tion, location and other data as well as to track
or retrieve radio collars from bighorn sheep. Heli-
copters could also be useful to release additional
sheep into the Virgin Mountains to supplement
the existing herd.

BLM may have occasional need for administra-
tive aircraft use including infrequent landings at
Black Rock helispot for such things as ferrying
maintenance materials or removal of abandoned
improvement material. Another potential use may
be eventual removal of the bighorn sheep encio-
sure.

Other individuals or agencies could have legit-
imate tow level or landing uses not yet identified.

The AGFD needs that involve low level flights
but not landings would be identified in advance
and receive minimum tool criteria review and min-
imized wheré practicable. AGFD proposed land-
ings, all BLM uses and other presently unidenti-
fied uses would be analyzed in a case-by-case EA
that includes minimum tool review.

Low level aircraft flights for wildlife monitoring
have both beneficial and detrimental impacts.
Healthy wildlife populations add wilderness eco-
system diversity, sightseeing and hunting oppor-
tunities. Aircraft can frighten and disrupt normal
behavior for both livestock and wildlife.

Solitude and naturalness are compromised for
wilderness visitors by the noise and sight of
aircraft.

The {evels of use and impacts would be less
than the prewilderness situation.

Emergency aircraft uses for human safety, and
fire control to protect wilderness and adjacent
nonwilderness lands are approved or disap-
proved on a case-by-case basis by the authorized
officer. This could include using Black Rock

helispot to preposition fire personnel during high
danger periods which affects humans and ani-
mals with unnatural sight and sounds.

Wilderness Quallty Emphasis Alternative

Under this alternative impacts from fandings
would be eliminated. Low level aircraft use would
be infrequent and if it occurs, could be timed to
least interfere with visitor uses. The potential for
some impacts to solitude, naturainess and visitor
experience remain but at a much lower level than
prior to wilderness designation.

If low level flights are discouraged and landings
prohibited, Game and Fish agencies (whose use
potential is the greatest) would not be able to land
to determine mortality causes or fly low to locate
collared sheep creating a negative impact on big-
horn sheep management.

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Alternative

Under this alternative, flights and landings
would be less than the prewilderness condition.
This level of flights and landings would have mod-
erate impacts to wilderness visitors including
losses of solitude, naturalness and possibly
annoyance. These impacts would be slightly less
than the prewilderness condition.

It would contribute only slightly to overall effi-
ciency in management compared to the Proposed
Action Alternative.

Abandoned Improvements and
Disturbed Sites

Proposed Action Alternative

Selected abandoned improvements would be
removed based on accessibility and degree of
unnaturalness. Any resulting disturbance would
be rehabilitated. Implementation of this alterna-
tive would provide short term trade-offs for long
term wilderness benefits. In the short term, use of
motorized vehicles or in extreme cases infrequent
helicopter Jandings or heavy equipment to
remove unnatural structures or rehabilitate dam-
aged sites may be traded for the tong term ben-
efits of naturalness, and lack of man-made fea-
tures. Use of the minimum tool and removing only
selected features based on accessibility and
degree of unnaturafness should minimize equip-
ment use while stili providing some wiiderness
enhancement.


APPENDIX G

GLOSSARY

ACTIVE PREFERENCE {GRAZING). The total animal unit
months {AUMs) that a livestock operation or allotment
is authorized to use in a year. Also referred to as Qual-
ifications.

ACTIVE NONUSE (GRAZING). The active grazing prefer-
ence not used or paid for by an operation during a year.
Active nonuse and active use equal active grazing pref-
erence or qualifications.

ACTIVE USE (GRAZING). The number of AUMs that a live-
stock operation actually uses and pays for during a year.

ALLOTMENT. A land area where one or more operators graze
their livestock. It ganeraily consists of public fand but
may include parcels of private and state-owned lands.
The number of livestock and season of use are stipulated
for each allotment. An allotment may consist of one or
several pastures.

ALLOTMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN {AMP}. A livestock graz-
ing management plan for a specific allotment, based on
multiple-use resource management objectives, The AMP
considers livestock grazing in relation to other uses of
the range and in relation to renewable resources-wa-
tershed, vegetation, and wildlife. An AMP establishes the
seasons of use, the number of livestock to be permitted
‘on the range and the rangeland developments needed.

ANIMAL UNIT (AU). Considered to be the forage required for
‘one. mature (1,000 pound) cow or the equivalent based
upon average daily forage consumption of 26 pounds dry
matter per day (Range Term Glossary Committee, 1974).

ANIMAL UNIT MONTH (AUM). The amount of forage neces-
sary for the sustenance of one cow or its equivalent for
4 month.

CARRYING CAPACITY (RECREATION). The maximum
number of people at one time that an area or facility can
accommodate without impairing the natural, cultural or
developed resource.

CULTURAL RESOURCES, Those fragile and nonrenewable
remains of human activities, occupations and endeavors
as refiected in sites, buildings, structuras or objects,
including works of art, architecture and engineering. Cul-
tural resources are commonly discussed as prehistoric
and historic values, but each period represents a part of
the tull continuum of cultura! values from the earliest to
the most recent,

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS. Impacts occurring as a result of a
succession of activities over a period of time.

ENDANGERED ANIMAL SPECIES. Any species in danger of
extinction throughout ail or a significant portion of its
range. This definition excludes species of insects that
the Secretary of the Interior determines to be pests and
whose protection under the Endangered Species Act of
1973 would present an overwhelming and overriding risk
to humans,

65

ENDANGERED PLANT SPECIES. Species of plants in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant por-
tion of their ranges. Existence may be endangered
because of the destruction, drastic change or severe cur-
tailment of habitat or because of overexpioitation, dis-
ease, predation or even unknown reasons. Plant taxa
from very limited areas, e.g., the type localities only, or
from restricted fragile habitats usually are considered en-
dangered. See also Threatened Plant Species.

EPHEMERAL STREAM. A stream that flows only briefly after
a storm or during snowmelt. See Perennial Stream,

HABITAT. A specific set of physical conditions that surround
the single species, a group of species or a farge commu-
nity. in wildlife management, the major components of
habitat are considered to be food, water, cover and living
space.

HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN (HMP)}. A written and offi-
cially approved plan for a specific geographical area of
public tand that identifies wildlite habitat and related
objectives, establishes the sequence of actions for
achieving objectives, and outlines procedures for evalu-
ating accomplishments.

LIMITS OF ACCEPTABLE CHANGE {LAC). The amount of
human-caused change to biophysical or social compo-
nents which is tolerable without the loss of desired wil-
demess conditions.

LIVESTOCK OPERATOR. An individual, family, corporation
or other entity that runs a livestock operation. An oper-
ator may have a single allotment, more than one allot-
ment, or a portion of an allotment,

MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK PLAN (MFP). A land use plan
for public lands that provides a set of goals and con-
straints for a specific planning area to guide the devel-
opment of detailed plans for the management of each re-
source.

MECHANIZED EQUIPMENT. “Mechanized equipment”
means any machine activated by a nonliving power
source, except small batlery-powered, handcarried
devices such as flashlights, shavers, Geiger counters
and cameras.

MOTOR VEHICLES. “Motor vehicle” means any vehicle
which is self-propelled or any vehicle which is propelled
by electric power obtained from batteries. For wilderness
purposes “mountain bikes” are included in this defini-
tion,

MULTIPLE USE. “...the management of the public lands and
their various resource values so that they are utilized in
the combination that will best meet the present and
future needs of the American people; making the most
judicious use of the land for some or atl of these
resources or related services over areas large enough to
provide sufficient latitude for periodic adjustments in use
to conform to changing needs and conditions; the use
of some land for less than all of the resources; a


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

during this period. There are three known put-in
or take-out points within the wilderness, one at
the Virgin River Campground and two others that
require parking in the I-15 highway right-of-way
and are somewhat dangerous because of the high~
way traffic. Boating activity is unregulated.

Assumptions

General nonhunting recreation use will
increase slightly in the near future (5-10 years).

Deer hunting will remain closed until deer pop-
ulations increase and resume again when popula-
tions are sufficient to allow hunting.

Increasing numbers of travelers on 1-16 will
have an opportunity to view the Virgin River
Gorge.

Commercial guiding for mountain lion will con-
tinue on a smail scale in the Black Rock area.

Commercial use will increase slightly if bighorn
sheep hunting becomes possible or if nonresi-
dents are allowed to guide for fions in Arizona.

Visitor exposure to natural environmental haz-
ards and lack of convenience is part of wilderness
recreation.

Noncommercial river running will continue and
a demand for commercial trips may develop.

Hunting pressure will increase slightly for small
game species due to the population growth in the
area, Big game hunting pressure will remain static
or move up slightly.

Hunting and trapping will be carried out in
accordance with state laws.

Management Policies

Regulation of recreation activities will be kept
toa minimum in order to provide wilderness expe-
rience opportunities.

New trails will not be constructed. Existing
trails will be maintained as needed based on level
of use. Trailheads may be maintained or improved
if necessary to protect wilderness resources. New
trailheads may also be developed to protect wil-
derness resources.

Signs within the wilderness will be the minimum
required to provide necessary information.

Commercial and private use of horses or other
pack stock will not be restricted unless potential
damage is indicated through monitoring.

10

Commercial use of the wilderness will be regu-
lated through the Special Recreation Permit pro-
cess. Appropriate stipulations to protect wilder-
ness values will be specified in the permits.

Management Actions

The Shivwits Resource Area will continue to set
up a hunter information station prior to the open-
ing day of deer season to provide information on
wilderness.

Existing trails and trailheads will be inventoried
and monitored to determine the need for mainte-
nance, improvement or new sites.

River running will be monitored to prevent any
resource damages.

Additional recreation policies and actions can
be found in the Sullivan Canyon, Black Rock, and
Virgin Gorge Management Unit sections of this
plan (Part !V, the Specific Unit Management
Objectives section).

Grazing Management

Management Objective

The objective is to allow grazing use to continue
at existing levels while preventing any adverse
impact on the wilderness resource.

Current Situation and Assumptions

Current Situation

There are presently 12 grazing allotments that
are partly or wholly within the Paiute-Beaver Dam
Mountains Wilderness Areas. Approximately
4,430 AUMs of active preference are within the
wilderness (see Table 1 for allotment breakdown).

The existing improvements in the wilderness
include fences, reservoirs, pipelines, developed
springs, corrals, livestock trails, roads, land
treatments and a cabin. Afso, 15 range study plots
are located within the wilderness. Of the 12
allotments involved, four are under intensive
management and eight receive maintenance level
management.

Vegetation types vary from Mohave desert to
Ponderosa pine with large areas covered with
mountain shrub and pinyon-juniper types.


APPENDIX C

V. NATURAL ROLE OF FIRE

Fire has tong been an important component of
the ponderosa pine ecosystem. The ponderosa
Pine is a very fire tolerant species. Before man
started suppressing fires in the pine type, lightsur-
face fires would periodically burn through the
understory. This reduced the buildup of ground
fuels, created natural fire breaks, created and
improved wildlife habitat and recycled important
nutrients back into the soil. The return interval of
these light surface fires is from 3 to 7 years. Years
of fire suppression has changed this situation.
Continued suppression of all starts could pro-
duce unnatural fuel buildups increasing the tike-
lihood of a catastrophic wildfire.

The pinyon-juniper vegetation type is not
greatly affected by fire. Much of the area in this
type does not contain enough surface fuel to
carry a fire and the trees are spaced far enough
apart so that fires cannot jump from tree to tree
except in the most extreme burning conditions.
Typically, fires in this type are isolated to one tree
or asmall group of trees. There are areas ( mainly
high elevation, easterly facing slopes) where
enough fuel is present to carry fires in this type.
The fire seral community that comes in is Moun-
tain Shrub.

The Mountain Shrub community is prone to
fires on a recurring basis. Many of the plant spe-
Cies in this type are prolific sprouters and recover
well from fire. In fact, keeping fires out of this type
causes it to become so dense that animal move-
ment through it is restricted. Periodic fires in this
type keep it open enough for wildlife to range
through it and enhances forage value of the plants
by keeping them young and succulent.

The Mohave Desert type does not have a fire
history because of the lack of ground fuels in this
type and the wide spacing of plants. There is only
potential for fires spreading if there is an under-
story of annual grasses. Fortunately this does not
occur in much if any of the wilderness areas at
the present time.

52

VI. PROPOSED DEGREE OF
SUPPRESSION

BLM policy states that fires occurring on public
lands are either wildfires or prescribed fires. The
BLM is responsible to suppress all wildfires on
public land. In order to allow naturally ignited
fires to burn on public lands, they must be desig-
nated as prescribed natural fires and a prescrip-
tion must be prepared before the fire starts. The
following action plan will outline fuel models and
associated prescriptions for each fuel type in
each wildemess, steps that will be taken upon the
report of an ignition, management constraints
and a section on how fires will be monitored.

A. Fuel Models and Prescriptions

There are two classified fuel types and two
unclassified fuel type in the two wilderness areas.

1. NFDRS Fuel Model C

Open ponderosa pine stands typify Model C
fuels. Perennial grasses and forbs are the primary
ground fuels but there is enough needle litter and
branchwood present to contribute significantly to
the fuel loading. Some brush and shrubs may be
present but they are of little consequence. Situa-
tions covered by Fuel Model C are open, long-
leaf, slash, ponderosa, Jeffrey and Sugar Pine
stands. Some pinyon-juniper stands may qualify.

a, Prescription

The following prescription criteria will be
used for fuel model C.

Temperature < 75
Minimum Relative Humidity > 20%
10 Hr. Fuel Moisture > 15%
1,000 Hr. Fuel Moisture > 20%
20 Ft. Windspeed < 10 mph
Live Fuel Moisture > 130%

Five of the six criteria outlined above must be
met before the fire is considered to be in pre-
scription. The weather information will be
obtained from the Tweedy Points Remote
Automated Weather Station (RAWS) and cor-
rected for elevation until personnel are on the
fire.


APPENDIX C

DECISION MATRIX (Fuel Model F & Unclassified)

Life or Property Threatened (YES) vom  Supress
(NO}

Boundary Threatened ~ (YES) -~ ~~ Supress
(NO)

Number of Prescribed Fires < 5 (NO) - “~~ Supress
(YES)

Smoke Management Favorable » (NO) ve Supress
(YES)

Prescription Criteria Met"
Temperature < 85
Minimum Relative Humidty > 10% = (NO) woe Supress
10 Hr. Fuel Moisture > 5%
20 Ft. Windspeed < 15 mph
(YES)

Current Weather Forecast Favorable ~-—-v----—-~ =
(YES)

a (NO) wren Suppress

Current Fire Behavior Favorable ~~ = " mer (NO) mmr Suppress:
{YES)

Ten Day Forecast Favorable “ (NO) wren Suppress
(YES)

Equipment/Personnel Available - ” w= (NO) ~  Supress
(YES)

Fire is Meeting Wilderness Objectives —— nn: (\|°) Ma Supress
(YES)

Fire is < 10 Days Old - z o (NO) wren onenne Supress
{YES}

Fire is < 50 Acres in Size " ” “ “— (NO oe —-  Supress
(YES)
MONITOR FIRE

Three of the four prescription criteria must be met to be considered in prescription.

58


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Annual coordination meetings will be held with
all affected grazing permittees to review and
update the maintenance plan.

Existing AMPs are being revised, when neces-
sary, to reflect wilderness management policies.
New AMPs will also incorporate these policies.

Wildlife

Management Objective

Wiidlife resource management will be con-
ducted to compiement wilderness values by man-
aging for an abundant and diversified native flora
and fauna in balance with the habitat.

Current Situation and Assumptions

Current Situation

Wildlife management in the Paiute-Beaver Dam
Wilderness Areas is guided by the Black Rock and
Virgin River-Pakoon Basin HMPs. In general,
these plans seek to enhance the quality and
quantity of habitat for all wildlife species. Several
species are given priority for habitat protection
and enhancement: They include three threatened
or endangered fishes, desert tortoise, peregrine
falcon, bighorn sheep and mule deer [see Tabie
2 for Threatened and Endangered Species
(T&E)}.

The Endangered Species Act of 1973 as
amended in 1982 directs management for the pro-
tection and recovery of T&E species. The Black
Rock HMP stresses enhancing mule deer habitat
and providing suitable bighorn sheep habitat. Sev-
eral wildlife water catchments and spring develop-
ments have been completed in connection with
these programs. Six water catchments, 5 spring
developments, a 700-acre enclosure and 2 fenced
riparian areas are in piace within the wilderness.
Specific policies and actions for bighorns and
mule deer will be presented in the West Virgin
Slope Unit, Virgin Gorge Unit and Black Rock
Unit sections of this plan (Part IV, the Specific
Unit Management Objectives section).

The wilderness contains approximately 3,500
acres of desert tortoise habitat, primarily in the
tower elevations of the West Virgin Slope and
Virgin Gorge Units. The tortoise is listed as a
threatened species.

12

Riparian communities associated with springs
or seeps are generally in good condition. Two wet
meadow areas at Sullivan Spring and Elbow Can-
yon are fenced to prevent livestock impact. Other
areas may be proposed for fencing in the future.
Riparian habitat along the Virgin River is made up
primarily of Tamerix (salt cedar) thickets.

Portions of the Virgin River are considered
habitat for the woundfin minnow (Piagopterus
argentissimus) and the Virgin River chub (Gila
robusta seminuda), which is federally listed as
threatened. However, according to the USFWS.
Woundfin Recovery Plan, woundfin numbers
have been greatly reduced in the stretch of river
that runs through the wilderness because the river
is intermittent due to irrigation diversions
upstream. The Virgin River spinedace (Lepi-
domeda m. moillispinus) are also listed by the state
of Arizona as being in jeopardy (see Table 2).

Assumptions

Diversity and abundance of wiidtife populations
will depend mainly on natural processes; how-
ever, minimal human influence may be necessary
with some species to promote viability and stabil-
ity in the population.

More upstream water contro} projects will be
proposed on the Virgin River system that may fur-
ther affect fish habitat in the wilderness.

Wiidlife managers will occasionally need motor-
ized vehicles and mechanized equipment for hab-
itat improvements, maintenance and other man-
agement activities.

Management Policies

Jurisdiction and responsibilities of the respec-
tive state agencies regarding the management
and protection of fish and wildlife species are not
changed by wilderness designation.

In coordination with the state agencies, BLM
will make habitat management recommendations
based on a need for protection of wilderness
resources.

Management will be directed toward long-term
goals of ensuring diversified natural levels of flora
and fauna.

Consultation with the USFWS is required if it is
found that a proposed management action may
have an impact on T&E species.


FINAL
WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT PLAN

PAIUTE AND BEAVER DAM MOUNTAINS
WILDERNESS

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Arizona Strip District — Arizona
Cedar City District — Utah
Shivwits and Dixie Resource Areas
Mohave County, Arizona and Washington County, Utah

June 1990
Recommended by Ze Ltd! LEP fponl. of Ys G9
Géorge w.[eropper, Area Manager date
Shivwits(Hesource Area, Arizona Strip District

Recommended by Ky. Lb, V2 zahy 2b hpi 90

Debbie J. Pidirzak, Area Manager
Dixie Resource Area, Cedar City District

at hae W

Recommended by Loy
Manager date

Arizona Strip District

Recommended wy Load S él Att) az y FO

Gordon R. Staker, District Manager date
Cedar City District

Approved by EK EAA ( aX lay, L203

Ze Engdahi, Acting State Director
Zane

Approved by; U Raber, I d I99D

James M. Parker, State Director . dat
Utah



APPENDIX A

TABLE 3 (Continued)
COMPARISON CHART OF ALTERNATIVES

Wildemess Elements

Wilderness Quality

Emphasis Alternative

Proposed
Action
Alternative

Wilderness
Quality Maintenance

WATER
Water Rights

Water Quality

WILDFIRE

INFORMATION/EDUCATION
{also see Signing)

Same as Proposed
Action except file
for water rights on
all unappropriated
sources.

intensively monitor
recreational water
sources.

Same as Proposed
Action.

Public information
limited to map and
wilderness preservation
oriented information
provided to inquiries.
User safety informa-
tion limited fo serious
hazards, if any.

File for water rights

on selected unappropri-
ated sources important
to maintain wilderness
character under State
law. Oppose requests
for private controi of
waters.

Monitor selected
springs that may be
consumed by users for
contaminants. Also
monitor Virgin River
water quality.

See fire management
plan (Appendix C},
wildfire would be allowed
to burn except protection
provided for life, property
and critical wilderness
values. Suppression
techniques would be
those that result in the
Jeast impact to the
wilderness resource.

Provide non-promotional
information such as
maps, brochure, no
trace camping, wilder-
ness etiquette, etc.
structured to wilder-
ness preservation and
public safety on an

as requested basis.

Same as Proposed Action
except do not oppose
private applications an
non-critical waters.

No water quality moni-
toring.

Same as Proposed
Action.

Same as Proposed Action
except information more
promotional in nature to
include use opportuni-
ties, interpretations,
trails, camping, park-
ing along with more
emphasis on user safety.
To be disseminated to
wider audiences on an
opportunistic basis.

Source: Arizona Strip District

1 Some of these trails are range improvements and may be maintained for livestock access purposes under Appendix B

processes.

33


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Scientific Study

Management Objective

Research for scientific, educational or conser-
vation purposes will be conducted in a manner
that will preserve the wilderness resource.

Current Situation and Assumptions

Current Situation

The Paiute and Beaver Dam Mountains Wilder-
ness Areas provide numerous opportunities for
study and research that requires a natural environ-
ment. Because of the several wildlife communi-
ties, biological research projects may be
requested. Studies have been done on the wound-
fin minnow in the Virgin River and on bighorn
sheep in relation to the recent transplants. Ar-
chaeologica! inventory in the Virgin Gorge has
alsotaken place. Additionally, livestock forage uti-
lization, range trend, mule deer, bighorn sheep
and tortoise studies are continuing.

Assumptions

Requests for research in the wilderness areas
will be received.

Wilderness management problems will require
field research in the wilderness.

Management Policies

BLM will encourage studies that will aid ina bet-
ter understanding of wilderness elements and
their management needs.

All study will be done in a manner consistent
with the concept of wilderness preservation.

Study proposais will be evaluated through the
EA process using the minimum tool criteria.
Management Actions

Research proposals will be evaluated on a case-
by-case basis using the policies listed above.

21

SPECIFIC UNIT
MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES

West Virgin Unit

Management Objective and Rationale

The objectives for this unit are to maintain or
enhance high quality desert bighorn sheep habi-
tatand to maintain or enhance desert tortoise hab-
itat consistent with the concepts of wilderness
preservation. The unit consists of the west slope
of the Virgin Mountains from Elbow Canyon on
the southern boundary to i-15 on the north end.
This area is historic desert bighorn habitat. Big-
horn populations began to decline around the
tum of the century and were believed to have dis-
appeared completely by 1960, primarily due to
competition and disease from domestic sheep. !n
1974, fresh sheep evidence was documented,
resulting in plans to reestablish the bighom.

Based on a proposal in the Black Rock HMP,
twelve bighorns were captured and put into the
700-acre enclosure between Hedricks and
Frehner Canyons in November 1979. The popula-
tion increased to 25 by 1981 and 21 of these were
released into the surrounding area. Forty-one
additional sheep were transplanted in Sullivan
Canyon and around Buck Springs in November
1981. The population is slowly increasing.

Because desert bighorns prefer habitat that is
undisturbed and relatively free from human
impact, wilderness designation provides protec-
tion over and above that provided under normal
multiple use management. By managing the unit
primarily to maintain and improve its value as big-
horn habitat, the wilderness goal of long-term
preservation can be realized as well as the com-
plementary wildlife objective of reintroducing a
native anima] to its historic range.

Desert tortoise habitat is generally found below
3,600 feet in the West Virgin Unit and the Virgin
Gorge Unit. Wilderness designation is expected
to provide an extra measure of protection for the
habitat.

Management Policies
New improvements for livestock will be discour-

aged unless there is a clear benefit to the wilder-
ness resource.


St. George

eaves Dam
iderness

a4

Mesquite

NEVADA

\ ARIZONA
\ STRIP DISTRICT

LOCATION MAP

© Flagstatt

fe) Phoenix

en

ARIZONA


APPENDIX A

areas. This alternative has the potential for nega-
tive social impact to persons who may perceive
this scenario as too much federal control. Gonser-
vation or recreation interests may feel more
secure knowing that all water sources would be
protected under a specific reservation.

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Alternative

This alternative proposes BLM filing on
selected water sources, but not opposing private
filing on noncritical waters. Impacts for this alter-
native would be very similar to those of the Pro-
posed Action Alternative. Water sources would be
more available for private appropriation (which
would be most likely on site livestock/ wildlife
uses} with reduced potential for social concerns
related to too much federal contro!. Wilderness
area protections would precludeany private devel-
opments for offsite uses, thus private appropria—
tions would have little practical effect on wilder-
ness values.

Some management options could be lost by pri-
vate control of waters.

Waier Quality

Proposed Action Alternative

With little exception, surface water (stock-
ponds, streams, water troughs or water holes) are
not acceptable for human consumption. The only
suitable sources for human consumption are from
springs near their source. Monitoring some of
these important sources could provide baseline
quality data for management purposes inthe LAC
program as well as information on suitable or un-
suitable water sources for wilderness users, thus
providing positive benefits. There could be nega-
tive impacts to users’ solitude if they encounter
BLM personnel collecting sampies.

Wilderness Quality Emphasis Alternative

More intensive monitoring would provide
greater quantities of data which would magnify
the potential beneficial and negative impacts
described under the Proposed Action Alternative.
Especially important under this alternative would
be the value of added information for manage-
ment of water related ecosystems under the over-
all LAG monitoring system. Greater losses of sol-
itude from collection activities would occur.

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Alternative

Lack of any water quality data would subject
recreational users to some risks in consuming

natural waters. There would be a lack of informa-
tion to consider in making overall management
decision including foregoing use of the LAC
system.

There would be no loss of solitude resulting
from water sampling from the prewiiderness
situation.

Wildfire

Management

BLM policy states that fires ocurring on public
lands are either wildfires or prescribed fires. The
BLM is responsible to suppress ali wildfires on
public Jand. in order to allow naturally ignited
fires to burn on public fands, they must be desig-
nated as prescribed natural fires and a prescrip-
tion must be prepared before the fire starts (see
Appendix C}. Suppression techniques would be
with minimum tool. This alternative would benefit
the wilderness resource by allowing natura! pro-
cesses to continue unaltered unless critical wilder-
ness values would be lost. The livestock operator
coufd be negatively impacted if critical forage spe-
cies were lost or weakened allowing invasion of
undesirable species.

Information/Education

Proposed Action Alternative

This level of information is anticipated to meet
the needs of a sfowly increasing number of visit-
ors. It would have insignificant impacts on users
orthe wilderness lands, but tend to protect the wil-
derness areas from human visitor traces. It would
provide some visitor safety elements, but allow a
reasonable degree of visitor risk.

Wilderness Quality Emphasis Altemative

This alternative may increase visitor risks due
to lack of safety information. This can add to or
detract from a wilderness experience depending
on view point. It would tend to fimit visits through
lack of information or opportunities and thus pro-
tect the wilderness areas from human impacts.

Wilderness Quality Maintenance
Alternative

Additional and more widely availabie visitor
information would attract more visitors and addi-


APPENDIX A

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

INTRODUCTION

The Paiute and Beaver Dam Wilderness Areas
were designated upon the passage of the Arizona
Wilderness Act of 1984.

A draft environmental impact statement (EIS)
was prepared in April 1980, and analyzed the envi-
ronmental, social and economic impacts of desig-
nating the Paiute Primitive Area as Wilderness.
Several other management plans and EAs have
been written on all or parts of the wilderness cov-
ering the prewilderness management issues. All
of those documents are available at the Arizona
Strip and/or Cedar City District Office.

Several management actions [e.g., hunter infor-
mation station priortothe opening day of deer sea-
son cited in the Wilderness Management Plan
(WMP)] have not been evaluated in this EA
because they do not have adverse environmental,
social or economic impacts on the wilderness
resources, wilderness users or to the local area.
Generally, the alternatives to these actions not
brought forward to the EA would be no action.

Impacts to the environment are evaluated in
comparison to conditions existing at the time of
passage of the Arizona Wilderness Act.

PURPOSE AND NEED

To guide management of these areas a wilder-
ness management pian has been prepared which
sets forth the Bureau of Land Management's
(BLM) proposed management objectives, poli-
cies and actions. This environmental assessment
(EA) has been written to identify, document and
analyze the environmental, social and economic
impacts of the proposed wilderness management
plan {WMP) and various alternative management
strategies.

The framework for wilderness management is
provided by the Wilderness Act of 1964, the Ari-
zona Wilderness Act of 1984, Congressional
guidelines, regulations and BLM Manual! sec-
tions. Management of this wilderness area is

29

unusually complex because of a mixture of excep-
tional natural values, recreational use and a
number of established and recognized noncon-
forming but acceptable uses, some of which
would require use of motorized vehicles or mech-
anized equipment. As a result, specific proce-
dures must be developed to guide how wilderness
preservation requirements, the rights of existing
but nonconforming uses, levels and types of rec~
reation use and other needs can be balanced in
accordance with established laws and regula~
tions.

DESCRIPTION OF THE
PROPOSED ACTION AND
ALTERNATIVES

Four alternative management proposals are
being considered. It is important to note that the
Decision Record to be prepared for this plan may
select individual elements or modifications based
on public comment and not necessarily any one
alternative entirely. Table 3 highlights the alterna-
tives to facilitate comparison. Table 4 compares
impacts by resource.

Proposed Action Alternative

The Propesed Action Alternative favors wilder-
ness preservation, with special emphasis on pro-
tecting naturalness, scenic quality, solitude and
primitive unconfined recreation while recogniz-
ing and providing for nonconforming but accept-
able uses. It is envisioned that the implementation
of this alternative would result in moderate
improvementin wilderness quality over prewilder-
ness conditions.

The Proposed Action Alternative consists of the
Management Policies and Management Actions
that are presented in Part IV of the Wilderness
Management Plan. This is the Bureau's proposed
action which reflects policies and public inputs.


APPENDIX A

DESCRIPTION OF THE
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

The Paiute Wilderness Area is a designated
84,700-acre wilderness area located in Mohave
County in extreme northwestern Arizona. It con-
sists of the south side of the Virgin River Gorge,
portions of the Virgin Mountains and Black Rock
Mountain with adjacent drainages, benchlands
and coves.

The Beaver Dam Mountains Wilderness Area is
adjacent to the Paiute Wilderness Area. It has
19,600 acres in both Mohave County, Arizona and
Washington County, Utah. It consists of the north
slopes of the Virgin River Gorge and the southern
end of the Beaver Dam Mountains. Detailed
descriptions of these environments are provided
in Part 1, Location and Description section, of the
Wilderness Management Plan.

ANALYSIS OF THE
PROPOSED ACTION AND
ALTERNATIVES

Assumptions

The analysis of impacts is based on the follow-
ing assumptions.

1, Each alternative is analyzed as if it were a fully
funded action and would be impiemented
with all necessary personnel.

2. Implementation of the management plan
would begin in 1990.

3. The short-term period would be 5 years; long-
term is greater than § years.

4, Site impacts from any proposed actions that
are not specifically projected in the WMP
would be analyzed by an Environmental
Assessment in accordance with NEPA regu-
lations.

5. The base against which theimpacts of the pro-
posed action and alternatives are judged is
the conditions existing at the passage of the
Arizona Wilderness Act on August 28, 1984.

38

Environmental Impacts

Anticipated Impacts - This section evaluates
the actions and policy statements in the Wilder-
ness Management Plan and the viable alternatives
to those actions. This section is arranged in sim-
ilar sequence to the Wilderness Management Plan
to facilitate comparisons with the Proposed
Action Alternative.

Administration

Motorized Vehicle/Equipment Use in
Nonemergency Situations For
Administration and Other Uses

Proposed Action Alternative

Any proposal would be reviewed in a site-
specific EA including minimum tool review prior
to approval or disapproval.

Wilderness Quality Emphasis Alternative

Under this alternative motor vehicies or motor-
ized equipment would not be used for nonemer-
gency administrative purposes in either wilder-
ness area. There would be natural healing of all
trails with beneficial impacts to soils, vegetation,
visuai resources, wildlife, and solitude values com-
pared to the prewilderness condition. Access
would require walking or horseback travel to meet
administrative needs such as range or wildlife
studies or wilderness monitoring (LAC).

Wilderness Quality Maintenance Alternative

Any proposal would be reviewed in a site-
specific EA including minimum too! review prior
to approval or disapproval.

Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC)
Process

Proposed Action Alternative

Utilizing existing monitoring and ultimately the
LAC monitoring process as described would have
long-term benefits to wilderness management


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Management Policies

Maintenance of existing improvements will
generally be by primitive, nonmechanized means.
Proposals for motorized vehicle use (e.g., helicop-
ters) will be analyzed through the EA process.

Efforts will be made, through off-site means, to
inform visitors of the necessity for water treat-
ment.

New improvements for any purpose will be eval-
uated through the EA process. If approved, use
of on-site natural materials and nonmechanized
methods will be emphasized.

Management Actions

Water treatment and other safety information
will be included on new wilderness brochures and
posted on displays at the Virgin River Camp-
ground.

Traits and trailheads will be inventoried and
determinations made on the need for mainte-
nance or improvements. If actions are proposed
involving surface disturbance, the proposal will
be analyzed through the EA process.

Coves Unit

Management Objectives and Rationale

The objective for this unit is to maintain or
enhance the wilderness resource with no single
element receiving emphasis.

This southeastern part of the Paiute Wilderness
receives little use by visitors except for occasional
deer hunters in the fall.

Most use is from cattle grazing operations on
one grazing allotment that covers the majority of
the area. Wilderness recreation opportunities are
quite good because of the low use and limited
access. There is some evidence of archaeological
resources although no inventory of the area has
been done. The area also provides significant
deer winter habitat.

Management Policies
Proposed new improvernents will be analyzed

through the EA process.

Management Actions

Actions will be taken as needed to protect the
wilderness resource,

24


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

to provide a controlled study area. The enclosure,
when constructed in 1978, was to have a 15-year
lifespan. The enclosure was determined to benon-
impairing to the Paiute Primitive Area in which it
was constructed.

Motorized travel for administrative purposes in
the past has been limited to infrequent trips by
resource area biologists and range conserva-
tionists on existing roads or ways in order to do
resource studies. Except for the specified open
roads, these routes are now closed io motor
vehicles,

Helicopters have been used occasionally by
BLM and AGFD to monitor raptor habitat, do big
game surveys (deer and bighorn sheep) and for
fire suppression.

Search and rescue operations have been infre-
quentin the area to date with most situations asso-
ciated with the falt deer hunt and spring river run-
ning activities.

There is a heliport inside the Paiute Wilderness
on Black Rock, and a fire !ookout and administra-
tive site just outside the wilderness in the same
area. The heliport was constructed in 1973 when
a decision was made to utilize a heticopter in fire
suppression operations on the district.

The present location was determined to be the
most suitable in terms of proximity to the fire crew
quarters and access to areas of high fire fre-
quency. The site was reviewed by the Office of Air-
craft Safety (OAS) in 1985 and it was determined
to be the only feasible site in the vicinity. Pro-
posed alternative sites outside the wilderness
were found to be unsafe because of slope and
nearby trees.

There is an interagency agreement between the
BLM and the Federat Aviation Agency (FAA) in
which ihe two agencies agree to seek voluntary
cooperation with aircraft operators to fly at a min-
imum altitude of 2,000 feet over wilderness areas.

Assumptions

Wilderness and its management will be an
increasingly important public land issue. Addi-
tionai funding and personnel will be needed for
adequate management in the future.

Visitation to the wilderness will increase as wilf
violations of wilderness laws and regulations.

There will be an occasionai need for emergency
search and rescue operations involving motor-
ized equipment or vehicles.

Management Policies

All. administrative activities will be accom-
plished so as to minimize adverse effects on the
wilderness resource. BLM will aggressively
pursue investigations of wilderness violations and
take appropriate actions to eliminate the problem,
preferably through information and education
efforts.

Administrative activities will be done using the
minimum tool, equipment or structure necessary
to successfully, safely and economically accom-
plish the objective.

Management will seek to build a close working
relationship with individuals, groups and other
government agencies that use or influence use of
the wilderness.

Use of motorized vehicles or equipment for
demonstrated emergency uses such as fire sup-
pression, search and rescue, or law enforcement
may be approved by the authorized officer.

Nonemergency motorized vehicle or equip-
ment use for administrative purposes must be
approved by the appropriate authorized officer.
Vehicle use will be the exception rather than the
rule.

Administrative aircraft use by BLM or other
agencies below 2,000 feet will be planned andcon-
ducted ina manner that ensures the least possible
intrusion on the wilderness. Management guide-
lines include but are not limited to:

Aircraft use will be the only practical alterna-
tive, kept to a minimum, and be as site-
specific as possible.

‘

Flights wilt be scheduled at times and loca-
tions that minimize impactson visitors’ wilder-
ness experience.

- Landing requests wil! be evaluated through
the EA process on asite-specific basis. Autho-
rized officer approval is required.

BLM will seek voluntary compliance by ali air-
craft users with the 2,000-foot minimum altitude
prescribed by the BLM/FAA agreement.

Nonconforming uses covered by special provi-
sion in Section 4(d) of the Wilderness Act will be
administered for minimum impact on the wilder-
ness resource. However, such administration
shall not negate the intent of Congress concern-
ing these uses as expressed in the Wilderness Act
of 1964 and the Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984.


& X


APPENDIX A

tional human user impacts. Greater emphasis on
user hazards would decrease risk and prevent
accidents or tenuous survival situations.

FINDING OF NO
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

Based on the analysis of potential environmen-
tal impacts contained in the EA, | have determined
that impacts are not expected to be significant
and an environmental impact statement is not
required.

DECISION AND RATIONALE

The selected alternative for this plan is the Pro-
posed Action. This alternative was selected
because it is consistent with the public comments
received on the Draft Plan, legislative mandates,
and Bureau policy.

. per, Area Manager
Shivwits Resource Area

August £LGLO
Di

ate

46


APPENDIX B

may be necessary for their maintenance based
again on the information described by the above
list. They will be grouped into three categories for
analysis purposes based on need for or type of
possible motorized vehicle and/or equipment
use.

Any project may be independently evaluated
through the remainder of the process at separate
times for either maintenance of a routine nature
or reconstruction where more equipment may be
necessary.

For those projects where it is conclusively
determined that neither motorized vehicles nor
mechanized equipment will be required in main-
tenance, no further analysis will be made. A list
of these projects will be prepared, the grazing per-
mittee notified and the list and maintenance deci-
sion made a condition of the AMP and/or grazing
permits by reference. On this basis, the permit-
tees will be authorized to proceed with nonmoto-
rized maintenance.

Compliance with these nonmotorized require-
ments will be a component of BLM's wilderness
monitoring program.

A second proposed list by priority of need will
be prepared for those projects where occasional
motorized vehicle use is deemed necessary to
inspect or maintain the improvements. Normal
vehicle use expected would be ATVs or trucks up
to 21% ton to haul materials or livestock.

A site-specific EA will be prepared to analyze
environmental impacts of alternatives with
respect to type, frequency of or access routes for
motorized vehicles on each individual project or
group of projects where the proposed vehicle
uses and potential environmental impacts are the
same, It wilt also consider factors such as min-
imum tools or possible project relocation outside
of the wilderness area.

These EAs will be prepared in priority order as
tapidly as possible following issuance of the final
Wilderness Management Plan and will be avail-
able for public review upon request.

A DR will be prepared to document the alterna-
tive selected and mitigating measures for each
Project.

Upon completion of these EAs and DRs, a writ-
ten maintenance plan will be prepared in consul-
tation with the permittee and based on mitigating
measures developed in the EA and in conform-
ance with the Decision Record. It will detail tim-
ing, vehicle type, number of trip(s), authorized
person(s) and record keeping requirements.

48

This plan will be incorporated into the AMP and
grazing permit by reference and will, upon
approval, authorize the permittee to make motor-
ized uses as specified during the normal grazing
period for the allotment.

In making uses authorized in the maintenance
pian, each permittee will be required to keep accu-
rate records of date, time, type vehicle, trail used,
purpose and duration of any motorized entry.
This tog will be submitted to the BLM at the end
of the grazing period.

Field compliance on these motorized vehicle
entries will be made and documented. Findings
can then be compared to the records submitted
by the permittee to detect and correct discrepan-
cies or violations.

Vehicle entry deemed necessary specifically for
livestock management purposes will be pro-
cessed in the manner described above with the
same constraints, reporting requirements and
monitoring procedures.

The third project grouping includes those
developments where heavy earth-moving equip-
ment is deemed necessary. These proposals will
require a minimum 60-day notice froma permittee
of the possible need for project maintenance. The
project is examined in the field and a sitespecific
EA is prepared that examines the need for main-
tenance and alternatives of access, equipment,
tool(s), timing, possible relocation as weli as rec-
ommending mitigating measures and reclama-
tion requirements.

A DR is prepared that selects an alternative with
mitigating measures or a no action alternative. If
the decision permits the action to proceed, the per-
mittee is notified of the terms and timing
approved. it is standard procedure to have a BLM
wilderness or surface protection specialist on site
during any earth-moving operations to assure
compliance with terms and supervise reclama-
tion.

Throughout this process, it may be found that
individual projects have been improperly classi-
fied relative to its continuation or need for equip-
ment. For example a project expected to require
motorvehicle access may be found by the EAanal-
ysis to not need vehicles, a heavy equipment pro-
posai may be found to be accomplishable with
motorized vehicles or vice versa. Also a project
preliminarily determined to be not needed, may
be upon further analysis found to be needed. In
these cases, the project's processing will be trans-
ferred to the more appropriate procedures that
cover the newly determined situation.


MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

TABLE 1

GRAZING ALLOTMENTS IN PA!UTE-BEAVER
DAM WILDERNESS AREAS
Bureau of Land Management, Arizona Strip District

Total Active Estimated Percent of
Preference AUMs in AUMs in
Allotment State(s} {AUMs) Wilderness Wilderness
Lambing AZ/UT 471 153 32
Apex AZ/UT 366 37 10
Cedar Pockets AZ/UT 271 79 29
Highway AZ 260 83 32
Cedar Wash AZ 374 374 100
Mountain Sheep AZ 84 84 100
Sullivan Canyon AZ 962 876 31
Littlefield AZ 2,705 4217 45
Cottonwood AZ 4,834 37 2
Mud and Cane AZ 4,716 1,344 29
Little Wolf AZ 280 78 27
Black Rock AZ 1,463 73 5
Totals 13,783 4431 32t

Source: Arizona Strip District records:
1 Average

Assumptions

Utilization levels and patterns of use will remain
generally as they are now.

Rancherswill occasionally need motorized vehi-
cles and mechanized equipment for range
improvement maintenance and other grazing
management needs.

Management Policies

Grazing will continue pursuant to Section
4{d}(4) of the 1964 Wilderness Act and House
Report 96-1126 which provides general grazing
management direction.

Adjustments in grazing use will be based on
BLM range monitoring studies, allotment evalua-
tions and consideration of impacts on all natural
resources.

Ajl newly proposed range improvements or
significant modifications to existing Improve-
ments will be evaluated in an environmental
assessment. New improvements will be allowed
for the management and protection of wilderness
values rather than to accommodate increased
numbers of livestock.

Whenever possible, new range improvements
will be located outside the wilderness.

Motorized vehicle or equipment use for live-
stock management or improvement maintenance
will be authorized when determined through the
EA process to be the only practical alternative and
not to have a significant adverse effect on the nat-
ural environment (see Appendix B for more infor-
mation).

Management Actions

Monitoring studies, including utilization, trend,
actual use, livestock counts and precipitation
data gathering will be continued.

An inventory of all range improvements within
the wilderness is being completed. improvements
which have been abandoned or are determined to
be unnecessary to the grazing operation may be
removed.

Maintenance plans developed under Appendix
B procedures for improvements within wilderness
will be incorporated into existing and any new
allotment management plans and made a part of -
each grazing permit.

W