United States Department of Agriculture

Forest 

Service

Southwestern

Region

MB-R3-03-26

September 2013

Environmental 

Assessment for Travel 

Management on the 

Magdalena Ranger 

District

Cibola National Forest; Catron, 

Sierra, and Socorro Counties, 

New Mexico
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and 

activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, 

marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, 

political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any 

public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with 

disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, 

large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and 

TTY). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 

1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or 

(202) 720-6382 (TTY). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 

Printed on recycled paper – September 2013 
EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District i

Contents

Chapter 1. Purpose and Need........................................................................................................1

Document Structure................................................................................................................................1

Background.............................................................................................................................................1

Previous Decisions .................................................................................................................................4

Purpose of and Need for Action .............................................................................................................5

Proposed Action Development...............................................................................................................5

Proposed Action .....................................................................................................................................6

Decision Framework...............................................................................................................................7

Public Involvement.................................................................................................................................7

Tribal Consultation .................................................................................................................................8

Issues......................................................................................................................................................9

Chapter 2. Alternatives................................................................................................................11

Consideration of No Action (Baseline Conditions)..............................................................................11

Alternatives Considered in Detail.........................................................................................................12

Alternatives...........................................................................................................................................12

Alternative 1 – Proposed Action ......................................................................................................12

Alternative 2.....................................................................................................................................13

Alternative 3.....................................................................................................................................14

Alternative 4.....................................................................................................................................15

Features Common to All Alternatives ..................................................................................................16

Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study.............................................................17

Development of an OHV Motorized Trail System...........................................................................17

Monitoring Requirements.....................................................................................................................18

Comparison of Alternatives..................................................................................................................18

Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences..................................27

Analysis of Unauthorized Roads ..........................................................................................................27

Recreation.............................................................................................................................................27

Affected Environment ......................................................................................................................27

Developed Recreation ......................................................................................................................28

Dispersed Recreation and Dispersed Camping.................................................................................28

Hunting and Motorized Big Game Retrieval....................................................................................29

Wilderness........................................................................................................................................31

Roads and Trails...............................................................................................................................31

Scenic Resources/Visual Quality Management................................................................................32

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum....................................................................................................36

Transportation.......................................................................................................................................51

Methodology ....................................................................................................................................52

Baseline Condition ...........................................................................................................................53

Environmental Consequences ..........................................................................................................55

Public Safety ....................................................................................................................................57

Road Maintenance Needs and Resources to Satisfy Needs..............................................................58

Access Needs....................................................................................................................................59

Cumulative Effects...........................................................................................................................61

Heritage Resources...............................................................................................................................61

Affected Environment ......................................................................................................................61

Heritage Resources Protocol for Travel Management......................................................................62

Analysis Methods.............................................................................................................................62

Vehicular Impacts within Routes .....................................................................................................63

Vehicular Impacts within Motorized Dispersed Camping Corridors ..............................................64

Motorized Big Game Retrieval ........................................................................................................64

Heritage Resource Survey ................................................................................................................65

Environmental Consequences ..........................................................................................................66

Contemporary American Indian Uses/Tribal Consultation .................................................................68
Contents

ii EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Tribal Consultation...........................................................................................................................68

Affected Environment ......................................................................................................................69

Environmental Consequences – Contemporary American Indian Uses..........................................69

Cumulative Effects – All Alternatives..............................................................................................72

Social and Economic Considerations ...................................................................................................72

Affected Environment ......................................................................................................................72

Demographic Conditions and Trends...............................................................................................73

Environmental Justice...........................................................................................................................76

Economic Conditions and Trends ....................................................................................................79

Environmental Consequences ..........................................................................................................81

Social Consequences........................................................................................................................82

Environmental Justice, Summary of Effects by Alternative.............................................................83

Economic Consequences..................................................................................................................85

Methodology for Analysis of Recreation Economic Contribution ..................................................85

Economic Effects by Alternative......................................................................................................87

Law Enforcement .................................................................................................................................93

Affected Environment ......................................................................................................................93

Environmental Consequences ..........................................................................................................95

Cumulative Effects...........................................................................................................................96

Timber and Vegetation Management ...................................................................................................97

Affected Environment ......................................................................................................................97

Environmental Consequences ..........................................................................................................98

Cumulative Effects.........................................................................................................................100

Wildlife Habitat and Special Status Species.......................................................................................100

Baseline Conditions........................................................................................................................100

Management Indicator Species.......................................................................................................101

High Priority Birds/Important Bird Areas/Overwintering Areas....................................................102

Threatened, Endangered, Candidate, and Sensitive Wildlife and Plant Species ............................104

Environmental Consequences ........................................................................................................107

Cumulative Effects: MIS, TES and High Priority Migratory Birds ..............................................138

Watershed, Soils, and Air Resources..................................................................................................140

Affected Environment ....................................................................................................................140

Watersheds.....................................................................................................................................140

Streams...........................................................................................................................................144

Water Quality .................................................................................................................................146

Soil Conditions...............................................................................................................................147

Air Quality......................................................................................................................................148

Methods and Assumptions .............................................................................................................148

Environmental Consequences ........................................................................................................149

Soil Condition ................................................................................................................................154

Soil Stability – Erosion and Soil Loss............................................................................................155

Fire and Fuels .....................................................................................................................................158

Fire Behavior..................................................................................................................................158

Fuels Management .........................................................................................................................158

Historical Condition .......................................................................................................................158

Fire Regime ....................................................................................................................................159

Condition Class ..............................................................................................................................159

Existing Condition..........................................................................................................................160

Risk ................................................................................................................................................161

Environmental Consequences ........................................................................................................162

Direct and Indirect Effects..............................................................................................................163

Effects Common to All Alternatives ..............................................................................................164

Cumulative Effects.........................................................................................................................164

Summary ........................................................................................................................................164
Contents

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District iii

Consistency with Regulatory Framework ......................................................................................164

Range..................................................................................................................................................164

Affected Environment ....................................................................................................................165

Environmental Consequences ........................................................................................................166

Cumulative Effects.........................................................................................................................167

Climate Change ..................................................................................................................................167

Environmental Consequences ........................................................................................................168

Effects Common to All Action Alternatives ..................................................................................168

Cumulative Effects.........................................................................................................................169

Inventoried Roadless Areas................................................................................................................169

Affected Environment ....................................................................................................................172

Action Common to All Alternatives...............................................................................................174

Environmental Consequences ........................................................................................................174

Cumulative Effects.........................................................................................................................176

Forest Plan Amendment Analysis ......................................................................................................176

Chapter 4. Consultation and Coordination.............................................................................177

ID Team Members, Preparers, and Contributors................................................................................177

Core Team Members......................................................................................................................177

Extended Team Members...............................................................................................................177

Consultation and Coordination ...........................................................................................................178

Literature Cited..........................................................................................................................179

Glossary.......................................................................................................................................183

Appendix

A. Forest Plan Amendment.................................................................................................................197

B. Past, Present, and Foreseeable Future Project...............................................................................201

C. Roads Designated for Administrative Use Only ..........................................................................209

D. Recreation Opportunity Spectrum and Visual Quality Objectives Maps......................................213

E. Travel Management Proposed Maps............................................................................................217

List of Figures

Figure 1. Magdalena Ranger District vicinity map ......................................................................... 4

Figure 2. Age distribution in the planning area, 2011................................................................... 75

Figure 3. Magdalena project area watershed class...................................................................... 141

Figure 4. Inventoried Roadless Area ........................................................................................... 171

List of Tables

Table 1. Road mileages by alternative ......................................................................................... 18

Table 2. Environmental consequences by alternative .................................................................. 20

Table 3. New Mexico Game Management Unit 13 permits for 2010–2011 ................................ 29

Table 4. New Mexico Game Management Unit 17 permits for 2010–2011 ................................ 30

Table 5. VQO classifications for the Magdalena Ranger District (in acres)................................ 35

Table 6. ROS classifications for the Magdalena Ranger District (in acres)................................. 37

Table 7. Hunter success rates ....................................................................................................... 41

Table 8. Alternative 1 – Miles of NFS roads designated for all motor vehicles .......................... 41

Table 9. Alternative 3 – Miles of NFS roads eesignated for all motor vehicles........................... 47

Table 10. Alternative 4 - Miles of NFS roads designated for all motor vehicles......................... 49

Table 11. Road miles by maintenance level................................................................................. 54

Table 12. Road system by alternative........................................................................................... 56
Contents

iv EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Table 13. Road miles and estimated annual maintenance costs by alternative ............................ 56

Table 14. Cost of work required to add routes as NFS roads....................................................... 57

Table 15. Potential for impacts to cultural resource sites 

by alternative presented as a decrease from the baseline ............................................ 63

Table 16. Areas surveyed by alternative ...................................................................................... 66

Table 17. Acreage by county; percent of county under forest management ................................ 73

Table 18. Historical and projected populations for Socorro, Catron and Sierra Counties ........... 74

Table 19. Median age by county, 2000 and 2007-2011* ............................................................. 75

Table 20. Elderly and disabled population ................................................................................... 76

Table 21. Ethnic composition by county, 2010 Census ............................................................... 78

Table 22. Racial composition by county, 2010 Census................................................................ 78

Table 23. Percent of population living below the 

poverty threshold and per capita income (2010 dollars) ............................................. 79

Table 24. Median household income............................................................................................ 79

Table 25. Share of labor and nonlabor income, 2011 (thousands of 2012 dollars)...................... 80

Table 26. Annual unemployment rates by county and State (percent)......................................... 81

Table 27. Payments in lieu of taxes, 2012.................................................................................... 81

Table 28. Employment and labor income effects 

by activity type, nonmotorized on the Magdalena Ranger District ............................. 88

Table 29. Employment and labor income effects 

by activity type, motorized on the Magdalena Ranger District................................... 88

Table 30. Employment and labor income effects 

by activity type, nature related on the Magdalena Ranger District ............................. 89

Table 31. Employment and labor income effects 

by activity type, all other on the Magdalena Ranger District...................................... 89

Table 32. Employment and labor income effects 

by activity type, all recreation on the Magdalena Ranger District .............................. 89

Table 33. Travel management violations 

on the Magdalena Ranger District 2000–January 2011............................................... 94

Table 34. Major vegetation types of the Magdalena district ........................................................ 97

Table 35. Habitat acreages in the Magdalena District travel management analysis area ........... 101

Table 36. Management indicator species and existing habitat/population trend analyzed for this 

travel management analysis....................................................................................... 102

Table 37. Priority bird species and associated habitat................................................................ 103

Table 38. Threatened, Endangered, Candidate and Sensitive Species Considered .................... 105

Table 39. Summary of variables by alternative and habitat type ............................................... 109

Table 40. Summary of effects to MIS ........................................................................................ 111

Table 41. Threatened, endangered, candidate, and sensitive 

wildlife and plant species habitat variable by alternative.......................................... 122

Table 42. Threatened, endangered, candidate, and sensitive 

wildlife and plant species impacts by alternative ...................................................... 127

Table 43. Determination of effects for high priority migratory birds......................................... 135

Table 44. 6th Code watersheds, road and trail density, percent of project 

in each watershed, watershed condition, and acres (shaded 

watersheds have road densities greater than 2.4 miles per square mile) ................... 142

Table 45. Riparian types in the project area ............................................................................... 145

Table 46. Measures for increased risk to water quality from pathogens.................................... 150

Table 47. Summary of measures of water quality related to sediment....................................... 152

Table 48. Acres of with potential for increased soil compaction and reduced nutrient cycling. 154
Contents

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District v

Table 49. Proposed activities by alternative with potential to change soil stability (in acres)... 156

Table 50. Measures for the potential for reduced or improved soil stability.............................. 156

Table 51. Fire Regime Condition Class...................................................................................... 160

Table 52. Large fires within the last 7 years............................................................................... 161

Table 53. Fire regimes and existing condition class 

within the Magdalena travel management area ......................................................... 161

Table 54. Total statistical fires on the district ............................................................................ 162

Table 55. Magdalena inventoried roadless areas........................................................................ 170

Table 56. Number of system roads or segments located within each IRA................................. 172

List of Acronyms

AMU............................. antelope management units

ATV .............................. all-terrain vehicle

BBS .............................. breeding bird survey

BLM ............................. Bureau of Land Management

BMP ............................. best management practices

CEQ.............................. Council on Environmental Quality

CFR .............................. Code of Federal Regulations

CHU ............................. critical habitat unit

CWA............................. Federal Clean Water Act

DEIS ............................. draft environmental impact statement

EA................................. environmental assessment

EIS................................ environmental impact statement

EO................................. Executive Order

EPS-HDT...................... Economic Profile System-Human Dimension Toolkit

ESA .............................. Endangered Species Act

EVC.............................. existing visual condition

FEIS.............................. final environmental impact statement

FPO............................... forest protection officer

FR................................. Federal Register

FS ................................. Forest Service

FSH............................... Forest Service Handbook

FSM.............................. Forest Service Manual

FWS.............................. Fish and Wildlife Service

GIS ............................... geographic information system

GMU............................. game management unit

HUC ............................. hydrologic unit code

IBA............................... important bird areas

Infra .............................. infrastructure database

IRA............................... inventoried roadless area

LEMARS...................... Law Enforcement Management Attainment Reports System
Contents

vi EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

LEO .............................. law enforcement officer

LRMP........................... land and resource management plan (forest plan)

MA ............................... management area (designated in forest plan)

MBGR.......................... motorized big game retrieval

MIS............................... management indicator species

ML................................ maintenance level

MVUM......................... motor vehicle use map

NAAQS ........................ National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NEPA............................ National Environmental Policy Act

NF................................. national forest

NFMA .......................... National Forest Management Act

NFS............................... National Forest System

NFSR............................ National Forest System Road

NHPA ........................... National Historic Preservation Act

NM ............................... New Mexico

NMDGF........................ New Mexico Department of Game and Fish

NMED .......................... New Mexico Environment Department

NMHPA........................ New Mexico Habitat Protection Act

NMPIF.......................... New Mexico Partners in Flight

NRHP ........................... National Register of Historic Places

NRI............................... National River Inventory

NVUM.......................... National Visitor Use Monitoring

OHV ............................. off-highway vehicle

PA ................................. proposed action

P.L................................. Public Law

QCEW .......................... Bureau of Labor Statistics Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages

R3 ................................. Southwestern Region

RACR........................... Roadless Area Conservation Rule

RD ................................ ranger district

RN ................................ roaded natural (ROS)

ROD ............................. record of decision

ROS .............................. recreation opportunity system

SHPO............................state historic preservation officer

SPM..............................semiprimitive motorized (ROS)

SPNM...........................semiprimitive nonmotorized (ROS)

SMS..............................scenery management system

SWF..............................southwestern willow flycatcher

TAP............................... travel analysis process

TCP............................... traditional cultural property
Contents

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District vii

TES............................... terrestrial ecosystem survey

TEU .............................. terrestrial ecological units

USBEA......................... U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis

USDA........................... U.S. Department of Agriculture

U.S................................ United States

USC.............................. United States Code

UTV.............................. utility terrain vehicle

VAC.............................. visual absorption capability

VMS ............................. Visual Management System

VQO ............................. visual quality objectives

WMA............................ wildlife management area

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 1

Chapter 1. Purpose and Need

Document Structure

This environmental assessment (EA) has been prepared in compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations contained in 40 CFR 1500–1508, Agency policy in 

the Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, and other relevant Federal and State laws and regulations. 

Additional documentation that supports this EA may be found in the project record, located at the 

Magdalena Ranger District office in Magdalena, New Mexico. 

This environmental assessment describes the proposed project for designating National Forest 

System roads, trails, and areas for motor vehicle use on the Magdalena Ranger District of the 

Cibola National Forest and Grasslands. The project will result in publication of a motor vehicle 

use map (MVUM). After the MVUM has been released, motorized travel off the designated 

system would be prohibited unless authorized in writing. By undertaking this project, the 

Magdalena Ranger District intends to comply with the Travel Management Rule to provide 

access to the district and to protect forest resources, such as water quality, wildlife and fish 

habitat, cultural resources, and rare plants. This EA discloses the direct, indirect, and cumulative 

environmental impacts that would result from the proposed action and alternatives. The document 

is organized as follows:

 Chapter 1. Purpose and Need: This chapter includes information on the history of the 

project proposal, the purpose of and need for the project, and the Agency’s proposal for 

achieving that purpose and need. This section also details how the Forest Service 

informed the public of the proposal and how the public responded. 

 Chapter 2. Alternatives: This chapter provides a more detailed description of the 

Agency’s proposed action as well as alternative methods for achieving the stated purpose.

These alternatives were developed based on issues raised by the public and other 

agencies. This discussion also includes possible mitigation measures. Finally, this section 

provides a summary table of the environmental consequences associated with each 

alternative.

 Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences: This chapter 

describes the environmental effects of implementing the proposed action and other 

alternatives. Within each section, the affected environment is described first, followed by 

the effects of the alternatives.

 Chapter 4. Consultation and Coordination: This chapter provides a list of preparers 

and agencies consulted during development of the environmental assessment.

 Literature Cited

 Glossary

 Appendix. The appendix consists of multiple parts that provide more detailed 

information to support the analyses presented in the environmental assessment.

Background

On November 9, 2005, the Forest Service published the final regulations governing off-highway 

vehicles (OHVs) and other motor vehicle use on national forests and grasslands (Travel 

Management; Designated, Routes and Areas for Motor Vehicle Use, Federal Register / Vol. 70, 

No. 216/36 CFR Parts 212, 251, 261, and 295, referred to as the Travel Management Rule). The 

Travel Management Rule was developed in response to the substantial increase in the use of off-
Chapter 1. Purpose and Need

2 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

highway vehicles (OHVs) on National Forest System lands. The increasing numbers of motor 

vehicles on National Forest System lands and the advancement in their capabilities have resulted 

in escalating impacts to the forest’s natural and cultural resources. The magnitude and intensity of 

motor use has increased to the point that the intent of Executive Orders 116544 and 11989 

(precursors to the Travel Management Rule aimed at protecting natural and cultural resources and 

user safety) cannot be met while still allowing unrestricted motorized cross-country travel. The 

Travel Management Rule can be found at: http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/ohv/final.pdf

The Travel Management Rule requires each national forest and grassland to provide for a system 

of National Forest System (NFS) roads, NFS trails, and areas designated for motor vehicle use.

Designation will include class of vehicle and, if appropriate, time of year for motor vehicle use.

Designated routes and areas will be identified on a motor vehicle use map (MVUM). After the 

routes have been designated and identified on a MVUM, motor vehicle use will be prohibited off 

the designated system. The following vehicles and uses are exempted from these designations:

 Aircraft; 

 Watercraft; 

 Over snow vehicles; 

 Limited administrative use by the Forest Service; 

 Use of any fire, military, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle for emergency purposes; 

 Authorized use of any combat or combat support vehicle for national defense purposes; 

 Law enforcement response to violations of the law; and 

 Motor vehicle use that is specifically authorized under written authorization issued under 

Federal law or regulation (36 CFR 212.51 (a)). 

In designating routes, the responsible official may include in the designation the limited use of 

motor vehicles within a specific distance of specific designated routes and, if appropriate, within 

a certain time period, solely for the purpose of dispersed motorized camping or the retrieval of a 

downed big game animal by an individual who has legally taken that animal (36 CFR 212.51(b)).

The Forest Service recognizes motorized use on national forests and grasslands as a legitimate 

and appropriate way for people to enjoy these lands—in the right places and with proper 

management, as described in the preamble to the Travel Management Rule on page 68264 of 

Volume 70 of the Federal Register.

The Magdalena Ranger District of the Cibola National Forest and Grasslands is located in westcentral New Mexico. The Magdalena Ranger District is located in parts of Catron, Sierra and 

Socorro Counties. The district’s lands are widely dispersed and are comprised of four distinct 

mountain ranges: the Bear/Gallinas Mountains; the Datil Mountains; the Magdalena Mountains;

and the San Mateo Mountains. There are approximately 797,569 acres within the district 

boundary, with approximately 65,862 acres that are private or other governmental in-holdings. 

The project area that will be analyzed under the Travel Management Rule, excluding private 

inholdings, wilderness areas, and the Langmuir Research Site, is 637,616 acres (acres are rounded 

to the closest whole number).

The Magdalena Ranger District transportation system serves a variety of administrative and 

public purposes. Timber harvesting, livestock grazing, fire management, law enforcement, 
Chapter 1. Purpose and Need

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 3

facilities management, and recreation are all important activities that rely on the forest 

transportation system to be successful. 

There are 1,171.4 miles of National Forest System roads on the Magdalena Ranger District that 

are currently open to motorized travel. These system roads are managed for various types of 

vehicles which include standard passenger vehicles and high-clearance vehicles, such as pickup 

trucks and sport utility vehicles. The mileages listed here and used throughout the document were 

derived from the travel analysis process (TAP) and modified to reflect the most recent 

information available.

Motorized cross-country travel is allowed by the “Cibola National Forest Land and Resource 

Management Plan,” amended 1985 (Forest Plan) except for the Apache Kid Wilderness and 

Withington Wilderness, which are closed to all motorized and mechanical uses. Motorized travel 

is restricted to the existing road system within the Langmuir Research Site. There are no trails 

designed or maintained for motorized use on the district.

Some National Forest System (NFS) roads on the district, including system and unauthorized 

roads, are redundant routes that access the same area. Others are poorly located, provide no 

obvious access to forest resources, or are causing natural and/or cultural resource impacts. Since 

the district is open to motorized cross-country travel, the problem of road redundancy is 

augmented by the continued creation and use of unauthorized roads. Road redundancy is most 

common in the southern part of the San Mateo Mountains.

Some roads decommissioned by the Forest Service continue to be used by the public and often act 

as connector roads between open system roads. For the purpose of this document, 

decommissioned roads are defined as roads that were removed from the NFS road system at some 

time in the past but many continue to receive some level of use. These roads may or may not have 

been physically closed when they were decommissioned.

The Forest Service lacks several legal rights-of-way through private lands bordering or within the 

district boundary, where access is not available for forest use and management. The lack of legal 

rights-of-way restricts access to some NFS roads and developed recreation areas. This is 

particularly true in the Magdalena and San Mateo Mountains where the lack of rights-of-way 

through private land makes some of the trailheads inaccessible by motor vehicles.

The district has experienced a proliferation of unauthorized routes as a result of the increased 

recreational use of OHVs, especially during the hunting season and because the district is 

currently opened to motorized cross-country travel. Motorized dispersed camping (camping in 

general forest areas outside of developed campgrounds), is a popular activity and commonly 

associated with hunting. The unregulated use of motorized cross-country travel has the potential 

to cause damage to soils, water quality, wildlife habitat, and archaeological resources. It may also

cause conflict with existing or proposed recreational uses such as hiking. A designated and 

managed system of routes for motor vehicle use and motorized dispersed camping is needed to 

address the above concerns as well as comply with the Travel Management Rule.

The Magdalena Ranger District will continue to provide access to the forest for nonmotorized 

activities such as camping, hunting, hiking, mountain biking, and horseback riding and will also 

continue to provide a road system for motorized access, although the routes available for 

motorized use may change. The district staff recognizes the ties the American Indian tribes and 

local communities have to the district and the need to maintain their cultural and traditional uses. 
Chapter 1. Purpose and Need

4 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Figure 1. Magdalena Ranger District vicinity map

The legal gathering of forest products will be maintained using roads designated for motorized 

use or through other written authorization as allowed by the Travel Management Rule.

Previous Decisions

The Travel Management Rule directs that “the responsible official may incorporate previous 

administrative decisions regarding travel management made under other authorities, including 

designations and prohibitions of motor vehicle use, in designating National Forest System lands 

for motorized use” (36 CFR 212.50(b)).

Many roads currently available for motorized use are open to all motorized vehicles and will not 

be changed. Only the changes to the current system are subject to the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA) per 36 CFR 212.50(b).

There are 44,530 acres within the Apache Kid Wilderness and 19,075 acres within the Withington 

Wilderness. Motorized and mechanized uses are prohibited in the Apache Kid Wilderness and 

Withington Wilderness. Congress designated both wilderness areas in 1980 in the New Mexico 

Wilderness Act. The 1964 Wilderness Act prohibits the use of motorized or mechanical transport 

or equipment in designated wilderness areas. As a result, the wilderness areas are outside of the 

project analysis area. This designation will not be revisited during this project because it complies 

with the Travel Management Rule.
Chapter 1. Purpose and Need

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 5

There are 30,606 acres within the Langmuir Research Site, located in the Magdalena Mountains. 

Motorized and mechanical uses are restricted to the existing designated road system within the 

Langmuir Research Site through Public Law 96–550, December 19, 1980: “Roads shall be 

limited to those necessary for scientific research activities and other reasonable activities as 

determined by the Secretary. Motor vehicle use shall be restricted to roads designated in the 

plan.” The area is closed to motor vehicle use off designated roads (Forest Plan, page 111). This 

designation will not be revisited during this project because it complies with the Travel 

Management Rule.

Seasonal road closures may be used to prevent damage to resources and routes during sensitive 

times of the year, such as winter or the monsoon season. Since closures are weather dependent, 

they will not be included on the MVUM. Closures will be posted in the field when they are in 

effect. 

Purpose of and Need for Action

There is a need for improving the management of motorized vehicle use on National Forest 

System lands within the Magdalena Ranger District of the Cibola National Forest and Grasslands 

in accordance with the provisions of the Travel Management Rule at 36 CFR parts 212, 251, and 

261. The Travel Management Rule requires the district to provide for a system of National Forest 

System roads, trails, and areas designated for motor vehicle use. There is a need to comply with 

the Travel Management Rule, 36 CFR 261.13, which requires that forests prohibit motor vehicle 

use off the system of designated motorized routes. There is a need to amend the Forest Plan to be 

compliant with the Travel Management Rule (see appendix A).

Proposed Action Development

The district hosted several public workshops in 2010 during development of the proposed action. 

These included community workshops in Magdalena, Reserve, Datil, Monticello, Socorro, and 

Truth or Consequences, New Mexico, and meetings with Native American tribes.

During the community workshops, the public was asked to clearly identify routes and areas that 

they use and consider important to their enjoyment of the district. Hard copy maps displaying all 

of the system routes and all known unauthorized routes were provided to participants at each of 

the community workshops. Individuals marked the routes and areas they use on these maps and 

provided a brief description of what uses they associated with these locations.

Information about travel management, maps, public workshops, and project contacts was made 

available online at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/cibola/home/?cid=STELPRDB5262323

The maps used at the community workshops were available online for people to download. These 

resources allowed people who could not attend community workshops to provide input during 

development of the proposed action.

The ID team weighed public input and natural and cultural resource management needs and 

concerns that were identified during the travel analysis process (TAP) to develop the proposed 

action. 

 In situations where public input was consistent with the recommendations of the TAP, 

that area or travel route was brought forward into the proposed action. 
Chapter 1. Purpose and Need

6 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

 In some instances, public input did not align with the recommendation of the TAP. In 

these cases, mitigation measures were developed to address the resource concerns and the 

route was brought forward into the proposed action. 

 In some instances, the route was dropped from consideration if mitigation measures could 

not be identified. 

 Some routes were dropped from consideration if there was no public input to support 

designation and the TAP recommendation did not support designating the route.

The following objectives were developed based on public input and natural and cultural resource 

concerns identified in the TAP. The goal during development of the proposed action was to 

designate a transportation system that would address most of the following considerations:

 Provide access to valued and popular areas for forest users and meet the transportation 

needs for managing the national forest.

 Allow for a variety of motorized uses including 4-wheel driving in trucks and/or OHVs.

 Ensure roads are properly located on the landscape to minimize damage to natural and 

cultural resources. Roads/routes that reduce these impacts would be selected over other 

roads/routes that access the same areas.

 Ensure motorized dispersed camping is located in areas that can support this use with 

minimal resource impacts.

 Coordinate with the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish to provide reasonable 

and accepted access to hunting on the forest while minimizing disturbance to habitat.

 Minimize illegal activities and trespass through public education and law enforcement, 

particularly in problem areas.

The existing conditions of each resource area in relationship to the current transportation system 

are summarized in chapter 3. Specialist reports provide detailed descriptions of existing 

conditions by resource and are available in the project record.

Proposed Action

This is the proposed action that was presented in the “Scoping Report for the Magdalena Ranger 

District Travel Management Proposed Action” dated June 2010. Changes were made as a result of 

additional field review. Please see the detailed description of the proposed action in chapter 2.

The Magdalena Ranger District proposes the following actions to implement the Travel 

Management Rule.

1. Restrict 400.5 miles of open National Forest System Roads (NFSR) to administrative use 

only. These roads would not be designated for motorized use and would not be displayed 

on the motor vehicle use map (MVUM).

2. Designate a 600-foot-wide corridor ( 300 feet on either side) of 374.4 miles of designated 

roads solely for the purpose of dispersed camping.

3. Reopen 14.7 miles of closed system roads (maintenance level 1) for all classes of 

vehicles.
Chapter 1. Purpose and Need

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 7

4. Construct 4.5 miles along five segments of roads to reroute around private land where the 

Forest Service does not have legal access. Designate open to all classes of vehicles.

5. Add 13.8 miles of unauthorized routes to the system as maintenance level 2 and designate 

for all classes of motor vehicles. These roads are needed to provide access to the forest, to 

meet resource and recreation management objectives, and to provide for an efficient 

transportation system.

6. Acquire approximately 25.7 miles of rights-of-way along 25 road segments located on 

private property within the Magdalena Ranger District boundary. The road segments will 

not appear on the MVUM until rights-of-way are obtained.

7. Amend the Forest Plan to remove the variable road density guidance for each 

management area and its associated analysis areas. Change the road density guidance to a 

maximum of 1.9 miles of roads per square mile average for Management Areas 11, 12, 

13, and 16 on the Magdalena Ranger District.

8. Amend the Forest Plan to remove outdated timeframes for performing road construction, 

reconstruction, maintenance, or obliteration of roads. To provide for consistency between 

the plan and Travel Management Rule, change or delete the standards/guidelines for the 

activities listed above to reflect the designated system as shown on the MVUM. 

When combined with previous decisions, these proposed changes would result in a motorized 

system with 843.9 miles of designated National Forest System roads. Of these, the limited use of 

motor vehicles within 300 feet either side of 374.4 miles of road would be allowed solely for the 

purpose of dispersed camping. Motorized big game retrieval off of the designated system would 

not be authorized.

Decision Framework

The responsible official will decide on a motorized transportation system that provides for 

motorized travel on the Magdalena Ranger District. This decision will include:

 Which system of roads, trails, and areas to designate.

 Which motor vehicle classes will be allowed on specific roads and trails.

 What special seasonal or timing restrictions, if any, will be applied to specific routes.

 Whether or not to allow dispersed motorized camping and, if so, under what conditions.

 Whether or not to allow motorized big game retrieval and, if so, under what conditions.

 Whether or not to approve proposed road routes that would address the lack of rights-ofway across private property.

 What mitigation and/or monitoring measures should be implemented as part of the 

selected alternative.

Linked to this decision would be a nonsignificant forest plan amendment to provide direction that 

is consistent with the Travel Management Rule.

Public Involvement

The Magdalena Ranger District travel management interdisciplinary team (ID team) initiated a 

collaborative process in January 2010 to inform the public about the travel management planning 
Chapter 1. Purpose and Need

8 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

process. Early in the process, the Cibola National Forest entered into an agreement with the U.S. 

Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution (USIECR) to secure assistance in the 

collaborative process design and implementation.

The process began with USIECR and the travel management ID team completing assessments of 

internal and external stakeholders. The Cibola National Forest entered into cooperating agency 

memorandums of understanding with Catron and Socorro Counties. The role of these 

stakeholders was to bring their perspectives on the potential outcomes of the Travel Management 

Rule to the table and to work collaboratively with other participants to develop recommendations 

for involving the wider public in motorized designations on the Magdalena Ranger District.

The July 22, 2010, scoping letter and report were sent to 180 people and/or organizations. The 

scoping letter, report, and maps were posted on the Cibola National Forest’s travel management 

Web page. Press releases were sent to local area media outlets to announce the release of the 

scoping letter and report. The district hosted public workshops in Magdalena, Datil, Monticello, 

and Socorro, New Mexico, during the scoping period to present the proposed action and to

receive comments from the public. Approximately 113 comments were received.

Tribal Consultation

The Cibola National Forest routinely consults with five American Indian tribes that may have 

used and may continue to use lands managed by the Magdalena Ranger District for traditional 

cultural and religious activities. The tribes are the: Pueblos of Acoma and Zuni, Navajo Nation,

Mescalero Apache Tribe, and Ft. Sill Chiricahua-Warm Springs Apache Tribe. In addition, the 

forest consults with the Alamo Band, a chapter of the Navajo Nation.

The tribes and chapter have been consulted regarding the Magdalena Ranger District’s travel 

management planning through both the Section 106 consultation process and the NEPA process. 

The Travel Management Rule and the forest’s planning efforts were first introduced to the tribes 

in a project consultation letter in February 2009. Consultation meetings were held in 2009 with 

the Pueblos of Acoma and Zuni, Navajo Nation, and Alamo Band. These meetings were 

preliminary in nature, as the proposed action had not yet been developed. Ysleta del Sur Pueblo 

responded to the forest that it had no concerns or objections to the undertaking and further 

consultation was not needed. The Pueblos of Acoma and Zuni, as well as the Navajo Nation 

confirmed their interest in consultation on this undertaking. During consultation, the Alamo Band 

indicated that its tribal members use national forest lands for collecting firewood and piñon nuts, 

and rely heavily on the sale of the nuts. The Band expressed concern that the travel restrictions 

would affect the tribal member’s ability to drive off-road for resource collection.

The travel management planning process was highlighted in the forest’s annual Section 106 

project consultation letter that was sent to the tribes in February 2010. In followup consultation, 

the Navajo Nation indicated that the tribe generally supports the idea of eliminating cross-country 

travel as it tends to create new roads and damage plants and makes it more difficult for traditional 

practitioners to conduct their activities in privacy. Attempts were unsuccessful to meet with the 

Pueblo of Acoma to consult regarding this undertaking in 2010. Consultation with the Pueblo of 

Zuni was closed in the fall of 2010 due to a lack of funding at the Zuni Heritage and Historic 

Preservation Office.
Chapter 1. Purpose and Need

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 9

The scoping letter and report was sent to all five tribes and the Alamo Band in July 2010. No 

written comments were received as a result of scoping. Information regarding sites of cultural and 

religious significance and general traditional use found in this analysis was obtained through 

consultation over an extended period, and prior to the timeframes for travel management planning 

on the Magdalena Ranger District.

Information and recommendations from these public and tribal involvement efforts, coordination 

with representatives from State, local, and tribal governments, and Forest Service ID team 

resource assessments have been incorporated to develop this proposed action. Further information 

on all public and tribal involvement efforts may be found in the project record located at the 

Magdalena Ranger District.

Issues

This section lists the issues identified as a result of the analysis of comments received during the 

scoping period. Issues are defined as those directly caused by implementing the proposed action. 

The analysis of major issues and project objectives provides the basis for formulating alternatives 

that meet the purpose and need of the proposed action and for making a decision on the project 

(Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 1909.15, Section 12.32–33).

The responsible official, Nancy Rose, Cibola National Forest supervisor (retired), approved the 

list of issues on November 1, 2010, in compliance with FSH 1909.15, Section 12.32.

1. Designation of unauthorized (user-created), closed, decommissioned, or new roads 

and motorized dispersed camping corridors. There is concern that designating 

unauthorized, closed, decommissioned, or new roads could have effects to natural or 

heritage resources. There is also a concern that the designation of motorized dispersed 

camping corridors will lead to conditions that mimic cross-country travel inside and 

adjacent to the corridors.

2. Loss or reduction of motorized recreation opportunities. There is concern that quality 

opportunities for motorized recreation, particularly opportunities for wider vehicles 

including full-size 4x4s, were not fully considered in the proposed action. These concerns 

included:

a. Requests for motorized trail opportunities for users desiring more challenges.

b. Requests for additional designations for full-size vehicles and ATV opportunities.

c. Requests for a designated OHV recreation area.

3. Environmental impacts. There is concern that motorized use designations being 

proposed could cause environmental impacts including:

a. Fragmentation and wildlife disturbance: There is a concern that adding 

unauthorized roads to the system and designating them for motor vehicle use may 

increase fragmentation of wildlife habitat and create additional barriers to wildlife 

movement. There is also a concern that the addition of unauthorized routes will 

reduce wildlife habitat capability to sustain populations and increase areas of 

disturbance.
Chapter 1. Purpose and Need

10 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

b. Impacts to drainage channels: There is concern that designating routes and 

constructing new trail segments in areas with intermittent and ephemeral stream 

channels may impair the ecological and hydrologic function of drainage channels.

c. Impacts to soils: Much of the project area has soils that erode easily or have a low 

bearing strength. These soils are extremely susceptible to compaction and rutting.

d. Impacts to vegetation: Concern was expressed about the loss of vegetation due to 

increased vehicle use and spread of invasive species from seed sources dispersed by 

the inclusion of unauthorized routes.

e. Impacts to heritage resources: There is concern about an increased potential for 

impacts to heritage resources by designation of unauthorized roads.

4. Lack of availability of motorized big game retrieval. There is a concern that not 

providing designated motorized big game retrieval from designated system roads would 

impede some hunters’ abilities to retrieve big game on the Magdalena Ranger District.
EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 11

Chapter 2. Alternatives

This chapter describes and compares the alternatives considered for travel management on the 

Magdalena Ranger District. It includes the following key sections:

 Alternatives described in detail;

 Alternatives considered but eliminated from detailed study;

 Monitoring requirements to avoid or minimize adverse effects.

Consideration of No Action (Baseline Conditions)

Typically, Forest Service environmental assessments include a “no action alternative” as one of 

the alternatives considered in detail. No action, or no changes from the current condition, serves 

as a baseline for comparing the effects of other identified action alternatives. Usually selecting no 

action or making no changes to the existing condition could be a realistic option for the 

responsible official. In the case of travel management on the Magdalena Ranger District, no 

action would, in part, provide for continued unrestricted cross-country motorized travel on the 

district outside of the Apache Kid Wilderness and Withington Wilderness, and on the Langmuir 

Research Site. This is not consistent with the Travel Management Rule that requires cross-country 

travel to be in designated areas, which are usually “a discrete, specifically delineated space that is 

smaller, and in most cases much smaller, than a ranger district.” (36 CFR 212.1) Because it is 

inconsistent with the requirements of the Travel Management Rule and could not be selected by 

the responsible official, the “No Action Alternative” is not one of the alternatives considered in 

detail in this assessment.

The Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) National Environmental Policy Act 

implementing regulations does not require a “no action” alternative for an environmental 

assessment. The CEQ regulations require “the alternative of no action” only in an environmental 

impact statement (40 CFR 1502.14(d)). The Forest Service NEPA regulations require 

environmental assessments to contrast the effects of action alternatives with that of taking no 

action (26 CFR 220.7(b)(2)(ii)). Although the “no action” alternative does not exist in this EA, it 

does display the effects of taking no action (baseline conditions) in chapter 3 at the beginning of 

the “Environmental Consequences” in each resource section. Continuation of the baseline 

conditions provides the basis for the comparison of the effects of the changes that would occur 

under each of the other action alternatives. (Please see appendix B for maps showing the 

alternatives.)

The baseline conditions related to motorized use include the following:

 There are 697,716 acres currently open to motorized cross-country travel on the 

Magdalena Ranger District, which represents 88 percent (791,707 acres) of the district.

As a result of unrestricted motorized cross-country travel, there has been a proliferation 

of unauthorized routes. Some of the activities that occur from motorized cross-country 

travel are: driving to dispersed camping sites; gathering forest product such as firewood; 

scoping hunting spots and retrieving downed game.

 There are 1,171.4 miles of National Forest System roads on the Magdalena Ranger 

District that are open to general motorized use which includes passenger vehicles and 

high-clearance vehicles, such as pickups or sport utility vehicles.
Chapter 2. Alternatives

12 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Alternatives Considered in Detail

This section describes the alternatives considered and presents those alternatives in comparative 

form, defining the differences between each alternative and providing a basis for choice among 

the alternatives for the decision maker. The alternatives were developed to respond to the issues 

described in the previous section. While many potential options for road designation exist, it is 

neither practical nor feasible to consider every possible combination. The alternatives described 

here represent a range of management options which address the issues raised and meet the 

purpose of and need for the proposal.

Alternatives

Alternative 1 – Proposed Action

This alternative is the proposed action that was presented in the “Scoping Report for Magdalena 

Ranger District Travel Management Proposed Action” dated July 22, 2010, with minor changes 

as a result of additional field review. These changes include refining the location of motorized 

dispersed camping locations and closing one road due to its location within threatened species 

protected activity centers.

Magdalena Mountains: Forest Road 45 would not be designated for motorized use, and its 

associated dispersed camping corridor would be removed starting at its location at the sections

35/36 section line and extending eastward to the end of the road. 

San Mateo Mountains: 

1. Remove the dispersed camping corridor on Forest Road 138 between its junction with 

Forest Road 549 and Forest Road 96; 

2. Remove the dispersed camping corridor on Forest Road 549 from Hughes Mill 

Campground south to its junction with Forest Road 476; 

3. Remove the dispersed camping corridor on Forest Road 478A. 

The Magdalena Ranger District proposes the following actions to implement the Travel 

Management Rule:

1. Changing the status of 378.2 miles of open National Forest System Roads (NFSR) to

“Restricted to Administrative Use Only.” These roads are needed periodically for 

resource management needs (i.e. wildlife and range improvements, vegetation 

management, and fire presuppression activities) and were not identified as roads used by 

the public to access the district. These roads will not be shown on the motor vehicle use 

map (MVUM).

2. Designating a 600-foot-wide corridor, 300 feet on either side of 374.4 miles of designated 

roads for dispersed camping.

3. Reopening 14.7 miles of closed system roads (Maintenance Level 1) for all classes of 

vehicles.

4. Constructing 4.5 miles along 5 segments of roads to reroute around private land where 

the Forest Service does not have access through rights-of-way. Designate the roads open 

to all classes of vehicles.
Chapter 2. Alternatives

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 13

5. Adding 17.0 miles of unauthorized routes to the system as Maintenance Level 2 and 

designate for all classes of vehicles.

6. Acquiring rights-of-way for approximately 21.4 miles within and leading to the 

Magdalena Ranger District boundary.

7. Prohibiting motorized big game retrieval on the Magdalena Ranger District off the 

designated system.

When combined with previous decisions, these proposed changes would result in:

 A road system with 850.8 miles of roads designated for motor vehicle use; 

 Motorized dispersed camping along 374.4 miles of specified National Forest System 

Roads;

 Prohibiting motorized big game retrieval off of the designated system.

Alternative 2

This alternative is the existing road system and responds to Issue 2: Providing additional 

motorized use access and recreation opportunities, when compared to the proposed action, as well 

as comments received during the scoping period in August 2010. Under this alternative, the 

district would:

1. Keep the 1,171.4 miles of open National Forest System Roads (NFSR) designated for 

motor vehicle use. Open system roads are those roads that are considered NFSR (as 

identified in INFRA) and currently available for motor vehicle use.*

2. Not add unauthorized routes to the system and designating for motor vehicle use.

3. Not all system roads would be accessible. Some roads would only be accessed by 

crossing private lands for which the Forest Service does not have legal rights-of-way.

There are 66.5 miles of rights-of-way that are located on private property within the 

Magdalena district boundary or are located outside of the Magdalena Ranger District 

boundary and are needed for access onto the district. 

When combined with previous decisions and route designations identified in the Proposed Action,

these proposed changes would result in:

 A road system with 1,210.8 miles of roads designated for motor vehicle use.

 Pullup parking adjacent to existing roads within a vehicle length.

 Prohibiting motorized big game retrieval off of the designated system.

* NOTE: After the baseline data was established, these discrepancies in the database were 

discovered: 35.1 miles of road were erroneously identified as National Forest System Roads 

(NFSRs) and 8 miles of NFSRs were not identified as such. These errors have been accounted for 

in alternative 2 by subtracting 27.1 miles of road from the miles of road that would be designated 

for motor vehicle use. For alternative 2, this would result in a baseline of 1,144.3 miles of open 

NFSRs. This discrepancy was accounted for in alternatives 1, 3, and 4 under “roads restricted to 

administrative use.” These database errors will be corrected prior to publishing the motor 

vehicle use map.
Chapter 2. Alternatives

14 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Alternative 3

Alternative 3 responds to Issues 2 and 4: Providing additional motorized access and motorized 

recreational opportunities when compared to alternatives 1 and 4. This alternative also responds 

to the issue of not allowing motorized big game retrieval off of the designated system in the

proposed action. This alternative designates additional roads and motorized access, designates an 

area for motor vehicle use, and proposes new construction of an additional route to access parts of 

the district for which the Forest Service has no legal rights-of-way.

This alternative provides for the following changes:

1. Changing the status of 367.1 miles of open National Forest System Roads (NFSR) to

“Restricted to Administrative Use Only.” These roads are needed periodically for 

resource management needs (i.e. wildlife and range improvements, vegetation 

management, and fire presuppression activities) and were not identified as roads used by 

the public to access the district. These roads will not be shown on the motor vehicle use 

map (MVUM).

2. Designating approximately 756 acres for a motorized recreation area in the southern part 

of the San Mateo Mountains in Sections 2 and 3, T. 9 S., R. 5 W., south of National 

Forest System Road 225. The area is bounded by NFSR 225 on the north, NFSR 925 on 

the south, a section fence on the east, and an unnamed arroyo on the west. This area is 

being considered based on the criteria for designation of trails and areas, as found in 36 

CFR 212.55 (b).

3. Changing the designation of several roads for motor vehicle use in response to natural 

resource protection needs (roads located primarily in arroyos). An adjacent unauthorized 

road or a National Forest System Road (NFSR) will be designated as their replacement in 

the road system. The changes are:

 Do not designate the southern segment of NFSR 10A2 and the eastern segment of 

NFSR 162A. Designate user-created road U10A2A.

 Do not designate NFSR 10BE. Designate user-created road U10BB1.

 Do not designate NFSR 469Z. Designate user-created road U469Z1.

 Do not designate NFSR 354L. Designate user-created road U354L1.

4. Authorizing motorized big game retrieval for elk and deer within a 0.5-mile-wide 

corridor, 0.25 mile on either side of 342.5 miles of designated roads in accordance with 

36 CFR 212.51(b). 

5. Designating a 600-foot-wide corridor, 300 feet on either side of 374.4 miles of designated 

roads for dispersed camping.

6. Constructing 6.4 miles along six segments of roads to reroute around private land where 

the Forest Service does not have access through rights-of-way. Designate open to all 

classes of vehicles.

7. Reopening 16.9 miles of closed system roads (maintenance level 1) for all classes of 

vehicles.

8. Adding 29.2 miles of unauthorized routes to the system as maintenance level 2 and 

designate for all classes of vehicles.
Chapter 2. Alternatives

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 15

9. Not all system roads are accessible; some can only be accessed by crossing private lands 

for which the Forest Service does not have legal rights-of-way. There are 19.9 miles of 

rights-of-way located on private property within the Magdalena district boundary or are 

located outside of the Magdalena Ranger District boundary and are needed for access 

onto the district. 

When combined with previous decisions and route designations identified in the proposed action,

these proposed changes would result in:

 A road system with 876.7 miles of roads designated for motor vehicle use.

 A 756-acre area designated for a motorized recreation area.

 Allowing motorized big game retrieval along 342.5 miles of specified National Forest

System Roads.

Alternative 4

This alternative was developed in response to Issues 1 and 3: The issues that new road 

construction and road reconstruction should be avoided and the potential natural and heritage 

resource impacts were a concern. This alternative also responds to the issues of reducing 

dispersed camping corridors along roads within endangered species habitat.

This alternative provides for the following changes:

1. Changing the status of 477 miles of open National Forest System Roads (NFSR) to

“Restricted to Administrative Use Only.” These roads are needed periodically for 

resource management needs (i.e. wildlife and range improvements, vegetation 

management, and fire presuppression activities) and were not identified as roads used by 

the public to access the district. These roads will not be shown on the motor vehicle use 

map (MVUM).

2. Designating a 600-foot-wide corridor, 300 feet on either side of 321.2 miles of designated 

roads for dispersed camping.

3. Constructing 3.7 miles along five segments of roads to reroute around private land where 

the Forest Service does not have access through rights-of-way. Designate open to all 

classes of vehicles.

4. Reopening 10.6 miles of closed system roads (maintenance level 1) for all classes of 

vehicles.

5. Adding 17.3 miles of unauthorized routes to the system as maintenance level 2 and 

designating for all classes of vehicles.

6. Not all system roads are accessible; some can only be accessed by crossing private lands 

for which the Forest Service does not have legal rights-of-way. There are 20.9 miles of 

rights-of-way located on private property within the Magdalena district boundary or 

located outside of the district’s boundary that are needed for access onto the district. 
Chapter 2. Alternatives

16 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

When combined with previous decisions and route designations identified in the proposed action, 

these proposed changes would result in:

 A road system with 746.9 miles of roads designated for motorized use.

 Motorized dispersed camping corridors along 321.2 miles of specified NF System Roads.

 Prohibiting motorized big game retrieval off of the designated system.

Features Common to All Alternatives

 With the Sandia Ranger District Travel Management decision in 2008, the Forest Plan 

was amended to prohibit cross-country travel off of the designated system, except as 

shown on the motor vehicle use map. This amendment would take effect for the 

Magdalena Ranger District once a decision is signed for the project. Motor vehicle use 

off the designated system of roads, trails, and areas will be prohibited, except as 

identified on the motor vehicle use map (MVUM). Motor vehicle operators are 

responsible for obtaining an MVUM prior to motorized travel on the Magdalena Ranger 

District.

 Amend the Forest Plan to remove outdated timeframes for performing road construction, 

reconstruction, maintenance, or obliteration of roads. To provide for consistency between 

the Forest Plan and the Travel Management Rule, change or delete the 

standards/guidelines for the activities listed above to reflect the designated system as 

shown on the motor vehicle use map (MVUM). 

 Access for permitted activities (i.e. firewood gathering, forest product gathering, mineral 

exploration and development, maintaining water developments, and recreational events) 

on National Forest System (NFS) lands would be authorized for motorized vehicles 

according to the terms of the written authorization. The Forest Service will determine 

when and how access is achieved through written stipulations in the terms of the permit 

or through annual operating plans. It is the responsibility of all permittees to follow the 

terms of their permits.

 Exempt the following vehicles and uses from these designations: (1) aircraft; (2) 

watercraft; (3) over-snow vehicles; (4) limited administrative use by the Forest Service; 

(5) use of any fire, military, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle for emergency 

purposes; (6) authorized use of any combat or combat support vehicle for national 

defense purposes; (7) law enforcement response to violations of law; and (8) motor 

vehicle use that is specifically authorized under a written authorization issued under 

Federal law or regulation (36 CFR 212.51(a)).

 Allow pullup parking adjacent to existing roads within a vehicle length.

 Emergency fire suppression activities would continue to be exempt from seasonal 

restrictions and restrictions on use, except in wilderness and other congressionally

designated special areas that restrict off-road motorized use. Any Federal, State, tribal, or 

local office, in the performance of an official duty, could receive permission to use 

motorized vehicles on unauthorized routes that are not designated as part of the 

transportation system.

 Amend the Forest Plan to remove the variable road density guidance for each 

management area and its associated analysis areas. Change the road density to a 

maximum of 1.9 miles of roads per square mile average for all management areas on the 

Magdalena Ranger District.
Chapter 2. Alternatives

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 17

 The forest supervisor can implement special orders to restrict public use of roads and 

trails where substantial resource damage is occurring or where implementation of other 

management activities is deemed necessary. This may include seasonal restrictions on an 

annual basis (e.g. calving areas or active raptor nests) as well as temporary restrictions for 

short-term conditions (e.g. mudslides and wet conditions, timber sale activities, etc.).

 Where included in the designation of roads for motor vehicle use, motorized dispersed 

camping corridors do not include private land nor are they designated within 300 yards of 

any human-made water structure used for livestock or wildlife (State of New Mexico 

Chapter 27, Article 1-8).

 Any unauthorized or decommissioned road that is added for motor vehicle use would be 

given a Forest Service Road System number and would become part of the forest 

transportation system. These roads will be surveyed for cultural resources prior to being 

added to the system. Any cultural resources located along the road would be mitigated 

through avoidance, testing for subsurface cultural deposits, data recovery, plating over 

resources in the road, or road reroutes. The routes will not appear on the MVUM until 

mitigation is complete.

 Road management objectives will be assigned for each newly constructed road and 

previously unauthorized route designated for use on the motor vehicle use map (MVUM).

 None of the alternatives make any changes to use and access of the district by foot, 

bicycle, and horse travel. This project does not designate or prohibit nonmotorized uses.

 On-the-ground signing would be used to clearly identify the road system number that 

corresponds with the MVUM.

 The district will identify portals, gateways, or trailheads where motorized vehicle use 

information can be displayed using “Tread Lightly” and “Leave No Trace” programs to 

educate motorized users.

 The district will explore partnerships and volunteer opportunities when making changes 

to the designations and maintaining motorized routes, and for conducting monitoring in 

accordance with 36 CFR 212.57.

 The district will emphasize user education and information as management tools to 

inform motorized recreationists of appropriate uses, ethics, and interactions with other 

users. Information would be distributed through active user groups and clubs to achieve 

compliance.

Alternatives Considered but 

Eliminated from Detailed Study

Development of an OHV Motorized Trail System 

The interdisciplinary team considered comments on developing a connected motorized OHV trail 

system on the eastern flanks of the Magdalena Mountains, to the north and south of Water 

Canyon.

 The area south of Water Canyon was not considered further because the motorized OHV 

trail system would have been located in the Langmuir Research Site. The Langmuir 

Research Site was constructed in 1963 and designated a research area in 1980. This 

congressionally designated research area is dedicated to atmospheric and astronomic 

research. Motorized and mechanical uses are restricted to the existing designated road 
Chapter 2. Alternatives

18 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

system within the Langmuir Research Site through Public Law 96–550, December 19, 

1980, “Roads shall be limited to those necessary for scientific research activities and 

other reasonable activities as determined by the Secretary. Motor vehicle use shall be 

restricted to roads designated in the plan.” The current travel management direction for 

the area is closed to motor vehicle use off designated roads. The area is also closed to 

OHV use.

 The area north of Water Canyon was not considered further due to resource protection 

needs and an issue with access (rights-of-way). The area presented for trail development 

is of high hydrological value (soil and water) and is an important wildlife habitat. 

Monitoring Requirements

The Travel Management Rule requires that the Forest Service “shall monitor the effects of motor 

vehicle use on designated roads, trails, and areas” (36 CFR 212.57). Monitoring on the 

Magdalena Ranger District will include:

 Annual condition surveys of randomly selected roads.

 Annual accomplishment reports of all district road construction, reconstruction, and 

maintenance.

 Monitoring 30 percent of the heritage resources located within motorized dispersed 

camping corridors designated for use under alternatives 1, 3, and 4 for a minimum of 5 

years. 

 Monitoring water and soil conditions through best management practice effectiveness 

monitoring (Cibola National Forest, Forest Plan, 1985).

Comparison of Alternatives

This section provides a comparative summary table and brief description of the environmental 

consequences of implementing each alternative, based on the analysis documented in chapter 3 of

this environmental assessment. Table 1 provides a comparison based on road mileage designated 

by alternative and acres open to cross-country travel by alternative. Table 2 summarizes the 

environmental consequences of each alternative by resource area. See appendix C for a list of 

National Forest System roads that were not designated by alternative.

Table 1. Road mileages by alternative

Action Type Baseline Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4

Proposed Changes to the Magdalena Road System

Miles of open National Forest System 

Roads to be restricted to administrative use 

only

0 378.2 0 367.1 477.0

Miles of closed roads changed to roads 

open to all vehicle use 

0 14.7 0 16.9 10.6

Miles of unauthorized roads added to the 

system1

0 17.0 0 29.2 17.3

Miles of road reroutes (new construction) 0 4.5 0 6.4 3.7
Chapter 2. Alternatives

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 19

Action Type Baseline Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4

Miles of road rights-of-way to be acquired 0 21.4 66.5 19.9 20.9

Miles of roads adjusted (subtracted) as a 

result of data cleanup

0 0 -27.120 0

Miles of roads designated for motorized 

dispersed camping corridors

0 374.4 0 374.4 321.2

Acres of motorized dispersed camping 

corridors

0 25,465.7 0 25,465.7 21,944.1

Miles of roads designated for motorized 

big game retrieval

0 0 0 342.5 0

Acres of motorized big game retrieval 0 0 0 86,683.7 0

Acres of areas designated for motor 

vehicle use 

0 0 0 756 

(1 area)

0

Acres open to cross-country motorized 

travel

697,716 0 0 0 0

Resulting System

Total miles of National Forest Service 

Roads designated for motor vehicles

1,171.4 850.8 1,210.8 876.7 746.9

1 Unauthorized roads include decommissioned roads and user-created roads.

2These miles represent database errors that were identified after establishment of the baseline data and do not reflect a 

change in the transportation system. In alternative 2, these roads are not identified as system roads and are, thus, not 

designated for motor vehicle use; the miles are subtracted from the total miles to be designated (1,171.4 + 66.5-27.1). 

In alternatives 1, 3, and 4, these errors are accounted for under “Roads Restricted to Administrative Use.” These 

database errors will be corrected prior to publishing the motor vehicle use map.
Chapter 2. Alternatives

20 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Table 2. Environmental consequences by alternative

Resource Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Recreation

Developed 

Recreation

No change from the 

existing condition.

No change is expected from 

the existing condition.

No change is expected from 

the existing condition.

A 756-acre motorized

recreation area would be 

designated.

No change is expected from 

the existing condition.

Dispersed 

Recreation

No change from the 

existing condition.

 Motorized cross-country 

travel would be prohibited.

 Motorized dispersed 

camping would be 

restricted to specific areas. 

 Increased crowding may 

occur within motorized 

dispersed camping areas. 

 Some may perceive these 

restrictions as a means of 

closing the forest.

 Motorized cross-country 

travel would be 

prohibited. 

 Dispersed camping would 

be restricted to one car 

length from a designated 

road. 

 Motorized cross-country 

travel would be restricted.

 Motorized dispersed 

camping would be 

restricted to specific 

areas.

 This alternative has more 

dispersed camping areas 

and an increased number 

of roads. This would 

allow camping close to 

customary areas and may 

minimize crowding.

 The effect of this 

alternative is similar to 

Alternatives 1 and 3. 

 Motorized cross-country 

travel would be 

prohibited.

 Motorized dispersed 

camping would be 

restricted to specific 

areas. 

 This alternative provides 

for the least amount of 

motorized dispersed 

camping areas.

Hunting and 

Motorized 

Big Game 

Retrieval

Motorized crosscountry travel for big 

game retrieval would 

likely continue, 

resulting in the 

continued creation of 

unauthorized routes 

on the district.

 Motorized cross-country 

big game retrieval would 

be prohibited. 

 This may result in a larger 

area for hunters who prefer 

solitude and /or limit the 

opportunities of those who 

rely on OHVs to hunt.

Motorized cross-country 

big game retrieval would be 

prohibited.

 Motorized cross-country 

big game retrieval would 

be allowed within 0.5 

mile on either side of 

designated roads. 

 The proximity of these 

corridors to private land 

and wilderness may result 

in vehicle trespass.

 This may reduce the 

opportunities for hunters 

seeking a quiet 

experience.

 Motorized cross-country 

big game retrieval would 

be prohibited. 

 This may result in a larger 

area for hunters who 

prefer solitude and/or 

limit the opportunities of 

those who rely on OHVs 

to hunt.
Chapter 2. Alternatives

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 21

Resource Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Wilderness No change from the 

existing condition.

 Potential of invasive 

species introduction. 

 Noise impact at or along 

the boundary.

 Reduction in motorized 

trespass.

 Potential of invasive 

species introduction.

 Noise impact at or along 

the boundary.

 Potential for motorized 

trespass.

 Potential of invasive 

species introduction.

 Noise impact at or along 

the boundary.

 Reduction in motorized 

trespass.

 Greater potential for 

vehicular trespass in big 

game retrieval zones near 

the boundary.

 Potential of invasive 

species introduction. 

 Noise impact at or along 

the boundary.

 Reduction in motorized 

trespass.

Visual 

Quality

No change from the 

existing condition.

Little change anticipated. Little change anticipated.

 Little change anticipated.  There may be short-term 

impacts from big game 

retrieval/camping 

corridors.

 Motorized recreation will 

affect the immediate area.

Visual enhancement over 

time.

Designated 

Roads and

Trails

No change from the 

existing condition.

 No designated motorized 

trails.

 Designated roads open to 

all vehicle classes.

 No cross-country travel.

 Seasonal road closures.  Favorable for full-size 

vehicles.

 Least favorable for 

OHV/ATV/UTV operators.

 No designated motorized 

trails.

 No cross-country travel.

 Seasonal road closures.

 No cross-country travel.

 Designate 756-acre area 

for motorized recreation.

 Seasonal road closures.  Favorable for OHV/

ATV/UTV operators.

 No designated motorized 

trails.

 Designated roads open to 

all vehicle classes.

 No cross-country travel. 

 Seasonal road closures.  Fewer available roads.  Most restrictive to OHV 

users.

 No opportunity for 

technical OHV operators.
Chapter 2. Alternatives

22 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Resource Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Motorized 

Dispersed 

Camping

No change from the 

existing condition.

 374.4 miles (25,465.7 

acres) of designated 

corridors.

 Some established areas 

were not considered due to 

resource concerns.

No change from the 

existing condition.

 374.4 miles (25,465.7 

acres) of designated 

corridors.

 Some established areas 

were not considered due 

to resource concerns.

 321.2 miles (21,944.1 

acres) of designated 

corridors.

 Some established areas 

were not considered due 

to resource concerns.

Transportation

Road 

Maintenance

Road maintenance 

needs would continue 

to far exceed the 

funding available for 

road maintenance.

 Road maintenance costs 

would decrease from the 

baseline condition by 12%. 

 The reduced maintenance 

costs would remain 

substantially higher than 

the forecasted budget for 

maintaining roads in the 

analysis area.

Road maintenance costs 

would increase by 

approximately 3%.

 Road maintenance costs 

would decrease from the 

baseline condition by 

10%.

 The reduced maintenance 

costs would remain 

substantially higher than 

the forecasted budget for 

maintaining roads in the 

analysis area.

 Road maintenance costs 

would decrease from the 

baseline condition by 

15%. 

 The reduced maintenance 

costs would remain 

substantially higher than 

the forecasted budget for 

maintaining roads in the 

analysis area.

Public Safety  The road system 

would remain 

relatively safe for 

prudent drivers. 

 If maintenance 

funding continues to 

decline, roads 

would deteriorate 

over time and 

become less safe.

 Some roads may 

experience more 

concentrated use. 

 Road management could 

change if vehicle conflicts 

became a problem.

 Maintenance costs would 

decrease by a relatively 

small amount and result in 

better maintenance of 

designated roads and a 

somewhat safer road 

system.

 Some roads may 

experience more 

concentrated use.

 Road management could 

change if vehicle conflicts 

became a problem.

 Maintenance costs would 

increase, which could 

hasten deterioration of 

road system condition.

 Some roads may 

experience more 

concentrated use. 

 Road management could 

change if vehicle conflicts 

became a problem.

 Maintenance costs would 

decrease by a relatively 

small amount, which 

would result in better 

maintenance of 

designated roads and a 

somewhat safer road 

system.

 Some roads may 

experience more 

concentrated use. 

 Road management could 

change if vehicle conflicts 

became a problem.

 Maintenance costs would 

decrease by a relatively 

small amount and result 

in better maintenance of 

designated roads and a 

somewhat safer road 

system.
Chapter 2. Alternatives

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 23

Resource Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Access 1,171.4 miles of road 

are presently open to 

motor vehicles.

850.8 miles would be 

designated for motor vehicle 

use. This is 27% fewer miles

than are presently available 

for use (baseline condition).

1,210.8 miles would be 

designated for motor 

vehicle use. This is 3% 

more miles than are 

presently available for use 

(baseline condition).

876.7 miles would be 

designated for motor 

vehicle use. This is 25%

fewer miles than are 

presently available for use 

(baseline condition).

746.9 miles would be 

designated for motor 

vehicle use. This is 36% 

fewer miles than are 

presently available for use 

(baseline condition).

Heritage Resources

Damage to 

Historic 

Properties 

by the 

Designated 

System

 Travel along all 

roads, existing or 

other, would have 

the potential to 

impact 890 known 

historic properties. 

 Motorized crosscountry travel would 

continue, potentially 

impacting all known 

and unknown 

historic properties.

 This alternative would 

result in a 79% reduction in 

the number of historic 

properties impacted by the 

existing road system. 

 The effect to historic 

properties from the 

proposed designation of 

non-system roads would be 

mitigated prior to the road 

being shown on the 

MVUM per Appendix I of 

the P.A.1

 Travel along the existing 

system would continue to 

impact 137 known 

historic properties. 

 Cross-country travel 

would be prohibited under 

this alternative reducing 

the potential effect to 

known and unknown 

historic properties.

 This alternative would 

result in a 64% reduction 

in the number of historic 

properties impacted by 

the existing road system. 

 The effect to historic 

properties from the 

proposed designation of 

non-system roads would 

be mitigated prior to the 

road being shown on the 

MVUM per Appendix I 

of the P.A. 1

 This alternative would 

result in a 79% reduction 

in the number of historic 

properties impacted by 

the existing road system. 

 The effect to historic 

properties from the 

proposed designation of 

non-system roads would 

be mitigated prior to the 

road being shown on the 

MVUM per Appendix I 

of the P.A1

1

Standard Consultation Protocol for Travel Management Route Designations, Appendix I of the Region 3 Amended Programmatic Agreement Regarding Historic Property 

Protection and Responsibilities.

Contemporary Tribal Use and TCPs

Traditional 

Cultural 

Properties 

and 

Traditional 

Use

 There is a potential 

to effect places and 

properties of cultural 

and religious 

significance and 

traditional use of the 

areas by 

practitioners. 

 There would be no 

change to access for 

traditional use on the 

district. 

 There would be a reduced 

potential to effect places or 

properties of cultural and 

religious significance.

 Vehicular access to some 

resources would be 

affected by prohibition of 

cross-country travel. 

 There would be some 

effect to hunting practices 

due to the need to change 

the method of game 

 There would be a reduced 

potential to effect places 

or properties of cultural 

and religious significance. 

 Vehicular access to some 

resources would be 

affected by prohibition of 

cross-country travel. 

 There would be some 

effect to hunting practices 

due to the need to change 

the method of game 

 There would be a reduced 

potential to effect places 

or properties of cultural 

and religious significance. 

 Vehicular access to some 

resources would be 

affected by prohibition of 

cross-country travel. 

 There would be a reduced 

effect to hunting practices 

as there would be less 

need to change the 

 There would be a reduced 

potential to effect places 

or properties of cultural 

and religious significance. 

 There would be a greater 

effect to the access and 

use of a cultural 

significance site. 

 There would be some 

effect to hunting practices 

due to the need to change 

the method of game 
Chapter 2. Alternatives

24 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Resource Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

 This alternative does 

not reduce the 

potential for the 

disruption of 

traditional cultural 

and religious 

activities.

retrieval.

 There would be a reduced 

potential for the disruption 

of traditional cultural and 

religious activities.

retrieval. 

 There would be a reduced 

potential for the disruption 

of traditional cultural and 

religious activities.

method of game retrieval. 

 There would be a reduced 

potential for the 

disruption of traditional 

cultural and religious 

activities.

retrieval. 

 There would be a reduced 

potential for the disruption 

of traditional cultural and 

religious activities.

Vegetation Management

Vegetation 

Management

No change to vegetation management 

projects.

No change to vegetation 

management projects.

No change to vegetation 

management projects.

No change to vegetation 

management projects.

No change to vegetation 

management projects.

Vegetation 

Removed

No change from the 

existing condition.

The construction of 4.5 miles 

of reroutes around private 

property would remove 19 

acres of vegetation.

No change from the 

existing condition.

 The construction of 6 

miles of reroutes around 

private property would 

remove 25 acres of 

vegetation. 

 The designation of a 756-

acre motorized recreation

area would have negative 

impacts on vegetation and 

increase the potential for 

invasive plants 

establishment.

No vegetation would be 

removed under this 

alternative.

Social and Economic

Local 

Economy

There would be no 

change to the existing 

condition.

This alternative would not 

affect the economic sectors 

that are supported by 

motorized recreation, 

motorized dispersed 

camping, or hunting.

There would be no change 

to the existing condition 

under this alternative.

This alternative would not 

affect the economic sectors 

that are supported by 

motorized recreation, 

motorized dispersed 

camping, or hunting.

This alternative would not 

affect the economic sectors 

that are supported by 

motorized recreation, 

motorized dispersed 

camping, or hunting.
Chapter 2. Alternatives

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 25

Resource Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Wildlife and Rare Plants

Potential 

indirect 

wildlife 

displace-ment 

due to motor-

ized dispersed 

camping and 

big game 

retrieval 

697,716 acres 25,466 acres 0 acres 112,150 acres 21,944 acres

Average route 

density 

resulting in 

wildlife 

displacement 

and habitat 

loss

2.0 miles per square 

mile

0.9 mile per square mile 1.4 miles per square mile 1.0 miles per square mile 0.8 mile per square mile

Law Enforcement

Enforcement Law enforcement 

priorities and patterns 

would likely remain 

unchanged. Patrols 

would continue to be 

infrequent. Patrols 

would focus on 

heavily-trafficked 

areas. 

 A reduction in the miles of 

system roads available to 

the public for motorized 

use may facilitate patrols.

LEOs may be able to 

identify roads being used 

and not designated, 

allowing them to focus 

patrols on areas where 

illegal activities may occur.

 The designation of 

motorized dispersed 

camping corridors would 

facilitate the enforcement 

of closure orders. 

Law enforcement priorities 

and patterns would likely 

remain unchanged. Patrols 

would focus on heavily-

trafficked areas.

Increase in the number of 

roads for motorized use 

and designation of 

motorized big game 

retrieval corridors may 

require an increase in 

LEO patrols.

 The designation of roads 

available to motorized use 

may allow LEOs to 

identify roads being used 

that are not designated, 

and to focus patrols on 

areas where illegal 

activities may occur.

 The designation of 

motorized dispersed 

camping corridors would 

Effects would be similar 

those identified in alternative 1.
Chapter 2. Alternatives

26 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Resource Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

facilitate the enforcement 

of closure orders.

Range

Permitted 

Range 

Activities

No change in 

permitted range 

management 

activities.

No change in permitted 

range management activities.

No change in permitted 

range management 

activities.

No change in permitted 

range management 

activities.

No change in permitted 

range management 

activities.

Fire and Fuels

Fire 

Suppression 

and Fire Risk

There would be no 

change in the existing 

road system. Initial 

attack response time 

to fires would remain 

the same.

 The use of all Forest 

Service system roads for 

administrative purposes, 

including fire patrols and 

suppression, would 

continue no matter what

alternative was selected. 

 Fewer miles of roads open 

to the public may result in 

fewer human-caused fire 

ignitions occurring. 

 Fewer roads may also 

hinder initial attack 

response time due to 

decreased road travel and 

less frequent road 

maintenance on nondesignated roads.

There would be no change 

in the existing road system.

Initial attack response time 

to fires would remain the 

same.

 The use of all Forest 

Service system roads for 

administrative purposes, 

including fire patrols and 

suppression, would 

continue no matter what

alternative was selected.

 More miles of roads open 

to the public may result in 

more human-caused fire 

ignitions occurring. 

 More roads may also 

hinder initial attack 

response time due to 

increased road travel and 

more frequent road 

maintenance on 

designated roads.

 The use of all Forest 

Service system roads for 

administrative purposes, 

including fire patrols and 

suppression, would 

continue no matter what

alternative was selected.

 More miles of roads open 

to the public may result in 

more human-caused fire 

ignitions occurring. 

 More roads may also 

hinder initial attack 

response time due to 

increased road travel and 

more frequent road 

maintenance on 

designated roads.
EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 27

Chapter 3. Affected Environment 

and Environmental Consequences

This section summarizes the physical, biological, social, and economic environments of the 

affected analysis area and the potential changes to those environmental conditions due to 

implementation of the alternatives. It also presents the scientific and analytical basis for the 

comparison of alternatives presented in table 2 (chapter 2).

Although there is not a “no acton alternative” for this project, the effects of taking no action 

(baseline conditions) are discussed at the beginning of each resource analysis section. These 

effects are used as the baseline for comparing the effects of the action alternatives.

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) guidance on the considerations of past actions in 

the cumulative effects analysis notes that “agencies are not required to list or analyze the effects 

of individual past actions unless such information is necessary to describe the cumulative effect 

of all past actions” (CEQ memo, 2005). The discussion of cumulative effects included in all the 

resource analyses in this chapter do not attempt to quantify the effects of past human actions by 

adding up all prior actions on an action-by-action basis. To understand the contribution of past 

actions to the cumulative effects of the proposed action and alternatives, the analyses rely on the 

current resource setting and conditions as a proxy for the impacts of past actions. This is because 

existing conditions reflect the aggregate impact of all prior human actions and natural events that 

are difficult to quantify that have affected the environment and might contribute to cumulative 

effects. These existing conditions are described under the baseline component of the 

“Environmental Consequences” section of each specialist’s report. 

Other present and reasonably foreseeable future actions are considered in the analysis of 

cumulative effects and listed in appendix D.

Analysis of Unauthorized Roads

The following analysis is based on interdisciplinary specialist reports that address the site-specific 

analysis of unauthorized roads. Each of the resource sections that follow considers the addition of

these roads in their discussion of effects in the action alternatives.

Recreation

The following analysis is based on the recreation specialist report prepared by Tyler Albers, 

landscape architect/forest trails manager and Herbert Ray, district recreation technician. This 

report is on file in the project record.

Affected Environment

The Magdalena Ranger District is located in Socorro, Catron, and Sierra Counties in New 

Mexico. The district has four separate and distinct mountain ranges: the Bear/Gallinas, Datil, 

Magdalena, and San Mateo Mountains, which are vastly spread apart by large grassland basins.

The communities of Alamo Band Navajo Indian Reservation, Datil, Magdalena, Dusty, and 

Monticello are in close proximity to the Magdalena Ranger District. These communities use lands 

managed by the Forest Service for uses such as: recreation, firewood gathering, grazing, piñon 

picking, water sources, and hunting. There are many communities located within a 2-hour drive 

of the Magdalena Ranger District, including: the Albuquerque metropolitan area, Socorro, Pie 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

28 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Town, Belen, Los Lunas, and Truth or Consequences. These communities primarily utilize the 

Magdalena Ranger District for recreation activities.

Recreation on the Magdalena Ranger District is growing, partly because of the overflow of 

recreationists from the Albuquerque metropolitan area. The district has 6 developed 

campgrounds, 1 developed trailhead, and 34 undeveloped trailheads as well as numerous 

opportunities for dispersed recreation. The district manages 193 miles of forest system trails, 

which are mainly used for hiking, horseback riding, and mountain biking. Recreation use is 

primarily overnight use from hunters, campers, backpackers, and rock climbers. The district’s day 

use activities include hunting, biking, pleasure driving, horseback riding, gathering forest 

products, rock climbing, and short day hikes. Hunting is popular throughout the district. The 

Magdalena Ranger District has 37 authorized special use permits for outfitter guides.

The Langmuir Research Site is comprised of 30,486 acres within the Magdalena Mountains.

Motorized and mechanical uses are restricted to the existing designated road system within the 

Langmuir Research Site through Public Law 96–550, December 19, 1980, “Roads shall be 

limited to those necessary for scientific research activities and other reasonable activities as 

determined by the Secretary. Motor vehicle use shall be restricted to roads designated in the 

plan.” All motorized vehicle use is restricted to National Forest System Road 235 within the 

boundaries of the Langmuir Research area. This designation will not be revisited during this 

project analysis because it complies with the Travel Management Rule.

Developed Recreation

The Magdalena Ranger District contains six developed campgrounds, one developed group 

shelter, one developed trailhead (Mesa). All but three (Water Canyon Campground, Water 

Canyon Group Campground, and Water Canyon Group Shelter) facilities are located in the San 

Mateo Mountains.

The district has 1 developed and 34 undeveloped trailheads accessible to the public. The main 

motorized travel routes into Hardy Springs, East Fork Sawmill, Post, and Shipman Trailheads, 

located on the Magdalena Mountains and southern San Mateo Mountains are currently 

inaccessible to the public due to road easement issues. The Forest Service does not have legal 

easements on the off forest access roads, and these roads have been gated by the local 

landowners.

Dispersed Recreation and Dispersed Camping

The district has many dispersed recreation opportunities including: hunting, hiking, dispersed 

camping (both backpack and car camping), pleasure driving, forest product gathering, wildlife 

viewing, rock climbing, biking, and horseback riding. Recreation use in the Magdalena area is 

growing, due to the population growth in the middle Rio Grande Valley. Attractions such as New 

Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology and the Bosque Del Apache National Wildlife Refuge 

(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) draw tourists to the area.

The district does not have any designated mountain bike trails. Web based searches for mountain 

biking in the area identify multiple rides in and near the national forest in the Magdalena, North 

San Mateo, and Bear/Gallinas Mountains. Horseback riding opportunities exist throughout the 

Magdalena Ranger District on designated pack/stock trails.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 29

Off-highway vehicle (OHV) use occurs across the district although no designated OHV 

trails/routes have been established. OHV users tend to travel on the roads and do not travel cross

country throughout the district. There is evidence of OHV users trespassing into the wilderness 

areas in several locations.

Motorized dispersed camping offers solitude and primitive recreation experiences that are 

generally not available in developed recreation sites. There is evidence of extensive motorized 

dispersed camping throughout the district. District personnel have observed that motorized 

dispersed camping occurs between 100 and 300 feet from the roads and is most frequent during 

hunting season.

Most of the motorized dispersed camping tends to occur in the same areas. Some of these areas 

may expand, but it is unlikely that many new areas would develop since factors such as terrain, 

privacy, and suitability for camping change little over time. 

Hunting and Motorized Big Game Retrieval

The U.S. Forest Service defines bison, bear, elk, and mule deer as big game species dependent on 

a forest environment. For purposes of this decision document, only elk and mule deer will be 

considered as big game. Bison are not found on the Magdalena Ranger District, and bear 

populations have not warranted large harvest limits.

The Magdalena Ranger District is divided into two game management units (GMUs) by New 

Mexico Department of Game and Fish: Unit 13, which includes the Datil and Bear/Gallinas 

Mountains and Unit 17, which includes the Magdalena and San Mateo Mountains (New Mexico 

Big Game and Trapper Rules and Information, 2010–2011 License Year).

Unit 13 (Datil and Bear/Gallinas is included as a portion of this unit) is designated for elk, mule 

deer, antelope, bear, turkey, and cougar hunting during the 2010–2011 hunting season. The

number of permits varies per species and type of hunt is shown in table 3.

Table 3. New Mexico Game Management Unit 13 permits for 2010–2011

Animal No. of Permits Issued Type of Permit Season of Hunt

Elk

300 Bow 9/1–10; 9/11–18; 9/19–24

413 Muzzleloader/Bow 10/9–13; 10/16–20; 10/23–27;

11/20–24, 12/4–8

120 Youth, Any Legal

Sporting Arm

11/26–30; 12/26–30

Deer

300 Bow 9/1–24; 1/1–15; 2011

500 Muzzleloader/Bow 10/30–11/3

1,100 Any Legal Sporting Arm 9/25–10/3; 11/6–10; 11/13–17

Antelope*

2 Mobility Impaired 7/30–8/1

100 Any Legal Sporting Arm 10/2–4

15 Bow 8/14–22
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

30 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Animal No. of Permits Issued Type of Permit Season of Hunt

Bear

§ Bow 9/1-24

§ Any Legal Sporting Arm 8/16-31; 9/25-11/30

Turkey Over the Counter 4/15-5/10

Cougar Ω Any Legal Sporting Arm 10/1-3/31

*Antelope Management Unit 12 includes the Datil and Bear/Gallinas units of the Magdalena district.

§ Total harvest limit allowed is 77 bears or 31 females between Units 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20–24, 26, and 27.

Ω Total harvest limit is 46 sustainable mortality/12 females between Units 13, 14, and 17.

Unit 17 (San Mateo and Magdalena Mountains are included as a portion of this unit) is designated 

for deer, elk, antelope, bear, and cougar hunting during the 2010–11 hunting season. The unit 

receives most of its use during the months of August through November. The number of permits 

varies per species and type of hunt is shown in table 4.

Table 4. New Mexico Game Management Unit 17 permits for 2010–2011

Animal No. of Permits Issued Type of Permit Season of Hunt

Elk

200 Bow 9/1–10; 9/11–18; 9/19–24

422 

including youth hunt

Muzzleloader/bow 10/9–13; 10/16–20; 10/23–

27; 12/4–8; 12/11–15

120 Youth, Any Legal Sporting 

Arm

11/26–30; 12/26–30

Deer

450 

including youth hunt

Any Legal Sporting Arm 11/6–10; 11/13–17; 11/25–

28; 12/4–5; 12/11–12

400 Bow only 9/1–24; 1/1–15; 2011

200 Muzzleloader/bow 10/30–11/3

Antelope

*

30 Bow 8/14–22

2 Mobility Impaired, Any 

Legal Sporting Arm

7/30–8/1 

Bear

§ Bow 9/1–24

§ Any Legal Sporting Arm 8/16–31; 9/25–11/30

Turkey Over the Counter 4/15–5/10

Cougar Ω Any Legal Sporting Arm 10/1–3/31

*Antelope Management Unit 20 includes the San Mateo and Magdalena units of the Magdalena district. 

§ Total harvest limit allowed is 77 bears or 31 females between Units 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20–24, 26, and 27. 

Ω Total harvest limit is 46 sustainable mortality/12 females between Units 13, 14, and 17.

The Magdalena Ranger District is a very popular area for hunting. In addition to the general 

hunting public, there are 30+ outfitters and guides who perform their hunting services on this 

district. The impacts from hunting (such as increased dispersed motorized camping, vehicular 

traffic, and big game retrieval) to the natural resources are evident throughout the district. District 

employees have noted hunting camps returning to the same location year after year. Impacts from 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 31

motorized big game retrieval are difficult to target, but once a hunter drives a vehicle cross

country on the fragile landscape of this district, the tire tracks become visible and inviting to other 

motorized vehicle users.

Wilderness

The Apache Kid Wilderness (44,530 acres) and Withington Wilderness (19,075 acres) are 

managed to provide a quality visitor experience, as the unique character of the wilderness is 

preserved and protected. The pristine character and natural processes are retained, with minimal 

evidence of human influence. Opportunities for solitude and ecological, scientific, educational, 

scenic, and historical aspects of the wilderness have been retained. Authorized outfitter/guide 

services are allowed where the use is compatible with management direction. Most roads near the 

wilderness boundaries provide access to the trailheads.

Congress designated both wilderness areas in 1980 in the New Mexico Wilderness Act. The 1967 

Wilderness Act prohibits the use of motorized or mechanical transport or equipment in designated 

wilderness areas. As a result, the wilderness areas are outside of the project analysis area.

Roads and Trails 

Roads are important for providing access to recreation opportunities and as a recreation resource 

on the Magdalena Ranger District. Roads provide opportunities for sightseeing, exploring the 

district, hunting, and accessing developed and dispersed recreation opportunities. The more 

primitive roads provide for challenging OHV driving skills. 

Driving for pleasure is a frequent recreation activity identified by 10 percent of the respondents in 

the Cibola’s 2001 National Visitor Use Monitoring surveys. In 2006, when the Cibola National 

Forest’s mountain districts were analyzed separately from the grasslands, 19.9 percent said they 

drove for pleasure on the mountain districts. (USDA 2006)

All of the district’s NFS roads are currently open to all vehicles. In addition to the NFS roads, 

unauthorized roads and a number of roads that are listed in the roads database as decommissioned 

are still in use. Often there is no obvious difference between system roads, unauthorized roads,

and roads listed as decommissioned, but still in use. The system roads are not always marked with 

route markers or other signs that would indicate that they are system roads. Unauthorized routes 

are often well defined and receive a moderate amount of use and are not easily discernible from 

system routes. This is also true for some decommissioned roads that were not successfully 

decommissioned and are still being used. 

Trail use is the primary dispersed recreation use. The Magdalena Ranger District’s trail system 

represents 31 percent of the Cibola’s trail system. The district has 193.6 miles of the National 

Forest System’s 618 miles of trails identified in the database. Many forest system trails in the San 

Mateo Mountains either lead to, or are connected to, trails that lead into the Withington or Apache 

Kid Wilderness areas. In addition, many trails in the Magdalena Mountains lead into the 

Langmuir Research Site. None of the 193.6 miles of trails on the district are managed for 

motorized recreation. The trails are mainly utilized for hiking or horseback riding (as many trails 

lead to the Withington Wilderness, Apache Kid Wilderness, and Langmuir Research Site which 

prohibits motorized and/or mechanized vehicles).
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

32 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

The trails budget is based on a forestwide allocation and distribution to the districts and is

determined on an annual basis, based on needs and priorities. The annual trail budget for the 

Cibola National Forest averages $140,000. The system is operated and maintained with the same 

funds, including those trails where motorized use has been accepted. As more districts designate 

motorized trails through Travel Management Rule decisions, the districts could be managing 

more trails but without an increase in budget.

Motorcycle Trials. There have been multiple requests proposed by a trials motorcycle club in 

Truth or Consequences, New Mexico, for an area designated for trials riding. Motorcycle trial

riding is a non-speed event performed on specialized motorcycles and is very popular in the 

United Kingdom and Spain, however, there are participants around the globe including New 

Mexico. Motorcycle trials consist of technical obstacle courses where the rider navigates a 

motorcycle through technical terrain while attempting to avoid placing a foot to the ground. Trial 

motorcycles are distinctive in that they are extremely lightweight, lack seating (they are designed 

to be ridden standing up) and have suspension travel that is short, relative to motocross or enduro 

motorcycles. Motorcycle trials is often utilized by competitors of other motorcycle sports (such as 

motocross or street racers) as a way to cross train, as trials teaches great throttle, balance, and 

machine control.

Scenic Resources/Visual Quality Management 

Please refer to appendix E for a map of the visual quality objectives for the Magdalena Ranger 

District.

The Bear/Gallinas Mountains are a large, sprawling, volcanic range that rises from the 

grassland basins. The foothills are gently rolling hills of piñon and junipers, with bands of 

ponderosa pines at higher elevations. The Bear/Gallinas Mountains are one section of the low, 

volcanic ranges surrounding the Plains of San Agustin (Julyan 2006). They are located within the 

Datil-Mogollon physiographic section which is a transition zone between the Colorado Plateau 

and the Basin and Range physiographic sections (USDA Forest Service 1999).

The landscape is predominantly natural appearing, but there is evidence of roads throughout the 

mountains. Near the district boundary, private inholding ranch lands influence the view. Grazing 

is common; cattle are part of the landscape throughout the Bear/Gallinas. The Alamo Band 

Navajo Indian Reservation borders the Bear/Gallinas Mountains to the north and the town of 

Magdalena to the south. The built environments of these communities are considered low density, 

but do affect the scenery. 

The Datil Mountains are a small range on the northwest edge of the Plains of San Agustin.

These mountains are known for their grey-pink-lavender rock canyons and dramatic rock 

columns, which were created by volcanic processes. From the higher elevations in the Datil 

Mountains, steep hills with dense conifer populations can be observed for miles. Even more 

striking is the view from the east, where a huge fault scarp created an uplift of vertical cliffs 

(Julyan 2006). The Datil Mountains are located in the Datil-Mogollon physiographic section 

which is a transition zone between the Colorado Plateau and the Basin and Range physiographic 

sections (USDA Forest Service 1999).

Within the Datil Mountains is the dramatic ridge of the Sawtooth Mountains. These isolated, 

buttelike peaks soar above the sage-covered flatlands and provide a climactic view from a 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 33

distance (Richie 2007). From within the Sawtooth Mountains, the landscape varies from 

intricately carved peaks, towering, freestanding formations, sheer-walled box canyons, colorful 

badland pockets, and hidden stands of magnificent, old-growth conifer forest (Richie 2007). The 

Datil Mountains are directly north of the town of Datil. The built environment is very low density 

and the only developed area in the proximity of these mountains. The landscape of the Datil 

Mountains is natural appearing, but roads and grazing activities can be distinguished throughout 

the district.

The Magdalena Mountains are highly valued for their scenic quality. The volcanic terrain is 

dominated by broad structural basins and scattered fault-block mountain ranges. They are located 

in the Datil-Mogollon physiographic section, which is a transition zone between the Colorado 

Plateau and the Basin and Range physiographic province (USDA Forest Service 1999).

The Magdalena Mountains are characterized by the variety of landscape types that change with 

the elevation and aspect. Lower elevations are open grasslands, transitioning to piñon and juniper 

woodlands. The ponderosa pine forests are found at the higher elevations, eventually mixing with 

the spruce-fir to the very top of the mountain ridge which is primarily tall, stately spruce, 

Douglas-fir, and white fir with patches of aspen providing magnificent fall colors. 

The landscape is predominantly natural appearing. Recreation development is minimal, but is 

evident along National Forest System Road 235. These developments include Water Canyon 

Campground, Water Canyon Picnic Site, and Mesa Trailhead. Research facility development is 

apparent along the southern ridge of the Magdalena Mountains. The Magdalena Ridge 

Observatory and Langmuir Laboratory for Atmospheric Research are located at the end of NFSR 

235. The majority of the lands adjacent to the district’s boundary around the Magdalena 

Mountains are undeveloped. The town of Magdalena is located on the northern end of the range 

and is a very low density development. 

Roads and trails are evident throughout the Magdalena Mountains. While roads and occasionally 

trails add a linear element when viewed from a distance, they are also the transportation system 

which provides access to outstanding scenic overlook points. NFSR 235 to South Baldy Peak 

provides dramatic views near the top of the ridge. There are expansive views across the Rio 

Grande Valley to the east and the San Mateo Mountains to the west.

The San Mateo Mountains’ scenic quality is a significant factor of the area’s recreation 

opportunities. The San Mateo Mountains are a large, steep, volcanic range towering over the 

western edge of the Rio Grande Valley. The topography is unforgiving and consists of dark 

volcanic cliffs and high mountain peaks. The lower elevations are alluvial basin grasslands which 

transform through piñon/juniper, ponderosa, and spruce/fir forests as elevations rise. They are 

located within the Datil-Mogollon physiographic section, which is a transition zone between the 

Colorado Plateau and the Basin and Range physiographic sections (USDA Forest Service 1999). 

The San Mateo Mountains are an extremely remote mountain range. The Apache Kid and 

Withington Wilderness areas are located in the San Mateo Mountains. Roads terminate at the 

wilderness boundaries, where undeveloped trailheads create a gateway to the wilderness. The 

landscape is natural appearing with many vista locations throughout the canyons and ridgelines.

The view is far reaching from the top of Blue Mountain, San Mateo Peak, Mt. Withington, and 

many other peaks throughout the San Mateo Mountains.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

34 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Outside of the wilderness boundaries are 4 developed campgrounds and 19 undeveloped 

trailheads. Recreation development exists in Bear Trap Canyon along NFSR 549. Hughes Mill 

and Bear Trap Campgrounds provide scenic opportunities within Bear Trap Canyon in the 

northwest region of the San Mateo Mountains. These campgrounds also provide access to 

multiple trails which traverse the Withington Wilderness. Springtime Campground is located on 

the southern end of the San Mateo Mountains below Vick’s and San Mateo Peaks. Springtime 

Campground serves as a portal to the Apache Kid Wilderness. Panoramic views of the San Mateo 

Mountains can be seen from Luna Park Campground on the southern end of the district boundary

(USDA Forest Service 1999).

Grazing activities and roads are evident outside of the wilderness areas of the San Mateo 

Mountains. Bordering the Magdalena Ranger District in the San Mateo Mountains are many large 

ranches. It is common for these ranches to have allotment grazing permits on lands managed by 

the district.

The 1985 Forest Plan utilized the Forest Service Visual Management System to determine visual 

quality objectives for all National Forest System lands within the Cibola National Forest (USDA 

Forest Service 1974). Visual quality objectives (VQOs) are designed to integrate the public’s 

concern for scenic quality (sensitivity levels) with the diversity and scenic attractiveness of the 

natural features (variety classes). These objectives describe the degree of acceptable alteration of 

the natural landscape based upon the importance of esthetics (USDA Forest Service 1974).

VQOs are used to describe the degree of alteration that may occur to the visual resource on lands 

within the Magdalena Ranger District management areas:

 Preservation – This visual quality objective allows ecological change only. Management 

activities, except for very low visual impact recreation facilities, are prohibited. 

 Retention – This visual quality objective provides for management activities which are 

not visually evident. Under the retention objective, activities may only repeat form, line, 

color, and texture which are frequently found in the characteristic landscape. Changes in 

their qualities of size, amount, intensity, direction, pattern, etc., should not be evident. 

 Partial Retention – Management activities must remain visually subordinate to the 

characteristic landscape. Associated visual impacts in form, line, color, and texture must 

be reduced as soon after project completion as possible but within the first year. 

 Modification – Management activities may visually dominate the characteristic 

landscape. However, landform and vegetative alterations must borrow from naturally 

established form, line, color, or texture so as to blend in with the surrounding landscape 

character. The objective should be met within 1 year of project completion. 

 Maximum Modification – Management activities of vegetative and landform alterations 

may dominate the characteristic landscape. However, when viewed as background, the 

visual characteristics must be those of natural occurrences within the surrounding area or 

character type. Alterations may be out of scale or contain detail which is incongruent 

with natural occurrences as seen in the foreground or middle ground. 

The VQOs specified in the Forest Plan for the Magdalena Mountains analysis area are

approximately half modification and half partial retention. The partial retention area is consistent 

with the Langmuir Research Site. There is a small area of retention in the Water Canyon area (a

visual quality objective map is included with this report). 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 35

The San Mateo Mountains are predominantly partial retention according to the VQO data. There 

are areas outside of the Withington and Apache Kid Wildernesses that are categorized as 

modification and maximum modification.

The VQOs for the Bear/Gallinas Mountains are predominantly maximum modification. Along 

NM 169, there is a corridor of modification and along U.S. 60, there is an area of partial 

retention. This indicates that with the exception of the partial retention areas, other management 

considerations are given a higher priority than scenic quality for most of the Bear/Gallinas 

Mountains.

The VQOs for the Datil Mountains are also predominantly maximum modification. The U.S. 60 

corridor is categorized as partial retention, with portions being retention. This partial 

retention/retention corridor signifies the importance of scenic quality within the view shed of the 

Datil community. 

Analyzing roads and trails in relation to scenic quality is complex. The roads and trails are a 

“viewer platform” where people experience the landscape, and are often used to define sensitivity 

levels and distance zones. Roads and trails are also linear elements in the landscape, so the impact 

they have to the view is also considered. For example, U.S. 60 through Datil contains scenic 

views. There is a high concern for scenic quality from this road, so views within a half-mile of 

this road in specific areas are a concern or sensitivity level of 1 (highest sensitivity level). In the 

Forest Plan the visual quality objective for the U.S. 60 corridor is partial retention/retention. Table 

5 represents VQO classifications acres designated by the Cibola 1985 Forest Plan for the 

Magdalena Ranger District (visual quality objective maps).

Table 5. VQO classifications for the Magdalena Ranger District (in acres)

Visual Quality 

Objective

Magdalena 

Ranger 

District

Magdalena 

Mountains

San Mateo 

Mountains

Bear/ 

Gallinas 

Mountains

Datil 

Mountains

Maximum Modification 290,339 0 33,387 129,944 127,008

Modification 168,216 53,045 89,478 18,729 6,964

Partial Retention 361,219 45,049 285,062 2,902 28,206

Retention 2,610 426 0 0 2,184

Preservation 0 0 0 0 0

Other visual resource management direction in the Cibola Forest Plan: Acceptable variations 

in VQO classifications from the acreages presented in the standards and guidelines for specific 

management areas are as follows:

 Preservation: No change

 Retention: + or - 2 percent in foreground, + or - 5 percent in middle ground and 

background.

 Partial Retention: + or - 5 percent in foreground, + or - 10 percent in middle ground and 

background.

 Modification: + or - 10 percent in all zones. Manage for the visual quality objectives of 

retention or partial retention for developed site plan perimeter using a definition of 

characteristic landscape which includes manmade features.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

36 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Inventory for existing visual condition (EVC) and visual absorption capability (VAC):

 EVC is the existing condition of the landscape. 

 VAC is the landscape’s ability to handle changes that detract from visual qualities 

without a major impact.

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum

Please refer to appendix E for a map of the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum for the Magdalena 

Ranger District.

People tend to choose settings for their outdoor recreation activities to realize a desired set of 

experiences. The Forest Service uses a classification system called the Recreation Opportunity 

Spectrum (ROS) to define and manage a range of recreational settings and opportunities on NFS 

lands. The ROS classes describe a desired condition for each ROS class: primitive, semiprimitive

motorized, semiprimitive nonmotorized, roaded natural, rural, and urban. The ROS User’s Guide 

(USDA Forest Service 1982) and a Forest Service report on ROS (USDA Forest Service 1979) 

provide guidelines for defining ROS classes and managing within each ROS class. 

The following are desired conditions for all ROS classes: 

1. They are fully integrated in forest land management planning.

2. They reflect current management direction and use patterns.

3. They are compatible with resource values. ROS classes provide the framework for 

defining types of recreation opportunities and identifying what recreational experience 

the Magdalena Ranger District might be able to provide.

Classes are defined based upon three settings: 

1. Physical (including size, remoteness, and evidence of humans)

2. Social (including number and type of encounters)

3. Managerial (including regimentation, control, and facilities)

The four ROS classes associated with the Magdalena Ranger District travel management analysis 

area is described as follows:

 Rural (R) – A substantially modified natural environment. There is evidence of resource 

modification and utilization practices, and facilities are often designed for larger numbers 

of people. Campgrounds often include paved roads, electricity, and other conveniences.

 Roaded Natural (RN) – Characterized by a predominantly natural-appearing 

environment with moderate evidence of human activity. Resource modification and 

utilization practices are evident but harmonize with the natural environment. May have a 

mosaic of highly modified areas with pockets of unmodified lands. Developed sites 

provide for some user comfort as well as site protection, but harmonize with the natural 

environment.

 Semiprimitive Motorized (SPM) – Similar setting to the SPNM except this area 

provides a motorized back-country experience where trails and primitive roads are 

designed for high-clearance, four-wheel drive vehicles. There is a moderate probability of 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 37

experiencing solitude and a high degree of self-reliance and challenge in using motorized 

equipment. These areas are predominantly natural, lacking some human modification, 

except when necessary for site protection.

 Semiprimitive Nonmotorized (SPNM) – Nonmotorized back-country area with a 

predominantly natural-appearing environment, without evidence of resource modification 

and utilization practices. Provides opportunities for self-reliance and challenge, with a 

low concentration of users and a high degree of interaction with the natural environment. 

Recreation developments are rustic and rudimentary and primarily provided for the 

protection of the resources rather than the convenience of users.

Table 6 represents the acres designated for the ROS classifications in the Cibola 1985 Forest Plan 

for the Magdalena Ranger District (ROS Maps – Magdalena, San Mateo, Bear/Gallinas and Datil 

Mountains).

Table 6. ROS classifications for the Magdalena Ranger District (in acres)

ROS Classifications

Magdalena 

Ranger 

District

Magdalena 

Mountains

San Mateo 

Mountains

Bear/ 

Gallinas 

Mountains

Datil 

Mountains

Rural 108 108 0 0 0

Roaded Natural 161,428 14,605 91,913 30,404 24,506

Semiprimitive Motorized 331,457 34,765 100,509 106,719 89,464

Semiprimitive 

Nonmotorized

334,060 49,013 206,111 28,425 50,511

 The Langmuir Laboratory and Magdalena Ridge Observatory within the Langmuir 

Research Site has a rural classification. 

 Withington Wilderness is primarily in the semiprimitive nonmotorized ROS 

classification.

 Apache Kid Wilderness is primarily a primitive ROS area and is characterized as an 

unmodified natural environment. Motorized and mechanized use within these areas is not 

permitted (USDA Forest Service 1985).

Acceptable variations in ROS classifications from the acreages presented in the Forest Plan 

standards and guidelines for specific management areas are as follows: 

 Primitive: No change 

 Semiprimitive Nonmotorized: ±15%

 Semiprimitive Motorized: ±15%

 Roaded Natural: ±15%

 Rural: ±15%

The Forest Plan also directs, “Where road construction would result in a loss of semiprimitive 

nonmotorized acreage, action will be taken to close the road and restore its surface at completion 

of the project when possible. Semiprimitive nonmotorized areas shall be managed for dispersed 

recreation opportunities.” (USDA Forest Service 1985)
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

38 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Environmental Consequences

Baseline Conditions

Developed Recreation

Developed recreation use and visitor experience would continue as described in the existing 

conditions/ affected environment throughout the Magdalena Ranger District.

Dispersed Recreation and Dispersed Camping

Dispersed camping would continue as described in the affected environment. The district would 

remain open to motorized cross-country travel and unrestricted motorized dispersed camping. 

Motorized recreation may increase over time, leading to the development of additional 

unauthorized routes. Most of the motorized dispersed camping tends to occur in the same areas. 

Some of these areas may expand, but it is unlikely that many new areas would develop since 

factors such as terrain, privacy, and suitability for camping change little over time. 

Hunting and Motorized Big Game Retrieval

Cross-country travel for motorized big game retrieval and to hunt and scout would continue to be 

allowed within the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish regulations. Additional 

unauthorized routes would likely continue to be created due to the high levels of hunting 

throughout the Magdalena Ranger District. 

Wilderness

Visitor experiences in Apache Kid Wilderness and Withington Wilderness would continue as 

described in the affected environment. Motorized cross-country travel would continue outside the 

wilderness areas, and there is the potential for motorized vehicle trespass into wilderness. The 

noise caused by the potential trespass could disrupt the sense of solitude, which is an important 

aspect of the wilderness recreation experience. 

Roads and Trails

Current management of roads and trails would continue as described in the affected environment. 

All 1,171.4 miles of system roads would be available for use. All 193.6 miles of existing system 

trails would continue to be managed for nonmotorized use. There are three areas where motorized 

use is prohibited:

 Apache Kid Wilderness: 66 miles of trail 

 Withington Wilderness: 13.4 miles of trail 

 Langmuir Research Area: 31.7 miles 

Motorized use of the remaining 82.5 miles could occur, but the district would continue to manage 

these trails for nonmotorized use. Maintenance of these trails would occur as budget and priorities 

permit. Motorized cross-country travel would continue to be allowed on 697,716 acres of the 

district outside of the wilderness and research area. Unauthorized roads and trails would continue 

to develop where the vegetation and topography provides fewer barriers to motorized crosscountry travel. However, overall impacts to recreation use and activities are not expected to 

noticeably change. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 39

Scenic Resources and Visual Quality Objectives

The VQOs in the forest plan are being met. Where the VQO is classified as retention, in general 

steep slopes and vegetation have reduced the development of unauthorized routes. Most retention 

areas occur in canyons with large volcanic walls, such as Thompson Canyon in the Datil 

Mountains. As a result, the VQO of retention would likely still be met if baseline conditions were 

to continue. 

There may be additional motorized cross-country travel, increasing the development of 

unauthorized roads and trails, disturbing the grasses and shrubs creating additional linear features 

as seen from the roads across the landscape. Where the VQO is classified modification, the 

objective would not likely be exceeded, because the disturbance from unauthorized roads and 

trails is not anticipated to dominate the landscape. Since this area has been open to motorized 

cross-country travel since at least 1985, many of the areas where this type of use was possible 

have already been disturbed and unauthorized roads and trails have been established.

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum

The ROS objectives on the Magdalena Ranger District are currently being met. Several motorized 

user created routes that impede on the wilderness boundary are impacting the primitive and 

semiprimitive nonmotorized objectives assigned to wilderness areas. This motorized trespass will 

continue as long as motorized user-created routes cross the wilderness boundary. 

Effects by Alternatives

Alternative 1

Developed Recreation

No change to developed campground recreation sites, trailheads, or visitor experience while using 

these sites is anticipated from the existing condition in this alternative. The need for new facilities 

has not risen during the Magdalena Ranger District’s travel management process. 

Dispersed Recreation and Dispersed Camping

The primary change to dispersed recreation will be the restriction of motorized cross-country 

travel throughout the district. Motorized access throughout the district will be limited to 

designated routes. Some of the public will perceive the designated routes as a means of closing 

the forest for their use. Their customary areas of visitation may be inaccessible by motorized 

travel but the forest is still accessible for nonmotorized transportation. A strong 

education/information campaign will be needed to gain compliance with the Travel Management 

Rule.

Under this alternative, motorized vehicles will be allowed to park one vehicle length along the 

side of any designated open road. Once this parking requirement is met, dispersed campers can 

establish their camp any distance from the road. In addition to the one car length requirement,

dispersed camping corridors 300 feet wide will be designated along both sides of 374.4 miles, for 

a total of 25,465.7 acres within the Magdalena Ranger District. The designated corridors do not 

cross into private land nor are they designated within 300 yards of any manmade water structure 

used for livestock or wildlife in accordance with New Mexico Department of Game and Fish 

specifications. Motorized dispersed camping on the district occurs throughout the year, with high 

use periods being the fall hunting seasons. People wishing to drive cross country and disperse 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

40 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

camp outside of the designated corridors would need to travel to other public lands where

motorized cross-country travel is allowed.

Factors used to identify the location for the camping corridors included: site popularity, observed 

use frequency, input from New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, and potential or existing 

impact to the resource(s). Motorized dispersed camping areas have been designated along the 

entire length of the selected roads (appendix B). There may be areas along the identified roads 

which are not suitable for motorized dispersed camping due to terrain. The corridors identified 

will be monitored in accordance with CFR 36 212.57. All these areas are located near main roads

and will be accessible for law enforcement and fire prevention patrols.

Several areas of known dispersed camping—particularly the areas along National Forest System 

Road (NRSR) 2, NFSR 235, and NFSR 123—were not considered due to environmental or 

cultural concerns. These sites have been popular for several years and users could feel displaced 

and become discouraged from camping on the district. At a minimum, these previously utilized 

areas will need to be signed, blocked, and revegetated to discourage further use.

Prohibiting motorized cross-country travel would benefit some forms of nonmotorized recreation. 

There may be improved bird watching or wildlife viewing in areas where there are fewer roads 

designated and, therefore, less noise disturbance. Additionally, roads that are not designated could 

still be used for hiking, horseback riding, and mountain biking. This may provide for additional 

nonmotorized recreation alternatives. There are no motorized trails currently on the district, and 

no motorized trails will be designated through this alternative. Due to the variety of opportunities 

for motorized recreation presented by the expansive size of the district and the road network 

proposed in this alternative, the need for motorized trails was not expressed. All public motorized 

travel will occur on National Forest System Roads. All roads designated for motor vehicle use 

will accommodate the following modes of transportation: state licensed highway legal vehicles, 

full-sized 4-wheel drive high-clearance vehicles, all terrain or utility vehicles (ATV/UTV), and 

motorcycles.

Hunting and Motorized Big Game Retrieval

This alternative would prohibit motorized big game retrieval on the district. This prohibition 

would also include the associated activities such as cross-county scouting and hunting from all 

forms of motorized transportation. Travel would be restricted to open system roads. For bow 

hunters and those who prefer more solitude and less noise intrusion, there will be more areas in 

which to hunt. Hunters would need to rely on pack stock or themselves for game retrieval. Table 7 

shows the results of a New Mexico Department of Game and Fish survey conducted in 2009–

2010 of hunter success rates based on species, number of permits issued, response rate, and the 

number of animals harvested. (New Mexico Game and Fish, 2010.)

According to New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, fewer roaded areas provide higher 

quality hunting experiences. There may be greater associated harvest opportunity depending on 

the management objectives for the game species. Roadless areas in New Mexico, including 

wilderness areas, provide some of the highest quality elk hunting opportunities and provide 

habitat that sustain elk populations for surrounding areas (“Wildlife, Habitat, and Hunting: New 

Mexico’s Roadless Areas,” 2006). By prohibiting motorized big game retrieval, the harvest 

opportunities are expected to increase.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 41

Table 7. Hunter success rates

Game

Management 

Unit

Big Game 

Species

Number of 

Permits 

Issued

Survey 

Response 

Rate

Reported 

Number Animals 

Harvested

Success 

Rate

13

Mule Deer 2,023 81.0% 272 16.1%

Elk 1,053 84.0% 278 27.0%

17

Mule Deer 1,099 86.1% 325 33.5%

Elk 757 87.0% 139 19.0%

Hunters who have relied on motor vehicles to hunt, scout, or retrieve animals off of roads may 

feel that this alternative reduces their opportunities and the quality of their hunting experiences. 

They may be displaced to areas off the district where motorized cross-country travel is permitted, 

or they may choose not to hunt. Others will adjust to the changed management and change their 

hunting practices. 

Wilderness

By prohibiting motorized cross-country travel, a reduction in motorized vehicle trespass within 

the Withington and Apache Kid Wilderness areas is expected with this alternative. Opportunities 

for solitude within the wildernesses may increase due to eliminating unauthorized routes and 

minimizing trespassing.

Roads and Trails

There are no motorized trails currently on the Magdalena Ranger District, and no motorized trails 

will be designated through this alternative. Due to the variety of opportunities for motorized 

recreation presented by the expansive size of the Magdalena Ranger District and the road network 

proposed in this alternative, the need for motorized trails was not expressed. All public motorized 

travel will occur on National Forest System Roads. All roads designated for motor vehicle use 

will accommodate the following modes of transportation: state licensed highway legal vehicles, 

full-sized 4-wheel drive high-clearance vehicles, all terrain or utility vehicles (ATV/UTV), and 

motorcycles.

Table 8. Alternative 1 – Miles of NFS roads designated for all motor vehicles

Use Type Miles

Existing miles of National Forest System Roads 1,171.4

Miles of roads designated for administrative use only -378.2

Miles of currently closed NFS road designated for motor vehicle use 14.7

Miles of unauthorized road added to system 17.0

Miles of new road construction 4.5

Miles of road added to system as a result of easements acquired 21.4

Total miles of road designated for motor vehicle use 850.8

Off-highway vehicle operators will find challenges along maintenance level 2 roads managed for 

high clearance vehicles throughout the district, but may have greater conflict with general vehicle 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

42 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

traffic along the main arterial roads as they prefer to avoid vehicles operating at higher speeds.

Motorcyclists will be the least accommodated in this alternative, as no single track trails will be 

created or authorized. Motorized operators looking for technical opportunities will find few 

choices under this alternative as multiple users will access the same routes.

Opening 14.7 miles of currently closed NFS roads and 17.0 miles of unauthorized roads will 

create an opportunity for improved resource management, resource protection, and connections 

for loop road experiences. The 378.2 miles of NFS roads restricted to administrative use only are 

typically roads used for range, wildlife habitat, and fire management. No need for recreational 

activities to exist on these restricted roads was expressed. 

Trailheads and wilderness trails in the southern San Mateo Mountains are currently inaccessible 

due to road easement issues. The Forest Service does not have legal easements on the off-forest 

access roads which have been gated by the landowners. This alternative’s 4.5 miles of new road 

construction will create public access around private land to improve motor vehicle access to the 

southern San Mateo Mountains.

As a majority of the forest visitors use the major arterial district routes, potential conflict between 

the nonmotorized and the different motorized groups can be mitigated through an 

education/information program to include public contact/meetings and signage at developed 

recreation facilities and trailheads.

Scenic Resources and Visual Quality Objectives

Since most of the routes being considered for designation are existing routes, little change to 

scenic quality is anticipated in this alternative. A total of 378.2 miles of NFSRs will be restricted 

to administrative use which means they will not be designated for motor vehicle use nor 

displayed on the motor vehicle use map. Since they will continue to receive motor vehicle use by 

permittees and for other administrative uses, the visual impacts will remain the same as the 

baseline. Where routes are not used, over time the visual contrast of the road’s bare soil will be 

reduced when grasses and shrubs grow in the tread. This would enhance the natural-appearing 

quality of the landscape and would be consistent throughout the Magdalena Ranger District in 

areas with the VQOs of retention and partial retention. 

There are 4.5 miles of new road construction to address rights-of-way issues. These roads would 

be designed and constructed to meet Forest Service road standards. These changes would meet 

the visual quality objective of modification, where the changes would be evident but would not 

dominate the view. 

The unauthorized roads and currently closed roads proposed to be opened in this alternative are 

not expected to make an impact on scenic quality. These roads currently exist and are evident on 

the landscape, but do not dominate the scenic character. 

Motorized dispersed camping can result in some localized reduction in visual quality where sites 

are frequently used and soil compaction reduces vegetation coverage. However, it is likely that 

few new sites would develop as a result of alternative 1 and the proposed dispersed camping 

corridors. Popular sites within the corridor will continue to be visually evident where some bare 

soil is visible from nearby roads and trails. When viewed at the district scale, the localized 

impacts of motorized dispersed camping corridors would be consistent with VQOs classified as 

modification. Where an established motorized dispersed camping area is not designated, over 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 43

time the visual contrast of the site’s bare soil would be reduced as grasses and shrubs grow. This 

would enhance the natural-appearing quality of the landscape.

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum

The ROS objectives on the Magdalena Ranger District are currently being met. There would be 

no effects to ROS under this alternative.

Alternative 2

Developed Recreation

This alternative does not include motorized dispersed camping corridors. This may result in some 

displacement of campers to developed recreation sites, which would lead to increased use at these 

recreation sites. 

Dispersed Recreation and Dispersed Camping

Motorized dispersed recreation would change under this alternative. Motorized cross-country 

travel would be prohibited and motorized activities would be limited to National Forest System 

roads. Prohibiting motorized cross-country travel would benefit some forms of nonmotorized 

recreation due to a reduction in disturbances from noise.

No motorized dispersed camping corridors are considered under this alternative and motorized 

camping would only be allowed up to one vehicle length from currently open NFS roads where it 

is safe to do so and where it does not cause environmental damage. The restriction of motorized 

cross-country travel coupled with no motorized dispersed camping corridors may affect those 

seeking motorized opportunities. The lack of motorized dispersed camping corridors could lead to 

the displacement of campers to other State or Federal lands where motorized dispersed camping 

is permitted. It could also lead to increased use of developed recreation sites. There may initially 

be a need for increased patrols and enforcement of commonly used dispersed camping areas that 

are not designated. 

Hunting and Motorized Big Game Retrieval

Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) would be prohibited under this alternative. This restriction 

would provide a larger area for hunters who prefer solitude and minimal noise intrusion. Less 

roaded areas provide high quality hunting experiences and may be associated with greater harvest 

opportunity depending on the harvest objectives for the game species (NMDGF 2006). However, 

hunters who have relied on motor vehicles to hunt, scout, or retrieve animals off of roads, may 

feel that this reduces their opportunities and the quality of their hunting experiences. They may be 

displaced to areas off the Magdalena Ranger District where motorized cross-country travel is 

permitted, or they may choose not to hunt. Others will adjust to the changed management and 

change their hunting practices. 

Wilderness

There will be little change to visitors’ experiences in the Apache Kid and Withington Wilderness

areas in this alternative. Restricting motorized cross-country travel may prevent some vehicle 

trespass into wildernesses and may improve the sense of solitude that is an important aspect of 

wilderness recreation.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

44 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Roads and Trails

This alternative would continue the current management of National Forest System roads. All 

1,210.8 miles of NFS roads open to the public would continue to be available for motorized use. 

However, not all system roads would be accessible because some can only be accessed by 

crossing private lands where the Forest Service does not have a legal right-of-way. There is a 

potential to displace recreational users of these roads that lack legal access. These roads would 

not appear on the MVUM until a legal right-of-way is obtained. In addition, this alternative 

would prohibit cross-country travel, displacing motorized recreationists who travel cross country.

The district does not have any motorized trails, and no motorized trails will be designated through 

this alternative. Due to the variety of opportunities for motorized recreation presented by the 

expansive size of the district and the road network proposed in this alternative, the need for 

motorized trails was not expressed. All public motorized travel will occur on National Forest 

System roads. All roads designated for motor vehicle use will accommodate the following modes 

of transportation: state licensed highway legal vehicles, full-sized 4-wheel drive high-clearance 

vehicles, all terrain or utility vehicles (ATV/UTV), and motorcycles.

Scenic Resources and Visual Quality Objectives

Little change would be anticipated to scenic resources in this alternative. The VQOs in the Forest 

Plan are being met. Where the VQOs are retention, steep slopes and vegetation have generally 

reduced the development of unauthorized routes. Most retention areas in the Magdalena Ranger 

District occur in canyons with large volcanic walls, such as Thompson Canyon in the Datil 

Mountains. As a result, the VQO of retention would likely still be met under this alternative. 

The restriction on motorized cross-country travel may result in the decrease of unauthorized 

routes that disturb grasses and shrubs and create additional linear features seen from the roads 

across the landscape. Where the VQO is classified as modification, the VQO would not likely be 

exceeded, because the disturbance from unauthorized roads and trails would be reduced as a 

result of the prohibition of motorized cross-country travel. 

Since this area has been open to motorized cross-country travel since at least 1985, many of the 

areas where this use was possible have already been disturbed and unauthorized roads and trails 

have been established. This is consistent with the management objectives of modification because 

the unauthorized roads do not dominate the landscape. There is potential for the disturbed areas to 

return to a natural-appearing landscape over time due to the cross-country motorized travel 

restriction.

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum

The recreation opportunity spectrum (ROS) objectives on the district are currently being met.

Several motorized user-created routes that impede on the wilderness boundary are impacting the 

primitive and semiprimitive nonmotorized objectives assigned to wilderness areas. This 

motorized trespass will continue as long as the motorized user-created routes cross the wilderness 

boundaries. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 45

Alternative 3 

Developed Recreation

No change to developed campground recreation sites or visitors’ experiences while using these 

sites is anticipated from the existing condition. No new facilities are planned for the Magdalena 

Ranger District. 

Dispersed Recreation and Dispersed Camping

Motorized cross-country travel would be prohibited across the district, but motor vehicles would 

be allowed off specified roads for motorized big game retrieval and dispersed camping. When 

compared to baseline conditions, dispersed recreation activities dependent on motorized travel 

may be impacted by the reduction in miles of roads designated for motor vehicle use and the 

prohibition of motorized cross-country travel. Nonmotorized recreation activities may benefit 

from the overall decrease in available routes where quiet and a sense of solitude are an important 

part of the user’s experience. Although this alternative would decrease the miles of road 

designated for motor vehicle use from the baseline conditions, it offers more motorized 

opportunities than alternatives 1 and 4.

This alternative includes motorized dispersed camping corridors within 300 feet of either side of 

374.4 miles of NFS road (appendix B). The motorized dispersed camping corridors throughout 

the district would allow more opportunities to camp across the unit, accommodating the current 

pattern of use. Although this alternative provides more dispersed camping opportunities, some 

users may feel restricted within these specific corridors and may be displaced from the 

unrestricted dispersed camping they enjoy. 

Hunting and Motorized Big Game Retrieval

Motorized travel for big game retrieval would be allowed in the Magdalena Ranger District up to 

0.25 mile on either side of the roads specifically identified in the alternative 3 maps (appendix B). 

This alternative provides for motorized big game retrieval along approximately 342.5 miles of 

roads. Authorized cross-country MBGR must be limited to those persons with a legally harvested

and properly tagged big game species. Those authorized for cross-country MBGR should take a 

relatively direct and safe route that minimizes resource effects when retrieving their harvested 

animal, and they should take the minimum number of trips to accomplish retrieval. Only one 

vehicle would be allowed for cross-country MBGR per harvested animal. (USDA 2008)

The New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF) assigned 1,053 elk permits and 2,023 

mule deer permits for Unit 13, which includes the Datil and Bear/Gallinas area, for the 2009–

2010 license year. Unit 17, which includes the Magdalena and San Mateo units, was assigned 757 

elk permits and 1,099 mule deer permits. The amount of issued permits for Units 13 and 17 are 

typically higher than other units across the State. New Mexico Department of Game and Fish 

conducted a survey in 2009–2010 of hunter success rates based on species, number of permits 

issued, response rate, and the number of animals harvested that is shown in table 7. (New Mexico 

Game and Fish, 2010.)

The big game success rates in Units 13 and 17 vary from 16.1 percent to 33.5 percent. It is 

estimated 10–20 percent of the total hunting permits for Units 13 and 17 will generate a shortterm impact on the District. There are many variables in estimating how many hunters use 

motorized means to retrieve game. Bow hunters typically pack out their harvested big game due 

to the terrain and remote nature of their hunts. Other factors include: weather, harvested animals’ 

proximity to an open road, size of animal, and preparedness of the hunter. An NMDGF 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

46 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

publication reports roads where motorized vehicles are allowed, reduced big game use of adjacent 

habitat from the road edge to more than 0.5 mile away is occurring (NMDGF 2006). This means 

harvested animals are typically further from roads, so many successful hunters may use motorized 

means to retrieve their big game. Short-term impacts from motorized big game retrieval will 

include damaged ground vegetation from tires and from skidded big game. There is potential for 

these visible impacts to become an inviting route to other motorized users. 

For hunters seeking a nonmotorized experience, this alternative may impact the quality of their 

hunt within and near areas where motorized big game retrieval is permitted. Due to the number of 

hunting permits available on Units 13 and 17, there is also a chance that motorized big game 

retrieval would disrupt the wildlife for other hunters.

Wilderness

By prohibiting cross-country travel, a reduction in motorized vehicle trespass within the 

Withington and Apache Kid Wilderness areas is expected with this alternative. Opportunities for 

solitude within wilderness may increase due to the elimination of unauthorized routes and 

minimizing trespass issues.

Roads and Trails

This alternative benefits motorized recreation opportunities across the district. The designation of 

a 756-acre motorized area in the San Mateo Mountains would give OHV enthusiasts an area for 

technical OHV opportunities. This motorized area would be delineated on the motor vehicle use 

map (MVUM) and would be physically delineated on the ground using topography and signage. 

The area would be open to all vehicles for cross-country travel. This alternative would result in 

more miles of NFS road designated for all vehicles than alternatives 1 and 4, thus increasing 

access to more portions of the district. 

A total of 6.4 miles of new roads would need to be constructed to reroute existing NFS roads 

around private land. The mileage of new road construction is increased in this alternative to 

access the additional unauthorized routes and currently closed roads that is proposed. The 

expected effects to these reroutes are the same as those described in alternative 1. By adding more 

unauthorized roads and opening additional closed roads compared to alternatives 1 and 4, this 

alternative creates more loop road opportunities for recreational enjoyment. 

A total of 367.1 miles of roads would be restricted to administrative use. They would not be 

designated for motor vehicle use and would not be displayed on the MVUM. National Forest 

System roads restricted to administrative use only is typically roads used for range, wildlife 

habitat, and fire management. No need for recreational activities to exist on these restricted roads 

was expressed. 

This alternative does not designate trails for motorized use. All roads designated as open will 

accommodate the following modes of transportation: state licensed highway legal vehicles, fullsized 4-wheel drive high-clearance vehicles, all terrain or utility vehicles (ATV/UTV), and 

motorcycles. Historically, trails on the Magdalena Ranger District have not been designated or 

managed for motorized use. The majority of the nonmotorized trails on the district would not be 

sustainable if motorized use were allowed due to the topography.

The 876.7 miles of roads open to all motorized vehicles in this alternative provide many different 

opportunities for OHV recreation. The terrain, distances, and changes in scenery available on the 

Magdalena Ranger District vary dramatically and offer a quality experience for many users. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 47

This alternative will provide the best experiences for the OHV, ATV/UTV and motorcycle 

operator. The designated motorized area will be open to all vehicles. This area will offer OHV 

opportunities for enthusiasts looking for technical OHV challenges. The motorized area addresses 

the need for a motorcycle trials technical riding area. The local communities would benefit from a 

designated motorized area and this motorized area would also become a destination for trials 

riders from around the state.

Table 9. Alternative 3 – Miles of NFS roads designated for all motor vehicles

Use Type Miles

Existing miles of National Forest System roads 1,171.4

Miles of roads designated for administrative use only -367.1

Miles of currently closed NFS road designated for motor vehicle use 16.9

Miles of unauthorized road added to system 29.2

Miles of new road construction 6.4

Miles of road added to system as a result of easements acquired 19.9

Total miles of road designated for motor vehicle use 876.7

With this alternative, the Magdalena Ranger District will provide visitors with a variety of 

motorized opportunities. This alternative would designate 25.9 more miles of road for motor 

vehicle use than alternative 1 (the proposed action).

This alternative would improve motorized access in the San Mateo Mountains. Currently the lack 

of access/rights-of-way through private land has prohibited users from accessing the southwest 

portion of the San Mateos. This alternative proposes constructing new roads to reroute access 

around private land and then connecting to additional proposed roads, which will give the public 

legal access to forest lands.

Although this alternative proposes more designated open National Forest System roads than 

alternatives 1 and 4, nonmotorized users should not be affected. The proposed motorized area is 

located in an area where nonmotorized users do not frequent. Also, the addition of the proposed 

road construction would establish access to nonmotorized trailheads on the southwest portion of 

the Apache Kid Wilderness, which will give users more nonmotorized opportunities.

Scenic Resources and Visual Quality Objectives

The effect to scenic resources in this alternative is very similar to alternative 1. The primary 

change is designating corridors for big game retrieval. There may be short-term visual impacts 

from motorized big game retrieval where grasses and shrubs are damaged by vehicles. If there is 

a one-time entry, this impact should last less than a few months. If other vehicles also use the 

route, the damage to vegetation could be more evident for a longer period of time. The changes 

would be within the thresholds set by their respective visual quality objectives. 

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum

Recreation opportunity spectrum objectives on the Magdalena Ranger District are currently being 

met. There would be no effects to ROS under this alternative.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

48 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Alternative 4 

Developed Recreation

Opportunities for motorized dispersed camping corridors are reduced in this alternative as 

compared to the baseline and alternatives 1 and 3. This may result in a slight increase in use at 

developed campgrounds.

Dispersed Recreation and Dispersed Camping

The prohibition of motorized cross-country travel and reduction in miles of National Forest 

System Roads designated for motor vehicle use may affect motorized dependent dispersed 

recreation activities more profoundly than the other alternatives. Motorized dispersed camping 

will be designated on 321.2 miles (21,944.1 acres) adjacent to system roads. The motorized 

dispersed camping corridors throughout the district would allow more opportunities to camp 

across the unit, accommodating the current pattern of use. Typically, dispersed camping corridors 

encompass camping locations which have been impacted and will continue to be used. The use of 

these established locations tends to decrease the impacts of dispersed camping in nonimpacted 

areas. The number of available corridors in the district will be reduced in size and number. This 

will result in the reduction of motorized camping corridors compared to alternative 1.

Hunting and Motorized Big Game Retrieval

Motorized big game retrieval would be prohibited on the district. Hunters’ vehicles would be 

restricted to NFS roads that are designated for motor vehicle use and displayed on the MVUM.

This alternative could enhance opportunities for hunters who prefer to hunt away from the 

presence and noise of motor vehicles. Since there is a reduction in the miles of roads being 

designated, motorized big game retrieval would become a greater challenge, with the potential for 

longer haul routes by foot or on horseback. 

Wilderness

A reduction in motorized vehicle trespass within the Withington and Apache Kid Wilderness

areas is expected with this alternative.

Roads and Trails

This alternative responds to potential natural and heritage resource impacts, resulting in a 41 

percent reduction in the number of roads designated for motor vehicle use compared to baseline 

conditions. No motorized trails will be designated on the district due to the lack of need for 

motorized trail opportunities. Opening 10.6 miles of currently closed NFS roads and 17.3 miles of 

unauthorized roads, will create an opportunity for improved resource management, resource 

protection, and connections for loop road experiences. The 477 miles of NFS roads restricted to 

administrative use only are typically roads used for range, wildlife habitat, and fire management.

The need was not expressed for recreational activities to exist on these restricted roads.

Trailheads and wilderness trails in the southern San Mateo Mountains are currently inaccessible

due to road easement issues. The Forest Service does not have legal easements on the off forest 

access roads, which have been gated by the local landowners. The 3.7 miles of new road 

construction included within this alternative will create public access around private land. This 

will improve motor vehicle access to the southern San Mateo Mountains, which are currently 

inaccessible.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 49

Table 10. Alternative 4 - Miles of NFS roads designated for all motor vehicles

Use Type Miles

Existing miles of National Forest System roads 1,171.4

Miles of roads designated for administrative use only -477.0

Miles of currently closed NFS road designated for motor vehicle use 10.6

Miles of unauthorized road added to system 17.3

Miles of new road construction 3.7

Miles of road added to system as a result of easements acquired 20.9

Total miles of road designated for motor vehicle use 746.9

Scenic Resources and Visual Quality Objectives

Over time, this alternative is expected to enhance scenic quality across the Magdalena Ranger 

District. There are fewer roads designated for motorized use compared to alternative 1. While 477 

miles will be restricted to administrative use, they will continue to receive some levels of motor 

vehicle use, and the visual impacts will remain the same as described in alternative 1. Where 

routes are not used, the visual contrast of the road’s bare soil will be reduced over time as grasses 

and shrubs grow in the tread. This would enhance the natural-appearing quality of the landscape.

This would be consistent in areas across the district with the VQOs of retention and partial 

retention. 

There are fewer corridors designated for motorized dispersed camping compared to the other 

alternatives. Where motorized dispersed camping is prohibited, the visual contrast of the more 

popular sites will be reduced over time as grasses and shrubs grow in the disturbed areas. This 

would enhance the natural-appearing quality of the landscape at those locations. In addition, 

prohibiting motorized big game retrieval will also reduce visual contrast and enhance the naturalappearing quality of the landscape.

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum

Recreation opportunity spectrum objectives on the Magdalena Ranger District are currently being 

met. There would be no effects to ROS under this alternative.

Cumulative Effects Area

The cumulative effects area for the recreation analysis includes other public and private lands 

where motorized recreation is available within a 3-hour drive of the Magdalena Ranger District.

A 3-hour drive is a reasonable amount of time people would be expected to drive for a day’s 

recreation. These lands include: other national forests, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Open Spaces, and private OHV areas. Motorized vehicles are not 

allowed in the Apache Kid and Withington Wilderness areas and, therefore, they are not part of 

the cumulative effects area. 

The Travel Management Rule applies to all national forest lands. The Santa Fe, Gila, Lincoln, and 

Carson National Forests have recently completed travel management projects or are currently 

undergoing analysis with the goal of producing a motor vehicle use map (MVUM) for all units by 

the end of 2013. The Cibola National Forest has completed the travel management process and is 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

50 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

implementing decisions on the Sandia, Black Kettle, Mountainair, Mt. Taylor, and Kiowa and 

Rita Blanca Ranger Districts. 

The BLM’s Rio Puerco (Albuquerque) and Socorro Field Offices manage lands near the 

Magdalena Ranger District. The Rio Puerco Field Office manages an OHV use area near San 

Ysidro. The Socorro Field Office is revising their resource management plan. A draft of the 

revised plan indicates that they are considering managing Gordy’s Hill Special Recreation 

Management Area for OHV use. The Quebradas Backcountry Byway is open to high-clearance 

vehicles. Albuquerque Open Space manages the Montessa Park for OHV use, including an open 

play area that permits motorized cross-country travel. 

There are several large OHV areas within the cumulative effects area that are located on private 

land and New Mexico State lands. The most popular areas are located on the western edge of Rio 

Rancho where there are two privately-run motocross parks (Sandia Motocross Park and Moriarty 

Motocross) open for OHV use.

Cumulative Effects

By prohibiting motorized cross-country travel, management of motorized recreation is changing 

on the Magdalena Ranger District with all action alternatives. All of the alternatives provide for 

continued motorized recreation in a variety of settings, providing a variety of experiences and 

challenges. The Travel Management Rule directs forests to designate roads, trails, and areas for 

motorized use. Complying with the Travel Management Rule will result in a net loss of motorized 

recreation opportunities since restricting use to a designated system will include the loss of crosscountry travel. 

The cumulative effects area that was determined for the recreation analysis in this EA are those 

areas within a 3-hour drive of the district. This includes the Albuquerque metro area. There has 

been no indication through employee observations, public comments, or online research that the 

Magdalena Ranger District is a regional or national destination for motorized recreation. Most of 

the observed use is from local communities and Albuquerque. This distance was determined 

based on CEQ guidance (40 CFR 1508.7) and the distance that most people drive for motorized 

recreation on the district. While management is changing on national forests within this area, 

there will still be motorized recreation available throughout the cumulative effects area, as well as 

BLM and other lands.

There are cumulative effects when this net reduction in motorized recreation is coupled with other 

travel management projects within the cumulative effects area. The Sandia Ranger District 

completed the travel management process in 2009 and a designated system is in place. The 

predominant OHV recreation that is provided is motorcycle single track in the Cedro area. There 

is also some full-size vehicle use and ATVs and UTVs can use most of the designated 

maintenance level 2 roads in the Cedro area. Motorcyclists would likely prefer the Sandia Ranger 

District’s opportunities with the single track trails, and may be displaced to the Cedro area. There 

has not been a large number of motorcycle riders observed on the Magdalena Ranger District, so 

this should not result in a noticeable increase on the Sandia Ranger District. 

The Mt. Taylor Ranger District signed a decision for travel management on April 14, 2011. This 

decision provides additional motorized recreation opportunities on the forest by including a 

motorized trail system for vehicles less than 65 inches in width as well as a system of trails for 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 51

motorcycles only. Depending on the alternative selected for this project, some motor vehicle 

users—such as OHV riders—may be displaced to other State and Federal lands where motorized 

trails exist, such as the Mt. Taylor Ranger District. 

The Mountainair Ranger District signed a decision for travel management on May 7, 2012. This 

decision focuses on providing motorized access for all types of vehicles throughout the district. 

Based on the analysis presented in the EA and the comments received, it is evident that the 

Mountainair Ranger District is valued for multiple forms of recreation, many of which are 

facilitated by motorized access to areas on the district. Although motorized trails were considered 

under the selected alternative, the comments received indicated a preference for these routes 

remaining open to all motor vehicles. Therefore, all routes being designated with this decision 

will be roads open to all classes of vehicles. The designated system will provide a variety of 

motorized recreation opportunities by including routes that vary in difficulty. This will provide 

four-wheel drivers with a diversity of terrain and challenges. 

Opportunities on the Mountainair Ranger District are typically the same in comparison to the 

action alternatives for this project. Once a decision is made for Magdalena Ranger District, the 

outcome is not expected to displace motorized users from Magdalena Ranger District to the 

Mountainair Ranger District.

Transportation

The following analysis is based on the transportation specialist report prepared by Richard 

Graves, forest roads manager. This report is on file in the project record.

The Magdalena Ranger District of the Cibola National Forest proposes to implement the national 

Travel Management Rule (36 CFR 212), which requires the Forest Service to provide for a 

system of National Forest System (NFS) roads, National Forest System trails, and areas on 

National Forest System lands designated for motor vehicle use. The result of this effort will be a 

motor vehicle use map (MVUM) for the Magdalena Ranger District. This map will display the 

roads and trails designated for motor vehicle use, by vehicle class and the period of allowed use, 

if appropriate.

The road system is the primary focus of this report, which discusses the current state of the road 

system in the analysis area and the changes that would occur with each of the alternatives 

analyzed. Please refer to the recreation report for a discussion of the trail system.

The travel analysis process (TAP) was conducted for the Magdalena Ranger District. The TAP 

provides a technical, science-based evaluation of the district’s motorized transportation system. It 

involves a broad-scale, comprehensive review of the transportation system. The TAP provides 

critical information for designating and managing a system of motorized roads and trails that:

 Is safe and responsive to public needs and desires,

 Conforms to the “Cibola National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan,”

 Is efficiently administered,

 Has minimal negative environmental effects, and 

 Is in balance with available funding for needed management actions.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

52 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

The direction provided in Forest Service Manual (FSM) 7700, Chapter 7710, requires that the 

responsible official consider the following roads-related criteria when designating roads for motor 

vehicle use:

 Need for maintenance and administration of roads,

 Availability of resources to satisfy the maintenance and administration needs,

 Public safety, and

 Access needs.

These criteria are discussed in detail in this report.

Methodology

Tabular data for the roads in the analysis area were obtained from the Forest Service 

infrastructure database (Infra). The geographic information system (GIS) application ArcMap was 

used to obtain road lengths and to display road locations.

The analysis area for this project is generally located within the Magdalena Ranger District 

boundary. Some roads located outside the district boundary were considered for motor vehicle use 

designation. An interdisciplinary team (ID team) consisting of specialists from several resource 

areas evaluated each National Forest System (NFS) road in the analysis area, as well as some 

unauthorized roads (refer to the “Baseline Condition” section for the definition of an 

unauthorized road), in determining which roads to propose for designation. For each road 

evaluated, the ID team considered information from three sources:

1. Magdalena Ranger District TAP,

2. Additional knowledge of the roads gained since the TAP was completed, and

3. Comments submitted during the public scoping period.

The Magdalena TAP identifies the risks and benefits associated with each NFS road and several 

unauthorized roads. Risks to natural and cultural resources were weighed against benefits relating 

to:

 Recreation access,

 Access for resource administration and protection,

 Emergency access, and

 Tribal access to areas of cultural significance and traditional use.

More unauthorized roads exist than were evaluated for this analysis. Some of these roads are 

known to the Forest Service, and there are undoubtedly others that the Forest Service is not aware 

of. The Travel Management Rule does not require that all existing unauthorized roads be 

documented or that all known unauthorized roads be evaluated for motor vehicle use designation.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 53

Baseline Condition

The Magdalena Ranger District of the Cibola National Forest is comprised of four mountain 

ranges: 

1. The Bear/Gallinas Mountains are a north-south trending range northwest of the village 

of Magdalena. Primary access to this range is by State Highway 169. Two inventoried 

roadless areas (IRA) are located within the Bear Mountains: Goat Spring and Scott Mesa. 

Refer to the section in this chapter titled “Inventoried Roadless Areas” for discussion of 

roads located in IRAs.

2. The Datil Mountains lie west of the district office, approximately 40 miles along U.S.

Highway 60. The range consists of two subranges: Crosby Mountains and Sawtooth 

Mountains. These ranges are accessed via U.S. Highway 60. Two IRAs are located within 

the Datil Mountains: Datil and Madre Mountain.

3. The Magdalena Mountain range is a north-south trending range and is immediately 

south of the village of Magdalena. State Highway 107 provides access to the west side of 

the mountain range, while the east side of the range is accessed from U.S. Highway 60. 

The Langmuir Research Site and Ryan Hill IRA are located in this mountain range.

4. The San Mateo Mountains are the largest of the four mountain ranges and have a northsouth trend. The Apache Kid Wilderness and Withington Wilderness are located in this 

range, as are the Apache Kid Contiguous, San Jose, and White Cap IRAs. Access to this 

mountain range is provided by State Highways 52, 107, and 1 to the west, east, and south 

respectively.

There are 1,218 miles of NFS roads (system roads) in the analysis area. Of this total, 1,171 miles 

(approximately 96 percent) are open to motor vehicle traffic. In addition, there are no restrictions 

on motorized cross-country travel. The forest road system does not include private roads or roads 

under the jurisdiction of a State, county, or local public road authority.

Because motor vehicle travel in the analysis area—both on and off system roads—is largely 

unrestricted, many miles of unauthorized roads exist throughout the analysis area. In this analysis, 

the term “unauthorized road,” means:

 A road created by repeated off-road motorized travel along the same path, without the 

knowledge and approval of the Forest Service;

 A temporary road constructed by the Forest Service for a particular project that was not 

decommissioned when it was no longer needed;

 A road that was once a system road and was decommissioned; or

 A road that was decommissioned but the decommissioning treatment proved to be 

ineffective.

Unauthorized roads that were created without the knowledge and approval of the Forest Service 

were likely not planned and designed to consider potential environmental impacts. Some of these 

roads may be in acceptable locations and may be good additions to the road system. However, it 

is likely that some of them adversely affect the surrounding environment through degradation of 

wildlife habitat, vegetation or soil productivity, or disturbance to archaeological sites. In addition, 

the potential for the spread of noxious weeds is increased as a result of unrestricted motorized 

travel.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

54 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Road Maintenance Needs and Resources to Satisfy Needs

The Forest Service uses the term maintenance level (ML) to describe the service provided by, and 

maintenance required for, a specific road. A road is assigned a maintenance level on the basis of 

the intended use of the road and the criteria that influence how the road will be operated and 

maintained. The maintenance level also provides an indication of the level of comfort the user 

would expect to experience while operating a vehicle on the road. 

The Forest Service uses five maintenance levels: ML 1 road, which requires the least amount of 

maintenance effort to an ML 5, which requires the greatest. Refer to the glossary for complete 

descriptions of the maintenance levels. Table 11 provides a summary of the road miles by

maintenance level in the analysis area with estimated maintenance costs. ML 1 roads are closed to 

all motorized traffic. MLs 2, 3, and 4 roads are open to all motor vehicles. There are no ML 5 

roads in the analysis area.

Table 11. Road miles by maintenance level

Maintenance 

Level* Miles Maintenance Cost/Mile

Total Annual 

Maintenance Cost

1 46.7 $61 $2,849

2 1,086.2 $855 $928,701

3 85.0 $8,530 $725,050

4 0.2 $30,570 $6,114

Total 1,218.1 $1,662,714

* There are no ML 5 roads in the analysis area.

The average annual maintenance costs per mile of road by maintenance level were determined for 

the Magdalena Ranger District TAP. Funding for Cibola National Forest road system maintenance 

in Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 was approximately $740,000. The Cibola’s road system consists of 

approximately 3,700 miles of roads, so the number of system road miles in the analysis area 

represents approximately 33 percent of the total number of forest system road miles. Using the 

simple ratio of miles in the analysis area to the total number of miles on the forest, the proportion 

of the total road maintenance budget available to maintain system roads in the analysis area is 

approximately $243,000. This figure represents only 15 percent of the funding necessary to 

maintain roads in the analysis area in a manner consistent with their assigned maintenance levels. 

This substantial shortfall in road maintenance funding has resulted in a large backlog of deferred 

road maintenance needs. Deferred maintenance can be generally defined as routine maintenance 

that was not completed when scheduled.

Public Safety

The primary concern regarding public safety as it relates to road system use is the potential for 

accidents, whether involving single vehicles or multiple vehicles. The latter could involve any 

combination of large commercial vehicles, full-size passenger vehicles, or off-highway vehicles. 

More safety features are typically incorporated into the design and management of higher 

standard forest roads (MLs 3–5) than are incorporated into the design and management of lower 

standard roads. These features include:

 Wider roadway widths with more frequent turnouts;
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 55

 Signing to warn users of potential hazards along the roadway;

 Guardrails, where appropriate; and

 More frequent maintenance to provide a relatively smooth road surface free from 

potentially hazardous irregularities.

Maintenance level 2 roads are typically lower standard roads managed for use by high-clearance 

vehicles. They generally have narrower road widths with fewer turnouts. Surface smoothness is 

not a consideration in the design or maintenance of the road. Roadway geometry and surface 

condition typically result in lower travel speed, which reduces the likelihood of accidents.

The potential for accidents between commercial and noncommercial vehicles is mitigated by the 

appropriate use of signing and control of public access in the vicinity of project activities. If 

necessary, roads can be temporarily closed by forest orders to limit interactions between 

commercial and noncommercial vehicles.

Access Needs

Access to National Forest System lands is needed or desired for several reasons: 

 Administrative use,

 Access to private property for property owners,

 Access to forest resources, for both commercial and noncommercial purposes,

 Recreation use, and

 Access to grazing allotments for grazing permittees.

As motorized travel in the analysis area on and off system roads is largely unrestricted, access to 

National Forest System lands is currently hampered only where the Forest Service lacks the rightof-way across private property.

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 is the proposed action. Alternative 3 was created in response to public comments 

requesting more access, primarily for recreation purposes, than is provided in the proposed action. 

Alternative 4 addresses public comments requesting less access, primarily for the purpose of 

resource protection. Alternative 2 provides for more access than any of the other alternatives, 

designating almost all of the existing open system roads for motor vehicle use. In the following 

tables, each of these alternatives is compared to the baseline condition (baseline).

Summary of Road System Effects

In table 12, the values in the “Miles of closed road changed to open road” row are the miles of 

ML 1 roads that would be reopened and designated for motor vehicle use. The maintenance level 

for these roads would be changed to ML 2, and they would be maintained for high-clearance 

vehicles. The values in the “Miles of new road construction” row are the total miles of reroute

construction proposed to bypass private property. The miles of road added to the system as a 

result of easements acquired represent road segments that are not under Forest Service 

jurisdiction. The Forest Service would pursue easements for these segments (please see table 1 in 

chapter 2) to gain legal access to system roads beyond. No roads would be closed (maintenance 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

56 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

level changed to ML 1) under any of the alternatives. Roads that are presently open to motor 

vehicles but would not be designated for motor vehicle use in an alternative, would be restricted 

to administrative use only.

Table 12. Road system by alternative

Baseline Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4

Miles of closed road changed to open road 0 14.7 0 16.9 10.6

Miles of new road construction (reroutes) 0 4.5 0 6.4 3.7

Miles of unauthorized routes1added as NFS 

roads

0 17.0 0 29.2 17.3

Miles of road added to system as a result of 

easements acquired

0 21.4 66.5 19.9 20.9

Miles of road restricted to administrative use 

only

0 -378.2 -0 -367.1 -477.0

Miles of road designated for motor vehicle use 1,171.4 850.8 1,210.8* 876.7 746.9

1 Consists of previously decommissioned roads and other documented non-system roads.

For alternatives 1, 3, and 4, the value in table 12 for miles of road designated for motor vehicle 

use equals the sum of the baseline road miles open to motor vehicle use (MLs 2, 3, and 4), the 

miles of closed road changed to open road, and the miles of road added to the system (rows 2, 3,

and 4) minus the miles of road restricted to administrative use only. For alternative 2, the value

for miles of road designated for motor vehicle use equals the sum of the baseline road miles open 

to motor vehicle use and the miles of road added as a result of easements acquired minus the 

miles of road that would not be designated for motor vehicle use. *There are 27.1 miles of road 

that would not be designated for motor vehicle use in alternative 2 (see alternative 2 maps). These 

roads connect with and are located beyond closed roads or unauthorized roads. No closed roads 

would be opened nor unauthorized roads added to the system in alternative 2, so the affected open 

system roads would remain inaccessible.

Table 13 displays the estimated annual road maintenance costs by alternative. The maintenance 

level for closed system roads that would be reopened and designated for motor vehicle use would 

be changed from ML 1 to ML 2. All roads added to the system (unauthorized roads and reroutes) 

would be maintained at an ML 2 standard.

A modified maintenance cost was used for the ML 2 roads that would not be designated for motor 

vehicle use. Because the traffic volume on these roads would be lighter and the required 

maintenance frequency, therefore, reduced, a maintenance cost of $300 per mile was used for 

these roads (ML 2mod in table 13)

Table 13. Road miles and estimated annual maintenance costs by alternative

Alternative

Maintenance Level1

Total 

Miles

Total Annual 

Maintenance 

1 2 2mod Cost 23 4

Baseline 46.7 1,086.2 0 85.0 0.2 1218.1 $1,662,714

1 32.0 765.6 378.2 85.0 0.2 1261.0 $1,501,164

2 46.7 1,152.7 0 85.0 0.2 1284.6 $1,719,571
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 57

Alternative

Maintenance Level1

Total 

Miles

Total Annual 

Maintenance 

1 2 2mod Cost 23 4

3 29.8 791.5 367.1 85.0 0.2 1273.6 $1,519,844

4 36.1 661.1 477.0 85.0 0.2 1259.4 $1,441,707

1 There are no ML 5 roads in the analysis area.

2 Values represent miles of ML 2 road not designated for motor vehicle use. A modified unit maintenance cost was 

used to reflect a reduced frequency of use and corresponding reduction in maintenance required.

In table 14, the values in the “Unauthorized Roads” column are the costs associated with the work 

required to improve the condition of unauthorized roads that would be added to the system to an 

ML 2 standard. The main criteria for meeting this standard are:

1. The road must be passable by a high-clearance vehicle, and 

2. Concerns regarding the existence of, or potential for, resource damage caused by the road 

must be addressed. 

No consideration is given to accommodating use by standard passenger cars. The values in the 

“New Construction (Reroutes)” column are the total estimated costs of constructing the reroutes 

proposed in an alternative (refer to table 13 for mileage).

Table 14. Cost of work required to add routes as NFS roads

Alternative Unauthorized 

Roads New Construction (Reroutes) Total Cost

Baseline $0 $0 $0

1 $7,410 $66,770 $74,180

2 $0 $0 $0

3 $18,220 $96,780 $115,000

4 $7,470 $56,150 $63,620

Public Safety

Baseline Condition

In the near future, the road system in the analysis area would continue to be relatively safe for 

prudent drivers. Because the vast majority of system roads are maintained for high-clearance 

vehicles, speeds would remain relatively low, and the likelihood of accidents between vehicles 

would continue to be low. If road maintenance budgets continue to decline, as anticipated, the 

frequency of road maintenance may need to be adjusted, and road conditions may deteriorate over 

time. Eventually, this deterioration could result in a road system that is less safe for all users.

Alternative 2

Compared with the baseline condition, more roads would be designated for motor vehicle use 

than are presently available. The accompanying additional road maintenance needs would 

consume more of the already limited funding and could hasten deterioration of portions of the 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

58 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

road system in the analysis area. The emphasis in prioritizing use of available funding would be 

on maintaining ML 3 and ML 4 roads.

Alternatives 1, 3, and 4

In these alternatives, fewer roads would be designated for motor vehicle use compared with the 

baseline condition, which would result in a decrease in road maintenance needs. The majority of 

the resulting savings in road maintenance costs would likely be directed toward satisfying the 

maintenance needs of roads designated for motor vehicle use. The result of this redirected 

funding would be a designated road system that is safer for public travel. However, the 

anticipated funding would be insufficient to adequately maintain the entire road system as it 

would exist under any of these alternatives. Because fewer roads would be designated for motor 

vehicle use, some roads may experience more concentrated use than currently exists. If the 

concentration of use were to increase to the extent that conflicts between vehicles become a 

problem, changes in management of the affected roads would be made as necessary.

All of the unauthorized roads proposed for designation would be added to the system as ML 2 

roads. They would not be added to the system or displayed on the motor vehicle use map

(MVUM) until the work necessary for them to meet ML 2 standards has been completed. ML 2 

roads are maintained for passage by high-clearance vehicles, and users of these roads should not 

expect to encounter signs warning of potential hazards. As a result, travel speeds are inherently 

slow and users tend to be more cautious, which means that the likelihood of accidents involving 

multiple vehicles is relatively low.

Road Maintenance Needs and Resources to Satisfy Needs

Baseline Condition

Road maintenance needs would continue to far outweigh the funding available to satisfy these 

needs. With the likelihood that funding will continue to decrease—or at best—remain the same, 

in coming years, deferred maintenance needs would continue to increase. In addition to the many 

miles of unauthorized road that already exist in the analysis area, continued unrestricted motor 

vehicle use would likely result in the creation of more unauthorized roads. A portion of these 

roads would likely cause resource damage and may need to be treated to mitigate the damage. 

The cost of this treatment would further reduce the funding available for maintaining system 

roads.

Alternative 2

According to table 14, the increase in road system miles associated with this alternative would 

result in an increase in the annual maintenance cost of approximately 3 percent. The increased 

maintenance cost would result in an increase in the number of road miles that are not adequately 

maintained, and the deferred maintenance backlog would become even larger. The prohibition of 

motorized cross-country travel in this alternative would likely limit the creation of new 

unauthorized roads.

Alternatives 1, 3, and 4

Table 14 indicates a decrease in maintenance costs for alternatives 1, 3, and 4 compared with the 

baseline condition of 10 percent, 9 percent, and 13 percent, respectively. These reduced 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 59

maintenance costs, however, would remain substantially higher than the forecasted budget 

allotment for maintaining the roads in the analysis area ($243,000 or less) consistent with their 

assigned maintenance levels. The estimated costs of the work associated with adding 

unauthorized roads to the system and constructing reroutes (table 15) would further reduce the 

funding available for road maintenance in the short term, unless additional funding is made 

available for this work.

Access Needs

Permits could be issued for access on system roads that would be restricted to administrative use 

only. Reasons for obtaining a permit would include allowing access to private property for 

property owners and access to grazing allotments for permittees.

Baseline Condition

Access to National Forest System lands via system roads in the analysis area would be unchanged 

and would continue to be hampered only by the lack of rights-of-way across private property.

Alternative 1

Compared with the baseline condition, 27 percent fewer miles of road would be designated for 

motor vehicle use than are presently available for use (table 12). To improve forest access, 4.5 

miles of reroutes connecting the following roads are proposed in this alternative (alternative 1 

maps):

 NFS Roads 537A and 540 in the southeastern part of the Datil Mountains;

 NFS Roads 214 and 218 in the eastern part of the Magdalena Mountains;

 NFS Roads 37 and 222 in the eastern part of the Magdalena Mountains;

 NFS Roads 271 and 282 in the northwestern part of the Magdalena Mountains; and

 Two sections of NFS Road 47 in the southwestern part of the Magdalena Mountains.

The proposed reroutes, as well as roads beyond the reroute segments that would not be accessible 

without the reroute, would not appear on the motor vehicle use map (MVUM) until the reroutes 

have been constructed. The unauthorized roads that would be added to the system (17 miles) also 

would not appear on the MVUM until the work necessary to improve their condition to meet the 

standards of an ML 2 road has been completed.

Easements across multiple road segments would be pursued to gain legal access to system roads 

proposed for designation. Acquiring these easements would result in 21.4 miles of road added to 

the system. The road segments for which the easements would be pursued and the roads located 

beyond these segments that would be designated for motor vehicle use would not appear on the 

MVUM until the necessary easements have been acquired.

Alternative 2

Compared with the baseline condition, 3 percent more road miles would be designated for motor 

vehicle use than are presently available (table 12). All open system roads would be designated for 

motor vehicle use, except those located beyond closed system roads or unauthorized roads. No 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

60 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

closed roads would be opened, no unauthorized roads would be added to the system, and no 

reroutes would be constructed.

Easements across multiple road segments would be pursued to gain legal access to system roads 

proposed for designation. Acquiring these easements would result in 66.5 miles of road added to 

the system. The road segments for which the easements would be pursued and the roads located 

beyond these segments that would be designated for motor vehicle use would not appear on the 

MVUM until the necessary easements have been acquired.

Alternative 3

Compared with the baseline condition, 25 percent fewer miles of road would be designated for 

motor vehicle use than are presently available for use (table 12). To improve forest access, 6.4 

miles of reroutes connecting the following roads are proposed in this alternative (alternative 3 

maps):

 NFS Roads 537A and 540 in the southeastern part of the Datil Mountains;

 NFS Roads 214 and 218 in the eastern part of the Magdalena Mountains;

 NFS Roads 37 and 222 in the eastern part of the Magdalena Mountains;

 NFS Roads 271 and 282 in the northwestern part of the Magdalena Mountains;

 Two sections of NFS Road 47 in the southwestern part of the Magdalena Mountains; and

 NFS Roads 894A and 896 in the southwestern part of the San Mateo Mountains.

The proposed reroutes, as well as roads beyond the reroute segments that would not be accessible 

without the reroute, would not appear on the motor vehicle use map (MVUM) until the reroutes 

have been constructed. The unauthorized roads (29.2 miles) also would not appear on the MVUM 

until the work necessary to improve their condition to meet the standards of an ML 2 road has 

been completed.

Easements across multiple road segments would be pursued to gain legal access to system roads 

proposed for designation. Acquiring these easements would result in 19.9 miles of road added to 

the system. The road segments for which the easements would be pursued and the roads located 

beyond these segments that would be designated for motor vehicle use would not appear on the 

MVUM until the necessary easements have been acquired.

Alternative 4

Compared with the baseline condition, 36 percent fewer miles of road would be designated for 

motor vehicle use than are presently available for use (table 12). To improve forest access, 3.7 

miles of reroutes connecting the following roads are proposed in this alternative (alternative 4 

maps):

 NFS Roads 537A and 540 in the southeastern part of the Datil Mountains;

 NFS Roads 214 and 218 in the eastern part of the Magdalena Mountains; 

 NFS Roads 37 and 222 in the eastern part of the Magdalena Mountains; and

 NFS Roads 271 and 282 in the northwestern part of the Magdalena Mountains.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 61

The proposed reroutes, as well as roads beyond the reroute segments that would not be accessible 

without the reroute, would not appear on the motor vehicle use map (MVUM) until the reroutes 

have been constructed. The unauthorized roads (17.3 miles) also would not appear on the MVUM 

until the work necessary to improve their condition to meet the standards of an ML 2 road has 

been completed.

Easements across multiple road segments would be pursued to gain legal access to system roads 

proposed for designation. Acquiring these easements would result in 20.9 miles of road added to 

the system. The road segments for which the easements would be pursued and the roads located 

beyond these segments that would be designated for motor vehicle use would not appear on the 

MVUM until the necessary easements have been acquired.

Cumulative Effects

All Alternatives

The list of ongoing and future foreseeable projects considered for cumulative effects is appendix 

D of this document. None of the activities associated with these projects is expected to change the 

route designations associated with this project. As a result, there would be no cumulative effects 

from the combination of route designations proposed with this project and activities associated 

with ongoing or future foreseeable projects.

Heritage Resources

The following analysis is based on the heritage resources specialist report prepared by Matt 

Basham, District Archaeologist. This report is on file in the project record. 

Affected Environment

The Magdalena Ranger District can be divided into four noncontiguous geographic units: 

Magdalena Mountains; San Mateo Mountains; Bear/Gallinas Mountains, and Datil Mountains. 

Interspersed within the mountains are expansive grassy plains, including the Plains of San 

Agustin, located some 20 miles west of the village of Magdalena, New Mexico. The geographic 

variability of the district undoubtedly contributes to the long duration of human occupation in the 

area, and partially accounts for the distribution of archaeological sites on the district. The cultural 

landscape of the district contains evidence of human occupation that extends back 14,000 years.

The Magdalena Ranger District has 1,081 cultural resources recorded in the New Mexico Cultural 

Resources Inventory System. Approximately 50 percent of those sites are prehistoric, 28 percent 

historic, with the rest representing multicomponents or unknown components. The sites are 

widely distributed across the district, with concentrations occurring in areas that were suitable for 

occupation.

Across the district, site density is low—defined as 20 or less sites per square mile. Sections of the 

district have moderate to high archaeological site density. Moderate site density is defined as 20 

to 40 sites per square mile, and high site density is 40 or more sites per square mile. Site density 

on the district tends to be lower in areas situated at high altitudes in the mixed conifer vegetation 

zone. Areas of the district located in the piñon-juniper zone or historic mining areas will most 

likely have higher site density. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

62 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Evaluation of site density on the Magdalena Ranger District is tied to the district’s distribution of 

survey. The district archaeologist used Geographic Information System (GIS) layers for known 

cultural resource sites and valid cultural resource surveys for site density evaluation. A valid 

cultural resource survey consists of systematic ground examination using professional 

archaeologists to intensively examine transect swaths that do not exceed 15 meters in width. The 

GIS layer shows that 51,563 acres have been surveyed to this standard, resulting in approximately 

six percent of the district having been surveyed. Survey on the district corresponds to land 

management activities such as timber sales, fuels projects, fire management activities, range 

projects, roads and infrastructure maintenance, and wildlife management. 

Heritage Resources Protocol for Travel Management

The Cibola National Forest meets its Section 106 responsibilities under a region-wide 

programmatic agreement (PA) signed by the Forest Service, State Historic Preservation Office 

(SHPO), and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. This agreement serves in lieu of 

procedures set out in 36 CFR 800. The “R3 First Amended Programmatic Agreement Regarding 

Historic Property Protection and Responsibilities” allows for the development of protocols related 

to specific undertakings. In 2006, the Forest Service, in consultation with the tribes, SHPOs, and 

Advisory Council, developed a protocol for travel management route designation (appendix I: 

“Standard Consultation Protocol for Travel Management Route Designation”). 

Per the Region 3 protocol with the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office regarding 

travel management, some existing roads and areas do not require heritage resource survey. No 

additional Section 106 survey is needed for the following areas:

 Existing system roads and trails already open for motor vehicle use. The Forest Service 

and SHPO have agreed that the integrity of sites located within an existing system road 

have already been compromised by construction, maintenance, and driving of the road.

 Existing associated constructed features such as pullouts, trailheads, and turnouts.

 Pull-off parking alongside existing roads within a vehicle length.

 Existing fixed-distance corridors where motorized use has been previously authorized in 

approved forest plans or covered by past decisions.

 Specific limited-use authorizations such as those for game retrieval or firewood gathering 

that are already covered by separate NEPA decisions.

The Region 3 protocol requires that some roads be surveyed to determine the effects of the 

alternatives on heritage resources. All unauthorized roads, decommissioned roads, and new road 

construction and areas will be inventoried. The areas considered in the Magdalena travel 

management proposed action and alternatives that require heritage resource survey are motorized 

dispersed camping corridors. An off-highway vehicle use area proposed in alternative 3 would 

require a heritage resource survey.

Analysis Methods

Cultural resources include both archaeological sites on district lands, as well as the heritage of 

extant communities in and around the Magdalena Ranger District. Unlike other resources on the 

district, archaeological resources are considered nonrenewable—they cannot be regenerated or 

replaced. Archaeological resources are a testament of past human behavior represented by sites, 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 63

buildings, structures, artifacts, ruins, objects, rock art, dendroglyphs, architecture, and natural 

features. Indeed, in the preamble of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), Congress 

recognized that “the spirit and direction of the Nation are founded upon and reflected in its 

historic heritage” and “the historical and cultural foundations of the Nation should be preserved 

as a living part of our community life and development in order to give a sense of orientation to 

the American people.” Simply stated, the past is who we are and why we are the way we are.

The potential for impacts to cultural resource sites in the existing condition is separated into 

direct and indirect impacts from unauthorized routes and motorized dispersed camping corridors. 

The potential for impacts is measured as a change from the baseline condition (existing road 

system plus unrestricted cross-country travel).

To determine the numbers of cultural resource sites, the district archaeologist intersected GIS data 

for existing unauthorized routes and motorized dispersed camping corridors for each alternative 

with known site boundaries. For sites that are less than 100 meters in maximum dimension 

(length or width) size, site boundaries are represented in most cases in the GIS data as circles 

representing the site’s maximum dimension. Route intersections were buffered using the same 

method as found in the standard road maintenance protocol that was consulted upon with the New 

Mexico State Historic Preservation Office (Benedict 2005). The widths account for the area of 

direct impact from vehicular travel in each class of route, plus a maintenance buffer of 98 feet (30 

meters) off centerline for a total width of 196 feet (60 meters). Motorized dispersed camping 

corridors were buffered 300 feet (91 m) off centerline for a total width of 600 feet (182 m).

Table 15. Potential for impacts to cultural resource sites by alternative presented as a 

decrease from the baseline

Measure: Number of Sites Baseline Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4

Potential vehicular impacts within unauthorized 

routes 

890 188 137 322 183

Percent of change from baseline condition — 79% 85% 64% 79%

Vehicular Impacts within Routes 

No additional Section 106 consultation is required for the designation of existing open system 

routes. In consultation with the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Officer, it was agreed 

that the integrity of these sites was compromised and the potential for substantial impacts to 

cultural resource sites from designating existing system routes was low (“First Amended 

Programmatic Agreement, Appendix I.II.A”). 

For unauthorized routes that will be added to system, where there is a potential for substantial 

impacts to cultural resource sites, the site will be protected or avoided. In some instances, a 

route—or a portion of a route—will be excluded from the motor vehicle use map (MVUM). 

Alternatively, when avoidance is not possible, the site within the route can in some cases be 

protected from vehicular impacts by plating the surface. Plating consists of placing a protective 

covering, usually consisting of geotextile and sediment to raise the grade of the route over the 

surface of the site, so that vehicular travel takes place on the surface of the plate rather than on the 

surface of the site. However, plating or the intentional burial of a site is often an irreversible 

action that would require periodic monitoring to ensure the plating is working. In other cases, a 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

64 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

section of a road may be rerouted to avoid sites. Where no other protection measures can be 

employed, data recovery may be needed to minimize adverse effects.

Vehicular Impacts within 

Motorized Dispersed Camping Corridors

The potential effects from motorized dispersed camping corridors that cause direct impacts

include: vehicles dislocating artifacts; forming ruts, the erosion of archaeological material;

repeated traveling on tracks that end up creating road systems; establishing vehicular access to 

significant archaeological sites, and the potential for subsequent looting of surface and subsurface 

archaeological materials. Disturbance of archaeological contexts impacts the preservation of

artifacts and limits the ability of archaeologists to learn about the past from these disturbed sites. 

Additionally, roads that access archaeological sites can potentially facilitate looting activities (e.g. 

theft of artifacts) and vandalism, although no evidence of this has been observed on the district.

For designated corridors where substantial impacts to cultural resources are identified, all or 

portions of a corridor will be excluded from the MVUM, so the site or sites with a potential for 

substantial impacts are excluded from a corridor. In situations where delisting the corridor or 

portions of the corridor are not feasible, on-the-ground protective closures will be enacted. 

Motorized Big Game Retrieval

Motorized big game retrieval for purposes of the following discussion consists of mule deer and 

elk only. The greatest extent of potential impacts from big game retrieval is limited to the number 

of public permits issued for big game on units located on Magdalena Ranger District lands, and 

the number of takes or successful hunts. The New Mexico Department of Game and Fish 

(NMDGF) assigned 1,053 elk permits and 2,023 mule deer permits for Game Management Unit 

(GMU) 13, which includes the Datil and Bear/Gallinas area, for the 2009–2010 license years. 

Unit 17, which includes the Magdalena and San Mateo units, was assigned 757 elk permits and 

1,099 mule deer permits. It is subjective to assume that the off-road route chosen by a hunter to

retrieve downed big game will intersect a cultural resource site, and there is no way to analyze a 

hypothetical circumstance. 

However, it is logical to assume that the probability of intersecting cultural resources increases in 

areas of higher archaeological site density. That being said, there is a higher probability of 

intersecting a cultural resource by retrieving downed game in GMU 13 because it is located in the 

northern part of the district where archaeological site density is highest. In addition, GMU 13 sold 

more permits (3,076) and had more successful hunts (550). By comparison GMU 17, located in 

an area with lower archaeological site density, sold 1,856 public permits and reported 464 

successful hunts. 

This activity is similar in its spatial extent and impact to districtwide or areawide personal use 

firewood collection. Personal use firewood collection often requires one or more cross-country 

trips to retrieve green or dead and down wood. In 2011 (the last complete year for which data is 

available), the Magdalena Ranger District issued 1,042 districtwide or areawide permits for the 

collection of dead and down or live green firewood. The 1,042 permits accounted for 2,084 cords 

of wood. The permitting process provides for a half-cord per load or trip, which means that 1,042 

permits could potentially result in 4,168 cross-country trips on the district. It has been 

programmatically determined that there are no substantial impacts to cultural resource sites from 

personal use district-wide firewood collection (“Region 3 Programmatic Agreement Appendix 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 65

A.II.P”). Because motorized big game retrieval is similar in impact, and similar in yearly 

occurrence, to district-wide or area-wide firewood permits, it is reasonable to assume that there 

will be no substantial impact to heritage resource sites from motorized big game retrieval. 

Limited trips for motorized big game retrieval, spread out across such a large area will have a low 

potential to affect cultural resources.

Heritage Resource Survey

In alternatives 1, 3, and 4, a heritage resource survey is required for:

 All unauthorized roads to be added to the system;

 Closed roads to be reopened;

 New roads to be constructed around private land; and

 Motorized dispersed camping corridors identified for motor vehicle use proposed.

The OHV area proposed in alternative 3 would need to be surveyed. Corridors will be evaluated 

for the level of survey needed. Corridors with high site densities will be surveyed 100 percent. 

Corridors with low site densities may be surveyed to less than 100 percent. The locations of the 

proposed reroutes have not been identified at this time. 

A heritage resource survey is not required for motorized big game retrieval corridors. Due to the

highly dispersed nature and the one-time-in/one-time-out requirement, it is unlikely that this 

activity would impact heritage resources. They will need to be surveyed for heritage resources 

prior to being added to the motor vehicle use map (MVUM). The responsible government official 

may provide for a system of roads, trails, and areas designated for motor vehicle use in a decision 

notice/finding of no significant impacts prior to completion of all required heritage resource 

surveys. 

Appendix I of the Region 3 programmatic agreement allows the Forest Service to complete the 

Section 106 process in phases. Compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) 

requires extensive literature review and field evaluation of the direct effects of designating a 

motorized system of routes and corridors. Site-specific effects are described in compliance 

documentation completed for the inventory, evaluation, and mitigation of effects to cultural 

resources completed to meet the requirements of Section 106 of NHPA as defined in 36 CFR 800 

and the Region 3 programmatic agreement. Development of the protocol was completed in 

consultation with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the State Historic Preservation 

Officers of Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas, southwestern tribal communities, and 

the USDA Forest Service. Completion of these requirements will occur in phases and will be 

reflected on the motor vehicle use map (MVUM). Only routes and areas meeting the 

requirements of Section 106, as articulated in the protocol, will be included on the MVUM.

In November and December 2010, contractors surveyed 4,302 acres of roads and corridors 

identified in the proposed action (alternative 1). In many instances, the surveyed routes and 

corridors are the same for each alternative with some minor deviations. All of the areas requiring 

survey were identified during a pre-field investigation of the heritage resource records for the 

Cibola National Forest. Roads and areas that have been 100 percent surveyed to standard 

previously were excluded from additional survey. All of the remaining areas not covered by 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

66 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

previous survey will be surveyed in phases, over 3 years, to meet the Forest Service’s Section 106 

obligations. Corridors will be evaluated for the level of survey needed based on site density.

No survey was completed for alternative 2. Per the Region 3 programmatic agreement with the 

SHPO, “Appendix I: Standard Consultation Protocol for Travel Management Route Designation,” 

the Forest Service and SHPO have agreed that the integrity of most sites located within an 

existing road system have already been compromised by construction, maintenance, and driving 

of the road. No additional survey is required before these roads can be shown on the MVUM. 

The areas surveyed for each alternative are described in table 16, the “Miles Surveyed” column 

includes previous surveys as well as locations that were newly surveyed for this project. 

Table 16. Areas surveyed by alternative 

Area Surveyed Total Miles Miles Surveyed

Alternative 1

Dispersed camping corridors 374.4 43.3

Closed roads (ML 1) 14.7 14.7

Unauthorized roads 17 13.8

Road reroutes 4.5 0

Alternative 3

Dispersed camping corridors 374.4 43.3

Closed roads (ML 1) 16.9 14.7

Unauthorized roads 29.2 15.52

Road reroutes 6.4 0

Motorized big game retrieval 342.5 0

Alternative 4

Dispersed camping corridors 321.2 43.3

Closed roads (ML 1) 10.6 10.6

Unauthorized roads 17.3 14.1

Road reroutes 3.7 0

Environmental Consequences

Evaluation of Effects by Alternative

Baseline Conditions 

There is no substantial impact to cultural resource sites from vehicular impacts within existing 

system routes. It has been programmatically determined that the integrity of sites has already 

been substantially compromised and the SHPO and Advisory Council agree that the existing road 

system is unlikely to have an effect on cultural resources (“First Amended Programmatic 

Agreement, Appendix I.II.A.”)

There is a potential for vehicular impacts to 890 known sites within existing unauthorized routes 

and unrestricted motorized cross-country travel. The degree of potential impact is contingent on 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 67

where the route passes through the cultural resource site. Because of the nature of how 

archaeologists establish archaeological site boundaries (either through the observed distribution 

of artifacts or the location of features and architecture), not every instance of a route intersecting 

a site will result in substantial impacts. In some cases, it is possible for a route to intersect a 

cultural resource site boundary without damaging contributing elements and features of that site. 

Site specific evaluations and mitigations will be completed in the NHPA process

All Alternatives

Archaeological resources are negatively impacted by both unmanaged motor vehicle use and by 

the location of some system roads. In most cases, continued driving on system roads may not 

affect heritage resources because the damage has already occurred. However, routine road 

maintenance cannot be performed on some segments of the roads due to the presence of heritage 

resources within the road prism, making continued use of these roads difficult. This has resulted 

in some segments of road becoming degraded or impassable.

There is no substantial impact to cultural resource sites from vehicular impacts within the existing 

system routes. It has been programmatically determined that the integrity of sites has already 

been substantially compromised and the SHPO and Advisory Council agree that the existing road 

system is unlikely to have an effect on cultural resources (“First Amended Programmatic 

Agreement, Appendix I.II.A”). Potential substantial impacts to sites resulting from the addition of 

unauthorized routes to the system and designating them for motor vehicle use will be mitigated.

There is a low potential for impacts to cultural resource sites from vehicular impacts, or from 

indirect impacts including surface and subsurface disturbance, within motorized dispersed 

camping corridors. Those motorized dispersed camping corridors previously surveyed will be 

evaluated for the level of Section 106 survey needed prior to being added to the motor vehicle use 

map (MVUM). 

Monitoring sites will take place, and if impacts are observed, the dispersed camping corridor will 

be removed from the MVUM until mitigation is completed. All or portions of corridors where 

there is a potential for substantial impacts to sites will be excluded from the MVUM. If sites 

cannot be avoided, any adverse effect will be minimized through data recovery. 

Substantial vehicular impacts will be eliminated. The potential for indirect effects such as the 

erosion of soils onto the site from high intensity use, would remain because the designation of a 

road includes parking a vehicle on the side of the road where it is allowed to do so without 

causing damage to Forest Service resources or facilities. These indirect effects would be 

substantially reduced from the existing condition, as it is assumed that the largest portion of 

motorized dispersed camping will continue to occur within designated motorized dispersed 

camping corridors.

The potential impacts to cultural resource sites as incremental changes from the baseline 

condition (the existing road system plus unrestricted motorized cross-country travel) is shown in 

table 15. In alternative 2, the existing road system will impact the fewest number of cultural 

resource sites (n = 137) representing an 85 percent decrease from the baseline condition. This is 

because alternative 2 eliminates unrestricted motorized cross-country travel, as do all the action 

alternatives, but includes no fixed distance motorized dispersed camping or motorized big game 

retrieval corridors. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

68 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

By contrast, the data show that alternative 3 will impact the greatest number of cultural resource 

sites (n = 322) representing only a 64 percent incremental decrease from the baseline condition. 

This is because alternative 3 contains more fixed distance motorized dispersed camping corridors 

in addition to including motorized big game retrieval opportunities not present in the other 

alternatives. 

The data show that potential impacts for alternative 1—the Proposed Action—and alternative 4 

are similar in that both represent a 79 percent incremental decrease from the baseline condition. 

However, none of the cultural resource sites identified in this analysis will be adversely affected 

as a result of designated National Forest System roads for motor vehicle use because those effects 

will be mitigated prior to that route or corridor being listed on the MVUM. 

Cumulative Effects

There are several present and foreseeable future project planned on the Magdalena Ranger 

District (see appendix D). Section 106 consultation had already been completed, or would be 

required to being completed for these projects, and any site located within the project areas would 

be protected and avoided to ensure that they will not be a no adverse effect to cultural resources. 

Given that there is no adverse effects expected for these project, or from the Travel Management 

Rule being enacted, implementation of any of the alternatives would not contribute to cumulative 

effects.

Contemporary American 

Indian Uses/Tribal Consultation

The following analysis is based on the contemporary American Indian uses/tribal consultation 

specialist report prepared by Cynthia Benedict, tribal relations program manager. This report is on 

file in the project record. 

Tribal Consultation

The Cibola National Forest routinely consults with five American Indian tribes that may have 

used and may continue to use lands managed by the Magdalena Ranger District for traditional 

cultural and religious activities. These include the: Pueblos of Acoma and Zuni; Navajo Nation;

Mescalero Apache Tribe; and Ft. Sill Apache Tribe. In addition, the forest consults with the 

Alamo Band, a chapter of the Navajo Nation.

The tribes and Alamo Navajo Band have been consulted regarding travel management planning 

on the Magdalena Ranger District, through both the Section 106 consultation process and the 

NEPA process. The Travel Management Rule and the forest’s planning effort were first 

introduced to the tribes in a project consultation letter in February 2009. Consultation meetings 

were held in 2009 with the Pueblos of Acoma and Zuni, Navajo Nation, and Alamo Band. These 

meetings were preliminary as the proposed action had not yet been developed. Ysleta del Sur 

Pueblo responded to the forest that it had no concerns or objections to the undertaking and further 

consultation was not needed. The Pueblos of Acoma and Zuni, as well as the Navajo Nation 

confirmed their interest in consultation on this undertaking. During consultation, the Alamo Band 

indicated that its tribal members use national forest lands for the collection of firewood and piñon 

nuts. The band expressed concern that the travel restrictions would affect the tribal members’

ability to drive off road for resource collection. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 69

The travel management planning process was highlighted in the forest’s annual Section 106 

project consultation letter that was sent to the tribes in February 2010. In followup consultation, 

the Navajo Nation indicated that the tribe generally supports the idea of eliminating cross-country 

travel as it tends to create new roads and damage plants and makes it more difficult for traditional 

practitioners to conduct their activities in privacy. Attempts to set up a meeting in 2010 with the 

Pueblo of Acoma to consult regarding this undertaking were unsuccessful. Consultation with the 

Pueblo of Zuni was closed in the fall of 2010 due to a lack of funding at the Zuni Heritage and 

Historic Preservation Office.

The scoping letter and report was sent to all five tribes and the Alamo Band in July 2010. No 

written comments were received from tribes as a result of scoping. Information regarding sites of 

cultural and religious significance and traditional use in general that was used in this analysis was 

obtained through consultation over an extended period, and prior to the timeframes for travel 

management planning on the Magdalena Ranger District. 

Affected Environment

The lands managed by the Magdalena Ranger District are culturally significant for the area tribes, 

including the Pueblo of Acoma, Pueblo of Zuni, Navajo Nation, Mescalero Apache Tribe, and Ft. 

Sill Apache Tribe. These lands have long standing and ongoing historical, cultural, and religious 

importance to these tribes. The lands have been used and continue to be used for a variety of 

traditional cultural and religious activities. Some of the tribes have acknowledged and identified 

places and properties of cultural and religious significance.

Environmental Consequences –

Contemporary American Indian Uses

Baseline Conditions 

The continuation of existing conditions would provide necessary access for traditional 

practitioners and allow them to continue to use the area for traditional cultural and religious 

activities. No tribe has indicated that the current road system is inadequate for their continued use 

of national forest lands for cultural and religious activities. 

Continuing unrestricted motorized cross-country travel has the potential to affect places and 

properties of cultural and religious significance and traditional use of the area by practitioners. 

Continuation of the existing condition does not reduce potential disruption of traditional cultural 

and religious activities, because motorized cross-country travel may draw unnecessary attention 

to sensitive areas and/or activities that practitioners need to conduct in privacy. One tribe has also 

indicated that in general, driving cross country creates roads and damages vegetation. 

Alternative 1 

The designation of National Forest System Road (NFSR) 59, NSFR 59A, NFSR 235, NFSR 140, 

and NFSR 511 would continue to provide general access, benefiting contemporary tribal uses. 

Even though the Forest Service will not pursue right-of-way access across private land to NFSR

140, County Road 19 would still provide access into the general area. No tribe has indicated that 

the routes proposed for designation are inadequate for their continued use of national forest lands 

for traditional cultural and religious activities.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

70 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Under this alternative, motorized cross-country travel would be prohibited, although motorized 

dispersed camping corridors would be included in the designation of 374.4 miles of NFS roads. 

The Navajo Nation and Alamo Band of Navajo provided specific comments regarding motorized 

cross-country travel. The Navajo Nation expressed support for restricting motorized crosscountry travel based on its potential for causing resource damage, and the need for practitioners to 

conduct traditional activities in privacy. The Alamo Band of Navajo expressed concern that 

restricting motorized travel would affect tribal members’ ability to drive off road for resource 

collection. The band uses the district for permitted firewood collection and personal use 

collection of piñon nuts. Activities authorized under permit would not be subject to the travel 

management designations. Under this alternative, the Alamo Band might be required to change its 

collection method for piñon nuts, because of the prohibition of motorized cross-country travel.

Designating corridors for motorized camping may have the effect of consolidating public use 

closer to the roads. This has the potential to reduce disruption of traditional cultural and religious 

activities, as these activities are generally done further away from roads to ensure privacy.

The prohibition of motorized cross-country travel would affect some tribes who have previously 

indicated the need for hunters to collect an animal whole. It would require those hunters to 

change their method of big game retrieval. However, it would likely be a benefit for other tribes 

because it would reduce the risk of disruption of traditional cultural and religious activities and 

would likely improve the hunting experience for those who prefer nonmotorized opportunities.

In comparison to the baseline conditions, this alternative proposes fewer miles of road to be 

designated for all vehicles and designates specific corridors for motorized dispersed camping. As 

a result, there would be a reduced potential to effect places or properties of cultural and religious 

significance.

Alternative 2 

This alternative involves the continued designation of those roads that are currently recognized as 

part of the forest’s open system. Most of the roads that have been identified as important for 

ongoing access would be designated, thus allowing practitioners to continue to use the areas for 

cultural activities. Under this alternative, the Forest Service would pursue a right-of-way for 

NFSR 140 from State Highway 142. If the Agency is unsuccessful in its attempts to obtain a 

right-of-way, there are other routes available to access the general area. The forest also does not 

have legal access to NFSR 59A at its junction with Hwy 60. Under this alternative, the Forest 

Service would pursue a right-of-way for NFSR 59A. Acquisition of a right-of-way would not 

affect tribal use of the general area as it can be accessed via a different route.

Under this alternative, all motorized cross-country travel would be prohibited. The effects of 

prohibiting motorized cross-country travel would be the same as alternative 1. In comparison to 

the baseline conditions, this alternative proposes slightly fewer miles of road to be designated for 

all vehicles and places more restrictions on travel by prohibiting cross-country travel. As a result, 

there would be a reduced potential to effect places or properties of cultural and religious 

significance.

Alternative 3 

All of the roads that have been identified to date as important for access would be designated, 

thus allowing practitioners to continue to use the areas for traditional cultural and religious 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 71

activities. In the case of NFSR 140, the forest does not have legal access to it from County Road 

19, and under this alternative, the forest would not pursue a right-of-way. However, this 

alternative proposes to acquire a right-of-way to NFSR 892, and to construct a connector road 

between NFSR 894A and NFSR 896. These two actions would facilitate continued access into the 

area. In addition, NFSR 511 is proposed to be re-opened and designated for all vehicles. While 

access to the general area site is not dependent on NFSR 511, opening the road would provide 

greater options for access. The forest also does not have legal access to NFSR 59A at its junction 

with Hwy. 60. Under this alternative, the Forest Service would pursue a right-of-way for NFSR 

59A. There are other options (routes) available to access the general area even if the Forest 

Service was unable to acquire legal access.

This is the only alternative that allows for motorized big game retrieval. Establishment of 

motorized big game retrieval corridors provides for less off-road driving than is currently 

allowed, and would likely be a benefit for some tribes because it would reduce the risk of 

disruption of traditional cultural and religious activities and would likely improve the hunting 

experience for those who prefer nonmotorized opportunities. One tribe has indicated that the 

animal must be taken whole, so restricting off-road travel to collect downed game would require 

tribal members to alter their method of big game retrieval and/or limit their hunt to within the 

retrieval corridors. 

Motorized dispersed camping corridors would be designated under this alternative. The effects of 

designating motorized camping corridors would be the same as alternative 1.

Under this alternative, an area would be designated for motor vehicle use southeast of the Apache 

Kid Wilderness in the San Mateo unit. The designated area encompassing 756 acres would 

provide a place for off-highway vehicle (OHV) riding, but would also allow for unrestricted use 

of vehicles of all classes and sizes. To date, no sites of cultural and religious significance have 

been identified in or around the area proposed for designation. Traditional plant collection is 

known to occur in the San Mateo Mountains, but it is not known whether or not the activity in the 

motorized area would have any auditory effects upon traditional activities.

In comparison to the baseline conditions, which allows unrestricted motorized use, this alternative 

proposes fewer miles of road to be designated for all vehicles and places more restrictions on 

travel by allowing only the limited use of motor vehicles within 300 feet along both sides of 

374.4 miles of NFS roads solely for the purpose of dispersed camping and within .25 mile of 

certain designated NFS roads solely for the purpose of retrieving legally downed elk and mule 

deer. As a result, there would be a reduced potential to effect places or properties of cultural and 

religious significance.

Alternative 4 

Under this alternative, NFSR 59 and NFSR 235 would be designated for motor vehicle use, 

allowing continued access into the general area. Roads such as NFSR 59A, NFSR 140, and NFSR 

511 would not be designated for motorized use. In the case of NFSR 59A, access into the general 

area could still be obtained through another route that would be designated. As a result of not 

designating NFSR 140 and NFSR 511, this alternative would have an effect upon a tribe’s access 

to a culturally significant area because it would require the tribe to obtain a permit to use the 

roads.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

72 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

In comparison to the baseline conditions, this alternative proposes the fewest miles of designated 

roads open to all vehicles and the fewest miles of motorized dispersed camping corridors. As a 

result, there would be a reduced potential to affect places or properties of cultural and religious 

significance, but a greater effect to the access and use of a culturally significant site. The effect of 

the designation of motorized camping corridors and the prohibition of motorized big game 

retrieval would have the same effect on traditional cultural properties as alternative 1.

Cumulative Effects – All Alternatives

For the purpose of analyzing cumulative effects to contemporary American Indian uses, the 

spatial boundary is the land managed by the Magdalena Ranger District. The temporal boundary 

covers 10 years from the date of the decision. To analyze beyond a 10-year time span would be 

speculative. 

Several tribes have indicated that the lands managed by the Magdalena Ranger District are 

culturally significant and are used for a variety of traditional cultural and religious activities. Past 

and present actions—such as mineral development, development of electronic communication 

sites, commercial timber harvesting, livestock grazing, road construction, and private land 

development—have affected American Indian contemporary traditional uses. These developments 

have affected the tribes’ ability to access areas of cultural significance, forced tribes to alter the 

methods and timing of cultural activities, and have introduced visual, audible, and atmospheric 

interference; disrupting or displacing prescribed traditional activities in a given area. 

There are no other proposals or activities on the district that would have an additional effect on 

the tribes’ ability to access traditional use sites or to conduct traditional activities. Because the 

travel management decision addresses the designation of roads and areas, none of the 

alternatives—when combined with past, present, and foreseeable actions—contribute to 

cumulative effects on the district.

Social and Economic Considerations

The following analysis is based on the social and economic specialist report prepared by Cynthia 

Geuss, land management planner and Delilah Jordahl, social scientist. This report is on file in the 

project record. 

Affected Environment

Magdalena Ranger District is the largest district on the Cibola National Forest, composed of four 

separate and distinct mountain ranges located in southwest New Mexico. The ranges include the 

Datil, Bear, San Mateo, and Magdalena Mountains. With an area of approximately 900,000 acres, 

the district is located within three counties: Catron, Sierra, and Socorro, (UNM-BBER 2007). In 

2010, all three counties had extremely low population densities:

 Catron County had 0.5 people per square mile,

 Sierra County had slightly less than 3 people per square mile, and 

 Socorro County also had less than 3 people per square mile.

The population density for the three-county planning area decreased by 3.7 percent between 2000 

and 2010 (UNM-BBER 2013). Table 17 reports the percent of each county under Cibola National 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 73

Forest management in 2007. There will be a slight variation in acreages reported in this table and 

table 27 “Payments in Lieu of Taxes” due to differences in reporting years and data source.

Table 17. Acreage by county; percent of county under forest management

County

Total Cibola 

NF Acres in 

County

Forest Service 

Managed Acres

Acres Under Other 

Ownership Within 

Forest Boundary

Cibola NF as a 

Percent of Total 

County Acres

Catron 223,493 158,039 217,915 5.03%

Sierra 21,172 18,869 2,303 0.78%

Socorro 832,720 614,805 65,454 19.57%

Source: UNM, BBER 2007, calculated using 2004 GIS data

Note: Acres under other ownership within the Magdalena proclamation boundary include the Alamo Navajo Indian 

Reservation and other privately owned land.

The three-county planning area is home to a rich scientific community including the New Mexico 

Institute of Mining and Technology in Socorro, a research laboratory for lightning and other 

weather related events, and two astronomical observatories. Among these, Langmuir Laboratory 

(the lab) is located on the district in the Magdalena Mountains near the summit of South Baldy 

Peak. The lab’s primary purpose is to study the cloud process that produces lightning, hail, and 

rain.

Langmuir Laboratory is a congressionally designated area and the facility operates under a 

special use permit with the Cibola National Forest. Public Law 96–550 passed by Congress in 

1980, established 31,000 acres for the laboratory within the Cibola National Forest. The lab is 

affiliated with New Mexico Tech in Socorro, and employs approximately 10 full-time scientific 

personnel and 4 graduate students (NM Tech 2010a). Colocated at the Langmuir site is the 

Magdalena Ridge Observatory for astronomical research.

Demographic Conditions and Trends

This section highlights demographic and economic conditions and trends in the planning area. 

Current population levels create the demand for access to forest resources, and forecasts of future 

population levels can indicate whether there is potential for increasing demand for access for any 

number of uses, including recreation, traditional/cultural, or potential economic development. 

Age distributions provide insight into the proportion of individuals who typically have different 

access needs. Similarly, the racial composition of the population influences access demand for 

cultural and heritage uses and household income affects participation levels in recreation or 

subsistence uses. 

Collectively, these three counties have a population (year 2011*) of approximately 33,538 people.

All three counties are largely rural and sparsely populated. The city of Socorro is the largest 

population center with approximately 8,951 people (2010), followed by Truth or Consequences in 

Sierra County with about 6,475 people. Magdalena is a small village located west of Socorro and 

has a population of 938. Magdalena is the headquarters for the Magdalena Ranger District (U.S.

Census, American fact Finder 2010). 

The Alamo Navajo Indian Reservation is located between the Datil and Bear Mountains within 

the Magdalena district boundary. The Alamo Chapter had a population of approximately 1,800 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

74 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

persons in the years 2005–2009 and 1,085 persons in 2010 (American Community Survey, 2005–

2009 Five Year Estimates, and ACS 2010). This represents a decrease of approximately 715 

people, possibly due to lack of economic opportunities in the area, or in search of educational 

opportunities outside the area. 

Table 18 shows the past, present, and projected population trends for each county in the planning 

area. From 2000 to 2011 the population of Catron County grew by 144 people, an increase of 

approximately 4.1 percent. For the same period, Sierra County lost 1,345 people, a 10.1 percent 

decrease in population. Socorro County lost 180 people, a decrease of about 0.8 percent. The 

three county area had a total decrease of 1,353 persons; about a 3.9 percent over the reporting 

period. In the three county planning area, only Catron County experienced growth in population 

(EPS-HDT, Profile of Demographics, County Region, 7/2/2013). 

Table 18. Historical and projected populations for Socorro, Catron and Sierra Counties

Historical Projected

County 1980 1990 2000 2011* 2020 2030

Catron 2,720 2,563 3,543 3,687 4,459 4,000

Sierra 8,454 9,912 13,270 11,925 12,048 12,218

Socorro 12,566 14,764 18,078 17,926 18,008 17,621

Area Total 23,740 27,239 34,891 33,538 48,809 54,561

Sources: UNM-BBER 2013 and EPS-HDT 7/2/2013. 

*Calculated by ACS using annual surveys conducted during 2007–2011 and are representative of average 

characteristics during this period.

As indicated in figure 2, the two most dominant age cohorts in the study area are 55 to 59 and 60 

to 64 years old. This represents the older working age group dependent upon their employment 

status to support themselves and their families. Older populations are likely to have different 

needs and preferences related to forest use than younger populations. 

However, the median age of a population is relevant for social and economic analysis of travel 

management planning. Table 19 lists the median age for planning area counties, the State, and the 

nation for year 2000 and 2007–2011 (estimate). The table provides a range of years for 

comparison to identify trends over time. The median age in all three counties has increased by 10

percent or more between 2000 and the 5-year 2007–2011 estimate.

Catron and Sierra Counties have substantially older median age populations than Socorro County, 

the State, and the nation. New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology (New Mexico Tech), 

which emphasizes science and engineering, is located in the city of Socorro. The 2008 fall 

enrollment was 1,921 students, which may account for the consistently lower median age within 

Socorro County (NM Tech 2010). Catron County has the highest median age and the only 

population rate increase. This may reflect the development of seasonal and recreation homes built 

in the county between 2000 and 2010. Seasonal and recreation homes increased from 628 homes 

in 2000 to 1,120 homes in 2011 (UNM-BBER 2012). Between 2000 and 2007–2011 the median 

age in the county also increased more than 20 percent. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 75

Figure 2. Age distribution in the planning area, 2011

EPS Headwaters Economics, accessed July 2013

Table 19. Median age by county, 2000 and 2007-2011*

Location 2000 Census 2007–2011 Census Estimate Percent Change

Catron County 47.8 57.4 20.1%

Sierra County 48.9 53.8 10%

Socorro County 32.4 36.2 11.7%

New Mexico 34.6 36.5 5.5%

United States 35.3 37.0 4.8%

Headwaters Economics 2013. Note: * Calculated by ACS using annual surveys conducted during 2007-2011 and 

are representative of average characteristics during this period.

Between 2000 and 2007, the three-county reporting area lost 2.4 percent of the population under 

18 years of age; 0.6 percent of the population 18 to 34 years of age, and 5.1 percent of the 

population 35 to 44 years of age. The decrease in these age groups reflects out-migration of 

younger adults and families looking for employment opportunities elsewhere. However, the 

three-county reporting area also experienced an 8 percent increase in people aged 45 and over 

during the same period. Some of that increase is due to in-migration as suggested above and also 

to aging. Issues concerning elderly and aging populations related to access to forest resources—

particularly recreation—may be more pronounced in Catron and Sierra Counties (EPS-HDT 

2013).

1,823

2,077

2,054

2,467

2,043

1,814

1,248

1,092

1,626

2,234

2,536

2,783

2,598

2,190

1,880

1,430

713

930

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Under 5 Years

5 to 9 Years

10 to 14 Years15 to 19 Years20 to 24 Years25 to 29 Years30 to 34 Years35 to 39 Years40 to 44 Years45 to 49 Years50 to 54 Years55 to 59 Years60 to 64 Years65 to 69 Years70 to 74 Years75 to 79 Years80 to 84 Years

85 Years and over

Total Population in Aggragate Area

Age Cohorts
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

76 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Table 20 reports age and disability data. All three counties in the planning area have a higher 

percent of disabled and elderly residents than both the State and Nation. Catron and Sierra 

Counties have the highest concentrations of elderly residents and the highest percentages of 

disabled residents. Socorro County, reflecting its’ younger median age, is more closely aligned 

with the State and Nation, possibly because of the university located in the city of Socorro. 

This is important to know because elderly and disabled residents may be more reliant on 

motorized access in order to participate in activities on the forest. Comments received during the 

scoping period identified limited motorized access as a concern of mobility-impaired people (due 

to age, disability, or both). Race, ethnicity, and poverty are described in tables 21–23 under 

“Environmental Justice.”

Table 20. Elderly and disabled population

Location

Persons with a Disability, 

Age 5+ (2000*)

Persons 65 Years and Over 

(2009)

Number Percent Percent

Catron County 718 20.3% 26.9%

Sierra County 3,996 30.1% 29.6%

Socorro County 3,591 19.9% 13.3%

New Mexico 338,430 18.6% 13.0%

United States 49,746,248 17.7% 12.9%

U.S. Census Bureau 2010

*The Census has not updated disability statistics for these counties since the 2000 Census 

Environmental Justice 

Executive Order (EO) 12898 directs Federal agencies to focus attention on the human health and 

environmental conditions in minority1and low income communities2. The purpose of EO 12898 

is to identify and address, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects3on minority and low income populations.

Environmental justice means that, to the extent practicable and permitted by law, all populations 

are provided the opportunity to comment before decisions are rendered on, are allowed to share in 

the benefits of, are not excluded from, and are not affected in a disproportionately high and 

 

1 Minority means a person who is a member of the following population groups: American Indian or Alaska Native; 

Asian or Pacific Islander; Black, not of Hispanic origin; or Hispanic (USDA DR5600-002, 1997).

2

Low income population means any readily identifiable group of low income persons who live in geographic 

proximity to, and, if circumstances warrant, migrant farm workers and other geographically dispersed/transient persons 

who will be similarly affected by USDA programs or activities. Low income populations may be identified using data 

collected, maintained, and analyzed by an agency or from analytical tools such as the annual statistical poverty 

thresholds from the Bureau of the Census’ Current Population Reports, Series P-60 on Income and Poverty (USDA

DR5600-002, 1997).

3 Human health and/or environmental effects as used in this Departmental Regulation include interrelated social and 

economic effects (USDA DR5600-002, 1997).
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 77

adverse manner by government programs and activities affecting human health or the 

environment.

Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of people of all races, 

cultures, and incomes, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of 

environmental laws, regulations, and policies. The goal of environmental justice is for Federal 

agency decision makers to identify impacts that are disproportionately high and adverse with 

respect to minority and low income populations,

4

and identify alternatives that will avoid or 

mitigate those impacts. 

The emphasis of environmental justice is on health effects and/or the benefits of a healthy 

environment. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has interpreted health effects with a 

broad definition: “Such effects may include ecological, cultural, human health, economic, or 

social impacts on minority communities, low income communities, or Indian Tribes...when those 

impacts are interrelated to impacts on the natural or physical environment.”

As defined by the U.S. Census Bureau, race and ethnicity are two different concepts; thus, people 

of Hispanic origin may identify with any race. Therefore, the percentages in tables 21 and 22 do 

not total 100 percent. 

According to the U.S. Census data reported in tables 21 and 22, in 2010 those self-identifying as 

White maintained a majority in all three counties. No individual minority group exceeds 50

percent of the population within the affected area; nor does the aggregate of all minority 

populations within the affected area meet the environmental justice criterion as meaningfully 

greater than the minority population percentage in the general population. Although there are 

Indian tribes in the affected area, there would be no disproportionate environmental impact on 

any tribal or minority community as a result of implementing any of the four travel management 

alternatives proposed for Magdalena Ranger District.

Table 23 reports per capita income, the number of individuals below the poverty level, and 

poverty rates in 1999 and the 5-year estimate for 2006–1010. In 1999, all three counties had 

poverty rates higher than the State of New Mexico. Between 1999 and 2006–2010, the poverty 

rates for Socorro and Catron Counties decreased, the State of New Mexico remained the same, 

but the poverty rate for Sierra County increased. This suggests that a substantial proportion of the 

existing population should be considered a low income group. It is unlikely that decisions 

regarding travel management would have disproportionate environmental effects upon this 

population. However, Magdalena Ranger District should assess possible effects on low income 

populations when making management decisions.

 

4 Minority population: Minority populations should be identified where either: (a) the minority population of the 

affected area exceeds 50 percent or (b) the minority population percentage of the affected area is meaningfully greater 

than the minority population percentage in the general population or other appropriate unit of geographic analysis. In 

identifying minority communities, agencies may consider as a community either a group of individuals living in 

geographic proximity to one another, or a geographically dispersed/transient set of individuals (such as migrant 

workers or Native American), where either type of group experiences common conditions of environmental exposure 

or effect. The selection of the appropriate unit of geographic analysis may be a governing body’s jurisdiction, 

neighborhood, census tract, or other similar unit that is to be chosen so as to not artificially dilute or inflate the affected 

minority population. A minority population also exists if there is more than one minority group present and the 

minority percentage, as calculated by aggregating all minority persons, meets one of the above stated thresholds. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

78 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Table 21. Ethnic composition by county, 2010 Census

Table 22. Racial composition by county, 2010 Census

Total Non-Hispanic

White

Total NonHispanicTotal Hispanic 

or Latino

Catron County 2,832 3,016 709

Sierra County 8,205 8,636 3352

Socorro County 6,711 9,202 8,664

Total for 3-County Area 17,748 20,854 12,725

Percent for 3-County Area 52.9% 62.1% 37.9%

Percent of State Total 52.9% 62.1% 37.9%

*New Mexico 833,810 1,105,776 953,403

Source UNM-BBER 2013. Note: Race and ethnicity are two different concepts. People of Hispanic origin may 

identify with any race. Therefore, the percentages in table 9 do not sum to 100 percent.

White 

Alone

African 

American

American 

Indian, 

Alone

Asian or 

Pacific 

Islander

Other

Alone

Two or 

More 

Races

Total

Catron

County

3,344 16 99 7 142 117 3,725

Sierra County 10,265 49 199 52 1,032 391 11,988

Socorro

County

13,424 188 2,082 227 1,442 503 17,866

Total for 3-

County Area 

27,033 253 2,380 286 2,616 1,011 33,579

Percent for 3-

County Area

80.5% 0.8% 7.1% 0.9% 7.8% 3.0%

Percent of 

State Total 

80.5% 0.8% 7.1% 0.9% 7.8% 3.0%

*New 

Mexico

1,407,876 42,550 193,222 30,018 308,503 77,010 2,059,179

Source UNM-BBER 2013. Note: Race and ethnicity are two different concepts. People of Hispanic origin may identify 

with any race. Therefore, the percentages in table 9 do not sum to 100 percent.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 79

Table 23. Percent of population living below the poverty threshold and per capita income 

(2010 dollars)

1999 2006-2010*

Per 

Capita 

Income

Persons 

Below 

poverty

Percent of 

Persons 

Below Poverty 

Level

Per 

Capita 

Income

Persons 

Below 

poverty

Percent of 

Persons 

Below Poverty 

Level

Catron

County

$18,255 860 25% $20,895 556 15%

Sierra

County

$19,658 2,706 21% $16,667 2,631 23%

Socorro

County

$16,783 5,539 32% $17,801 4,703 27%

New 

Mexico

$22,587 328,933 18% $22,966 361,771 18%

UNM-BBER 2013

*American community survey, 5-year estimate.

Economic Conditions and Trends

Employment, Income, and Unemployment

Employment and income statistics are important indicators of economic health. Table 24 lists the 

median household income for the planning area counties, the state and the nation. All counties in 

the planning area continue to have median household incomes below the state and the nation; this 

suggests that economic changes may have a more pronounced effect on the economic well-being 

of the area. However all three counties have experienced increased median household income 

since 2008. Catron County increased the most, about 13 percent.

Table 24. Median household income

Median Household 

Income (2008)

Median Household 

Income (2007–2011)*

Catron County $29,127 $37,857

Sierra County $27,580 $28,373

Socorro County $32,387 $34,148

New Mexico $43,719 $44,631

United States $52,029 $52,762

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau 2010, Census Quick Facts, (ACS), 5-Year Estimates 2013

Total personal income is comprised of labor and nonlabor income. Labor income is the wage or 

salary received by an employee or sole proprietor. Nonlabor income includes rent, dividends and 

interest, and transfer payments (e.g., Social Security). Table 25 identifies the division of labor and 

nonlabor income in the three planning area counties as compared to the State and Nation. 

In many places nonlabor income can be the single largest component of personal income, and 

also the largest source of new personal income. With the baby boom generation reaching 

retirement age, it is likely nonlabor income will continue to be a growing source of personal 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

80 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

income. Unlike most sources of labor income, nonlabor income—which often arrives in the form 

of a dividend check or retirement benefit—can be more difficult to see in a local economy.

Because nonlabor income is often a large and growing source of personal income, it is important 

for public land managers to understand this portion of the economy. 

When investigating nonlabor income, some important issues for public land managers include 

whether the area is attracting retirees and people with investment income, the role public lands 

play in attracting and retaining people with nonlabor income, how these people use or enjoy 

public lands, and whether these uses or ways of enjoying public lands are at odds with current 

uses or management (Headwaters Economics 2013).

Table 25. Share of labor and nonlabor income, 2011 (thousands of 2012 dollars)

Labor Income (percent) Nonlabor Income (percent)

Catron 48% 52%

Sierra 41% 59%

Socorro 58% 42%

Three County Average 51% 49%

New Mexico 62% 38%

United States 66% 34%

Catron 48% 52%

Source: Headwaters Economics, 2013

The three-county planning area is somewhat more reliant on nonlabor income than the State and 

Nation. Total personal income in New Mexico and the U.S. is composed of approximately twothirds labor income and one-third nonlabor income. In contrast, Catron and Sierra Counties 

receive more nonlabor income than labor income. Of the three, only Socorro County receives 

more labor income than nonlabor income, and is more closely aligned with State and national 

averages.

Overall, this data suggests that the planning area has a high concentration of retirees and 

individuals reporting as unemployed. The reliance on nonlabor income may also indicate 

dependence on government transfer payments such as unemployment or social security benefits.

Nonlabor income may help to stabilize the economy, as it is not necessarily tied to employment 

status. However, nonlabor income can fluctuate based on asset market performance (e.g., 

investments in stocks and bonds) or changes in government policy (USDA, Gila National Forest 

2010).

Table 26, reports the annual unemployment rate for the counties and State from 2000 through 

2012. Catron County has the highest unemployment rate, consistently greater than the State, 

except for 2012 when it was the same. Sierra and Socorro Counties have maintained an 

unemployment rate approximately equal to or lower than the State average. The difference in 

these unemployment rates may reflect a larger working age population in Catron County as 

compared to retired and student populations in Sierra and Socorro Counties who would not be 

actively looking for work or reporting as unemployed.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 81

Table 26. Annual unemployment rates by county and State (percent)

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Catron

County

6.7 6.2 6.2 7.6 7.4 6.6 5.2 4.5 5.3 8.5 9.1 8.4 6.9

Sierra

County

4.4 4.8 5.4 5.7 5.9 5.4 4.4 3.3 4.1 5.4 6.2 6.4 6.2

Socorro

County

5.1 5.3 5.1 5.1 5.0 4.5 3.7 3.0 3.6 5.0 5.6 5.6 4.9

New 

Mexico

5.0 4.9 5.5 5.9 5.8 5.2 4.1 3.5 4.5 7.2 7.9 7.5 6.9

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 2013.

Payments in Lieu of Taxes

Payments in lieu of taxes (PILT) are Federal payments to local governments that help offset 

losses in property taxes due to nontaxable Federal lands within their boundaries. PILT payments 

help local governments carry out vital services such as firefighting and police protection, 

construction of public schools and roads, and search and rescue operations. The formula used to 

compute the payments is based on population, receipt sharing payments, and the amount of 

Federal land with the county.

The payments shown in table 27 have been adjusted to reflect only Cibola NFS acres within each 

county. PILT payments are in addition to other Federal revenues such as oil and gas leasing, 

livestock grazing, and timber harvesting that the Federal government transfers to the states. Table 

27 shows the total number of Cibola NFS acres in each county and the associated PILT payments 

made in 2012. These payments are made annually for tax-exempt lands administered by all 

agencies of the Department of the Interior, Forest Service, Federal water projects, and some 

military installations (USDI 2010).

Table 27. Payments in lieu of taxes, 2012

Cibola NFS Acres PILT Payments 

Catron County 158,869 $483,970

Sierra County 18,963 $311,180

Socorro County 620,886 $482,147

Note: Payments adjusted to reflect contribution by Cibola NF acres.

Source: U.S. Department of the Interior, www.doi.gov/pilt, 2013; USFS 

Land Area Records (LAR), accessed 6/26/2013.

Environmental Consequences

Overview of Issues and Indicators

A number of issues were identified as a result of the analysis of comments received during the 

scoping period. Most issues fell under two larger categories: loss of recreation opportunities 

including OHV use and big game retrieval due to motorized designations; and potential negative 

impacts on cultural and natural resources due to designation of unauthorized or new roads for 

motorized use. The analysis of major issues together with the project objectives provided the 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

82 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

basis for formulating the alternatives. The alternatives are analyzed below according to the 

following social and economic indicators:

 Social Indicators: Population and population trends as they relate to the magnitude of 

future demand and need. These included the proportion of population who is older or 

may have physical access challenges, and the racial and ethnic composition of the 

planning area. The area of analysis is at the county level for Catron, Sierra, and Socorro 

Counties.

 Economic Indicators: Employment and income, as indicators of the proposal’s effects 

on the tourism industry and general economy of the area. Recreation-based tourism is 

likely to be more sensitive to the proposed action and alternatives than other employment 

because of the Travel Management Rule’s provision for written authorization applicable 

to livestock grazing and mining plans of operations (USDA, Gila National Forest 2010).

Social Consequences

Effects Common to All Alternatives

Firewood Gathering

For fiscal years 2009 and 2010, the Magdalena Ranger District issued 2,299 forest product 

permits worth $57,002.73 (USDA, Cibola NF 2010a). The majority of these permits were for 

firewood collection. However, these numbers also reflect permits and revenues for poles and 

Christmas tree cutting.

Firewood gathering on the forest is particularly tied to the livelihoods in parts of the three-county 

area. Wood fires continue to be used either aesthetically or as the primary heat source within 

homes. Approximately 48 percent of the housing units in Catron County rely on wood as the 

primary heating fuel type. In Sierra County approximately 4 percent of housing units use wood 

for heat, and approximately 18 percent of homes in Socorro County use wood as the primary heat 

source (U.S. Census Bureau 2010b). The use of wood for heating homes may be tied to the longterm customs, traditions, and culture of the community. Much of the firewood gathering on the 

district relies on motorized access for transport.

The elimination of cross-country travel and closing roads to motor vehicle use under all action 

alternatives may affect the ability of people to collect firewood for their homes. Although 

firewood gathering would continue under all alternatives, it will be limited to designated areas.

Under all alternatives, the quantity of firewood available is not expected to decrease. However, a 

change in habits (i.e., where, when, and how firewood is collected) may be required. These 

changes will be required under all action alternatives (USDA Cibola National Forest, Jordahl 

2011).

Elderly and Disabled Access

All of the alternatives will affect the ability to travel cross country by motorized vehicle and 

could have an effect on people with these concerns. The number of miles of motorized routes 

varies by alternative and could affect the ability of mobility-impaired people to reach their 

favorite places, if those places are not accessible in any other way (USDA Cibola National Forest, 

Jordahl 2011).
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 83

There is no legal requirement to allow people with disabilities to use motor vehicles in areas that 

are closed to motor vehicle use. Restrictions on motor vehicle use that are applied consistently to 

everyone are not discriminatory. Generally, granting an exemption from designations for people 

with disabilities would not be consistent with the resource protection and other management 

objectives of travel management and would fundamentally alter the nature of the Forest Service’s 

travel management program (29 U.S.C. 794; 7 CFR 15e.103).

Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, no person with a disability can be denied 

participation in a Federal program that is available to all other people solely because of his or her 

disability. Consistent with 36 CFR 212.1, FSM 2353.05, and Title V, Section 507(c), of the 

Americans With Disabilities Act, wheelchairs and mobility devices, including those that are 

battery powered, that are designed solely for use by a mobility-impaired person for locomotion,

and that are suitable for use in an indoor pedestrian area, are allowed on all NFS lands that are 

open to foot travel (USDA Cibola National Forest, Jordahl 2011).

Traditional and Tribal Uses

The Alamo Navajo Indian Reservation is situated partially within the Magdalena district 

boundary and the Acoma Pueblo is adjacent to the north, but outside of the planning area. The 

tribes would be considered low income minority populations dependent on district resources for 

recreation and subsistence uses, but changes to tribal social and economic activities as a result of 

travel management designation are predicated to be minor to none. Tribes will continue to have 

opportunities to gather culturally important materials on the forest under applicable Forest 

Service policies such as Forest Service Handbook 2409.18 on granting free permits to federally

recognized tribes to gather forest products for traditional and cultural uses.

Environmental Justice, Summary of Effects by Alternative

While low income populations have a greater presence in the communities surrounding the 

Magdalena Ranger District than the general population of the State, none of the alternatives are 

expected to have disproportionately high and/or adverse human health or environmental effects. 

There may be effects on the residents of Catron County related to firewood gathering. As noted in 

the “Environmental Consequences” section, approximately half of the homes in Catron County 

rely on wood as the primary heating source. This is consistent with the custom and culture of the 

area and the relatively low median household income suggests that affordable energy sources are 

fundamental to individuals’ well-being. Under all action alternatives, motorized gathering would 

be limited to designated routes. However, the forest will provide access for all forest product 

permittees. These actions are likely to mitigate any potentially adverse effects on low income 

populations who depend on firewood or other forest products from Magdalena Ranger District. 

See the summary of social and economic effects by alternative and issue, itemized below (USDA 

Cibola National Forest, Jordahl 2011).

Alternative 1 ─ Proposed Action

 Employment and Income: Approximately 55 jobs and $1,454,773 in labor are supported 

by recreation. Two of these jobs and $37,015 in labor income are due to motorized uses.

 Firewood Gathering: Off-road gathering of firewood would be limited. However, no 

decrease in the supply of firewood is expected and no expected change in the number of 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

84 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

permits or the value of the firewood collected. However, gathering may change, requiring 

adjustment in how and when firewood is gathered. 

 Access for the Elderly and Disabled: May limit access of elderly and disabled 

populations to some nonmotorized areas. However, in accordance with ADA, mobility 

devices that are suitable for indoor pedestrian use are permitted on all NFS lands open to 

foot travel. Furthermore, under all alternatives, diverse motorized options remain.

 Nonmarket Effects: Travel management has the potential to increase nonmarket values 

as a result of improved ecological health (ecosystem service values).

Baseline5and Alternative 2─Existing System Roads

 Employment and Income: Approximately 55 jobs and $1,454,773 in labor are 

supported by recreation. Two of these jobs and $37,015 in labor income are due to 

motorized uses.

 Firewood Gathering: No change from current condition.

 Access for Elderly and Disabled: No change from current condition.

 Nonmarket Effects: No change from current condition.

Alternative 3 

 Employment and Income: Approximately 55 jobs and $1,454,773 in labor are supported 

by recreation. Two of these jobs and $37,015 in labor income are due to motorized uses.

 Firewood Gathering: Off-road gathering of firewood would be limited. However, no 

decrease in the supply of firewood is expected and no expected change in the number of 

permits or the value of the firewood collected. However, gathering may change, requiring 

adjustment in how and when firewood is gathered. 

 Access for Elderly and Disabled: May limit access of elderly and disabled populations 

to some nonmotorized areas. However, in accordance with ADA, mobility devices that 

are suitable for indoor pedestrian use are permitted on all NFS lands open to foot travel. 

Furthermore, under all alternatives, diverse motorized options remain.

 Nonmarket Effects: Travel management has the potential to increase nonmarket values 

as a result of improved ecological health (ecosystem service values). 

Alternative 4 

 Employment and Income: Approximately 55 jobs and $1,454,773 in labor are 

supported by recreation. Two of these jobs and $37,015 in labor income are due to 

motorized uses.

 Firewood Gathering: Off-road gathering of firewood would be limited. However, no 

decrease in the supply of firewood is expected and no expected change in the number of 

permits or value of the firewood collected. However, gathering may change, requiring 

adjustment in how and when firewood is gathered. 

 Access for Elderly and Disabled: May limit access of elderly and disabled populations 

to some nonmotorized areas. However, in accordance with ADA, mobility devices that 

 

5

Baseline is not considered an alternative. It is a description of existing conditions.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 85

are suitable for indoor pedestrian use are permitted on all NFS lands open to foot travel. 

Furthermore, under all alternatives, diverse motorized options remain.

 Nonmarket Effects: Travel management has the potential to increase nonmarket values 

as a result of improved ecological health, i.e., ecosystem service values (USDA Cibola 

National Forest, Jordahl 2011).

Economic Consequences

No significant economic impacts are expected as a result of the proposed changes under any 

action alternative. The relationship between road miles and recreation use is unknown. Although 

travel management planning may reduce some recreation activities on the forest, it also has the 

potential to increase others. For example, outfitters may experience increased business in big 

game hunting due to improved wildlife habitat as a result of limitations on motorized access.

Other forest activities, such as nonmotorized and wilderness recreation, may also be more 

attractive to recreationists, as conflict with off-road motorized users is less likely with travel 

management planning.

Methodology for Analysis 

of Recreation Economic Contribution 

Incomplete and Unavailable Information

Insufficient information exists to accurately estimate changes in recreation use that would occur 

under implementation of the action alternatives analyzed in this report. Changes in road miles per 

alternative are used as a proxy for all changes contained in the alternative. It is not possible to 

incorporate camping corridor information nor to evaluate big game retrieval differences per 

alternative through Impact Analysis for Planning (IMPLAN), which is used to assess the relative 

size of sectors in a local economy and Recreation Economic Contribution Analysis (RECA).

These differences need to be analyzed in a qualitative manner, gleaning information from other 

sources found in the affected environment.

Although certain trends in visitor use may be predicted from the guidelines set forth under each 

alternative, there are no methods and/or data available to estimate actual changes in motorized 

and nonmotorized recreation. The current visitor use data represent the condition under the no 

action alternative and are used to conduct an economic contribution analysis based on existing 

conditions. Those contributions serve as a baseline for comparison to the effects of action 

alternatives. Discussion of those effects is based on the jobs and income by activity and visit type 

and includes a qualitative assessment of potential economic implications.

IMPLAN Professional Version 3.0 (IMPLAN) and Recreation Economic Contribution 

Application (RECA) were used to assess economic impacts of the travel management 

alternatives. IMPLAN uses county-level input-output data to determine the extent to which 

activities contribute to the local economy. For this analysis, the local economy includes all 

counties containing or bordering the forest—Catron, Sierra, and Socorro Counties. IMPLAN 

considers direct, indirect, and induced impacts:

 Direct impacts include the economic value generated by the activity itself, such as the 

value of cattle grazed on the forest.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

86 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

 Indirect impacts include the value generated by purchases to support that activity and 

the corresponding purchases to support those activities, in perpetuity. For example, 

indirect impacts would include the value of fencing purchased for ranching, the value of 

steel purchased to make the fencing, and so on.

 Induced impacts capture the value of economic activity generated from spending by 

employees that produce the direct and indirect goods. Ranch employees will purchase 

food, pay for electricity, etc., all of which generates additional value from the purchases 

(UNM-BBER 2007).

The outputs from IMPLAN are exported to RECA, which produces employment and income 

estimates relevant to travel management planning. RECA is only concerned with the economic 

effects of recreation-based spending. Therefore, this analysis does not give a complete picture of 

the economic contributions of activities on the forest. However, the information in RECA is 

directly relevant for decisions related to travel management planning.

The RECA estimates use National Visitor Use Monitoring (NVUM) estimates for the Cibola 

National Forest and Grasslands. Estimates are not available by ranger district. Based on 

discussions with the Cibola’s recreation specialist, the NVUM estimates were adjusted to reflect 

the portion of use that can be attributed to the Magdalena Ranger District. The forest recreation 

specialist estimated that the Magdalena Ranger District receives 10 to 15 percent of total use on 

the Cibola. Therefore, use figures (and the associated employment and labor income) have been 

multiplied by 0.125 (average of 10 to 15 percent) to estimate use on the Magdalena Ranger 

District. The recreation specialist identified hunting as the most common visitor activity on the 

district. Therefore, the hunting participation figures for the Cibola NF have been multiplied by 

0.3—reflecting the assumption that 30 percent of hunting on the forest occurs on the Magdalena 

Ranger District.

Visitor expenditures by segment type are estimated in Stynes and White (2010). The Cibola 

National Forest and Grasslands is a “high” expenditure forest. The average expenditures are 

applied to visitor estimates to determine the economic impact of various activities on the Cibola 

generally, and the Magdalena Ranger District in particular.

Population projections were produced by University of New Mexico, Bureau of Business and 

Economic Research (UNM-BBER 2007) using cohort-component modeling and Decennial 

Census data for 1980, 1990 and 2000.

Economic data attributed to Headwaters Economics comes from the Economic Profile System 

(EPS), which is software that allows users to create a socioeconomic profile at a variety of 

geographic scales from existing and publically available data sources. Data sources used by EPS 

include U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Regional Economic Information 

System (REIS) of the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce. The 

program is useful in evaluating rural areas because it uses statistically sound methods of 

interpolation to estimate population and economic information that is not available due to 

disclosure protections for areas with small populations. 

Economic Modeling Limitations

A change in supply (motorized opportunities) will affect quantity demanded (visitation). 

However, the precise relationship between opportunities and visitation is uncertain. Given data 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 87

limitations, an assumption of linearity is least likely to bias the analysis toward either motorized 

or nonmotorized interests. If we assume a nonlinear relationship, we would need to know how the 

rate of change in visitation varies across the function (i.e., between current miles and zero). This 

information is unknown and cannot be ascertained given available resources.

The economic modeling makes the simplest and most defensible assumption (linearity). The 

numerical nature of the economic outputs can give a false sense of precision. Therefore, it is 

appropriate to heavily weigh the qualitative social and economic analysis in the evaluation of 

tradeoffs. The qualitative analysis emphasizes the mitigating factors that would lessen the 

economic consequences, such as the prevalence of substitution behavior and the potential 

increased demand for the services of outfitter guides. 

Economic Effects by Alternative

Baseline Conditions 

The baseline condition represents the transportation system and access allowed by the 1985 

Forest Plan, as amended; meaning there would be no change from the current management 

direction. Under the baseline condition, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations 

require environmental assessments to contrast the effects of action alternatives with baseline 

conditions (36 CFR 220.7(b) (2) (ii)). Baseline conditions are not compliant with the 2005 Travel 

Management Rule, which requires each national forest and grassland to provide for a system of 

roads, trails, and areas designated for motor vehicle use. The existing condition serves as a 

baseline for comparing the effects of other alternatives.

There are 697,716 acres currently open to motorized cross-country travel on the Magdalena 

Ranger District, which represents 88 percent of the Magdalena Ranger District (791,707 acres).

As a result of unrestricted motorized cross-country travel, there has been a proliferation of 

unauthorized roads. Motorized dispersed camping is currently unrestricted in the areas open to 

motorized cross-country travel. There are 1,171.4 miles of National Forest System roads on the 

Magdalena Ranger District open to general motorized use, which includes passenger vehicles and 

high-clearance vehicles such as pickups or sport utility vehicles.

Economic Contribution of Recreation Under Baseline Condition

The economic contribution of recreation on the Magdalena Ranger District under the baseline 

condition is provided in tables 28–29. The tables are divided according to activity type (e.g., 

motorized or nonmotorized recreation). Within each table, the estimated jobs and labor income 

derived from those activities are listed. The total economic contribution of recreation on the 

Magdalena District is provided in table 28 and shows that nonmotorized recreation activities on 

the forest contribute approximately 14 jobs and $291,622 in labor income to the local economy

annually.

Table 29 shows that motorized recreation activities on the forest contribute approximately two 

jobs and $37,015 in labor income to the local economy annually.

Table 30 shows that nature-related recreation activities on the forest contribute approximately 30 

jobs and $934,300 in labor income to the local economy annually. Nature-related activities may 

have both motorized and nonmotorized components.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

88 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Table 28. Employment and labor income effects by activity type, 

nonmotorized on the Magdalena Ranger District

Activity Employment Income

Backpacking Local 0 $1,163.25

Nonlocal 0.125 2,232.63

Hiking/walking Local 3.125 63,673.75

Nonlocal 7.5 158,243.13

Horseback riding Local 0 395.50

Nonlocal 0 983.00

Bicycling Local 0.875 17,591.50

Nonlocal 2 43,718.63

Cross-country skiing Local 0 876.75

Nonlocal 0.125 1,836.13

Other nonmotorized Local 0 260.50

Nonlocal 0 647.50

Total Nonmotorized 13.75 $291,622.25

Source: IMPLAN 2009 and RECA 2010.

Table 29. Employment and labor income effects by activity type, 

motorized on the Magdalena Ranger District

Activity Employment Income

OHV use Local 0.125 $1,615.88

Nonlocal 0.125 2,073.88

Driving for pleasure Local 0.5 9,120.75

Nonlocal 0.625 13,722.38

Snowmobiling Local 0 —

Nonlocal 0 —

Other motorized Local 0.25 4,590.63

Nonlocal 0.25 5,891.63

Total Motorized 1.875 $37,015.13

Source: IMPLAN 2009 and RECA 2010.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 89

Table 30. Employment and labor income effects by activity type, nature 

related on the Magdalena Ranger District

Table 31 shows that all other (i.e., not accounted for above) recreation activities on the district 

contribute approximately nine jobs and $191,835 to the local economy annually.

Table 32 shows total employment and income in the three-county area that can be attributed to 

recreation on the Magdalena Ranger District.

Table 31. Employment and labor income effects by activity type, all other 

on the Magdalena Ranger District

Table 32. Employment and labor income effects by activity type, all 

recreation on the Magdalena Ranger District

In sum, recreation on the forest is estimated to support approximately 55 jobs and $1,454,773 in

labor income in the local economy annually. However, these figures do not capture the entire 

economic value of recreation on the forest. Many visitors are willing to pay more than required to 

participate in recreational activities. The difference between willingness to pay and actual cost is 

Activity Employment Income

Fishing Local 0.75 $ 15,762.00

Nonlocal 1.375 30,146.38

Hunting Local 1.5 30,981.30

Nonlocal 2.4 52,037.40

Nature related Local 4.25 88,698.00

Nonlocal 19.5 716,675.63

Total Nature Related 29.775 $934,300.70

Source: IMPLAN 2009 and RECA 2010.

Activity Employment Income

All other Local 2.625 $ 55,081.63

Nonlocal 6.5 136,754.25

Total All Other 9.125 $191,835.88

Source: IMPLAN 2009 and RECA 2010.

Activity Employment Income

Nonmotorized 13.75 $ 291,622.25

Motorized 1.875 37,015.13

Nature related 29.775 934,300.70

All other 9.125 191,835.88

Total 54.525 $1,454,773.95

Source: IMPLAN 2009 and RECA 2010.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

90 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

known as consumer surplus. Although consumer surplus is not captured in the market, it does 

represent a real economic value to the users. 

Estimates of consumer surplus by recreation activity on the Magdalena Ranger District are not 

available; therefore, the total economic value of recreation on the forest cannot be measured. 

Nevertheless, it is important to note that the estimates of jobs and income do not completely 

capture the economic consequences of forest recreation. 

Outfitters and guides are an important consideration in the context of the economic impacts of 

recreation. Thirty-two guides reported bringing clients to the Magdalena Ranger District in 2010. 

These guides reported $621,860 in client fees related to use of district lands. Many of the clients 

purchased goods and services such as motel rooms and groceries locally. This data should not be 

considered in addition to the above economic estimates, since NVUM surveys likely capture 

some outfitter guide use, so estimates are adjusted accordingly. However, this data does add 

clarity to the type of uses that exist on the district. As mentioned above, the impact of travel 

management on outfitter guides is difficult to discern. Although travel management decreases the 

number of roads and trails available for use (including guided use), it may also increase guide 

business related to big game hunting and retrieval. 

Recreation is not the only activity on the forest that may be affected by travel management. In 

particular, firewood gathering is not considered in the above economic impact analysis. As 

Magdalena firewood reports reveal, in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, the district issued 

approximately 2,300 forest product permits and more than $50,000 of firewood, poles, and 

Christmas trees are collected in the ranger district annually. Both personal and commercial uses 

exist–for instance, firewood may be used to heat the permitee’s home or sold to others. 

Motorized dispersed camping and motorized big game retrieval were identified as major issues 

with potential social and economic considerations. These issues are analyzed in detail in the 

recreation specialist’s report.

Direct and Indirect Effects of Baseline Conditions

Baseline conditions continue current management. The economic effects from this management 

are reflected in tables 29 through 32. The employment and labor income identified in these tables 

would continue to be supported. 

The baseline condition on the Magdalena district limits opportunities for recreationists seeking 

quiet and solitude from motorized activities, but provides the greatest opportunities for on- and 

off-road motorized recreation. Hunting is one activity that may bring in nonlocal dollars and has 

some dependence upon motor vehicle use; and camping with a recreational vehicle may 

contribute to the local economy. Under the baseline condition, this would remain unchanged.

Alternative 1: Proposed Action

Alternative 1 is the proposed action that was presented in the “Scoping Report for Magdalena 

Ranger District Travel Management Proposed Action,” dated July 22, 2010, with minor changes 

as a result of additional field review. These changes include refining the location of motorized 

dispersed camping locations and closing one road due to their locations within threatened species 

protected activity centers. When combined with previous decisions, these proposed changes 

would result in a motorized system with 850.8 miles of designated National Forest System roads.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 91

Of these, 374.4 miles would allow the limited use of motor vehicles solely for the purpose of 

dispersed camping. Motorized big game retrieval off of the designated system would not be 

authorized.

Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 1

Alternative 1 proposes an approximately 30 percent decrease in open designated roads from 

1,171.4 miles to 850.8 miles. Although the miles of roads and trails open to motorized travel is 

reduced relative to existing conditions (alternative 2), no economic consequences are anticipated. 

The relationship between designated road miles and forest visits is unknown. As table 29 shows, 

motorized recreation is estimated to contribute approximately two jobs and $37,000 in labor 

income to the local economy annually (this estimate does not include nature-related uses that may 

have motorized components, such as hunting). It is not expected that motorized uses will decrease 

under this alternative. Rather, motorized uses will continue on designated roads and trails. 

Therefore, jobs and incomes related to motorized uses are not expected to change (economic 

consequences are expected to continue the effects as identified in tables 29 through 32). 

In addition, the decrease in available routes for motorized use may offer other economic benefits. 

Designating areas appropriate for motorized use may decrease resource use conflicts between 

motorized and nonmotorized recreationists, which may encourage nonmotorized visitors to 

recreate on the ranger district. Nonmarket values, such as ecosystem services, may be improved 

under alternative 1. Unlimited cross-country motorized travel contributes to soil and water 

degradation, habitat disruption and fragmentation, and the spread of invasive weeds. Although the 

value of ecosystem health is not captured in markets, the goods and services provided (e.g., clean 

water) have economic value. 

Alternative 2

Under this alternative, public motorized use would continue on all currently open National Forest 

System roads (1,210.8 miles). Currently open system roads are those that are NFS roads and are 

available to the public for motorized use. However, not all system roads are accessible to the 

public; some can only be accessed by crossing private lands for which the Forest Service does not 

have legal right-of-way. This alternative would prohibit all cross-country travel.

Direct and Indirect Effects

The direct and indirect effects of alternative 2 would be similar to the baseline condition.

Although local communities have service sectors that may be partially supported by tourism, 

there is little evidence that OHV use is a factor in bringing nonlocal dollars to the analysis area. 

Hunting is one activity that has some dependence upon motor vehicle use and may contribute 

nonlocal dollars to the Magdalena area economy. Under this alternative, vehicular access would 

be limited to open NFS roads, and there would be no off-road big game retrieval. Given that there 

are no measurable direct or indirect effects from this alternative, there would also be no 

measurable cumulative effects.

Alternative 3

This alternative responds to scoping issues concerned with loss or reduction of motorized 

recreation opportunities for larger 4-wheel drive vehicles or ATVs; lack of availability for 

motorized big game retrieval, and a designated motorized recreation area, which are absent in the 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

92 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

proposed action. This alternative would add approximately 25.8 miles of roads to those identified 

in the proposed action as designated as open to motorized use. It provides for a 756-acre 

motorized recreation area in the southern San Mateo Mountains and authorizes a 0.5 mile corridor 

on either side of 342.5 miles of designated roads for big game retrieval, and designates a 600-

foot-wide corridor along 374.4 miles of designated roads for dispersed camping. 

Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 3

Alternative 3 proposes an approximate decrease of 26 percent in open designated roads and trails, 

from the existing 1,171.4 miles of open roads to 876.7 miles. Although the miles of roads and 

trails open to motorized travel is reduced relative to existing conditions, no economic 

consequences are anticipated. The relationship between designated road miles and forest visits is 

unknown. As table 29 shows, motorized recreation is estimated to contribute approximately two 

jobs and $37,000 in labor income to the local economy annually (this estimate does not include 

nature-related uses that may have motorized components, such as hunting). It is not expected that 

motorized uses will decrease under this alternative. Rather, motorized uses will continue on 

designated roads. Therefore, jobs and incomes related to motorized uses are not expected to 

change (economic consequences are expected to continue the effects identified in tables 29 

through 32.

In addition, the decrease in available routes for motorized use may offer other economic benefits. 

Designating areas appropriate for motorized use may decrease resource use conflicts between 

motorized and nonmotorized recreationists, which may encourage nonmotorized visitors to 

recreate on the ranger district. Nonmarket values, such as ecosystem services, may be improved 

under alternative 3. Unlimited cross-country motorized travel contributes to soil and water 

degradation, habitat disruption and fragmentation, and the spread of invasive weeds. Although the 

value of ecosystem health is not captured in markets, the goods and services provided (e.g., clean 

water) have economic value. 

Alternative 4

Alternative 4 was developed in response to concerns that designating unauthorized, closed, 

decommissioned, or new roads may have negative effects on natural and heritage resources. In 

addition, dispersed camping corridors may lead to conditions similar to cross-country travel 

within and adjacent to the corridors. This alternative also responds to issues of reducing densities 

to improve wildlife habitat. This alternative would remove approximately 104.6 miles of roads 

from those identified in the proposed action that would be designated as open to motorized use. 

These roads would not be shown on the motor vehicle use map. This alternative proposes 321.2 

miles of dispersed camping corridors, but would prohibit cross-country motorized big game 

retrieval.

Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 4

Alternative 4 has the fewest miles of designated roads among the considered alternatives. It 

provides for 746.9 miles of designated roads, which represents a 39 percent decrease in motorized 

roads from the existing roads alternative. However, as with alternatives 1 and 3—given the 

relatively small contribution of motorized recreation to the local economy and the imprecision 

inherent in estimating economic changes—no significant economic impacts are expected from 

alternative 4. As with alternatives 1 and 3, motorized recreation opportunities are still available on 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 93

the forest and a decrease in use is not anticipated. Rather, use is expected to be more concentrated 

on designated routes.

Due to the restrictions on motorized use under alternative 4, this alternative offers the highest 

protection of nonmarket/ecosystem service values. 

Cumulative Effects 

All national forests in the Southwestern Region are either in the process of travel management 

planning or implementing existing travel management plans. The Bureau of Land Management 

has also made decisions to designate routes for OHV use. All of the new decisions and the 

implementation of past land use and travel management decisions are generally resulting in fewer 

opportunities for cross-country OHV uses and fewer open routes for OHV use. These past 

decisions include the establishment of wilderness areas and other areas that prohibit motor 

vehicle recreation, reducing the motor vehicle access to the forest. 

Although these past decisions are not part of current planning for the Magdalena Ranger District 

travel management plan, they are relevant because they are part of the cumulative effects of the 

travel management plan. Additionally, they are relevant to the discussion because much of the 

visitor data used in the “Social and Economics” section discussion was collected within these 

areas previously designated for non-motorized use recreation only. The selection of any 

alternative reduces cross-country access as required by the Travel Management Rule. However, 

the range of alternatives provides an array of motorized travel opportunities.

Law Enforcement

The following analysis is based on the law enforcement specialist reports prepared by Aban 

Lucero, northern zone patrol captain and Cliff Nicoll, ID team leader. This report is on file in the 

project record.

Affected Environment

One of the issues identified in scoping for this project was the Agency’s ability to provide 

effective law enforcement for motor vehicle use on the Magdalena Ranger District. The motor 

vehicle use map (MVUM) would be the primary enforcement and information tool for travel 

management, but field law enforcement patrols would be critical to both sharing information, 

public education, and enforcing designations.

Travel management violations on the Magdalena Ranger District between 2000 and January 25, 

2011, were extracted from the Law Enforcement Investigation Management Attainment 

Reporting System (LEIMARS) database (table 33).
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

94 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Table 33. Travel management violations on the Magdalena Ranger District 2000–January 

2011

Violation Type Warning 

Notice

Incident 

Report

Citation 

Issued Total

§ 261.12 (d) Blocking or restricting use of a road, trail, or 

gate. 

0 0 0 0

§ 261.15 It is prohibited to operate any vehicle off National Forest System, State or county roads:

(g) Carelessly, recklessly, or without regard for the safety of 

any person, or in a manner that endanger, or is likely to 

endanger, any person or property. 

0 0 2 2

(h) In a manner which damages or unreasonably disturbs the 

land, wildlife, or vegetative resources.

0 1 0 1

In violation of State law established for vehicles used off 

road. 

0 0 2 2

§ 261.52 Fire. When provided by an order, the following are 

prohibited: (e) Going into or being upon an area. 

0 2 0 2

§ 261.54 National Forest System Roads. When provided by an order, the following are prohibited:

(a) Using any type of vehicle prohibited by the order. 0 0 0 0

(d) Operating a vehicle in violation of the speed, load, 

weight, height, length, width, or other limitations specified 

by the order. 

7 2 25 34

(e) Being on the road. 0 0 0 0

(f) Operating a vehicle carelessly, recklessly, or without 

regard for rights or safety of other persons, or in a manner or 

at a speed that would endanger or be likely to endanger any 

person or property.

0 0 1 1

The Magdalena Ranger District has minimal traffic violations. The most frequent violations 

during this period were operating a motor vehicle in violation of the posted regulations (34 

violations) and operating a motor vehicle within an area closed due to fire (2 violations). There 

have been no recorded vehicle accidents on Forest Service roads in the district in the last 10

years. This does not mean that accidents have not occurred, only that they have not been reported 

or resulted in law enforcement involvement.

A 2007 report considered issues related to law enforcement on Forest Service lands based on 

interviews with law enforcement officers (LEOs). In the Southwestern Region, priority issues 

facing law enforcement professionals included off-road vehicle use and off-highway vehicle 

(OHV) activity on roadways. When asked what type of violations most commonly affect 

recreation visitors in the Southwestern Region, 24 percent of LEOs said motor vehicle violations 

including OHV/ATV violations, speeding, and reckless operation. This is compared to 33 percent

of LEOs reporting this issue nationally. OHV management was identified as a challenge where 25

percent reported that past policing programs in this area had been unsuccessful (Chavez and 

Tynon 2007).

The district is patrolled by law enforcement officers and forest protection officers (FPOs). FPOs 

are employees trained to patrol and respond to petty offenses. The LEOs generally focus on the 

heavily trafficked areas of the district. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 95

Illegal woodcutting, live tree theft, and rock theft have become a significant problem on the 

district. The current road system makes enforcement difficult. Roads are visible from long 

distances, making it difficult for law enforcement to approach people conducting illegal activities.

The amount of roads in the Bear/Gallinas Mountains and in the San Mateo Mountains provides 

illegal woodcutters with numerous opportunities to leave the scene before another vehicle 

approaches. Patrolling the four mountain ranges is difficult due to their distance from the district

office and other forest districts. Additionally, it is common for people conducting illegal activities 

to create their own access routes into the forest. These routes often come from private lands and 

are generally not known by law enforcement. Illegal woodcutting and rock theft result in resource 

damage such as cut fences, damaged gates, and the creation of new roads. 

Environmental Consequences

Baseline Conditions

It is anticipated that law enforcement priorities would remain unchanged if the existing baseline 

condition were to continue. Patrols would continue to be infrequent and would focus on the

district’s heavily trafficked areas such as the main arterial roads and developed recreation sites.

User conflicts would likely increase with increased use of the area and limited patrols.

Effects Common to All Alternatives

All of the action alternatives, with the exception of alternative 2, would reduce the miles of 

system roads designated for motor vehicle use. This may facilitate patrols by concentrating 

people on the major arterial roads and reducing the size of the area to be patrolled. Additionally, 

LEOs may be able to identify roads that are being used but are not designated, possibly indicating 

that illegal activities are occurring along the roads. This may allow LEOs to focus their patrols on 

specific areas and prevent some illegal activities. 

Enforcement can be expanded through the use of FPOs. The action alternatives would necessitate 

more district employees becoming FPO certified in addition to other duties. Alternatives 1, 3, and 

4 would include limited use of motor vehicles within 300 feet either side of designated roads for 

the purpose of motorized dispersed camping. In addition, motorized big game retrieval would be 

allowed within 0.25 mile of designated roads under alternative 3. These designations could 

facilitate patrols and the enforcement of closure orders, particularly those related to fire 

restrictions. 

It would be important to emphasize information and education as well as enforcement for the first 

2 to 3 years after the motor vehicle use map (MVUM) is released. Motor vehicle violations are 

expected to increase with more restrictive regulations, especially those associated with the 

MVUM. 

Alternative 1

It is anticipated that law enforcement priorities and patterns would remain unchanged. Patrols on 

the district would continue to be infrequent. Patrols in the four mountain ranges would continue 

to focus on the district’s heavily trafficked areas such as the main arterial roads and developed 

recreation sites. User conflicts would likely increase with increased use of the area, the reduction 

in miles available for motorized use, and limited patrols.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

96 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Alternative 2

It is anticipated that law enforcement priorities and patterns would remain unchanged. Patrols on 

the district would continue to be infrequent. Patrols in the four mountain ranges would continue 

to focus on the district’s heavily trafficked areas such as the main arterial roads and developed 

recreation sites. Violations and the numbers of citations issued would likely increase, as 

motorized use would be restricted to the existing road system. Motorized cross-country travel and 

using unauthorized roads would be prohibited. The designations would not include the limited use 

of motorized use off any designated road for motorized dispersed camping or motorized big game 

retrieval, which would also be prohibited.

Alternative 3 

This alternative differs from alternatives 1 and 4 because it includes the designation of an area for 

motorized use and allows motorized big game retrieval corridors. It would also result in more 

miles of system road being designated for motor vehicle use.

It is anticipated that law enforcement priorities and patterns would remain unchanged. Patrols on 

the district would continue to be infrequent. Patrols in the four mountain ranges would continue 

to focus on the district’s heavily trafficked areas such as the main arterial roads and developed 

recreation sites.

Motorized big game retrieval may be difficult to enforce during popular hunting periods. 

Increased patrols would be necessary to ensure that motor vehicles are only being used to retrieve 

elk and mule deer in accordance with the Travel Management Rule and not for additional 

activities associated with hunting. Increased patrols during hunting season would also ensure that 

motorized dispersed camping is occurring in designated locations and that potential fire 

restrictions are enforced. During hunting season, patrols by the New Mexico Department of 

Game and Fish can supplement Forest Service enforcement. Hunters are required to follow Forest 

Service travel management regulations as part of their license requirements. 

Alternative 4

It is anticipated that law enforcement priorities and patterns would remain unchanged. Patrols on 

the district would continue to be infrequent. Patrols in the four mountain ranges would continue 

to focus on the district’s heavily trafficked areas such as the main arterial roads and developed 

recreation sites. Violations and the numbers of citations issued may increase, at least initially, as 

the number of miles of roads available for motorized use would be reduced, the number of miles 

of dispersed camping corridors would be reduced, and motorized big game retrieval would also 

be prohibited.

Cumulative Effects

There may be a need for increased patrols on the Magdalena district, particularly after the motor 

vehicle use map (MVUM) is released and people are learning about the new regulations.

Alternative 3 would be the most complicated action alternative to enforce due to the miles of road 

designated; the establishment of a trails system that may require LEOs to use ATVs; and the 

designation of motorized big game retrieval corridors. Patrols on the Magdalena district may be 

reduced during periods of increased activities on other ranger districts. None of the other 

reasonably foreseeable future projects would have an effect on law enforcement.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 97

Timber and Vegetation Management

The following analysis is based on the timber and vegetation specialist report prepared by Susan 

Schuhardt, district forester, with edits and modifications by Cliff Nicoll, ID team leader. The 

report is on file in the project record.

Affected Environment

The Magdalena Ranger District utilizes vegetation management to maintain forest densities at 

sustainable levels, as well as to maintain or enhance species composition and forest structure to 

achieve various resource objects. The resource objectives include, but are not limited to: 

enhancing wildlife habitat; providing livestock forage; mitigating the threat of uncharacteristic 

wildfire; preventing/slowing the spread of harmful insects or disease; maintaining watershed 

health; providing forest products to support local and regional communities; and enhancing scenic 

quality. Vegetation management includes activities such as prescribed burns, firewood sales, and 

timber harvests. 

Half the district is comprised of piñon- juniper woodlands. Forest (mixed conifer and ponderosa 

pine) is the next most common vegetation type. Grasslands make up 13 percent of the district.

Spruce-fir, aspen, and riparian vegetation types are rare, with less than 1 percent of the total area. 

Table 34. Major vegetation types of the Magdalena district

Vegetation Type No. of Acres Percent of District

Grassland 105,228 13%

Chaparral 11,241 2%

Piñon-juniper 424,359 54%

Oak woodland 18,567 2%

Ponderosa 90,760 11%

Ponderosa/Gambel oak 27,265 3%

Mixed conifer 115,568 15%

Total 792,991 100%

A total of 81,741 acres on the Magdalena Ranger District is classified as tentatively suitable 

timber lands (“Cibola National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan” as amended 1996; 

“Determination of Tentatively Suitable Timber Lands on the Cibola National Forest,” 1998).

Tentatively suitable timber lands are defined as areas of conifer and ponderosa pine forest located 

outside of wilderness areas on slopes less than 40 percent that would likely regenerate after 

harvest. The majority of these areas are currently unhealthy and susceptible to uncharacteristic 

wildfire or insect/disease attacks. 

There is a total of 442,926 acres of piñon-juniper and oak woodland that is managed for varying 

resource objectives and to provide special forest products, such as firewood, but is not considered 

tentatively suitable timber lands. These areas also tend to be unhealthy, with uniform tree 

distribution, high tree densities, and limited variation in tree size and age, which increases the 

likelihood of these stands being affected by uncharacteristic wildfires and insect/disease attack. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

98 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Personal use firewood is a tool used to achieve vegetation resource objectives such as 

improvement of forest health. Currently, firewood cutting is allowed on most of the district, 

except for closed areas. A special use permit is required to cut firewood. Demand for firewood is 

high and seems to be increasing. Future firewood projects are being planned. Special forest 

products are currently available on the district and include Christmas trees and vigas.

An unknown amount of wood is harvested through illegal woodcutting. Large diameter juniper 

and oak, and valuable snags, are often the target of wood theft. Smaller trees are sometimes cut to 

reach the larger, more valuable timber. This activity affects the vegetation by removing the larger 

trees and leaving the stands homogenous and prone to threats such as disease and fire.

Additionally, illegal woodcutting creates new two-track roads that damage the soil, lessening soil 

productivity and vegetation coverage. 

Two noxious weeds are on the district: Tamarisk is found in small ephemeral drainages and 

around springs on the north side of the district. There is also a small amount of cheatgrass on the 

north side. These plants out compete native plants for water, nutrients, light, and space. They can 

severely affect wildlife habitat, soil stability, and forage production if they are not controlled.

Invasive/exotic plants are spread through human activities such as unrestricted motorized travel, 

foot traffic, and livestock grazing. 

The road system is used administratively to access various vegetation management projects such 

as timber sales and by the public to access special forest products or firewood areas. The existing 

road system is adequate for conducting vegetation management projects and collecting 

miscellaneous forest products. Poor road conditions and wet weather can restrict access to areas 

during the year.

The Forest Service would continue to have access to all system roads, designated or not 

designated, for limited administrative use. This includes the use of roads for vegetation 

management projects. Access for future projects would be handled on a case-by-case basis under 

a separate National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis. Firewood would continue to be 

available in designated areas through special use permits. These permits will specify the access 

routes for the area. Special forest products would continue to be available. However, the public 

would not be allowed to drive off of designated routes to access these products. Special use 

permits may be available for limited off road driving to obtain these resources.

Environmental Consequences

Effects Common to all Alternatives

Alternatives 1, 3, and 4 would reduce the miles of roads designated for motor vehicle use and 

likely reduce the introduction and spread of invasive/exotic plants and increase the potential

vegetation to re-establish itself.

Baseline Condition 

There are 697,716 acres currently open to motorized cross-country travel on the Magdalena 

Ranger District, which represents 88 percent of the Magdalena Ranger District (791,707 acres).

As a result of unrestricted motorized cross-country travel, there has been a proliferation of 

unauthorized roads. Motorized dispersed camping is currently unrestricted in the areas open to 

motorized cross-country travel.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 99

There are 1,171.4 miles of National Forest System roads on the Magdalena Ranger District open 

to general motorized use which includes passenger vehicles and high-clearance vehicles, such as 

pickups or sport utility vehicles. The unrestricted use of motor vehicles on the district would 

provide for the continued loss of vegetation and a decrease in the viability of plant communities.

Alternative 1

A total of 4.5 miles of road construction around private lands is proposed. These reroutes would 

remove some vegetation and provide locations that could potentially be occupied by invasive 

species. Assuming a construction width of 35 feet for a maintenance level 2 road, approximately 

19 acres of vegetation would be permanently removed. Also, 17 miles of unauthorized roads and 

14.7 miles of closed roads would be designated for motorized use.

However, these changes are relatively small and are much less than the 378.2 miles of system 

roads that would not be designated for motorized use, but restricted to administrative use. They 

would provide continuing access to areas of the forest and allow for efficient vegetation 

management. There would be 374.4 miles of dispersed camping corridors, which reflects a 

relatively small change from current conditions. There would be no motorized cross-country 

travel, which would be beneficial to vegetative cover by providing for more vigorous plant 

communities.

Alternative 2 

There would be no change to the current road system. Any roads without legal public access 

would not be designated. Cross-country motorized travel would not be permitted. The effects 

associated with this alternative to the management of timber and vegetative resources would 

remain unchanged.

Alternative 3

This alternative proposes to construct 6.4 miles of road around private lands. These changes 

would have a negative effect on vegetation by reducing surface vegetation. Assuming a 

construction width of 35 feet for a maintenance level 2 road, approximately 27 acres of vegetation 

would be permanently removed. Approximately 29.2 miles of unauthorized roads and 16.9 miles 

of closed roads would be designated for motorized use. However, these changes are relatively 

small and are much less than the 367.1 miles of system roads that would not be designated for 

motorized use, but designated for administrative use. 

These changes would have a beneficial effect on the vegetation. This alternative includes 

designation of a 756-acre area of motor vehicle use, which could create negative impacts on the 

amount and kind of vegetation in the area. Bare soil would be exposed, creating ideal conditions 

establishing invasive weed populations.

Alternative 4

This alternative proposes to construct 3.7 miles of road around private lands. These reroutes 

would remove some vegetation. Assuming a construction width of 35 feet for a maintenance level 

2 road, approximately 15.7 acres of vegetation would be permanently removed. Also, 17.3 miles 

of unauthorized roads and 10.6 miles of closed roads would be designated for motorized use.

However, these changes are relatively small and are much less than the 477 miles of system roads 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

100 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

that would not be designated for motorized use, but designated for administrative use. They 

would provide continuing access to areas of the forest and allow for efficient vegetation 

management. There would be 321.2 miles of dispersed camping corridors, which is not much 

change from current conditions. The district would be closed to motorized cross-country travel, 

which would be beneficial to vegetative cover by reducing the size of areas impacted by motor 

vehicle use and allowing for an increase in plant vigor.

Cumulative Effects

Present or reasonably foreseeable projects on the Magdalena Ranger District include forest 

restoration thinning in the Fisher project and forest and grassland restoration and a prescribed 

burn in the Baney project. The district is also in the process of considering establishing new 

firewood areas of 400–600 acres per year in various locations. Since vegetation management 

projects are conducted administratively through special use permits, or by contract, any of the 

alternatives would be beneficial to timber and vegetation management. There are no effects 

associated with any of the alternatives to the management of timber and vegetative resources; 

therefore, they do not contribute to cumulative effects.

Wildlife Habitat and Special Status Species

The following analysis is based on the wildlife habitat and special status species specialist report 

prepared by Dave Heft, district wildlife biologist (retired), Beverly deGruyter, forest wildlife 

biologist, and Amada Ginithan, wildlife biologist. This report is on file in the project record.

Baseline Conditions

The travel management planning area (Magdalena Ranger District, excluding wilderness areas) 

has a wide variety of wildlife species associated with varied habitat types. In general, there are 

seven basic wildlife habitat types: mountain grassland; mountain shrub; piñon-juniper woodland; 

mixed conifer, ponderosa pine and pine/oak; spruce/fir, and a small amount of riparian habitat 

with small inclusions of other types such as deciduous forest (table 35).

There is a direct connection between vegetation types and wildlife use of sites in the area. 

Ponderosa pine, piñon-juniper, mixed conifer, riparian, and scattered mountain grassland areas are 

the primary habitats impacted by the existing motorized route network due to the higher 

percentage of routes in those habitats. Motorized cross-country travel is currently allowed 

throughout the analysis area, causing loss of all habitat types and displacement of associated 

species when and where that use occurs. Some decommissioned and unauthorized routes continue 

to be used, compounding this situation.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 101

Table 35. Habitat acreages in the Magdalena District travel management analysis area

Habitat Type Acres Existing Route Density by Habitat 

Type (miles per square mile)

Mountain grasslands 96,991 2.62

Mountain shrub 16,647 0.48

Piñon-juniper woodland 394,417 1.02

Mixed conifer forest* 64,863 0.85

Ponderosa pine and pine/oak forest 103,254 1.85

Riparian or wetland** 21,114 6.6

Spruce/fir 22 0.86

Total Acres 697,308 —

*Deciduous forest is a subset of the mixed conifer habitat type. It is composed primarily of aspen that occur in 

mostly isolated patches or where large burns removed the mixed conifer overstory. Because it is isolated it has not 

been mapped.

**Much of the riparian habitat includes dry washes and other ephemeral drainages that are not considered true 

riparian areas, but were included to be consistent with RMAP (Riparian Mapping Project) and the watershed 

specialist report. 

Loss of wildlife habitat can be correlated to road miles by converting road width and road 

distance into acres of habitat. Most single lane roads, level 2 and some level 3 roads, have a width 

standard of 12 feet. Most double lane roads, level 4 roads, have a width standard of 24 feet. For 

this analysis, an average width of 16.5 feet will be used. A road 16.5 feet wide and 1 mile long is 

equivalent to 2 acres. For the purpose of the wildlife species and habitat analysis, route density is 

defined as all motorized routes, including roads (system, unauthorized, and decommissioned) and 

trails.

For each of the habitats, analysis has focused on Cibola National Forest special status species 

including: management indicator species (MIS); threatened, endangered, candidate and sensitive 

species (TES); and high priority migratory birds. A separate report was prepared for each of the 

special status species and is available in the project record. This environmental assessment (EA) 

summarizes information contained in those reports.

Management Indicator Species

The “Cibola National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan” (LRMP) identified 13 

management indicator species (MIS) to estimate the effects planned activities may have on forestwide wildlife populations and habitat. Only those MIS whose habitat (vegetation) types occur 

within the project area were analyzed. Of the 13 MIS identified, 10 are found within the analysis 

area. Table 36 displays the 10 species and their habitats. The forest-wide MIS report (as revised in 

2011) was used to prepare the project specific MIS report. Both reports are available in the 

project record.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

102 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Table 36. Management indicator species and existing habitat/population trend analyzed 

for this travel management analysis

Species MIS Habitat Type

Acres in 

Analysis 

Area

Existing 

Forestwide 

Habitat Trend

Existing 

Forestwide 

Population Trend

Elk

Mountain grassland 96,991 Stable Up

Mixed conifer 64,863 Stable Up

Mule deer

Mountain shrub 16,647 Down Down

Piñon-juniper 394,417 Stable Down

Red-naped 

sapsucker 

Deciduous forest 

(included in mixed 

conifer acres)

64,863 Stable Up

Merriam’s wild 

turkey

Ponderosa pine 103,254 Stable Up

House wren *Riparian 21,114 Up Stable

Juniper titmouse Piñon-juniper 394,417 Stable Down

Pygmy nuthatch Ponderosa pine 103,254 Stable Stable

Hairy 

woodpecker

Mixed conifer 64,863 Stable Up

Red-breasted 

nuthatch

Spruce-fir 22 Stable Up

Black Bear 

Spruce-fir 22 Stable Stable

Mixed conifer 64,863 Stable Stable

*The riparian acres displayed here differ from the forestwide MIS report because dry washes and ephemeral drainages 

are included.

High Priority Birds/Important Bird Areas/Overwintering Areas

On the Cibola National Forest, populations of birds are monitored through the use of breeding 

bird surveys (BBS) on geographic areas to detect population and trend during the breeding 

period. There are two types of BBS surveys done on the Cibola and both types of survey routes 

are conducted on the district including: 

 Magdalena (a U.S. Geological Survey BBS route in the Bear Mountains);

 Vick’s Peak (a USGS BBS route in the San Mateo Mountains);

 Horse Mountain (a USGS BBS route in the San Mateo Mountains); and

 Three shorter BBS routes at Potato Canyon, Sawmill Canyon, and Copper Canyon.

In addition, there are two bird survey routes conducted for the San Juan and Deep Canyon 

allotments for Aplomado falcon potential prey species. The Cibola National Forest’s 2012 

“Breeding Bird Survey Report” provides a summary of the potential occurrence of high priority 

migratory bird species by habitat type. Those species potentially occurring in habitats similar to 

the analysis area on the Magdalena Ranger District were reviewed. There are no important bird 

areas (IBA) or important overwintering areas on the district. Refer to the high priority migratory 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 103

bird report in the project record for a complete description of species and habitats and effects of 

alternatives. Table 37 summarizes species and habitat analyzed.

Table 37. Priority bird species and associated habitat

Priority Bird Species Habitat

Piñon jay Piñon-juniper woodland is used most extensively by this species but flocks also breed 

in sagebrush, scrub oak, and chaparral communities.

Black throated gray 

warbler

This species can be found in piñon-juniper with some oak understory between 7,000 

and 8,000 feet, but can also be common in more mesic piñon/juniper with a high 

canopy closure.

Band-tailed pigeon This species may be found from piñon-juniper up through spruce/fir depending on 

availability of food that includes a wide variety of mast such as fruits and nuts, 

especially acorns and piñon pine nuts.

Gray flycatcher This species is found in piñon-juniper woodland into the fringes of ponderosa pine, 

together with some understory of oak, mountain mahogany, etc., and often occur in 

semimixed xeric conditions.

Dusky grouse Dusky grouse prefer open, shrubby high meadows in summer and coniferous forest in 

winter.

Flammulated owl Flammulated owls occur in open, old-growth ponderosa pine, mixed conifer and 

spruce/fir areas with large snags.

Black-chinned 

hummingbird

This species is the foothills hummingbird that occurs up to about 7,000 ft.

Broad-tailed hummingbird This mountain hummingbird is found from about 7,000 feet upward. It frequents 

meadows and open forest with a shrubby component and forbs.

Scaled quail Primarily found in peripheral shrubby grasslands in the vicinity of canyon foothills on 

the San Mateo, Magdalena and Bear Mountain ranges.

Red-naped sapsucker They are found in high elevation riparian woodland, ponderosa pine, mixed conifer,

and spruce/fir. This species prefers aspen and cottonwoods for nesting and are often 

found in oaks in winter.

Montezuma quail Primarily occurs in open pine grasslands, but also utilizes habitats from piñon-juniper 

to spruce-fir.

Grace’s warbler This species is fairly common in ponderosa pine but may extend into mixed conifer if 

ponderosa pine is also present.

Elf owl Found on the San Mateo and Magdalena Mountain ranges in low to mid-elevation 

riparian areas where it nests in cavities excavated by woodpeckers.

Vesper sparrow This species is found in dry meadows with some shrub component from about 7,000 

feet to at least 8,400 feet.

Williamson’s sapsucker This species is uncommon in ponderosa, mixed conifer, and spruce/fir.

Olive-sided flycatcher This species breeds in habitat along forest edges and openings, including: burns, 

natural edges of bogs, marshes, open water; semi-open forest, and harvested forest 

with some structure retained. 

Loggerhead Shrike Generally prefers juniper savannah or grassland/shrub habitats below 7,000 feet in 

elevation.

Gray vireo Prefers juniper savannah habitats especially on moderate rocky slopes generally 

below 6,800 feet in elevation.

Juniper titmouse Prefers juniper dominated relatively dry and open piñon-juniper habitats at elevations 

of 6,000 to about 7,200 feet.

Bendire’s thrasher Prefers relatively open grassland, desert shrublands, juniper woodland with scattered 

shrubs or trees.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

104 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Priority Bird Species Habitat

Crissal thrasher Prefers shrubby thicketlike habitat associated with dry washes with scrub, live oak,

and four-wing saltbush.

Olive warbler Found on the San Mateo and Magdalena ranges in ponderosa pine and mixed conifer 

from 7,400 to 9,800 feet in elevation.

Virginia’s warbler Considered to prefer arid montane forests with Gambel oak understory from 6,000 to 

9,000 feet in elevation.

Red-faced warbler Habitat for this species is high elevation (7,500–9,200 feet) riparian, ponderosa pine,

and mixed conifer especially those sites with a component of deciduous trees.

Painted redstart Prefers cool moist sites in ponderosa pine-oak riparian forests.

Black-chinned sparrow Habitat for this species is dense chaparral on mountain slopes, rugged canyons, and 

sagebrush. 

Eastern meadowlark Prefers grassland habitats with a diversity of cover heights and good litter cover.

Threatened, Endangered, Candidate,

and Sensitive Wildlife and Plant Species

Several wildlife and/or plant species lists were reviewed to determine potential species which 

may occur in the analysis area. Refer to the 2007 Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species list and 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service threatened and endangered county list for a complete list of 

species considered (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012).

Table 38 shows federally listed TES wildlife and plant species having potential to occur within 

the analysis area. Other species were considered but were not included because the habitat type 

for the species does not occur in the analysis area. Refer to the biological assessment (BA) and 

the biological evaluation (BE) in the project record for a complete list of species considered but 

not evaluated.

Threatened, endangered, candidate, or sensitive wildlife and plant species which may occur or 

have potential habitat in the analysis area include: 

 Northern goshawk (4 known territories occur within the analysis area);

 Mexican spotted owl (33 known territories);

 Eight other species of birds;

 Seven small mammals;

 Two amphibians;

 Four invertebrates; and

 Six plants including the endangered Zuni fleabane. 

There is a small portion of designated Mexican spotted owl critical habitat within the analysis 

area (the majority of critical habitat is within the Apache Kid and Withington Wilderness areas, 

outside the scope of this analysis). Table 38 shows all the TES species having potential to occur 

on the Magdalena Ranger District’s travel management planning area.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 105

Table 38. Threatened, endangered, candidate, and sensitive species considered

Common 

Name Special Status Status in Project Area

Mexican 

spotted owl

Federally 

Threatened/

Critical Habitat 

This species occurs in dense, multistory mixed conifer stands with large tree 

structure. Spotted owls prefer shaded, cool, moist canyon sites and mountain 

slopes with rock outcrops, cliffs, talus, and standing dead and down woody 

material. There are 33 protected activity centers within the district. There are 

169,081 acres of critical habitat on the district and 180 acres within the 

analysis area. Mexican spotted owl habitat is managed at three levels—

protected activity centers, recovery habitat, and other forest and woodland 

types—to achieve a diversity of habitat conditions across the landscape. 

Protected activity centers are known territories which are a minimum of 600 

acres each. Recovery habitat includes all mixed conifer, pine-oak forests, and 

riparian areas meeting Mexican spotted owl recovery plan definitions. Other 

forest and woodland types include ponderosa pine, spruce-fir, woodland, and 

aspen forests outside PACs and recovery habitat. The analysis area is in the 

Upper Gila Mountains Ecological Management Unit (EMU). The primary 

threat in this EMU is stand-replacing wildfire. Lesser threats are 

indiscriminant firewood harvests (especially the removal of large oaks, 

snags, and down logs), and improper grazing by livestock. 

Zuni 

fleabane

Federally 

Threatened

The Zuni fleabane occurs on nearly barren detrital clay hillsides with soils 

derived from shale of the Chinle or Baca formations (often seleniferous) in 

the Datil Mountain area. 

Northern 

aplomado 

falcon

Federally 

Endangered

The falcon occurs in arid desert grasslands with some potential habitat 

occurring in the southeastern portion of the analysis area. No individuals 

have been documented on the district.

Chiricuhua 

leopard frog

Federally 

Threatened

This species occurs in wetland and stream habitats. An existing population 

occurs on private property and State lands near the forest boundary southwest 

of the San Mateo Mountains.

Northern 

leopard frog

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

This species is usually found in springs, slow moving streams, marshes, 

ponds, lakes, and other aquatic habitats.

Alamosa 

springsnail

Federally 

Endangered

This species occurs in the Alamosa Warm Springs on private and State land 

near the southwestern boundary of the San Mateo Mountains.

Bleached 

skimmer 

dragonfly

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

Prefers pond and spring habitats with ephemeral vegetation being a vital 

component.

Western 

yellowbilled 

cuckoo

Federal 

Candidate

Yellow billed cuckoos in New Mexico prefer desert riparian woodlands 

comprised of willow, Fremont cottonwood, and dense mesquite. This species 

has not been recorded on the district.

Northern 

goshawk

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

Nests are typically in mature to old-growth ponderosa pine and pine/oak 

forests composed primarily of large trees, with 60 to 70 percent canopy 

closure in large tree groups, near the bottom of moderate hill slopes, with 

sparse ground cover. There are four known post fledgling family areas 

(PFAs) within the analysis area.

Bald eagle USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

The analysis area provides winter habitat only. There are no known roosts.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

106 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Common 

Name Special Status Status in Project Area

American 

peregrine 

falcon

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

Peregrine falcons inhabit open wetlands and canyons near cliffs. They prey 

chiefly on birds.

Zone-tailed 

hawk

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

There are no known locations of zone-tailed hawks on the allotment but the 

arid, semi-open pine-oak woodlands and small pockets of riparian habitat in 

rugged canyons that are described for New Mexico are present on the 

analysis area. Prey species include birds, small mammals, and lizards.

Burrowing 

owl

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

Prefers open plains, grasslands, deserts, and steep banks of dry washes.

Loggerhead 

shrike

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

Prefers open, shrubby grasslands with scattered shrubs or small trees.

Gray vireo USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

Inhabits dry, shrub dominated landscapes such as grasslands with scattered 

junipers and shrubby arroyos. 

Spotted bat USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

The spotted bat ranges throughout the western states. It is found in various 

habitats from desert to montane coniferous stands, including open ponderosa 

pine, piñon-juniper woodland, canyon bottoms, open pasture, and hayfields. 

Locations of this species are unknown in the analysis area. Threats include 

riparian/other habitat loss and degradation. 

Allen’s 

Lappet 

browed bat

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

This species primarily inhabits coniferous forests in southwestern mountains. 

Locations of this species are unknown in the analysis area, but they 

commonly roost behind pieces of loose bark in large conifer snags and trees. 

Small moths are the primary food source of these bats. They are known to 

forage in a variety of forest and woodland types

Pale 

Townsend’s 

big-eared bat

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

Locations of this species are unknown in the analysis area. This bat prefers 

mines/caves for roost sites but also roosts in other habitats. Small moths are 

the primary food of these bats. They forage along forested edges taking prey 

from leaves and in flight.

Southern 

red-backed 

vole

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

This vole occurs in the coolest mesic sites within spruce-fir forest. Nests are 

usually in a secondary cavity in a live or dying tree, hole in the ground, 

stumps, logs, or under rocks.

Gunnison’s 

prairie dog

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

Gunnison’s prairie dog is usually found in grassland/herbaceous and 

shrubland areas, high mountain valleys, as well as open or slightly brushy 

country, rarely with scattered junipers and pines.

Botta’s 

pocket 

gopher

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

This pocket gopher has been found in sycamore, cottonwood, and rabbitbrush 

riparian habitats (Bison-M, 2009).

New Mexico 

banner-tailed 

kangaroo rat

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

Primarily found in grasslands with both sand and clay based soils. This 

species constructs burrows which have conspicuous dirt mounds at the 

openings. Each mound is occupied by an adult male or female, and an animal 

may have more than one mound in its home range.

Magdalena 

Mountain 

snail

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

This mountain snail seems to occur widely in the Magdalena Mountain 

range, above elevations of 7,000 ft. It has been taken at several localities. 

Along North Fork Canyon, a branch of Water Canyon, it was found at 7,320 

ft. on a north-facing slope near the bottom of the canyon, living under loose, 

igneous stones in thick leaf litter from deciduous trees. It has been taken in 

coniferous forest as high as 9,850 ft. on North Baldy Peak.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 107

Common 

Name Special Status Status in Project Area

Subalpine 

mountain 

snail

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

Occurs on the San Mateo range in rhyolitic (igneous) talus.

Zuni 

milkvetch

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

This species is limited to the Zuni and Datil Mountains of New Mexico. 

Villous 

groundcover 

milkvetch

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

This plant prefers sandy soils of volcanic origin on slopes, benches, and 

ledges in xeric pine forest.

San Mateo 

penstemon

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

Primary occurrence is within open ponderosa pine and spruce-fir forest and 

high mountain meadows at 9,000–10,000 feet in elevation.

Arizona 

leatherflower

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

Moist mountain meadows, prairies, and open woods and thickets in a wide 

range of elevations up to 10,000 ft. 

Tall 

bitterweed

USFS 

Southwestern 

Region Sensitive

Found on dry sites with coarse soils in piñon-juniper woodland and lower 

montane coniferous forest; 6,900–8,200 ft. elevations in northwestern 

Lincoln, northeastern Socorro, and western Torrance Counties, southern 

Manzano Mountains, Gallinas Mountains, Los Pinos Mountains, and 

northern Chupadera Mesa.

Environmental Consequences

Baseline Conditions

Motorized use of roads and trails and cross-country motorized travel off of system roads and 

trails affects terrestrial and aquatic species through: 

1. Loss of habitat due to conversion of native vegetation to a particular road/trail surface 

(paved, gravel, dirt);

2. Fragmentation of habitats due to road and trail system development and cross-country 

motorized travel off of system roads and trails;

3. Lack of habitat use by wildlife due to disturbance caused by use of the road or trail 

system and cross-country motorized use; and

4. Direct mortality due to vehicle collisions.

Routes are considered to have similar effects regardless of whether they are in the existing system 

or new route designations. Routes being added to the system as new route designations are 

existing two-track routes currently being used by the public. For the wildlife species/habitat 

analysis, motorized roads and trails are considered together as routes since the primary effects to 

wildlife are similar. Effects are related to route densities, motorized traffic along those routes, and 

possible cross-country motorized travel off of system roads and trails potentially contributing to 

wildlife disturbance/harassment and habitat fragmentation. Overall, in all alternatives there is a 

net reduction in both system routes and acres affected by motorized use compared to the baseline. 

Motorized cross-country travel will be reduced from the current situation, reducing impacts to all 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

108 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

habitat types and associated species when and where that use occurred. Some decommissioned 

and unauthorized motorized routes are proposed to be added to the system but there would be an 

overall reduction in motorized routes. 

In a letter dated May 12, 2009, the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF) stated 

that the agency is in favor of closing many routes to motor vehicle traffic to lessen fragmentation 

and disturbances to wildlife caused by motorized use. The ID team that developed the proposed 

action and alternatives, worked closely with the NMDGF to determine sufficient and strategically 

located roads and trails to remain open to vehicle use. The team assured that reasonable access to 

hunting areas is provided to meet the NMDGF’s need for successful harvest and wildlife 

conservation. Alternative analysis also provides descriptions of how the intent of Executive Order 

13443, Facilitation of Hunting Heritage and Wildlife Conservation, was met.

Motorized use of routes during hunting season can provide increased hunter opportunity 

especially for disabled and youth hunters and increased harvest of game species. However, 

motorized use can also reduce the quality of hunts for some users since noise associated with that 

use can displace wildlife. In another letter dated February 28, 2006, the NMDGF confirmed their 

position related to motorized big game retrieval (MBGR), stating that individual national forests 

should not provide special treatment to mobility impaired hunters so that the spirit and intent of 

the Travel Management Rule is maintained. The NMDGF suggested that MBGR be consistent 

across forests in the State to ensure compliance and enforcement capabilities. The Forest Service 

Southwestern Region also provided guidance for MBGR in their Travel Management Rule 

Guidelines (Revised June 30, 2008). For the purposes of this analysis, only elk and mule deer are 

being considered for MBGR on Game Management Unit 13 (Datil and Bear Mountains units) and 

Unit 17 (San Mateo and Magdalena Mountains units). Other species such as cougar and black 

bear are not being considered for MBGR since there are very few harvested on the district.

Management Indicator Species

The general wildlife effects described above apply to MIS habitat and populations. Table 39 

describes the rationale for the estimated effects determination including effects to forestwide MIS 

population and habitat trend. The Forest Service is required to analyze impacts to specific habitat 

types and the primary species associated with these habitat types (see the project level MIS report 

for a more detailed discussion of motorized route and motorized dispersed use impacts to 

wildlife).

Variables analyzed for MIS include route density (miles per square mile), miles of motorized big 

game retrieval, miles of dispersed camping, and acres of direct habitat loss. Route density by 

habitat type is based on a GIS analysis of the miles of routes in seven separate habitat types. 

The Forest Service is required to analyze how a project will affect the forest-wide population and 

habitat trends for each MIS habitat type and MIS species associated with these habitat types. In 

most cases, the amount of habitat affected is a very small percentage of the amount of habitat 

available forest-wide. Motorized use will not affect the quantity of habitat available for 

management indicator species in the forest but habitat quality may be affected by routes and 

cross-country motorized use. Table 39 describes the variables analyzed to determine the estimated 

effects to MIS including effects to forest-wide population and habitat trend. Ultimately there is 

very little difference between the alternatives in terms of the miles of motorized routes being 

designated. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 109

The primary difference between the alternatives is where routes are not being proposed for 

designation (such as avoiding some threatened and endangered species habitat) and the proposed 

amount of dispersed camping corridors, motorized big game retrieval zones, and designation of 

an OHV area. In general, alternative 2 has the least amount of motorized cross-country use since 

MBGR and motorized dispersed camping zones would not be designated. Alternative 3 would 

have the most dispersed use and alternative 4 would have the fewest miles of designated routes. 

Table 39. Summary of variables by alternative and habitat type

Grassland Habitat Baseline

Alt. 1, 

Proposed 

Action

Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4

Route density 2.62 1.63 2.08 1.70 1.39

Miles of motorized routes 435 271 346 283 231

Acres of direct habitat loss 

(assuming habitat along 

undesignated routes will recover)

870 542 692 566 462

MBGR miles All available 0 0 137 0

Dispersed camping (miles) All available 106 0 106 106

Mixed Conifer with Deciduous Inclusion

Route density 0.85 0.33 0.63 0.33 0.32

Miles of motorized routes 91 35 67 35 34

Acres of direct habitat loss 

(assuming habitat along 

undesignated routes will recover)

182 70 134 70 68

MBGR miles All available 0 0 3 0

Dispersed camping (miles) All available 10 0 10 3

Piñon-Juniper

Route density 1.02 0.45 0.61 0.48 0.40

Miles of motorized routes 662 292 395 310 262

Acres of direct habitat loss 

(assuming habitat along 

undesignated routes will recover)

1,324 584 790 1,376 

(includes 

OHV 

area)

524

MBGR miles All available 0 0 106 0

Dispersed camping (miles) All available 137 0 137 125

Mountain Shrub

Route density 0.48 0.15 0.26 0.22 0.15

Miles of motorized routes 13 4 7 6 4

Acres of direct habitat loss 

(assuming habitat along 

undesignated routes will recover)

26 8 14 12 8

MBGR miles All available 0 0 2 0

Dispersed camping (miles) All available 2 0 2 2
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

110 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Grassland Habitat Baseline

Alt. 1, 

Proposed 

Action

Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4

Ponderosa Pine/Pine-Oak

Route density 1.85 0.58 1.12 0.59 0.52

Miles of motorized routes 314 98 190 101 89

Acres of direct habitat loss 

(assuming habitat along 

undesignated routes will recover)

628 196 380 202 178

MBGR miles All available 0 0 47 0

Dispersed camping (miles) All available 60 0 60 49

Riparian

Route density 6.6 3.41 4.81 3.51 3.16

Miles of motorized routes 246 126 178 130 117

Acres of direct habitat loss 

(assuming habitat along 

undesignated routes will recover)

492 252 356 260 234

MBGR miles All available 0 0 48 0

Dispersed camping (miles) All available 58 0 58 43

Spruce-Fir

Route density 0.86 NA NA NA NA

Miles of motorized routes 2 0 0 0 0

MBGR miles All available 0 0 0 0

Dispersed camping (miles) All available 0 0 0 0

Acres of habitat Loss 0 0 0 0 0
Chapter 

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 111

Table 40. Summary of effects to MIS

Habitat Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Elk - Mountain Grassland

Miles of route/acres of 

habitat loss.

435 miles/870 acres 271 miles/542 acres 346 miles/692 acres 283 miles/566 acres 231 miles/ 462 acres 

Route densities in 

mountain grassland 

habitat with comparison 

to baseline.

2.62 miles of route per 

square mile. This route 

density is high compared to 

most other habitat types. 

Route density would be 

1.63 miles/sq. mile, a 

reduction of 38% from 

the baseline. 

Route density would be 

2.08 miles/sq. mile, a 

reduction of 21% from 

the baseline.

Route densities would 

be 1.70 miles/sq. mile, 

a reduction of 35% 

from the baseline. 

Route densities would 

be 1.39 miles/sq. mile, a 

reduction of 47% from 

the baseline.

Acres of habitat loss 

compared to the amount 

of forestwide habitat 

available (shown as a 

percentage).

Acres of habitat loss 

represents only 0.45% of the 

amount of habitat available 

forestwide, so habitat 

quantity at the forest scale is 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.28% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.36% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected.

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.29% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, 

so habitat quantity at 

the forest level would 

be unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.24% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected. 

Proposed 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes to be 

added to the system in 

grassland habitat.

Many of the closed, 

decommissioned, or 

unauthorized routes are 

being used resulting in 

habitat loss, fragmentation,

and displacement of elk.

Thre would be 7.9 miles 

of decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and closed 

routes in this habitat 

under this alternative.

There are no 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, or closed 

routes being added to the 

system under this 

alternative.

Thre would be 10.8 

miles of 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes in this 

habitat under this 

alternative.

There would be 7.5 

miles of 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes in this 

habitat under this 

alternative. 

Effects Summary – Elk in Grassland Habitat

Baseline: Under the baseline, motorized route density is higher in the grassland habitat type than Forest Plan standards by 0.72 mile of motorized route per square mile. 

Cross-country motorized travel is currently available throughout this habitat type on a year-long basis resulting in habitat fragmentation, loss of habitat, and displacement due 

to disturbance. Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) is available districtwide in mountain grassland habitat, causing some displacement of elk during hunting seasons. 

Current levels of MBGR may allow increased hunter opportunity (since some hunters will avoid hunting areas without MBGR), but may also result in lower hunter success 

due to displacement of wildlife due to noise. Motorized dispersed camping is available districtwide in mountain grassland habitat causing displacement of elk when camps are 

in use. Population trend for elk remains upward because factors other than motorized use are more likely to be responsible for the upward elk population trend on a forestwide 

basis, (Refer to the forestwide MIS report). Habitat trend remains stable. Even though motorized route densities are high, it is a small percentage of the total available 

forestwide, representing 0.45 percent of the grasslands on the forest. Motorized use is not considered to be the limiting factor for grassland habitat trend affecting habitat 

quality more than quantity. 
Chapter 

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

112 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Habitat Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Alternatives 1–4

 Cross-Country Motorized Travel: Under all alternatives, cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout grassland habitat type reducing 

displacement of elk and habitat loss and fragmentation. Grassland areas are generally easily accessible to motorized off-route travel, and habitat quality would benefit 

locally under all alternatives. 

 Motorized Big Game Retrieval: Under alternatives 1, 2, and 4, MBGR would not be designated, benefiting elk and grassland habitat. Under alternative 3, MBGR would 

be available along 137 miles of routes adjacent to grasslands, creating a potential for some displacement of elk during the deer and elk hunting seasons. MBGR may allow 

increased hunter opportunity for elk but may also result in lower hunter success. 

 Motorized Dispersed Camping: Under all alternatives, motorized dispersed camping would no longer be available districtwide, benefiting wildlife and habitats. Motorized 

dispersed camping would be available along 100 miles (alternative 4) to 106 miles (alternatives 1 and 3) of grassland habitat, creating a potential for displacement of elk 

when camps are in use. Only alternative 2 would not provide for designated camping resulting in benefits to elk and grassland habitat compared to the other alternatives. 

 Grassland Habitat Trend remains stable under all alternatives since the amount of motorized use is considered low on a forestwide scale. Alternative 2 would have the 

most motorized routes which would reduce habitat availability locally, but dispersed use would not be allowed benefiting grassland habitat. Alternative 3 would have the 

most motorized dispersed use which would reduce habitat availability locally. Alternative 4 would have the fewest proposed designated routes, but more motorized 

dispersed use than alternative 2. 

 Elk Population Trend would remain upward because factors other than motorized use are more likely to be responsible for the upward elk population trend on a forestwide 

basis. Compared to the baseline, local populations of elk may increase since route densities and motorized cross-country use would be reduced under all alternatives. 

Elk, Hairy Woodpecker, Black Bear, and Red-naped Sapsucker in Mixed Conifer Habitat

Miles of route/acres of 

habitat loss in mixed 

conifer

91miles/182 acres 35 miles/70 acres 67 miles/134 acres 35 miles/70 acres 34 miles/68acres

Motorized route 

densities in mixed 

conifer habitat with 

comparison to baseline

Route densities remain at 

0.85 mile per square mile in 

this habitat type. 

Route densities are 0.33 

mile per square mile 

which is reduced 62% in 

this habitat type 

compared to the baseline.

Route densities would be 

0.63 mile per square

mile, reduced 27% from 

the baseline.

Motorized route 

densities would be 

0.33 mile per square

mile, reduced 62% 

from the baseline.

Motorized route 

densities are 0.32 in this 

habitat type which is 

reduced 63% compared 

to baseline.

Acres of mixed conifer 

habitat loss compared to 

the amount of 

forestwide habitat 

available (shown as a 

percentage).

Direct habitat loss represents 

0.08% compared to the 

forestwide total so habitat 

quantity at the forest scale is 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.03% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.06% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.03% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, 

so habitat quantity at 

the forest level would 

be unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.03% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected. 
Chapter 

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 113

Habitat Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Proposed 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes to be 

added to the system in 

mixed conifer habitat.

Many of the closed, 

decommissioned, or 

unauthorized routes are 

currently being used 

resulting in habitat loss, 

fragmentation, and 

displacement of elk, black 

bear, red-naped sapsucker,

and hairy woodpecker.

There would be 0.6 mile

of decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and closed 

routes in this habitat 

under this alternative.

There are no 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, or closed 

routes being added to the 

system under this 

alternative.

There would be 0.6 

mile of 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes in this 

habitat under this 

alternative

There are no 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, or closed 

routes being added to 

the system under this 

alternative in this 

habitat type.

Effects Summary – Elk, Hairy Woodpecker, Black Bear, and Red-naped Sapsucker in Mixed Conifer Habitat

Baseline: Motorized travel is currently available throughout mixed conifer habitat on a yearlong basis resulting in habitat fragmentation, loss of habitat, and displacement to 

elk, black bear, red-naped sapsucker, and hairy woodpecker due to disturbance. Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) is available districtwide in mixed conifer habitat 

causing some displacement of elk and black bear during the hunting seasons. Current levels of MBGR may allow increased hunter opportunity for elk (since some hunters 

will avoid hunting areas without MBGR), but may also result in lower hunter success. Black bear would not be available for MBGR which would not affect hunting success. 

MBGR would occur outside the breeding season for red-naped sapsucker and hairy woodpecker so effects would not cause nest abandonment resulting in unintentional take. 

These bird species are yearlong residents so some displacement due to MBGR would still occur. Motorized dispersed camping is available districtwide in mixed conifer 

habitat causing displacement of elk, black bear, red-naped sapsucker, and hairy woodpecker when camps are in use. Population trend of elk and hairy woodpecker remains 

upward because factors other than motorized use are more likely to be responsible for the upward population trends on a forestwide basis (refer to the forestwide MIS report). 

Population trends for red-naped sapsucker and black bear remains stable. For black bear, factors such as food availability are more likely to be responsible for population 

trend forestwide. Habitat trend for mixed conifer would be stable because the amount of motorized use in mixed conifer is relatively low when considered on a forestwide

scale. 

Alternatives 1–4

 Cross-Country Motorized Travel: Under all alternatives, cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout mixed conifer habitat, reducing 

displacement of elk, black bear, red-naped sapsucker, and hairy woodpecker. Habitat loss and habitat fragmentation would also be reduced for these species under all 

alternatives. 

 Motorized Big Game Retrieval: Under alternatives 1, 2, and 4 MBGR would not be designated, benefiting elk, black bear, red-naped sapsucker, hairy woodpecker, and 

their mixed conifer habitat. Under alternative 3, MBGR would be available on only 3 miles of mixed conifer habitat creating a potential for minimal displacement of elk, 

back bear, red-naped sapsucker, and hairy woodpecker during the deer and elk hunting seasons. MBGR may allow increased hunter opportunity for elk, but may also result 

in lower hunter success. Black bear would not be available for MBGR which not affect hunting success. 

 Motorized Dispersed Camping: Under all alternatives, motorized dispersed camping would no longer be available districtwide benefiting wildlife and habitats. Motorized 

dispersed camping would be available along 3 miles (alternative 4 ) to 10 miles (alternatives 1 and 3) of mixed conifer habitat, creating a potential for displacement of elk, 

black bear, red-naped sapsucker, and hairy woodpecker when camps are in use. Only alternative 2 would not provide for designated camping in this habitat type resulting in 

benefits to these species and mixed conifer habitat compared to the other alternatives. It is unlikely that snags used by the red-naped sapsucker and hairy woodpecker for 

nesting would be gathered by campers as firewood, since the species generally uses large diameter trees that are not usually gathered by campers. 

 Mixed Conifer Habitat Trend remains stable under all alternatives since the amount of motorized use is considered low on a forestwide scale. Alternative 2 would have 

the most motorized routes which would reduce habitat availability locally, but dispersed use would not be designated benefiting mixed conifer habitat. Alternative 3 would 
Chapter 

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

114 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Habitat Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

have the most motorized dispersed use which would reduce habitat availability locally and alternative 4 would have the fewest proposed designated routes, but more 

motorized dispersed use than alternative 2. 

 Elk Population Trend remains upward since factors other than motorized use are more likely to be responsible for elk population trend on a forestwide basis. Under all 

alternatives, local populations may improve with increased habitat availability. Alternative 4 has slightly fewer motorized routes and motorized dispersed use is less than 

alternatives 1 and 3. 

 Black Bear Population Trend remains stable since factors such as food availability are more likely to be responsible for population trend on a forestwide basis. 

 Red-naped Sapsucker Population Trend remains stable since factors other than motorized use are more likely to be responsible for population trend on a forestwide

basis. 

 Hairy Woodpecker Population Trend remains upward since factors other than motorized use are more likely to be responsible for population trend on a forestwide basis.

Mule Deer and Juniper Titmouse–Piñon-Juniper Habitat

Miles of route/acres of 

habitat loss in piñon–

juniper.

662 miles/1,324 acres 292 miles/584 acres

The 4 miles of reroute in 

piñon-juniper habitat 

would result in an 

additional habitat loss of 

8 acres under this 

alternative. 

395 miles/790 acres 310 miles/620 acres 

plus a 756-acre OHV 

area = 1,376 acres.

The 2.3 miles of 

reroute would result in 

an additional habitat 

loss of 4.6 acres under 

this alternative.

262 miles/524 acres

Motorized route 

densities in piñonjuniper habitat with 

comparison to baseline.

Route densities remain at 

1.02 miles per square mile.

Motorized route densities 

would be 0.45 mile per 

square mile, reduced 

56% from the baseline.

Motorized route densities 

would be 0.61 mile per 

square mile, reduced 

40% from the baseline. 

Motorized route 

densities would be 

0.48 mile per square

mile, reduced 53% 

from the baseline. 

Motorized route 

densities would be 0.40 

mile per square mile, 

reduced 61% from the 

baseline. 

Acres of piñon-juniper 

habitat loss compared to 

the amount of Forest 

wide habitat available 

(shown as a 

percentage).

Direct habitat loss represents 

0.16% compared to the 

forestwide total so habitat 

quantity at the forest scale is 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.06% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.09% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.25% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, 

so habitat quantity at 

the forest level would 

be unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.06% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected.
Chapter 

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 115

Habitat Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Proposed 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes to be 

added to the system in 

piñon-juniper habitat

Many of the closed, 

decommissioned, or 

unauthorized routes are 

currently being used 

resulting in habitat loss, 

fragmentation, and 

displacement of mule deer 

and juniper titmouse.

There are 10.1 miles 

(affecting 20.2 acres) of 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and closed 

routes in this habitat 

under this alternative.

There are no 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, or closed 

routes being added to the 

system under this 

alternative.

There are 19 miles 

(affecting 38 acres) of 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes in this 

habitat under this 

alternative. 

There are 8.4 miles 

(affecting 16.8 acres) of 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes in this 

habitat under this 

alternative. 

Effects Summary – Mule Deer and Juniper Titmouse in Piñon-Juniper Habitat

Baseline: Motorized travel is currently available throughout piñon-juniper habitat on a yearlong basis resulting in habitat fragmentation, loss of habitat, and displacement to 

mule deer and juniper titmouse due to disturbance. Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) is available districtwide in piñon-juniper habitat causing some displacement of 

mule deer and juniper titmouse during the hunting seasons. Current levels of MBGR may allow increased hunter opportunity for mule deer (since some hunters will avoid 

hunting areas without MBGR), but may also result in lower hunter success due to noise and displacement. MBGR would occur outside the breeding season for juniper 

titmouse so effects would not cause nest abandonment resulting in unintentional take. Motorized dispersed camping is available districtwide in piñon-juniper habitat causing 

displacement of mule deer and juniper titmouse when camps are in use. Population trend of mule deer and juniper titmouse remains downward because factors other than 

motorized use are more likely to be responsible for the downward population trends on a forestwide basis (refer to the forestwide MIS report). Habitat trend for piñon-juniper 

would be stable because the amount of motorized use in piñon-juniper is relatively low when considered on a forestwide scale. 

Alternatives 1–4

 Cross-Country Motorized Travel: Under all alternatives, cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout piñon-juniper habitat, reducing 

displacement of mule deer and juniper titmouse. Habitat loss and habitat fragmentation would also be reduced for these species under all alternatives. 

 Motorized Big Game Retrieval: Under alternatives 1, 2, and 4, MBGR would not be designated, benefiting mule deer and juniper titmouse in piñon-juniper habitat. Under 

alternative 3 MBGR would be available along 106 miles of routes in piñon-juniper habitat creating a potential for displacement of mule deer during the deer and elk hunting 

seasons. MBGR may allow increased hunter opportunity for mule deer but may also result in lower hunter success. 

 Motorized Dispersed Camping: Under all alternatives, motorized dispersed camping would no longer be available districtwide benefiting wildlife and habitats. Motorized 

dispersed camping would be available along 125 miles (alternative 4) to 137 miles (alternatives 1 and 3) of piñon-juniper habitat, creating a potential for displacement of 

mule deer and juniper titmouse when camps are in use. Only alternative 2 would not provide for designated camping in this habitat type resulting in benefits to these species 

and piñon-juniper habitat compared to the other alternatives. It is unlikely that snags used by the juniper titmouse for nesting would be gathered by campers as firewood 

since the species uses large diameter trees that are not usually gathered by campers. 

 OHV Area Open to Motor Vehicle Use: Only alternative 3 would designate an OHV area. OHV use would displace mule deer and juniper titmouse and severely alter 

piñon-juniper habitat on 756 acres causing habitat loss. 

 Piñon-Juniper Habitat Trend remains stable under all alternatives since the amount of motorized use is considered low on a forestwide scale. Alternative 2 would have 

the most motorized routes which would reduce habitat availability locally, but dispersed use would not be allowed benefiting piñon-juniper habitat. Alternative 3 would 

have the most motorized dispersed use which would reduce habitat availability locally. Alternative 4 would have the fewest proposed designated routes, but more motorized 

dispersed use than alternative 2. 
Chapter 

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

116 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Habitat Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

 Mule Deer Population Trend remains downward since factors other than motorized use are more likely to be responsible for mule deer population trend on a forestwide

basis. Under alternative 3, local populations of mule deer may decrease with impacts associated with the OHV area. Alternative 4 has slightly fewer motorized routes, and 

motorized dispersed use is less than alternatives 1 and 3 which may increase habitat availability locally to increase populations in the analysis area in the long term.

 Juniper Titmouse Population Trend remains downward since factors other than motorized use are more likely to be responsible for juniper titmouse population trend on a 

forestwide basis. Under alternative 3, local populations may decrease with impacts associated with the OHV area. Alternative 4 has slightly fewer motorized routes, and 

motorized dispersed use is less than alternatives 1 and 3 which may increase habitat availability locally to increase populations in the analysis area in the long term.

Mule Deer - Mountain Shrub Habitat

Miles of route/acres of 

habitat loss in mountain 

shrub habitat.

13 miles/26 acres 4 miles/8 acres 7 miles/14 acres 6 miles/12 acres 4 miles/8 acres

Motorized route 

densities in mountain 

shrub habitat with 

comparison to baseline.

Route densities remain at 

0.48 mile per square mile. 

Route densities would be 

0.15 mile per square

mile, reduced 69% from 

the baseline. 

Route densities would be 

0.26 mile per square

mile, reduced 46% from 

the baseline. 

Route densities would 

be 0.22 mile per 

square mile, reduced 

55% from the baseline. 

Route densities would 

be 0.15 mile per square

mile, reduced 69% from 

the baseline. 

Acres of mountain 

shrub habitat loss 

compared to the amount 

of forestwide habitat 

available (shown as a 

percentage).

Direct habitat loss represents 

0.05% compared to the 

forestwide total so habitat 

quantity at the forest scale is 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.01% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.02% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected.

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.02% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, 

so habitat quantity at 

the forest level would 

be unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.01% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected. 

Proposed 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes to be 

added to the system in 

mountain shrub habitat.

Many of the closed, 

decommissioned, or 

unauthorized routes are 

currently being used 

resulting in habitat loss, 

fragmentation, and 

displacement of mule deer.

There are no 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, or closed 

routes being added to the 

system under this 

alternative.

There are no 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, or closed 

routes being added to the 

system under this 

alternative.

There are no 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, or 

closed routes being 

added to the system 

under this alternative.

There are no 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, or closed 

routes being added to 

the system under this 

alternative.

Effects Summary – Mule Deer - Mountain Shrub

Baseline: Motorized travel is currently available throughout mountain shrub habitat on a yearlong basis resulting in habitat fragmentation, loss of habitat, and displacement to 

mule deer due to disturbance. Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) is available districtwide in mountain shrub habitat causing some displacement of mule deer during the 

hunting seasons. Current levels of MBGR may allow increased hunter opportunity for mule deer (since some hunters will avoid hunting areas without MBGR), but may also 

result in lower hunter success. Motorized dispersed camping is available districtwide in mountain shrub habitat causing displacement of mule deer when camps are in use. 

Population trend of mule deer remains downward because factors other than motorized use are more likely to be responsible for the downward population trends on a 

forestwide basis (refer to the forestwide MIS report). Habitat trend for mountain shrub would remain downward because the amount of motorized use in mountain shrub is 
Chapter 

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 117

Habitat Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

relatively low when considered on a forestwide scale. 

Alternatives 1–4

 Cross-Country Motorized Travel: Under all alternatives, cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout mountain shrub habitat, reducing 

displacement of mule deer. Habitat loss and habitat fragmentation would also be reduced for mule deer under all alternatives.

 Motorized Big Game Retrieval: Under alternatives 1, 2, and 4, MBGR would not be designated, benefiting mule deer in mountain shrub habitat. Under Alternative 3 

MBGR would be available along 2 miles of routes in mountain shrub habitat creating a minimal potential for displacement of mule deer during the deer and elk hunting 

seasons. MBGR may allow increased hunter opportunity for mule deer but may also result in lower hunter success. 

 Motorized Dispersed Camping: Under all alternatives, motorized dispersed camping would no longer be available districtwide benefiting wildlife and habitats. Motorized 

dispersed camping would be available along 2 miles (alternatives 1, 3, and 4) of mountain shrub habitat, creating a minimal potential for displacement of mule deer when 

camps are in use. Only alternative 2 would not provide for designated camping in this habitat type resulting in benefits to mule deer and mountain shrub habitat compared to 

the other alternatives.

 Mountain Shrub Habitat Trend remains downward (does not change) under all alternatives since the amount of motorized use is considered low on a forestwide scale. 

Alternative 2 would have the most motorized routes which would reduce habitat availability locally, but dispersed use would not be allowed benefiting mountain shrub 

habitat. Alternative 3 would have the most motorized dispersed use which would reduce habitat availability locally and alternative 4 would have the fewest proposed 

designated routes, but more motorized dispersed use than alternative 2. 

 Mule Deer Population Trend remains downward since factors other than motorized use are more likely to be responsible for mule deer population trend on a forestwide

basis. Under all alternatives, local populations may improve with increased habitat availability. Alternative 4 has slightly fewer motorized routes, and motorized dispersed 

use is less than alternatives 1 and 3 which may increase habitat availability locally to increase populations in the analysis area in the long term.

Black Bear and Red-breasted Nuthatch– Spruce-Fir Habitat

Miles of route/acres of 

habitat loss in spruce-fir 

habitat.

There are 0.86 mile of 

existing routes in spruce-fir 

habitat. 

There are no routes being 

proposed in spruce-fir 

habitat. 

There are no routes being 

proposed in spruce-fir 

habitat. 

There are no routes 

being proposed in 

spruce-fir habitat. 

There are no routes 

being proposed in 

spruce-fir habitat. 

Motorized route 

densities in spruce-fir 

habitat with comparison 

to baseline.

NA NA NA NA NA

Acres of spruce-fir 

habitat loss compared to 

the amount of 

forestwide habitat 

available (shown as a 

percentage).

There is less than 2 acres of 

spruce-fir habitat lost as a 

result of existing motorized 

use. 

There are no acres of 

spruce-fir habitat lost as a 

result of motorized use 

designations. 

There are no acres of 

spruce-fir habitat lost as 

a result of motorized use 

designations.

There are no acres of 

spruce-fir habitat lost 

as a result of 

motorized use 

designations.

There are no acres of 

spruce-fir habitat lost as 

a result of motorized 

use designations.
Chapter 

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

118 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Habitat Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Proposed 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes to be 

added to the system in 

spruce-fir habitat.

NA NA NA NA NA

Effects Summary – Black Bear and Red-breasted Nuthatch

Baseline: Motorized travel is currently available throughout spruce-fir habitat on a yearlong basis resulting in minimal habitat fragmentation, loss of habitat, and 

displacement to black bear due to disturbance. Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) is available districtwide in spruce-fir habitat causing some displacement of black bear 

and red-breasted nuthatch during the hunting seasons. Black bear are not available for MBGR which would not affect hunter success. Motorized dispersed camping is 

available districtwide in spruce-fir habitat causing displacement of black bear and red-breasted nuthatch when camps are in use. Population trend of black bear remains stable 

because factors such as food availability are more likely to be responsible for the stable population trends on a forestwide basis (refer to the forestwide MIS report). Habitat 

trend for spruce-fir would remain stable because the amount of motorized use in spruce-fir habitat in the analysis area is relatively low when considered on a forestwide scale. 

Alternatives 1–4

 Cross-Country Motorized Travel: Under all alternatives, cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout spruce-fir habitat, reducing 

displacement of black bear and red-breasted nuthatch. Habitat loss and habitat fragmentation would also be reduced for black bear and red-breasted nuthatch under all 

alternatives. 

 Motorized Big Game Retrieval: Under alternatives 1, 2, and 4, MBGR would not be designated, benefiting black bear in spruce-fir habitat. Under alternative 3, MBGR 

would be available, however, there is no contiguous habitat within the analysis area. There would be no effect to black bear in this habitat type during the deer and elk 

hunting season. Black bear are not being considered for MBGR.

 Motorized Dispersed Camping: Under all alternatives, motorized dispersed camping would no longer be available districtwide benefiting wildlife and habitats. Motorized 

dispersed camping designations do not occur in spruce-fir habitat.

 Spruce-Fir Habitat Trend remains stable under all alternatives since the amount of motorized use is considered low on a forestwide scale. There is no contiguous habitat 

within the analysis area, therefore, there would be no effect to the spruce-fir habitat type. 

 Black Bear Population Trend remains stable. Factors such as food availability are more likely to be responsible for population trend forestwide. In the long term, not 

allowing motorized cross-country travel may increase population trend locally by reducing habitat fragmentation and displacement. 

 Red-Breasted Nuthatch Population Trend: Population trend remains stable since other factors are more likely to be responsible for population trend forestwide. 
Chapter 

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 119

Habitat Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Merriam’s Turkey and Pygmy Nuthatch - Ponderosa Pine

Miles of route/acres of 

habitat loss in 

ponderosa pine habitat.

314 miles/628 acres 98 miles/196 acres 190 miles/380 acres 101miles/202 acres 89 miles/178 acres

Motorized route 

densities in ponderosa 

pine habitat with 

comparison to baseline.

Route densities remain at 

1.85 miles per square mile. 

Existing route densities in 

this habitat type are 

considered high. 

Route densities would be 

0.58 mile per square

mile, reduced 69% from 

the baseline. 

Route densities would be 

1.12 miles per square

mile, reduced 39% from 

the baseline. 

Route densities would 

be 0.59 mile per 

square mile, reduced 

68% from the baseline. 

Route densities would 

be 0.52 mile per square

mile, reduced 72% from 

the baseline.

Acres of ponderosa pine 

habitat loss compared to 

the amount of 

forestwide habitat 

available (shown as a 

percentage).

Direct habitat loss represents 

0.11% compared to the 

forestwide total so habitat 

quantity at the forest scale is 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.04% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.06% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.04% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, 

so habitat quantity at 

the forest level would 

be unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

only 0.03% of the 

amount of habitat 

available forestwide, so 

habitat quantity at the 

forest level would be 

unaffected. 

Proposed 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes to be 

added to the system in 

ponderosa pine habitat.

Many of the closed, 

decommissioned, or 

unauthorized routes are 

currently being used 

resulting in habitat loss, 

fragmentation, and 

displacement of Merriam’s 

turkey and pygmy nuthatch.

There are 2.9 miles 

(affecting 5.8 acres) of 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and closed 

routes in this habitat 

under this alternative. 

There are no 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, or closed 

routes being added to the 

system under this 

alternative.

There are 4.2 miles 

(affecting 8.4 acres) of 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes in this 

habitat under this 

alternative. 

There are 2.9 miles 

(affecting 5.8 acres) of 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes in this 

habitat under this 

alternative.

Effects Summary- Merriam’s Turkey and Pygmy Nuthatch in Ponderosa Pine

Baseline: Motorized travel is currently available throughout ponderosa pine habitat on a yearlong basis resulting in habitat fragmentation, loss of habitat, and displacement to 

Merriam’s turkey and pygmy nuthatch due to disturbance. Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) is available districtwide in ponderosa pine habitat causing some 

displacement of Merriam’s turkey during the deer and elk hunting seasons. The pygmy nuthatch is generally present during the hunting season, although MBGR would occur 

outside the breeding season for pygmy nuthatch so effects would not cause nest abandonment resulting in unintentional take. Motorized dispersed camping is available 

districtwide in ponderosa pine habitat causing displacement of Merriam’s turkey and pygmy nuthatch when camps are in use. Population trend of Merriam’s turkey and 

pygmy nuthatch remains stable because factors other than motorized use are more likely to be responsible for the stable population trends on a forestwide basis (refer to the 

forestwide MIS report). Route densities in ponderosa pine habitat are considered high, but are slightly below the maximum allowed by the Forest Plan. Habitat trend for 

ponderosa pine would be stable because the amount of motorized use in ponderosa pine is relatively low when considered on a forestwide scale. 
Chapter 

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

120 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Habitat Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Alternatives 1–4

 Cross-Country Motorized Travel: Under all alternatives, cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout ponderosa pine habitat, reducing 

displacement of Merriam’s turkey and pygmy nuthatch. Habitat loss and fragmentation would also be reduced for these species under all alternatives. 

 Motorized Big Game Retrieval: Under alternatives 1, 2, and 4, MBGR would not be designated, benefiting mule deer in ponderosa pine habitat. Pygmy nuthatch are 

unaffected by MBGR. Under alternative 3, MBGR would be available along 47 miles of routes in ponderosa pine habitat creating a potential for displacement of Merriam’s 

turkey and pygmy nuthatch during the deer and elk hunting seasons. 

 Motorized Dispersed Camping: Under all alternatives, motorized dispersed camping would no longer be available districtwide, benefiting wildlife and habitats. Motorized 

dispersed camping would be available along 49 miles (alternative 4) to 60 miles (alternatives 1 and 3) of ponderosa pine habitat, creating a potential for displacement of 

Merriam’s turkey and pygmy nuthatch when camps are in use. Only alternative 2 would not provide for designated camping in this habitat type, resulting in benefits to 

these species and ponderosa pine habitat compared to the other alternatives. It is unlikely that snags used by the pygmy nuthatch for nesting would be gathered by campers 

as firewood, since the species uses large diameter trees that are not generally gathered by campers. 

 Ponderosa Pine Habitat Trend remains stable under all alternatives since the amount of motorized use is considered low on a forestwide scale. Alternative 2 would have 

the most motorized routes which would reduce habitat availability locally, but dispersed use would not be allowed benefiting ponderosa pine habitat. Alternative 3 would 

have the most motorized dispersed use which would reduce habitat availability locally. Alternative 4 would have the fewest proposed designated routes, but more motorized 

dispersed use than alternative 2. 

 Merriam’s Turkey Population Trend remains stable since factors such as food availability are more likely to be responsible for the Merriam’s turkey population trend on 

a forestwide basis than motorized use. 

 Pygmy Nuthatch Population Trend remains stable since other factors are more likely to be responsible for the pygmy nuthatch population trend on a forestwide basis than 

motorized use. 

House Wren – Riparian Habitat

Miles of route/acres of 

habitat loss in riparian 

habitat.

246 miles/492 acres 126 miles/252 acres 178 miles/356 acres 130 miles/260 acres 117 miles/234 acres

Motorized route 

densities in riparian 

habitat with comparison 

to baseline.

Route densities remain at 

6.65 miles of route per 

square mile. 

Route densities would be 

3.41 miles per square

mile, reduced 49% from 

the baseline. 

Route densities would be 

4.81 miles per square

mile, reduced 28% from 

the baseline. 

Route densities would 

be 3.51 miles per 

square mile, reduced 

47% from the baseline. 

Route densities would 

be 3.16 miles per square

mile, reduced 52% from 

the baseline. 
Chapter 

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 121

Habitat Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Acres of riparian habitat 

loss compared to the 

amount of forestwide

habitat available (shown 

as a percentage). *The 

amount of riparian 

habitat in this analysis 

is consistent with the 

watershed specialist 

report which is based on 

RMAP GIS analysis, 

not the forestwide MIS 

report.

Direct habitat loss represents 

0.98% compared to the 

forestwide total so habitat 

quantity at the forest scale is 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

0.50% of the amount of 

habitat available 

forestwide, so habitat 

quantity at the forest 

level would be 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

0.71% of the amount of 

habitat available 

forestwide, so habitat 

quantity at the forest 

level would be 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

0.52% of the amount 

of habitat available 

forestwide, so habitat 

quantity at the forest 

level would be 

unaffected. 

Habitat loss represents 

0.47% of the amount of 

habitat available 

forestwide, so habitat 

quantity at the forest 

level would be 

unaffected. 

Proposed 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes to be 

added to the system in 

riparian habitat.

Many of the closed, 

decommissioned, or 

unauthorized routes are 

currently being used 

resulting in habitat loss, 

fragmentation, and 

displacement of Merriam’s 

turkey and pygmy nuthatch.

There are 10.2 miles 

(20.4 acres) of 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and closed 

routes in this habitat 

under this alternative.

There are no 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, or closed 

routes being added to the 

system under this 

alternative.

There are 11.2 miles 

(22.4 acres) of 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes in this 

habitat under this 

alternative.

There are 8.9 miles 

(17.8 acres) of 

decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and 

closed routes in this 

habitat under this 

alternative.

Effects Summary– House Wren in Riparian Habitat

Baseline: Motorized travel is currently available throughout riparian habitat on a yearlong basis resulting in habitat fragmentation, loss of habitat, and displacement of house 

wren due to disturbance. Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) is available districtwide in riparian habitat causing some displacement of house wren during the deer and elk 

hunting seasons. The house wren is generally not present during the hunting season so this species would not be affected by MBGR. Motorized dispersed camping is 

available districtwide in riparian habitat causing displacement of house wren when camps are in use. Population trend of house wren remains stable because factors other than 

motorized use are more likely to be responsible for the stable population trends on a forestwide basis (refer to the forestwide MIS report). Route densities in riparian habitat 

are considered very high. Habitat condition will begin trending downward. Continued use of motorized routes and dispersed use in riparian habitat may cause loss of 

vegetation, alter channels, and cause erosion and downcutting of streambeds. 

Alternatives 1–4

 Cross-Country Motorized Travel: Under all alternatives, cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout riparian habitat, reducing displacement 

of the house wren. Habitat loss and fragmentation would also be reduced for this species. 

 Motorized Big Game Retrieval: House wrens are unaffected by MBGR since it is absent during the hunting seasons. MBGR would be allowed along 48 miles of routes in 

riparian habitat during the deer and elk hunting seasons. Motorized use in riparian areas may cause loss of vegetation, alter channels, and cause erosion and downcutting of 

streambeds.
Chapter 

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

122 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Habitat Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

 Motorized Dispersed Camping: Under all alternatives, motorized dispersed camping would no longer be available districtwide benefiting wildlife and habitats. Motorized 

dispersed camping would be available along 43 miles (alternative 4) to 58 miles (alternatives 1 and 3) of riparian habitat, creating a potential for displacement of house 

wrens when camps are in use. Only alternative 2 would not provide for designated camping in this habitat type resulting in benefits to these species and riparian habitat 

compared to the other alternatives. 

 Riparian Habitat Trend remains stable under all alternatives since the amount of motorized use is considered low on a forestwide scale. Alternative 2 would have the 

most motorized routes which would reduce habitat availability locally, but dispersed use would not be allowed benefiting riparian habitat. Alternative 3 would have the 

most motorized dispersed use which would reduce habitat availability locally, and alternative 4 would have the fewest proposed designated routes, but more motorized 

dispersed use than alternative 2. 

 House Wren Population Trend remains stable since populations are generally not affected by motorized use. 

Threatened, Endangered, Candidate, and Sensitive Wildlife and Plant Species

Table 41 describes the variables analyzed to determine the estimated effects to TES species. Ultimately there is very little difference between 

the alternatives in terms of the miles of motorized routes being designated. The primary difference between the alternatives is where routes are 

not being proposed for designation (such as avoiding some threatened and endangered species habitat) and the proposed amount of dispersed 

camping corridors or motorized big game retrieval zones and the designation of an OHV area.

Table 41. Threatened, endangered, candidate, and sensitive wildlife and plant species habitat variable by alternative

Species Name / 

Habitat Variable Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Mexican Spotted Owl (MSO)

Existing permanent 

system road miles/acres 

in PACs.

31 miles/62 acres 14 miles/28 acres 27 miles/54 acres 15 miles/30 acres 14 miles/28 acres

Miles/acres of routes in 

other protected habitat 

(mixed conifer and 

pine/oak on steep slopes) 

now known as recovery 

habitat.

39 miles/78 acres 13 miles/26 acres 26 miles/52 acres 13 miles/26 acres 12 miles/24 acres
Chapter 

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 123

Species Name / 

Habitat Variable Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

Routes/acres in restricted 

habitat (other mixed 

conifer, pine/oak, and 

riparian) now known as 

recovery habitat.

203 miles/406 acres 76 miles/152 acres 138 miles/276 acres 77 miles/154 acres 69 miles/138 acres

Routes/acres in critical 

habitat.

180 miles/360 acres 77 miles/154 acres 136 miles/272 acres 78 miles/156 acres 73 miles/146 acres

Miles of motorized big 

game retrieval (MBGR)

in MSO habitat.

All MSO habitat is 

available for MBGR and 

other motorized crosscountry travel.

0 miles 0 miles 29 miles 0 miles

Miles of motorized 

dispersed camping in 

MSO habitat

All MSO habitat is 

available for motorized 

dispersed camping and 

other motorized crosscountry travel.

43 miles 0 miles 43 miles 34 miles

Decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and closed 

routes/acres in MSO 

habitat.

All habitat is available 2.5 miles/5 acres 0 miles 2.5 miles/5 acres 1.9 miles/3.8 acres

Determination of effect 

for Mexican spotted owl.

 All MSO habitat is 

available for motorized 

travel including crosscountry motorized.

 Most motorized use on 

the district is during 

hunting season which 

occurs outside of the 

MSO breeding season. 

 Hunting seasons for 

turkey, javelina and

cougar occur during the 

MSO breeding season, 

but the number of 

 Motorized routes are in 

MSO habitat;

motorized routes in 

PACs are reduced 55% 

compared to the 

baseline. 

 Motorized routes in 

other MSO habitat 

(protected and 

restricted now 

collectively known as 

recovery habitat) are 

reduced by 64%. 

 There would be 

 This alternative has the 

most motorized routes 

in MSO habitat but 

does not designate 

motorized dispersed 

use. 

 Motorized routes in 

PACs are reduced 13% 

from the baseline 

because unauthorized 

routes would not be 

designated for use. 

 Motorized routes in 

other protected and 

 This alternative has the 

most motorized crosscountry use 

designations in MSO 

habitat. 

 Routes in PACs are 

reduced by 51% 

compared to the 

baseline.

 Motorized routes in 

other protected and 

restricted habitat (now 

collectively known as 

recovery habitat) are

 This alternative has the 

least amount of route 

designations in MSO 

habitat, but has the 

same amount of routes 

in MSO PACs as 

alternative 3 because 

these routes are primary 

Forest Service system 

roads. 

 Motorized routes in 

other protected and 

restricted habitat (now 

collectively known as 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

124 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Species Name / 

Habitat Variable Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

hunters is low. 

 Motorized use may 

degrade/destroy MSO 

habitat, particularly 

meadow and shrub 

habitats vital to the 

owl’s prey. 

 Noise produced by 

vehicles and the vehicle 

riders may disturb 

spotted owls at 

important nesting and 

roosting sites (USDI 

1995). 

 Birds may be more 

susceptible to 

disturbance caused nest 

abandonment early in 

the nesting season, 

because adult owls 

have less time and 

energy invested in the 

nesting process. 

 Direct habitat loss from 

roads may reduce prey 

availability and use of 

system roads in PACs 

during the breeding 

season may cause some 

avoidance of area

within the PAC.

 This alternative may 

continue to affect 

species, but is not 

likely to adversely 

affect the species or its 

dispersed camping 

designated in recovery 

habitat.

 This alternative may 

affect the Mexican 

spotted owl, but it is 

not likely to adversely 

affect the species or its 

habitat. 

 If this alternative is 

chosen, the Forest 

Service would seek 

concurrence with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service on this 

determination.

restricted habitat (now 

known as recovery 

habitat) are reduced 

32%. 

 Selection of this 

alternative may affect 

the species, but is not 

likely to adversely 

affect the species or its 

habitat. 

 If this alternative is 

chosen, the Forest 

Service would seek 

concurrence with the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service on this 

determination.

reduced 63%. 

 This alternative has 

motorized big game 

retrieval (for deer and 

elk) in MSO habitat, 

but motorized use 

would occur outside of 

the MSO breeding 

season with 

discountable effects to 

MSO. 

 Use of motorized 

routes and cross-

country motorized use 

may affect the species, 

but is not likely to 

adversely affect the 

species or its habitat.

 If this alternative is 

chosen, the Forest 

Service would seek 

concurrence with the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service on this 

determination.

recovery habitat) are 

reduced 67%. 

 Because motorized 

routes are in MSO 

habitat, this alternative 

may affect the species 

but is not likely to 

adversely affect the 

species or its habitat.

 If this alternative is 

chosen, the Forest 

Service would seek 

concurrence with the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service on this 

determination.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 125

Species Name / 

Habitat Variable Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

habitat.

 If this alternative is 

chosen, the Forest 

Service would seek 

concurrence with the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service on this 

determination.

Effects to MSO critical 

habitat (CH).

 Motorized routes are 

located in critical 

habitat and potentially 

there would be 

motorized dispersed 

camping and motorized 

big game retrieval in critical habitat since 

there are currently no 

restrictions against that 

use.

 Existing routes in MSO 

habitat have generally 

been in place for years 

and have received 

variable levels of use 

depending on the 

location of the route 

and season. 

 Motorized use in 

critical habitat affects 

primary constituent 

elements (PCEs) by 

reducing the diversity 

of age classes in 

riparian forest types, 

reducing adequate 

levels of residual plant 

cover to maintain fruits 

There are 58% fewer 

motorized routes in critical habitat under this 

alternative lessening 

affects to PCEs 

compared to the baseline. 

There are 24% fewer 

motorized routes in critical habitat under this 

alternative lessening 

affects to PCEs 

compared to the baseline. 

There are 57% fewer 

motorized routes in critical habitat under this 

alternative lessening 

affects to PCEs 

compared to the baseline. 

There are 59% fewer 

motorized routes in critical habitat under this 

alternative lessening 

affects to PCEs compared 

to the baseline. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

126 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Species Name / 

Habitat Variable Baseline Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4

and seeds and allow 

plant regeneration. 

 In canyon habitats 

motorized use could 

reduce the percent of 

ground litter and 

woody debris needed 

for prey species. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 127

Table 42. Threatened, endangered, candidate, and sensitive wildlife and plant species 

impacts by alternative

Zuni Fleabane – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: There are 1.8 miles (3.5 acres) of motorized routes in Zuni fleabane habitat. There are 0.8 mile (1.6 acres) 

of motorized routes in potential Zuni fleabane habitat. Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) and motorized 

dispersed camping are currently available districtwide which may impact individual plants. 

Alternatives 1–4: There would be no motorized routes or dispersed use designated in Zuni fleabane habitat. No 

MBGR is being proposed under alternatives 1, 2, and 4 and motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) proposed under 

alternative 3 does not occur in this species’ current or potential habitat. MBGR and motorized dispersed camping 

would no longer be allowed districtwide benefiting habitat for this species. 

Determination of Effect for Zuni Fleabane

Baseline: All occupied and potential Zuni fleabane habitat is available for off-route travel, including MBGR and 

motorized dispersed camping. There are existing motorized routes in Zuni fleabane habitat. Motorized use 

associated with the baseline condition may continue to impact individual plants. Off-highway vehicle use is one of 

the threats listed for the species.

Alternatives 1–4: The removal of motorized cross-country use would benefit this species. There is no motorized 

dispersed camping proposed in Zuni fleabane habitat, and there are no route designations proposed in potential or 

occupied habitat. Implementation of these alternatives may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the Zuni 

fleabane.

Northern Goshawk – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: There are 4 miles (8 acres) of motorized routes in goshawk PFAs. Cross-country motorized travel will 

continue to be available throughout this species’ habitat. All PFA and foraging habitat is available for motorized big 

game retrieval (MBGR) and other motorized cross-country use, but much of that potential use occurs outside the 

nesting season. There is a minor amount of displacement to goshawk prey from existing MBGR and motorized 

dispersed camping. All PFA and foraging habitat is available for motorized dispersed camping and other motorized 

cross-country use. Some of that use occurs during the breeding season which may lead to nest abandonment if the 

camp or use is too close to a nest. 

Alternatives 1–4: There are 4 miles (8 acres) of motorized routes in goshawk PFAs. Cross-country motorized travel 

will no longer be available throughout this species’ habitat. MBGR would no longer be allowed districtwide 

benefiting wildlife and habitat. No MBGR is being proposed under Alternatives 1, 2 and 4. Under alternative 3, no 

MBGR is being proposed in PFAs. Most of the MBGR would occur outside the nesting season, although early deer 

hunts will coincide with the end of breeding season (through September 30). There would be small amounts of 

displacement to goshawk prey during the hunts along 47 miles (94 acres) of routes. MBGR would no longer be 

allowed districtwide benefiting wildlife and habitat. Motorized dispersed camping would be allowed along 60 miles 

(under alternatives 1 and 3) and 49 miles (alternative 4) of goshawk foraging habitat which may displace prey 

species or result in habitat loss if camps are used repeatedly. Motorized dispersed camping would no longer be 

allowed districtwide on a yearlong basis benefiting this species and habitats. 

Determination of Effect for Northern Goshawk

Baseline: Motorized routes are in PFAs and may be used during the breeding season. All PFAs are available for 

motorized dispersed camping and MBGR. Currently, the baseline situation may impact the northern goshawk, but is 

not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability. 

Alternatives 1–4: Motorized routes are in PFAs and may be used during the breeding season. Dispersed camping 

may impact PFAs and prey species habitat when camps are used repeatedly. This may impact the northern goshawk, 

but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

128 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Gray Vireo – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: There are 662 miles (1,324 acres) of existing routes in piñon-juniper habitat. All habitat for this species is 

available for cross-country motorized use including motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) and motorized dispersed 

camping. Piñon-juniper habitat is available districtwide for MBGR. 

Alternative 1: There are 292 miles (584 acres) of routes in piñon-juniper habitat. Motorized route densities would 

be reduced 56 percent compared to the baseline. The 4 miles of reroute in piñon-juniper habitat would result in a 

habitat loss of 8 acres. There are 10.1 miles (20.2 acres) of decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed roads in this

habitat under this alternative. There is no MBGR proposed. MBGR would no longer be available districtwide 

benefiting wildlife and habitats. No OHV areas would be designated. Much of the piñon-juniper habitat is easily 

traversed off route. Prohibition of this activity and reductions in route densities by 56 percent over existing 

conditions would benefit this species and its potential nesting/foraging habitat.

Alternative 2: There are 395 miles (790 acres) of routes in piñon-juniper habitat. Motorized route densities would 

be reduced 40 percent compared to the baseline. There is no MBGR proposed or designated OHV areas under this 

alternative.

Alternative 3: There are 310 miles (620 acres) of routes proposed in piñon-juniper habitat. Motorized route 

densities would be reduced 53 percent compared to the baseline. There are 2.3 miles (4.6 acres) of reroute under this 

alternative resulting in 4.6 acres of habitat loss. There are 19 miles (38 acres) of decommissioned, unauthorized, and 

closed roads in this habitat. There are 106 miles of MBGR in piñon-juniper habitat. MBGR would no longer be 

available districtwide benefiting wildlife and habitats. OHV use would severely alter piñon-juniper habitat on 756 

acres, but gray vireo are not known to occur in the proposed OHV area. 

Alternative 4: There are 262 miles (524 acres) of routes proposed in piñon-juniper habitat. Motorized route 

densities would be reduced 60 percent compared to the baseline. There are 8.4 miles (16.8 acres) of 

decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed roads in this habitat under this alternative. There is no MBGR proposed 

nor would any OHV areas be designated. This alternative has the least amount of motorized routes in gray vireo 

habitat. Overall the effect would be an improvement of habitat for this species.

Determination of Effect for Gray Vireo

Baseline: All suitable habitat would be available for cross country and dispersed use, and motorized routes would 

continue to be used. The baseline situation may impact the gray vireo, but is not likely to result in a trend toward 

Federal listing or loss of viability.

Alternatives 1–4: Implementation of these alternatives may impact the gray vireo, but is not likely to result in a 

trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability.

Loggerhead Shrike – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: Route density is 0.48 mile per square mile. Direct habitat loss remains at 26 acres. Cross-country 

motorized travel is currently available throughout this habitat type on a yearlong basis. MBGR and motorized 

dispersed camping is currently available districtwide.

Alternatives 1–4: Cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout this habitat type on a 

yearlong basis benefiting wildlife and habitats. Route densities reduced 69 percent (alternatives 1 and 4); 46 percent 

(alternative 2), and 55 percent (alternative 3) compared to baseline. MBGR would not occur under alternatives 1, 2,

and 4 and would no longer be available distric-wide, benefiting this species and its habitat. Disturbance and 

displacement could occur from MBGR under alternative 3. There are 2 miles of dispersed camping available in 

mountain shrub habitat which may result in minimal disturbance and displacement to the species. 

Determination of Effect for Loggerhead Shrike 

Baseline: All suitable loggerhead shrike habitat is available for off-route travel, MBGR, and motorized dispersed 

camping. The baseline condition may impact the loggerhead shrike, but is not likely to result in a trend toward 

Federal listing or loss of viability.

Alternatives 1–4: Motorized routes and motorized dispersed use would be reduced from the baseline. 

Implementation of these alternatives may impact the loggerhead shrike, but is not likely to result in a trend toward 

Federal listing or loss of viability.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 129

Bald Eagle – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: The analysis area provides winter habitat only. There are no known roosts. MBGR and motorized 

dispersed camping are currently available districtwide. 

Alternatives 1–4: The analysis area provides winter habitat only. There are no known roosts. MBGR does not occur 

under alternatives 1, 2, and 4 and will no longer be available districtwide, benefiting this species and its habitat. 

Under alternative 3, MBGR may occur in habitat used by this species in the winter, but use is reduced from the 

baseline. This will benefit this species and its habitat. Motorized dispersed camping does not occur within any 

known winter roost areas.

Determination of Effect for Bald Eagle

Baseline: The existing situation could result in possible disturbance to winter roosts if motorized use occurs near a 

roost tree. All habitat for this species is available for cross-country motorized use, including MBGR and motorized 

dispersed camping. The baseline situation may impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward 

Federal listing or loss of species viability.

Alternatives 1–4: There are no nests or known winter roosts in the analysis area. Human activities would not occur 

within 0.25 mile of a bald eagle roost or nest site during any time of occupation by bald eagles. There would be no 

impact to the bald eagle. (The “National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines” would be followed if roosts or nests 

are discovered.) There would be no impact to the bald eagle or its habitat.

Northern Aplomado Falcon – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: This species is not currently known to occupy the analysis area, but potential habitat exists. Motorized 

routes, cross-country, and dispersed use are available in all potential foraging habitat which may limit species use in 

some areas. Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) is currently available districtwide which may limit species use in 

some areas. Motorized dispersed camping is available districtwide, causing potential displacement of this species 

from its foraging habitat when camps are in use.

Alternatives 1–4: Cross-country motorized travel will no longer be available throughout this species’ potential 

habitat. Habitat for this species would improve from route density reductions and off-route travel prohibition.

MBGR does not occur under alternatives 1, 2, and 4 and will no longer be available districtwide, benefiting this 

species and its habitat. Under alternative 3, MBGR may occur in habitat used by this species in the winter, but use is 

reduced from the baseline. This will benefit this species and its habitat. Motorized dispersed camping would result 

in displacement from foraging habitat when camps are in use (except alternative 2). Alternative 2 has the most 

routes of all action alternatives, but does not allow motorized cross-country use. This species would benefit from 

reduction in motorized cross-country use. Alternative 3 has the most dispersed use of all action alternatives, but the 

species would benefit from the overall reduction in route density and motorized cross-country use compared to the 

baseline. Alternative 4 has the least routes in potential habitat. This species would benefit from route density 

reductions.

Determination of Effect for Northern Aplomado Falcon

Baseline: Baseline conditions may affect the prey used by the Aplomado falcon. 

Alternatives 1–4: Selection of these alternatives may affect prey used by the Aplomado falcon, but is not likely to 

adversely affect the species or its habitat. If this alternative is chosen, the Forest Service would seek concurrence 

with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on this determination.

American Peregrine Falcon – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: Peregrine nesting in the Magdalena Ranger District occurs in steep, rugged canyon habitat. Road 235 in 

the Magdalena Mountains, 199, 6A, and 6 in the Datil Mountains are designated routes that occur in the species’ 

sensitive zones. Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) is currently available districtwide. MBGR generally occurs 

outside of the breeding season for this species so effects are discountable. Motorized dispersed camping is currently 

available districtwide and may cause displacement if use is occurring near breeding areas or in foraging habitat. 

Alternatives 1–4: Road 235 in the Magdalena Mountains, 199, 6A, and 6 in the Datil Mountains are designated 

routes that occur in the species’ sensitive zones. Under alternative 4, Road 6 in the Datil Mountains would be 

decommissioned, limiting access to a recreational area that has caused displacement of this species. MBGR does not 

occur under alternatives 1, 2, and 4 and would no longer be available districtwide, benefiting this species and its 

habitat. Motorized dispersed camping would result in displacement from foraging habitat when camps are in use 

(except alternative 2 where no dispersed use is proposed).
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

130 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Determination of Effect for Peregrine Falcon

Baseline: Peregrine falcon prey may be slightly affected by dispersed use. Generally breeding territories are on high 

cliffs and are unaffected by motorized route use. 

Alternatives 1–4: Peregrine falcon prey may be slightly affected by dispersed use. Generally breeding territories are 

on high cliffs and are unaffected by motorized route use. May impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend 

toward Federal listing or loss of viability.

Zone-tailed Hawk – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: Nest sites have not been documented so there are no known routes that affect this species. In general,

routes in riparian habitat with ponderosa pine uplands may occur in this species nesting habitat. Motorized big game 

retrieval (MBGR) and motorized dispersed camping are currently available districtwide and may cause 

displacement if it is occurring near breeding areas or in foraging habitat. MBGR generally occurs outside of the 

breeding season for this species, so effects are discountable.

Alternatives 1–4: Cross-country motorized travel will no longer be available throughout this species’ potential 

habitat. Habitat for this species would improve from route density reductions and off-route travel prohibition. 

Alternative 2 has the most routes available of all the alternatives, resulting in greater impacts to foraging habitat 

compared to the other alternatives. Under alternatives 1, 3, and 4, habitat for this species would improve from route 

density reductions. Alternative 3 has the most dispersed use available of all the alternatives, while alternative 4 has 

the least routes in potential habitat. Under alternative 3, MBGR would occur in this species habitat, but MBGR 

generally occurs outside of the breeding season so effects are discountable. For alternatives 1, 2, and 4, MBGR 

would not occur and would no longer be available districtwide, benefiting this species and its habitat. Dispersed 

camping would result in displacement from foraging habitat when camps are in use, except alternative 2 where 

dispersed camping would not be designated. 

Determination of Effect for Zoned-tailed Hawk

Baseline: Zone-tailed hawk prey may be slightly affected by dispersed use. Breeding territories are generally near 

high cliffs and are unaffected by motorized route use.

Alternatives 1–4: Zone-tailed hawk prey may be slightly affected by dispersed use. Breeding territories are 

generally near high cliffs and are unaffected by motorized route use. May impact individuals, but is not likely to 

result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability.

New Mexico Banner-tailed Kangaroo Rat, Gunnison’s Prairie Dog, and 

Botta’s Pocket Gopher in Mountain Grassland Habitat – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: Route densities in grassland habitat remain at 2.62 miles of route per square mile. This route density is 

high compared to most of the other habitat types. Cross-country motorized travel is currently available throughout 

this habitat types on a yearlong basis. Cross-country MBGR is available districtwide in mountain grassland habitat 

causing some habitat loss. Motorized dispersed camping is available districtwide in mountain grassland habitat 

causing habitat loss in high use camps. 

Alternative 1: Route density would be reduced 38 percent compared to the baseline. There are 7.9 miles (affecting 

15.8 acres) of decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed routes in this habitat under this alternative. Cross-country 

motorized travel will no longer be available for big game retrieval benefiting habitat. Route densities remain at 2.62 

miles of route per square mile in grassland habitat. This route density is high compared to most of the other habitat 

types. 

Alternative 2: Cross-country motorized travel will no longer be available throughout this habitat type on a yearlong 

basis. Route densities reduced 21 percent compared to the baseline. Motorized dispersed camping would no longer 

be available districtwide on a yearlong basis benefiting grassland habitats. 

Alternative 3: Cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout this habitat type on a 

yearlong basis. Route densities reduced 35 percent compared to the baseline. There are 10.8 miles (affecting 21.6 

acres) of decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed roads in this habitat under this alternative. MBGR would be 

available on 137 miles of grassland creating a potential for some direct habitat loss. Motorized dispersed camping 

would no longer be available districtwide on a yearlong basis benefiting wildlife and habitats. Motorized dispersed 

camping would be available along 106 miles of grassland. 

Alternative 4: Cross-country motorized travel will no longer be available throughout this habitat type on a yearlong 

basis. Route densities reduced 47 percent compared to the baseline. There are 7.5 miles of decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and closed roads in this habitat under this alternative. MBGR does not occur in this alternative and 

would no longer be available districtwide benefiting wildlife and habitats. Motorized dispersed camping would no 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 131

longer be available districtwide on a yearlong basis. Motorized dispersed camping would be available along 106 

miles of grassland. 

Determination of Effect for New Mexico Banner-tailed Kangaroo Rat

Baseline: All suitable habitat is available for off-route travel, MBGR, and motorized dispersed camping causing 

direct habitat loss. 

Alternatives 1–4: May impact banner-tailed kangaroo rat, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing 

or loss of viability.

Determination of Effect for Gunnison’s Prairie Dog

Baseline: All suitable habitat is available for off-route travel, MBGR, and dispersed camping. The baseline 

condition may impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability.

Alternatives 1–4: May impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of 

viability.

Determination of Effect for Botta’s Pocket Gopher

Baseline: All suitable habitat is available for off-route travel, MBGR, and dispersed camping. The baseline 

condition may impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability. 

Alternatives 1–4: May impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of 

viability.

Spotted Bat, Allen’s Lappet-browed Bat, and 

Pale Townsend's Big-eared Bat – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: Motorized route, cross-country, and dispersed use are available in all potential foraging habitat, which 

may limit species use in some areas. MBGR and dispersed camping are currently available districtwide, which may 

limit species use in some areas. Wood gathering associated with camping may affect roosting habitat for Allen’s 

Lappet-browed bat.

Alternative 1: Habitat for these species would improve from route density reductions and off-route travel 

prohibition. MBGR does not occur under this alternative and would no longer be available districtwide, benefiting

these species and their habitat. Dispersed camping would result in displacement from foraging habitat when camps 

are in use. Wood gathering associated with camping may affect roosting habitat for Allen’s Lappet-browed bat.

Alternative 2: Cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout these species’ potential 

habitat. This alternative has the most routes of all alternatives, but does not allow motorized cross-country use. 

These species would benefit from reduction in motorized cross-country use. MBGR does not occur under this 

alternative and would no longer be available districtwide, benefiting species and their habitat. Motorized dispersed 

camping does not occur under this alternative and would no longer be available districtwide on a yearlong basis, 

benefiting species and habitat. Wood gathering associated with camping may affect roosting habitat for Allen’s 

Lappet-browed bat.

Alternative 3: Cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout these species’ potential 

habitat. This alternative has the most dispersed use of all action alternatives, but species would benefit from the 

overall reduction in route density and motorized cross-country use compared to the baseline. Motorized big game 

retrieval (MBGR) would not occur near cliff roosting areas benefiting species and habitat. Dispersed camping would 

result in displacement from foraging habitat when camps are in use. Wood gathering associated with camping may 

affect roosting habitat for this species.

Alternative 4: Cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout these species’ potential 

habitat. This alternative has the least routes in potential habitat. These species would benefit from route density 

reductions. MBGR does not occur under this alternative and would no longer be available districtwide, benefiting

species and habitat. Dispersed camping would result in displacement from foraging habitat when camps are in use. 

Wood gathering associated with camping may affect roosting habitat for Allen’s Lappet-browed bat.

Determination of Effect for Spotted Bat

Alternatives 1–4: May impact spotted bats, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of 

viability.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

132 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Determination of Effect for Allen’s Lappet-browed Bat

Alternatives 1–4: May impact spotted bats, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of 

viability.

Determination of Effect for Pale Townsend’s Big-eared Bat

Alternatives 1–4: May impact spotted bats, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of 

viability.

Southern Red-backed Vole – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: Cross-country motorized travel is currently available throughout spruce-fir habitat on a yearlong basis. 

Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) is available districtwide in spruce-fir habitat causing some direct habitat loss. 

Motorized dispersed camping is available districtwide in spruce-fir habitat resulting in direct habitat loss in high use 

camps. 

Alternatives 1–4: Cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout spruce-fir habitat on a 

yearlong basis benefiting wildlife and habitats. Under alternatives 1, 2, and 4, MBGR would not occur and would no 

longer be available districtwide benefiting wildlife and habitats. Under alternative 3, MBGR would be available in 

spruce-fir habitat creating a potential for some displacement. Motorized dispersed camping would no longer be 

available districtwide on a yearlong basis benefiting wildlife and habitats. Motorized dispersed camping would be 

minimally available in spruce-fir habitat, creating a potential for habitat loss in high use camps except in alternative 

2 where dispersed camping would not be designated. 

Determination of Effect for Southern Red-backed Vole

Baseline: All suitable habitat is available for off-route travel, MBGR, and dispersed camping which may reduce 

habitat for the southern red-backed vole.

Alternatives 1–4: There is no contiguous habitat within the analysis area and dispersed use is minimal under all

alternatives. Therefore, there would be no effect to species in this habitat.

Chiricuhua Leopard Frog – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: An existing population occurs on private property and State lands near the forest boundary. Roads 511, 

97, and 140 are the designated routes located in the dispersal zone of this species. Off-route travel is currently 

available districtwide increasing the likelihood of direct mortality. MBGR and dispersed camping are available in all 

riparian habitat within the dispersal zone of this species. 

Alternative 1–4: Roads 511, 97, and 140 are the designated routes located within the watershed occupied by this 

species. Under alternatives 1, 2, and 4, MBGR would no longer be available districtwide benefiting dispersal 

habitats. Under alternative 3 MBGR occurs within the CLF 1 mile dispersal zone, causing potential direct impact 

from being driven over by vehicles. Motorized dispersed camping does not occur in the species’ habitat. Motorized 

dispersed camping would no longer be available districtwide on a yearlong basis benefiting dispersal habitat of this 

species. 

Determination of Effect for Chiricahua Leopard Frog

Baseline: All suitable habitat is available for off-route travel, MBGR, and dispersed camping which may lead to 

direct mortality.

Alternatives 1–4: Motorized routes are in CLF habitat, but there is no motorized cross-country travel, benefiting 

this species. Route densities are reduced 28 to 52 percent from the baseline depending on the alternative. Because 

motorized routes are in the Chiricahua leopard frog habitat, these alternatives may affect this species but are not 

likely to adversely affect this species or its habitat. The Forest Service would seek concurrence with the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service on this determination. 

Northern Leopard Frog and Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: Route density is 6.6 miles of route per square mile in riparian habitat. Direct habitat loss remains at 492 

acre, although not all of this is true riparian or wetland habitat and instead is mostly drainages where little riparian 

vegetation exists. Cross-country motorized travel is available throughout this habitat type on a yearlong basis. 

Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) and motorized dispersed camping are available in all riparian habitat 

districtwide causing some potential for direct mortality and habitat loss of frogs, and displacement and habitat loss 

for the cuckoo. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 133

Alternative 1: Cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout this habitat type on a 

yearlong basis benefiting northern leopard frog and yellow-billed cuckoo habitats. Route densities would be reduced 

49 percent compared to the baseline. MBGR and motorized dispersed camping would no longer be available 

districtwide benefiting riparian habitat. There are 10.2 miles (affecting 20.4 acres) of decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and closed roads in this habitat under this alternative. Motorized dispersed camping would be allowed 

along 58 miles of road in riparian habitat, creating a potential for some mortality and habitat loss when camps are in 

use. 

Alternative 2: Cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout this habitat type on a 

yearlong basis benefiting wildlife and habitats. Route densities would be reduced 28 percent compared to the 

baseline. MBGR or motorized dispersed camping does not occur in this alternative, benefiting riparian habitat.

Alternative 3: Cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout this habitat type on a 

yearlong basis benefiting wildlife and habitats. Route densities would be reduced 47 percent from the baseline. 

Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) would be allowed along 113 miles of road causing some direct habitat loss 

for both species and potential direct mortality of the frog species. MBGR would no longer be available districtwide 

benefiting habitats. There are 11.2 miles (affecting 22.4 acres) of decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed roads 

in this habitat under this alternative. Motorized dispersed camping would be allowed along 58 miles of road in 

riparian habitat with effects similar to alternative 1. Motorized dispersed camping would no longer be available 

districtwide on a yearlong basis benefiting wildlife and habitats.

Alternative 4: Cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout this habitat type on a 

yearlong basis benefiting wildlife and habitats. Route densities would be reduced 52 percent. MBGR would no 

longer be available districtwide benefiting northern leopard frog and yellow-billed cuckoo habitats. There are 8.4 

miles (affecting 16.8 acres) of decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed roads in this habitat under this alternative. 

Motorized dispersed camping would be allowed along 43 miles of riparian habitat, creating a potential for some 

mortality of frogs and habitat loss and displacement of both species when camps are in use. Motorized dispersed 

camping would no longer be available districtwide on a yearlong basis benefiting wildlife and habitats.

Determination of Effect for Northern Leopard Frog

Baseline: All suitable habitat is available for off-route travel, MBGR, and dispersed camping. 

Alternatives 1–4: May impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of 

viability.

Determination of Effect for Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo

Baseline: All suitable habitat is available for off-route travel, MBGR, and dispersed camping. 

Alternatives 1–4: May impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of 

viability.

Alamosa Springsnail – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: The 511 road is the only designated route that is located upstream from this species’ occupied habitat. 

Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) and motorized dispersed camping is available along all the routes in the 

watershed occupied by this species. If dispersed camping is occurring upstream from the occupied habitat, there is a 

slight chance of sediment reaching the springs where the springsnail occurs.

Alternatives 1–4: The 511 road is the only designated route that is located upstream from this species. Sediment 

from roads is not listed as a threat to the species, and it is unlikely that sediment would reach the springs occupied 

by the Alamosa springsnail. Under alternatives 1, 2, and 4, MBGR would no longer be available districtwide 

benefiting Alamosa springsnail habitat. Under alternative 3, MBGR occurs within a watershed that contains 

Alamosa springsnail habitat. Motorized dispersed camping would not occur in the species habitat. 

Determination of Effect for Alamosa Springsnail 

Baseline: All suitable habitat is available for off-route travel, MBGR, and dispersed camping. 

Alternatives 1–4: Cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout this habitat type on a 

yearlong basis benefiting this species. These alternatives may affect the species, but they are not likely to adversely 

affect the species or its habitat. The Forest Service would seek concurrence with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

on this determination. Alternative 3 would allow MBGR within the entire Alamosa springsnail watershed which 

would have a greater potential effect to the species.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

134 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Bleached Skimmer Dragonfly – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: Route densities in or adjacent to this species habitat is not known. Cross-country motorized travel is 

available throughout wetland habitat type on a yearlong basis potentially affecting occupied habitat. MBGR and 

motorized dispersed camping is available districtwide which would reduce habitat quality for this species.

Alternatives 1–4: Cross-country motorized travel would no longer be available throughout this habitat type on a 

yearlong basis benefiting dragonfly habitats. Under alternatives 1, 2, and 4, MBGR would no longer be available 

districtwide benefiting habitat potentially used by this dragonfly. Under alternative 3, it is not known how much 

MBGR would be allowed near pond and spring habitat. Where that use occurs, dragonflies would be potentially 

affected. Motorized dispersed camping would be allowed near riparian habitat creating a potential for a reduction in 

habitat quality (except alternative 2), but motorized dispersed camping would be reduced from the baseline 

benefiting habitat. 

Determination of Effect for Bleached Skimmer Dragonfly

Baseline: All suitable habitat is available for off-route travel, MBGR, and dispersed camping. The baseline 

condition may impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability.

Alternatives 1–4: May impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of 

viability.

Magdalena Mountainsnail and Subalpine Mountainsnail – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: Motorized cross-country and dispersed use is available in all habitat which may reduce habitat availability 

and result in direct mortality in some areas where the species occurs. Motorized routes generally do not provide 

habitat for this species. Motorized big game retrieval (MBGR) and motorized dispersed camping are currently 

available districtwide which may reduce habitat availability and result in direct mortality to species in some areas 

where these species occur. 

Alternatives 1–4: Habitat for these species would improve with off-route travel prohibition compared to the 

baseline. Alternative 3would have the most dispersed use available of all the alternatives resulting in direct mortality 

and habitat loss. Motorized dispersed camping would be allowed except for alternative 2, creating a potential for 

habitat loss and direct mortality when camps are in use. 

Determination of Effect for Magdalena Mountainsnail 

Baseline: All suitable habitat is available for off-route travel, MBGR, and dispersed camping resulting in habitat 

loss and direct mortality. 

Alternatives 1–4: Motorized dispersed use is available under this alternative. Implementation of this alternative 

may impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability.

Determination of Effect for Subalpine Mountainsnail 

Baseline: All suitable habitat is available for off-route travel, MBGR, and dispersed camping. Motorized use is 

unlikely to affect the subalpine mountainsnail.

Alternatives 1–4: Motorized use is unlikely to affect the subalpine mountainsnail. There would be no impact to the 

species.

Zuni Milkvetch, Villous Groundcover Milkvetch, San Mateo Penstemon, 

Arizona Leatherflower, and Tall Bitterweed – Impacts by Alternative

Baseline: Direct impacts to sensitive plants are possible due to motorized route use and motorized off-route travel 

that is available in all potential habitats. Motorized use may result in loss of habitat and individual plants. MBGR 

and motorized dispersed camping are currently available districtwide which may impact individual plants.

Alternatives 1–4: Prohibiting off-route travel and reducing route densities compared to the baseline may have only 

slight benefits to sensitive plant species; however the potential exists for plants to be directly impacted by vehicle 

use. Under alternatives 1, 2, and 4, no MBGR is being proposed and MBGR would no longer be allowed 

districtwide, benefiting habitat for sensitive plant species. Under alternative 3, proposed MBGR may occur in 

sensitive plant species’ current or potential habitat which may cause plants and their habitat to be lost due to that 

use. Motorized dispersed camping would no longer be available districtwide on a yearlong basis, benefiting plant 

species and their habitat. Along some routes, motorized dispersed camping would be designated (except under 

alternative 2), creating a potential for habitat loss and loss of individual plants. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 135

Determination of Effect for Sensitive Plant Species

Baseline, All Species: All occupied and potential sensitive plant species habitat is available for off-route travel, 

including MBGR and motorized dispersed camping. There are existing motorized routes in sensitive plant species 

habitat. Motorized use associated with the baseline condition may continue to impact individual plants. Off-highway 

vehicle use is one of the threats listed for sensitive plant species.

Determination of Effect for Zuni Milkvetch

Alternatives 1–4: Prohibiting off-route travel and reducing route densities may have only a slight benefit to the

species; however, the potential exists for this plant to be directly impacted by vehicle use. There is no motorized 

dispersed camping proposed in Zuni milkvetch habitat, and there are no route designations proposed in potential or 

occupied habitat. Implementation of these alternatives may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the Zuni 

milkvetch. 

Determination of Effect for Villous Groundcover Milkvetch

Alternatives 1–4: Motorized use may result in loss of habitat and individual plants. Implementation of these 

alternatives may impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability.

Determination of Effect for San Mateo Penstemon

Alternatives 1–4: Motorized use may result in loss of habitat and individual plants. Implementation of these 

alternatives may impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability.

Determination of Effect for Arizona Leatherflower

Alternatives 1–4: Motorized use may result in loss of habitat and individual plants. Implementation of these 

alternatives may impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability.

Determination of Effect for Tall Bitterweed

Alternatives 1–4: Motorized use may result in loss of habitat and individual plants. Implementation of these 

alternatives may impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability.

High Priority Migratory Birds

The effects described in general in the project specific migratory bird report (in the project 

record) apply to high priority migratory bird habitat and populations. Table 43 describes the 

rationale for the estimated effects determination. See the project level high priority migratory bird 

report in the project record for a complete description of each bird species considered and their 

respective habitat and population analysis. Under all alternatives, unintentional take of migratory 

birds due to nest abandonment may occur as a result of motorized use along designated routes or 

off-route during dispersed motorized use.

Table 43. Determination of effects for high priority migratory birds

Priority Bird Species Determination of Effects

Mixed Conifer Species

 Band-tailed pigeon

 Dusky grouse

 Flammulated owl

 Broad-tailed hummingbird

 Williamson’s sapsucker

 Red-naped sapsucker

 Olive warbler 

 Under the baseline condition, there are 91 miles (affecting 182 acres) of 

route in mixed conifer habitat, as well as off-route travel which may 

cause nest abandonment and direct mortality due to ground or shrub nests 

being driven over resulting in unintentional take.

 Under alternatives 1 and 3, the potential for unintentional take of these 

priority species exists, but is reduced from the baseline condition because 

of route reduction and elimination of off-route travel. There are 0.6 mile

(affecting 1.2 acres) of decommissioned, unauthorized and closed routes 

in this habitat under these alternatives. 

 Under alternative 2, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is the highest of all of the action alternatives, but is still reduced 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

136 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Priority Bird Species Determination of Effects

 Red-faced warbler 

 Olive-sided flycatcher 

from the baseline condition because of route reduction and the 

elimination of motorized cross-country travel.

 Alternative 4 has the least potential for unintentional take of these 

priority species due to the least amount of routes in the mixed conifer 

habitat type. Motorized dispersed use is less than alternatives 1 and 3. 

 The potential to affect individuals under all alternatives exists, but there 

would be no measurable negative effects on these migratory species. 

Unintentional take of individuals may occur, but these alternatives would 

not negatively affect population levels. 

Mountain Grassland 

Species

 Scaled quail

 Montezuma quail

 Vesper sparrow

 Loggerhead shrike 

 Gray vireo

 Bendire’s thrasher

 Eastern meadowlark

 Under the baseline condition, there are 435 miles (affecting 870 acres) of 

route in mountain grassland habitat, as well as off-route travel which may 

cause nest abandonment and direct mortality if ground or shrub nests are 

driven over resulting in unintentional take. 

 Under alternative 1, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is decreased due to reduction of routes in mountain grassland 

habitat and the elimination of off-route travel. There are 7.9 miles 

(affecting 15.8 acres) of decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed 

routes in this habitat under this alternative. 

 Under alternative 2 the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is the highest of all of the alternatives, but is still reduced from 

the baseline condition because of route reduction and the elimination of 

motorized cross-country travel.

 Under alternative 3, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species exists but is reduced from the baseline condition because of route 

reductions. There are 10.8 miles (affecting 21.6 acres) of 

decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed routes in this habitat under 

this alternative. 

 Alternative 4 has the least potential for unintentional take of these 

priority species due to the least amount of routes in the mountain 

grassland habitat type. There are 7.5 miles (affecting 15 acres) of 

decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed routes in this habitat under 

this alternative. 

 The potential to affect individuals under all alternatives exists, but there 

would be no measurable negative effects on these migratory species. 

Unintentional take of individuals may occur, but these alternatives would 

not negatively affect population levels. 

Mountain Shrub Species

 Dusky grouse

 Black-chinned hummingbird

 Vesper sparrow

 Loggerhead shrike

 Gray vireo

 Bendire’s thrasher 

 Crissal thrasher 

 Black-chinned sparrow

 Under the baseline condition, there are 13 miles (affecting 26 acres) of 

route in mountain shrub habitat, as well as off-route travel which may 

cause nest abandonment and direct mortality if ground or shrub nests are 

driven over resulting in unintentional take. There are no 

decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed routes in this habitat type. 

 Under alternative 1, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is decreased due to reduction of routes in mountain shrub habitat. 

 Under alternative 2, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is the highest of all of the action alternatives, but is still reduced 

from the baseline condition because of the elimination of motorized 

cross-country travel.

 Under alternative 3, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is decreased due to reduction of routes in mountain shrub habitat. 

 Alternative 4 has the least potential for unintentional take of these 

priority species due to the least amount of routes in the mountain shrub 

habitat type. 

 The potential to affect individuals under all alternatives exists, but there 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 137

Priority Bird Species Determination of Effects

would be no measurable negative effects on these migratory species. 

Unintentional take of individuals may occur, but these alternatives would 

not negatively affect population levels.

Piñon-Juniper

Woodland Species

 Piñon jay

 Black throated gray warbler

 Band-tailed pigeon

 Gray flycatcher

 Black-chinned hummingbird

 Montezuma quail

 Juniper titmouse 

 Virginia’s warbler 

 Under the baseline condition, there are 662 miles (affecting 1,324 acres) 

of route in piñon-juniper habitat, as well as off-route travel which may 

cause nest abandonment if ground or shrub nests are driven over resulting 

in unintentional take. 

 Under alternative 1, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is decreased due to reduction of routes in piñon-juniper habitat. 

There are 4 miles of reroute under this alternative, resulting in a habitat 

loss of 8 acres. There are 10.1 miles (affecting 20.2 acres) of 

decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed routes in this habitat under 

this alternative. 

 Under alternative 2, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is the highest of all of the action alternatives, but is still reduced 

from the baseline condition because of route reduction and the 

elimination of motorized cross-country travel.

 Under alternative 3, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species exists but is reduced from the baseline condition because of route 

reduction. The 2.3 miles of reroute would result in a habitat loss of 4.6 

acres. There are 19 miles (affecting 38 acres) of decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and closed routes in this habitat. OHV use is allowed in 

this alternative, resulting in displacement of birds in this habitat type as 

well as severely altering piñon-juniper habitat on 756 acres causing 

habitat loss and displacement. 

 Alternative 4 has the least potential for unintentional take of these 

priority species due to the least amount of routes in the piñon-juniper 

habitat type. There are 8.4 miles (affecting 16.8 acres) of 

decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed routes in this habitat. 

 The potential to affect individuals under all action alternatives exists, but 

there would be no measurable negative effects on these migratory 

species. Unintentional take of individuals may occur, but these 

alternatives would not negatively affect population levels. 

Ponderosa Pine Species 

 Gray flycatcher

 Flammulated owl

 Broad-tailed hummingbird

 Williamson’s sapsucker

 Red-naped sapsucker 

 Grace’s warbler

 Olive warbler 

 Red-faced warbler 

 Painted redstart

 Under the baseline condition, there are 314 miles (affecting 628 acres) of 

route in ponderosa pine habitat, as well as off-route travel which may

cause nest abandonment or direct mortality if ground or shrub nests are 

driven over and result in unintentional take. There are 4 miles (affecting 

8 acres) of decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed routes in this 

habitat type. 

 Under alternative 1, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is decreased due to reduction of routes in ponderosa pine habitat. 

There are 2.9 miles (affecting 5.8 acres) of decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and closed routes in this habitat. 

 Under alternative 2, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is the highest of all of the alternatives, but is still reduced from 

the baseline condition because of route reduction and the elimination of 

motorized cross-country travel.

 Under alternative 3, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is decreased due to reduction of routes in ponderosa pine habitat. 

There are 4.2 miles (affecting 8.4 acres) of decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and closed routes in this habitat. 

 Alternative 4 has the least potential for unintentional take of these 

priority species due to the least amount of routes in the ponderosa pine 

habitat type. There are 2.9 miles (affecting 5.8 acres) of decommissioned, 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

138 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Priority Bird Species Determination of Effects

unauthorized, and closed routes in this habitat. 

 The potential to affect individuals under all action alternatives exists, but 

there would be no measurable negative effects on these migratory 

species. Unintentional take of individuals may occur, but these 

alternatives would not negatively affect population levels. 

Riparian Species 

 Williamson’s sapsucker 

 Red-naped sapsucker 

 Elf owl 

 Red-faced warbler

 Olive-sided flycatcher

 Under the baseline condition, there are 246 miles (affecting 492 acres) of 

route in riparian habitat, as well as off-route travel which may cause nest 

abandonment or direct mortality if ground or shrub nests are driven over 

resulting in unintentional take. 

 Under alternative 1, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is decreased due to reduction of routes in riparian habitat. There 

are 3 miles of decommissioned, unauthorized and closed routes in this 

habitat. There are 10.2 miles (affecting 20.4 acres) of decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and closed routes in this habitat. 

 Under alternative 2, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is the highest of all of the action alternatives, but is still reduced 

from the baseline condition because of route reduction and the 

elimination of motorized cross-country travel.

 Under alternative 3, the potential for unintentional take of these priority 

species is decreased due to reduction of routes in riparian habitat. There 

are 11.2 miles of decommissioned, unauthorized, and closed routes in 

this habitat. 

 Alternative 4 has the least potential for unintentional take of these 

priority species due to the least amount of routes in the riparian habitat 

type. There are 8.9 miles (affecting 17.8 acres) of decommissioned, 

unauthorized, and closed routes in this habitat. 

 The potential to affect individuals under all action alternatives exists, but 

there would be no measurable negative effects on these migratory 

species. Unintentional take of individuals may occur, but these 

alternatives would not negatively affect population levels. 

Cumulative Effects: MIS, TES

and High Priority Migratory Birds

Cumulative impacts to management indicator species; threatened, endangered, candidate, or 

sensitive species; and high priority migratory birds are discussed broadly with a focus on impacts 

to wildlife species in general from noise disturbance, direct mortality and habitat degradation. 

Treatments and projects considered as past, present, and future actions include prescribed burns, 

WUI fuels reductions, cattle grazing, special use permits, forest health improvement projects (tree 

thinning), mining, mineral exploration, private land development, and recreational activities (such 

as hunting, wildlife viewing, hiking, biking, horseback riding, etc.). 

The cumulative effects analysis includes projects that occurred during the last 10 years and those 

that are projected 10 years ahead. The boundary of the effects analysis includes the entire 

Magdalena Ranger District. 

Alternative 1 

Maintenance of existing WUI and vegetation treatments (and additional treatments) is expected to 

occur as tree regeneration takes place. Most thinning in treatment areas would take place adjacent 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 139

to road systems, so additional disturbance to wildlife (from noise and human activity) is not 

expected to occur because the use of the road system already disturbs wildlife. Maintenance and 

additional vegetation treatments and enforcement of off-route travel are within the control of the 

Agency. Past, present, and future cumulative impacts in areas where private land development is 

anticipated would substantially reduce security areas and travel corridors for wildlife. Areas on 

National Forest System (NFS) lands which border private land where development is occurring 

could become more important for wildlife migration and dispersal. 

Vehicle use on designated roads could be expected to increase in the future, as well as other 

recreational activities such as mountain biking, wildlife viewing, horseback riding, and hiking. 

All these increased activities would cause disturbance for a longer period during daylight hours. 

With the elimination of motorized cross-country travel, many areas where cattle grazing, timber 

harvesting, and prescribed burning occur could regenerate with fewer problems, improving 

wildlife foraging, nesting, burrowing, and den habitat. Wildlife would have other areas to find 

security during times when disturbance factors are present, meaning their habitat is less 

fragmented and more secure. Prohibition of motorized cross-country travel would improve 

wildlife security over time, and cumulative impacts on the district—particularly with offsite 

development increasing—would put more pressure on NFS lands as refuges from human impacts. 

Alternative 2

This alternative maintains the current designations for all NFS roads open to all vehicles for 

public use within the district, while eliminating all motorized cross-country travel. Prescribed 

burning, cattle grazing, tree thinning, and other actions on the district would continue to impact 

wildlife. Many of the impacts would be the same as the baseline, as the proposed changes include 

designating all existing system roads for all vehicles. More roads generally mean more habitat 

fragmentation. Eliminating motorized cross-country travel could balance out the number of areas 

where wildlife could find refuges from human disturbance. Noise disturbance along with other 

cumulative impacts would continue to impact wildlife under this alternative. 

Alternative 3 

This alternative designates fewer NFS roads for motor vehicle use within the district and includes 

fewer corridors for motorized dispersed camping and MBGR compared to the baseline. 

Prescribed burning, cattle grazing, tree thinning, and other actions on the district will continue to 

impact wildlife. More roads generally result in increased habitat fragmentation, resulting in less 

habitat available for species that require large areas of contiguous habitat. Eliminating motorized 

cross-country travel could balance out the number of areas where wildlife could find refuges from 

human disturbance. Noise disturbance along with other cumulative impacts would continue to 

impact wildlife under this alternative. 

Alternative 4 

This alternative is expected to have the least amount of cumulative impacts to wildlife. In 

addition to all of the forest projects and actions, the miles of roads designated for motorized 

vehicle use would be less than the other alternatives and baseline. With motorized cross-country 

travel reduced from the baseline, noise disturbance would be reduced and a greater number of 

acres would be available as wildlife refuges.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

140 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Watershed, Soils, and Air Resources

The following analysis is based on the hydrology and soils specialist report prepared by Livia 

Crowley, forest hydrologist. This report is on file in the project record.

Affected Environment

The Magdalena Ranger District is located in central New Mexico and is comprised of four 

geographic areas: the Magdalena Mountains, San Mateo Mountains, Datil Mountains, and 

Bear/Gallinas Mountains. Elevations in the project area ranges from just below 6,000 feet in the 

southern end of the Magdalena Mountain unit to 10,783 feet at the top of South Baldy Peak. The 

project area analyzed for this report, excluding wilderness and private inholdings, is 

approximately 697,716 acres.

Climate and topography can contribute to the effects that road locations have on water and soil 

conditions. Precipitation varies seasonally within the project area and is largely influenced by the 

southwest monsoons. The areas affected by these monsoons receive greater amounts of summer 

precipitation from moist air masses originating in the Gulf of Mexico and the Gulf of California. 

The majority of annual precipitation within the project area occurs between July and September. 

Temporal and spatial variability of precipitation is also a characteristic within the analysis area. 

Summer precipitation tends to have more spatial variability than winter frontal storms. 

Topography and storm type are two factors that control the spatial variability of precipitation. At 

the local scale, precipitation tends to increase with elevation due to the effects of orographic 

lifting. Higher elevations of the analysis area receive cool season moisture in the form of snow.

Watersheds

Watersheds are areas drained by streams to a single location. These drainage areas are defined by 

the highest elevations surrounding a selected location on a stream so that a drop of water falling 

inside the boundary will drain to the stream while a drop of rain falling outside of the boundary 

will drain to another watershed. The project area is located in portions of 80 individual 6th field 

Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) watersheds, also known as 6th level watersheds. Watersheds can be 

impacted by numerous factors: including cross-country travel and existing roads (authorized or 

other). Motorized cross-country travel is allowed within the portions of watersheds that fall 

outside of the Apache Kid and Withington Wilderness areas and has an impact on the overall 

watershed conditions.

All of the 6th code watersheds across the forest have been classified based on the national 

Watershed Condition Framework (WCF). WCF allows an interdisciplinary team to assess the 

risks to the condition of each watershed and then rate the watershed based on these risks. Twentyfour different criteria, including terrestrial physical and biological indicators and aquatic physical 

and biological indicators, were used to rate watershed conditions. The resulting ratings indicate 

that a given watershed is “functioning properly” (good), “functioning at risk” (fair), or “impaired” 

(poor). Of the eighty 6th code watersheds on the Magdalena Ranger District rated using the WCF, 

16 are rated as “fair” and 53 were rated as “good” using the definition provided by this process. 

Eleven watersheds were not rated since less than 10 percent of their area is located within 

National Forest System lands. The primary causes for those watersheds rated as functioning at 

risk are roads, proximity of roads and trails to water, soil condition, range condition, and fire 

regime condition class. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 141

Watershed conditions can be impacted by roads; generally, these impacts are a result of road 

location and not road use. Research indicates that route density, defined as both roads and trails, 

can impact watershed conditions as well as water quality (Forman et al. 2003). A study in the Rio 

Puerco showed that route density has a strong influence on sediment loads (Phippen and Wohl 

2003) on soils similar to those in the project area. The Watershed Condition Framework 

(Potyondy and Geier 2011) considers a road density greater than 2.4 miles per square mile to be 

indicative of a higher probability that the hydrologic regime is substantially altered. A moderate 

probability of hydrologic alteration exists when road and trail densities are between 1 and 2.4 

miles per square mile.

Figure 3. Magdalena project area watershed class 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

142 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Table 44. 6

th Code watersheds, road and trail density, percent of project in each 

watershed, watershed condition, and acres (shaded watersheds have road densities 

greater than 2.4 miles per square mile)

6

th Code Watershed Name 

and HUC6 Number

Road 

Density 

mi/mi2

Project 

Percent

in HUC6

Watershed 

Condition Acres

Alameda Spring–Milligan Gultch (130202110203) 0.7 26.6 good 15,425

Arroyo Montosa (130202090602) 2.3 98.8 good 15,455

Arroyo de La Matanza (130202031005) 1.8 7.6 good 28,527

Baca Canyon–Rio Salado (130202090703) 1.1 34.5 fair 34,155

Bear Spring Canyon-Rio Salado (130202090705) 0.9 19.7 good 17,283

Bear Springs Canyon (130202090704) 1.4 78.1 fair 22,263

Big Pigeon Canyon–Alamosa Creek (130202110602) 1.9 75.4 fair 32,633

Big Rosa Canyon (130202110204) 0.9 22.4 good 25,452

Big Rosa Canyon–Milligan Gultch (130202110205) 1.2 44.1 good 16,569

Blue Mesa Canyon–Alamocita Creek (130202090106) 0.7 7.5 good 26,239

Canon del Alamito–Rio Salado (130202090702) 0.5 29.6 fair 37,012

Carada de Ila–Alamosa Creek (130202110704) 1.4 23.3 good 29,916

Clemente Lake (130202080301) 1.1 0.5 not rated 36,554

Crawford Hollow–Rio Grande (130202110307) 1.5 21.7 good 25,967

Cuervo Canyon–Rio Grande (130202110503) 1.3 29.9 good 34,256

Dog Springs Canyon (130202090501) 0.9 2.8 not rated 30,401

Dry Lake Canyon (130202090603) 2.8 91.9 fair 30,313

Durfee Canyon (130202080103) 1.9 55.7 good 20,545

East Well (130202080104) 1.2 0.8 not rated 27,929

Elephant Butte Reservoir–Alamosa Creek 

(130202110705)

1.9 4.5 not rated 24,557

Gallinas Canyon (130202090601) 2.2 97.9 good 10,239

Garcia Falls–Alamosa Creek (130202110703) 0.9 15.3 good 38,979

Goat Spring (130202090607) 1.4 40.1 good 26,598

Grapevine Canyon–Alamosa Creek (130202110701) 1.0 38.5 fair 32,216

Headwaters Arroyo Gato (130202090604) 2.0 27.9 good 38,184

Headwaters East Red Canyon (130202110101) 1.0 66.2 fair 33,451

Headwaters La Jencia Creek (130202090606) 3.4 60.3 good 20,715

Headwaters Veteado Draw (130202060202) 1.7 1.5 not rated 17,122

Headwaters White House Canyon (130202080207) 2.5 84.2 good 36,968

Headwaters Z Slash Draw (130202080405) 1.6 57.1 good 36,062

High Lonesome Well (130202080205) 0.8 5.1 good 33,463

Indian Creek (130202110501) 0.6 19.9 good 13,612
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 143

6

th Code Watershed Name 

and HUC6 Number

Road 

Density 

mi/mi2

Project 

Percent

in HUC6

Watershed 

Condition Acres

Jaralosa Creek (130202090505) 1.2 22.0 fair 39,118

La Jara Canyon (130202090701) 1.5 41.7 good 25,317

Limestone Canyon–Alamosa Creek (130202110601) 1.6 51.9 good 35,447

Little Pigeon Canyon–Alamosa Creek (130202110603) 1.8 15.8 good 22,544

Little Well (130202080203) 0.9 13.4 good 24,946

Lumbre Canyon–Rio Grande (130202110306) 1.2 28.6 good 38,521

Main Canyon (130202080206) 2.0 95.2 good 27,700

Mill Canyon–Milligan Gultch (130202110202) 1.6 34.3 good 30,019

Mitchell Canyon (130202110802) 1.3 16.0 good 28,624

Montoya Well (130202080502) 0.9 2.4 not rated 27,934

New Well (130202080102) 3.6 20.4 good 10,806

Newton Draw (130202060201) 1.9 0.2 not rated 24,929

Nogal Arroyo (130202031002) 1.5 39.6 fair 33,821

Nogal Canyon–Rio Grande (130202110502) 1.9 30.2 fair 26,854

Outlet Arroyo Gato (130202090605) 2.9 39.1 good 12,813

Outlet East Red Canyon (130202110102) 2.0 69.8 good 28,900

Outlet La Jencia Creek (130202090608) 1.1 0.1 not rated 35,484

Outlet White House Canyon (130202080208) 1.9 0.2 not rated 13,926

Outlet Z Slash Draw (130202080406) 1.6 7.0 good 15,676

Ox Spring Canyon (130202090102) 1.8 97.0 fair 16,350

Ox Spring Canyon–Alamocita Creek (130202090104) 1.1 8.4 good 13,673

Pature Canyon–Alamocita Creek (130202090105) 0.8 30.1 good 23,548

Pino Draw (130202080402) 1.5 15.8 good 28,995

Point of Rocks Canyon (130202080303) 2.1 62.3 good 28,556

Puertecito Arroyo (130202110206) 0.5 0.4 good 10,159

Puertecito Arroyo–Milligan Gultch (130202110207) 1.6 41.4 good 35,372

Red Canyon (130202031101) 2.5 0.8 good 18,906

Rincon Draw (130202080204) 1.2 26.0 good 30,692

Rock Springs–Milligan Gultch (130202110201) 1.2 12.7 good 37,851

Romero Canyon (130202110801) 1.4 35.1 good 27,053

San Jose Arroyo–Rio Grande (130202110504) 1.2 50.7 fair 35,822

San Mateo Canyon–Alamosa Creek (130202110702) 1.3 43.8 fair 33,526

Sawmill Canyon (130202031205) 1.6 0.1 good 30,201

Shakespeare Canyon (130202031001) 1.3 32.3 fair 33,099
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

144 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

6

th Code Watershed Name 

and HUC6 Number

Road 

Density 

mi/mi2

Project 

Percent

in HUC6

Watershed 

Condition Acres

Sim Yaten Canyon–Alamosa Creek (130202110607) 1.3 43.6 good 24,336

Simon Canyon (130202110303) 1.0 14.0 good 23,202

Sugar Loaf Canyon (130202080501) 1.2 6.7 good 34,779

Taylor Well (130202080305) 1.2 8.6 good 31,237

Tenmile Hill–Milligan Gultch (130202110208) 0.6 0.0 not rated 22,918

Third Canyon–Alamocita Creek (130202090101) 1.4 26.6 fair 33,648

Tres Lagunas Draw (150200030104) 2.8 1.5 not rated 15,995

Walnut Creek (130202031103) 1.3 6.1 good 21,084

West Red Canyon (130202110605) 1.6 78.8 good 28,456

White Lake (130202080209) 1.5 8.9 good 30,500

White Well (130202080302) 1.1 9.1 good 28,252

Whitewater Canyon–Alamosa Creek (130202110604) 1.9 60.5 good 27,679

Wildhorse Canyon–Alamosa Creek (130202110609) 1.8 85.8 fair 13,180

Wolf Wells (130202080101) 1.8 11.6 good 21,065

Within these 6th code watersheds, the road densities as shown in table 44 range from .5 to 3.6 

miles/square mile (mi/mi2). While road densities may indicate hydrological alteration, the overall 

watershed condition considers many other factors:

 Seven watersheds have road densities greater than 2.4 mi/mi2 which indicates a high 

probably that the hydrologic regime has been altered by the presence of roads and trails. 

 Sixty-one watersheds have densities between 1 and 2.4 mi/mi2indicating a moderate 

probability of hydrologic alteration.

 Twelve watersheds have road densities less than 1 mi/mi2; an indicator the hydrologic 

regime is substantially intact.

Streams

Streams are classified by their flow characteristics into perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral 

types:

 Perennial streams flow year-round because they get water from water storage in the 

ground. However, these streams may dry up during extreme droughts. 

 Ephemeral streams only flow in direct response to precipitation or snow melt. 

 Intermittent streams fall between ephemeral and perennial; these types of streams get

water from the ground seasonally and usually dry up in the summer. 

Intermittent and ephemeral streams provide many of the same ecosystem goods and services as 

perennial streams (EPA 2008). All streams are pathways for the movement of water, nutrients,

and sediment throughout the watershed. Intermittent and ephemeral streams comprise a large 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 145

portion of the stream network within watersheds. These features have greater relative moisture 

than the surrounding area, often stored in the ground. In addition, when these features erode and 

downcut, gullies can form. This leads to soil loss and the surrounding water tables get deeper. 

Because of the value of these features, similar measures are used in this report to assess potential 

effects to these features. In recognition of the additional values of perennial streams, measures are 

separated by perennial and intermittent/ephemeral reaches.

Data used for analysis of water features such as streams is from the Cibola National Forest GIS 

dataset and the National Hydrography Data (NHD). 

There are 3,313.5 miles of mapped intermittent and ephemeral stream channels and 1.7 miles of 

perennial streams within the analysis area. Cold Spring Canyon and Indian Creek in the San 

Mateo Mountains are the currently mapped perennial streams within this area. There are other 

small segments of perennial water, many of which are related to springs, which have not been 

mapped. These include North Fork of Water Canyon and Mill/Canyon, Copper Canyon. There are 

76 mapped springs and 39 mapped seeps within the project area. Many springs are developed and 

provide water for livestock and wildlife. 

The 300 foot proximity of streams was used to assess the potential for effects to increase or 

decrease from the proposed alternatives in relation to the baseline condition. There are currently 

725.9 miles of ephemeral/intermittent streams within 300 feet of NFS roads. This is 22 percent of 

the ephemeral/ intermittent stream network. A small length (~.01 mi.) of the perennial stream in 

Nogal Canyon is within 300 feet of a National Forest System road (959). Because smaller 

perennial areas are not mapped in GIS and no consistent inventory exists, many smaller perennial 

portions are not represented in this data and do exist along roads. The riparian layer incorporates 

many of these areas.

There are 2,935.7 acres of riparian vegetation mapped within the project area, associated with 

132.4 miles of intermittent/ephemeral streams and 1.3 miles of perennial channels. The different 

types of riparian areas are shown in table 45. A total of 1,608.4 acres of riparian areas are 

currently within 300 feet of a road. This is 55 percent of the mapped riparian acres in the project 

area. Note that since the riparian data is currently being ground verified, cottonwood and walnut 

systems may vary by species so there may be changes to acres within these types.

Table 45. Riparian types in the project area

Riparian Type Acres

Fremont cottonwood – conifer 123.3

Fremont cottonwood – oak 47.7

Fremont cottonwood – shrub 53.9

Narrowleaf cottonwood – shrub 863.6

Rio Grande cottonwood – shrub 1,714.9

Upper montane conifer – willow 67.7

Arizona walnut 1.4

Unknown 6.6

Ponderosa pine – willow 56.6
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

146 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Currently, unrestricted motorized cross-country travel across the project area is contributing to 

destabilization of stream channels, impacts to riparian areas, increased sediment, and reduced 

water quality. Roads—authorized and unauthorized—including motorized cross-country use have 

impacted many of these features causing disruption of flow patterns, bank destabilization, channel 

changes, and increased sedimentation of stream channels.

Water Quality

The Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to restore and maintain the chemical, 

physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters. Section 303 of the act requires states to 

adopt water quality standards necessary to protect designated uses whenever possible. No streams 

in the analysis area have been assessed by the State of New Mexico for water quality standards.

Therefore, it is unknown whether or not water quality in the project area meets New Mexico 

water quality standards (2011). The water quality parameters of specific interest for this project 

are sediment and pathogens:

 Sediment is mobilized through surface disturbances and transported by water into stream 

channels. 

 Pathogens such as bacteria are in fecal matter of animals including people. Because of 

this, areas where waste is deposited and accumulates become locations where pathogens 

could occur at elevated levels.

Sediment as a water quality concern has two parts: sediment, which causes cloudiness in water 

(turbidity) and sediment which deposits into stream channels as bottom deposits. Both types of 

sediment are related to the length of roads and trails adjacent to channels and the number of times 

these routes cross the stream (Gucinski et al. 2001). 

Where roads are in close proximity to stream channels, effects to these streams have been noted. 

This is due to sediment and changes in morphology; especially where roads cross streams 

(Forman et al. 2003). Motorized vehicle crossings due to cross-country travel have similar effects. 

“Close proximity” was set at 300 feet for analysis purposes. This distance could be considered an 

average buffer width that is effective in mitigating effects to streams. Therefore, where roads are 

closer than 300 feet to a stream, some level of effects is likely to occur. 

The literature shows that prescribing an effective buffer width is difficult due to variation in site 

characteristics and the values being protected (Clinton 2011). A range of buffer widths from 10m 

(~33 feet) (Clinton 2011) to over 1,000 m (~3,281 feet) (Forman and Alexander 1998) has been 

found to be effective in protecting stream and wetland values during management activities. 

Three hundred feet was chosen as the buffer to use for this project since several sources suggest 

that 100 m (303 feet) is generally effective in controlling sediment (Belt et al. 1982) and nutrients 

(Feller 2009). This distance provides an effective buffer for preventing effects to streams. 

Therefore, identifying those roads which are closer than 300 feet is a way to identify roads which 

are likely to have effects on streams.

Pathogens can be introduced into the soil and water at elevated levels in association with 

dispersed recreation (MacDonald et al. 1991). A pathogen is an infectious agent that causes 

disease to its host. These include bacteria, virus, and protozoan. There are over 100 bacteria, 

protozoan, and viruses present in human feces that are capable of causing illness (Cilimburg et al.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 147

2000). Bacteria include coliforms and pathogenic bacteria such as Salmonella. Protozoans include 

Giardia and Cryptosporidium. Viruses can include the Adenovirus and Hepatitis A. 

There is the potential for these pathogens to enter the soil and water where people gather and 

spend time without sanitary facilities; particularly if these areas are located near water. Studies 

have shown that dispersed recreation areas without sanitation contribute to elevated levels of 

selected pathogens in water and soil (Varness et al. 1978, Cilimburg et al. 2000). While these 

increases tend to be localized and short term, they do occur in the area of concentrated use and at 

the time of high use. There is no water quality data on pathogens or nutrients from within the 

analysis area, so it is not known what the current levels are. 

Soil Conditions

The Forest Plan goal for soil resources is to: “Improve and maintain soil productivity and 

condition of watersheds and riparian areas.” (Cibola Forest Plan, page 34) General soil 

characteristics on the Cibola National Forest are described within the terrestrial ecological units 

(TEU) survey (2009). TEUs are integrated combinations of landscape elements including climate, 

soils, potential natural vegetation, geology, and geomorphology. TEUs provide information about 

the ability to produce vegetation and respond to management activities and natural disturbances 

(U.S. Department of Agriculture 2005). The Magdalena travel management project area contains 

97 individual TEUs.

Soil condition consists of three components: hydrologic, nutrient cycling, and stability (U.S. 

Department of Agriculture 1999). Soils in satisfactory condition are functioning properly and can 

maintain resource values. Impaired soils have a reduction in soil functions and/or an increased 

risk of degradation. Unsatisfactory soils have lost soil function and are unable to sustain resource 

values.

Soil hydrology refers to properties which effect how water percolates into or flows over the 

ground. Soil compaction is one hydrologic property of soil and is evidenced through changes in 

porosity, surface structure, bulk density, infiltration, or penetration resistance. Roads result in 

increased soil compaction due to vehicle weight compressing soil structure. Soil compaction 

occurs quickly on an undisturbed soil but reaches a plateau where soil compaction increases very 

little (Ampoorter et al. 2010). Road surfaces, unauthorized routes, and trails reach this plateau. 

Changes to soil compaction affect the other properties of soil, including the ability to support 

vegetation, the amount of water that soaks into the soil, and soil biological processes (McNabb, 

Startsev, and Nguyen 2001). 

System roads, decommissioned roads, and inventoried unauthorized roads occupy 2,272 acres. 

These surfaces are extremely compacted. In addition, soil compaction is likely occurring on 

portions of the project area due to being open to motorized cross-country travel and unauthorized 

routes. It is unknown to what extent this occurs. These areas have unsatisfactory condition. 

Nutrient cycling relates to soil organic matter and sustaining long-term soil productivity and plant 

growth. Woody material, soil crusts, litter, roots, and vegetation are all indicators of nutrient 

cycling. Roads affect nutrient cycling by removing topsoil, organic litter, and vegetation and 

changing soil properties (Gucinski et al. 2001). Clearly, roads remove all vegetation from the soil 

surface, thereby eliminating the soil’s function in providing inputs to nutrients. Further, 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

148 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

compaction affects the ability of soils to revegetate. Roads which can revegetate and decompact 

can begin to recover this process. 

Stability of soils refers to the erosion, transport, and deposition of soil particles by water, wind, or 

gravity (U.S. Department of Agriculture 1999). Roads cause unstable soils through surface 

disturbance leading to loss of vegetation and litter, increased erosion, and compaction. The type 

of soil and site characteristics determines how easily soil is mobilized and eroded away. The TEU 

data provides this information for soils through the erosion hazard rating. Erosion hazard is based 

on potential soil loss from complete removal of vegetation and litter (USDA 1986). A moderate 

rating indicates a loss of soil productivity would occur if the barren condition is not mitigated. A 

severe rating indicates a high probability of reduced site productivity before mitigations can be 

used. 

 Currently, approximately 203.1 miles of roads are located on soils with a severe rating 

and 290.4 miles on soils with a moderate rating. 

 Twenty-eight percent of the project area has soils with severe erosion potential. Thirtyeight percent of soils have a moderate rating. 

Overall existing soil condition in the analysis area was determined using TEU data for the main 

component in each unit. As determined, these conditions are largely due to bare ground and 

unsustainable soil loss. Lack of ground cover can be the result of many activities, including 

erosion from roads and trails, motorized cross-country use, recreational use, and livestock. Where 

roads and trails are determined to be the cause, lands adjacent to roads can be observed to have 

reduced ground cover from concentrated flows of water which accumulate on compacted road 

and trail surfaces. Road runoff contributes to gully formation in several areas. Motorized off-road 

use has a similar effect.

Within the project area, satisfactory soil conditions occur on 46 percent of the analysis area. 

Impaired soils occur on 29 percent and unsatisfactory soils on 25 percent. Sixteen percent of the 

roads currently being used are located on unsatisfactory soils, 43 percent of roads are located on 

impaired soils, while 41 percent are located on satisfactory soils.

Air Quality

Under the Clean Air Act, the Forest Service is charged with protecting air quality and visibility in 

Class I wilderness areas (defined as wilderness areas in existence as of August 7, 1977, that are 

larger than 5,000 acres). The analysis area is within the Middle Rio Grande and Central Closed 

Basins air sheds. None of these air sheds include mandatory Class I wilderness areas. 

Additionally, existing information indicates that the analysis area, including the surrounding 

communities, meets the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Because of this, 

effects to air quality are not carried through the analysis.

Methods and Assumptions

Geographic Information System (GIS) data, the TAP (USDA 2009), use of existing information, 

and field reviews were used to assist in the analysis of effects of the proposed alternatives. GIS 

was supplemented with best available science, literature reviews, and professional judgment. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 149

Due to the large size and complexity of the project area, certain assumptions were made to 

simplify the analysis process. The assumptions are:

 Public education, compliance, and enforcement of regulations will generally limit public 

travel to designated routes. Compliance with the motor vehicle use map is likely to 

increase over time for all alternatives as visitors become more familiar with the new rules 

and designated routes.

 Routes refer to all motorized routes, including roads (system, unauthorized, and 

decommissioned) within the project area.

 The alternatives involve the designation of routes open to vehicle use by the public and 

not the physical removal or barricading of roads. 

 All existing roads are currently driven on to some degree, regardless of status. This 

includes decommissioned and unauthorized roads.

 Routes not designated for public use are expected to receive less travel (administrative 

purposes only).

 Unauthorized routes may not be in an acceptable condition, as they were created without 

engineering design. 

 Motorized trails and unsurfaced roads, when maintained properly, have similar effects to 

water and soil resources.

 Dispersed camping corridor locations were selected based on areas that have historically 

been used for this activity. Because of this, some effects to soil conditions have already 

occurred in these areas. However, it is possible that user density within these corridors 

will increase, particularly during holiday weekends and hunting season, because the same 

amount of users will be confined to a smaller area.

 For the purposes of standardizing calculations, affected road width is 16 feet. Motorized 

trail widths are assumed to be 10 feet, unless they have been converted from existing 

roads. In this case, assumed width impacted by soil compaction is 16 feet. This 

information was provided by the engineering staff (Graves 2011).

Environmental Consequences

Water Resources

The effects of concern for water resources are water quality and drainage channels. The analysis 

timeframe for effects to water resources related to proposed activities is 10 years. This is because 

in 10 years, it may be possible to observe or measure changes related to the selected alternative. 

The analysis area is the project area since it is this area that will contribute to water quality and 

channel changes from proposed activities.

Water Quality

Water quality has several components of interest. These are pathogens and sediment. Sediment is 

discussed under the soil stability as related to erosion. Additional information is provided in this 

section on sediment which makes it to the channel.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

150 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Alternatives — Water Quality — Pathogens

The only proposed activity which has the potential to change pathogen levels is motorized 

dispersed camping since this use would occur without waste disposal of any sort. Where 

motorized dispersed camping corridors are included in the designation of roads for motor vehicle 

use, waste would be a potential source of pathogens. Dispersed camping corridors do have some 

overlap with perennial water and drainage channels. These are the areas where the risk to water is 

greatest.

Measures to assess the potential effect for pathogens to increase as the result of the proposed 

alternatives are listed in table 46. Proximity to perennial water is the most important indicator 

when combined with use levels for determining the risk to water quality. Proximity to any stream 

channels is another indicator since channels can transport pathogens offsite. Pathogens can stay 

viable in soil and be transported to water, depending on the conditions and type of pathogen, for 

over a year (Santamaria and Toranzos 2003, Cilimburg et al. 2000). It is the increase in 

concentrated visitor use that elevates the risk of pathogens through the waste products introduced 

into a smaller area.

Table 46. Measures for increased risk to water quality from pathogens

Baseline Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4

Acres of 

designated 

motorized 

dispersed 

camping within 

300 feet of 

stream channels

Perennial 

Streams

130 0 0 0 0

Intermittent 

and 

Ephemeral 

Streams

232,772 13,340 0 13,340 11,237

Number of 

springs within 

300 feet of 

designated 

motorized 

dispersed 

camping

Persistent 76

41 named 

springs, 35 

unnamed 

springs, see 

map

12

Road Spring, 

Aragon Spring, 

Turkey Springs, 

Pony Spring, 

Deer Springs, 

Questa Spring,

Beartrap Spring, 

7 unnamed 

springs

0 12

Road Spring, 

Aragon Spring, 

Turkey 

Springs, Pony 

Spring, Deer 

Springs, 

Questa Spring, 

Beartrap 

Spring, 7 

unnamed 

springs

9

Road Spring, 

Aragon 

Spring, 

Turkey 

Springs, 

Pony Spring, 

Deer 

Springs, 

Questa 

Spring, 3 

unnamed 

springs

Seep 39 2 0 2 2

Acres open for motorized 

dispersed camping

697,716 25,466 0 25,466 21,944

Baseline

There are no designated motorized dispersed camping corridors within the project area. 

Motorized dispersed camping can occur anywhere within the project area as described in the 

recreation report. Popular areas for dispersed camping are also described in the recreation report. 

In the baseline condition, motorized dispersed camping is not concentrated to smaller designated 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 151

areas, so the risk of pathogens to occur in surface waters and soils is low, with possible 

exceptions at popular areas during high use. 

Alternatives 1 and 3

By concentrating motorized dispersed camping into smaller areas by restricting motorized crosscountry travel, these alternatives increase the potential for pathogens to occur in water and soil 

from the baseline condition. There are 25,466 total acres of motorized dispersed camping 

proposed in these alternatives. Within the 25,466 acres, 13,340 acres of corridor would occur 

within 300 feet of intermittent and ephemeral streams. No motorized dispersed camping areas are 

proposed along mapped perennial streams. In addition, 12 springs and 2 seeps are within 300 feet 

of the proposed motorized dispersed camping areas.

Alternative 2

This alternative does not propose to designate motorized dispersed camping areas; therefore this 

use would not be concentrated into smaller areas. Unlike the baseline, motorized cross-country 

travel would not be allowed under this alternative; parking would only occur within a car width 

adjacent to designated roads. This limitation would curtail the amount of use these areas receive. 

As a result, this use would remain widely dispersed, and there would be no increase in the 

potential of concentrating pathogens.

Alternative 4

By concentrating motorized dispersed camping into smaller areas, including along streams, this

alternative increases the potential for pathogens to occur in water and soil relative to the baseline 

condition and alternatives 1 and 3. This alternative proposes 21,994 acres for motorized dispersed 

camping. This is 3,522 fewer acres for motorized dispersed camping than alternatives 1 and 3, 

which means the use would be more concentrated due to less area. Within the 21,994 acres 

proposed, 11,237 acres of corridor would occur within 300 feet of intermittent and ephemeral 

streams. There are no dispersed camping corridors proposed along perennial streams. Nine 

springs and two seeps are within 300 feet of the proposed motorized dispersed camping areas.

Alternatives – Sediment and Streams

None of the alternatives propose removing any roads or associated stream crossings. While the 

length of road and proximity to channels is not going to change, the amount of motorized travel 

on the roads will vary by alternative and designation. Designated roads and a motorized crosscountry area are expected to have an increase in the amount of motorized use. The amount of 

travel on unpaved roads is related to the amount of erosion and sedimentation produced by these 

roads (MacDonald and Stednick 2003). 

Indirect effects to streams related to proposed activities are those related to sediment and changes 

in stream morphology from motorized access to streams. When streams are crossed by motor 

vehicles on roads or through motorized cross-country use, changes in morphology occur. This 

includes the breakdown of streambanks, widening of the stream channel, and subsequent decrease 

in water depth. Motorized cross-country travel results in numerous stream crossings, some of 

which are used repeatedly. This would also be true of the designated corridors for dispersed 

camping and motorized big game retrieval.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

152 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

There are three measures assessing for potential effects to water quality from sediment related to 

the designation of roads and off-road motorized use areas. The most important factors that 

influence the risk of adverse effects to water quality from unpaved roads and trails are related to 

the length of unpaved roads adjacent to channels and the number of times roads cross the stream 

(Gucinski et al. 2001). Sediment yield related to motorized cross-country use is assessed using the 

miles of channels in those areas open or designated for this use. The timeframe is 10 years since it 

is expected that within 10 years use patterns would have adjusted to the designations. 

A 300-foot-wide buffer is used to assess the miles of designated roads adjacent to channels. This 

width, as discussed in the “Affected Environment,” “Water Quality” section of this report is wide 

enough to effectively mitigate the effect of sediment carried by overland flow from most road 

surfaces. Sediment carried by channelized flow is not impeded by a buffer as it does not travel 

across the buffer. Mitigation of channelized flow includes prevention through proper design and 

maintenance.

Table 47. Summary of measures of water quality related to sediment

Activity Baseline Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4

Miles of roads within 300 feet of ephemeral and 

intermittent stream channels

647.2 431.6 636.8 453.2 391.6

Miles of roads within 300 feet of perennial 

stream

.02 0 .02 0 0

Number of stream crossings on intermittent and 

ephemeral channels

1,481 1,035 1,495 1,090 957

Number of stream crossing on perennial 

streams

0 0 0 0 0

Miles of intermittent 

and ephemeral 

channels where 

motorized cross 

country use is allowed 

general motorized 

cross-country use

3,313.5 0 0 0 0

designated dispersed 

camping areas

0 223.5 0 223.5 186.1

designated OHV area 0 0 0 1.8 0

designated big game 

retrieval area

0 0 0 494.9 0

Miles of perennial

channels where 

motorized crosscountry use is allowed

general motorized 

cross-country use

1.7 0 0 0 0

designated dispersed 

camping areas

0 0 0 0 0

designated OHV area 0 0 0 0 0

designated big game

retrieval area

0 0 0 0 0

Baseline Conditions – Sediment and Streams

Due to unrestricted motorized cross-country travel, the baseline condition would continue to 

increase the potential for sediment to mobilize into streams across the entire project area. Within 

the analysis area there are no road crossings on the 1.7 miles of perennial streams within the 

project area. Currently, motorized cross-country use occurs across the analysis area with the 

potential to mobilize sediment on 1.7 miles of perennial stream and 3,313.5 miles of intermittent 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 153

and ephemeral channels with 1,481 crossings. These intermittent and ephemeral streams carry 

sediment into perennial streams where connected.

Alternative 1

This alternative creates the potential for sediment to increase on 4 percent of the project by 

proposing dispersed camping corridors, adding unauthorized roads to the system and designating 

them for motor vehicle use, constructing reroutes, and opening closed roads, which increase the 

potential for sediment yields to increase on 28,240 acres. Sediment yields are expected to 

improve on the remainder of the project area due to the restriction of motorized cross-country 

travel. In addition, designations result in 67 percent fewer crossings (2,897) on intermittent and 

ephemeral streams and no crossings on perennial streams. In addition, 612.6 fewer miles of road 

within 300 feet of intermittent and ephemeral channels and no designations within 300 feet of 

perennial streams, further decreases the potential for sediment yield from the baseline condition.

Alternative 2

This alternative does not propose any additional actions and would not result in an increased 

potential for sediment yields above the baseline condition. It does include a very small section 

(.02 mile) along a perennial stream which could increase sediment. Overall, it would reduce the 

potential for sediment yields by prohibiting motorized cross-country travel across the project 

area.

Alternative 3

This alternative has the potential to increase sediment yield on the most acres (29,653) and 

decrease sediment yield potential on the fewest acres (668,063) as compared to the baseline 

condition. These areas where the potential for sediment rates to increase are due to the inclusion 

of motorized big game retrieval corridors and designated motorized dispersed camping corridors. 

Alternative 4

This alternative has the most potential to decrease sediment inputs to streams, especially when 

compared to the baseline. Motorized big game retrieval is not proposed in this alternative. In 

addition, by designating 662.1 fewer miles of road within 300 feet of ephemeral and intermittent 

channels and no designations within 300 feet of perennial streams, the potential for sedimentation 

decreases from the baseline condition.

Cumulative Effects – Water Resources

Appendix D lists the past, present, and reasonable foreseeable future activities in the project area. 

The cumulative effect of interest is the watershed condition. The scale is Sixth Level (12-digit) 

HUC watersheds. The timeframe is 10 years, since the chosen alternative would be implemented 

and changes to roads such as obliteration may have occurred within this timeframe by then. 

Watershed condition as determined using the Watershed Condition Framework (WCF), 

considered the number of open roads in each watershed. The alternatives would change the 

number of open roads on National Forest System lands by varying amounts within each 

watershed. However, these changes when implemented in the 16 watersheds rated as “fair” would 

not affect the rating, regardless of the alternative selected. In addition, as calculated, the other 

watersheds would continue to be rated as “good.”
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

154 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Soil Condition

As described in the “Affected Environment” section, soil resources are assessed using three 

components: hydrologic, nutrient cycling, and stability. Soil compaction is assessed through the 

hydrologic function and nutrient cycling functions. Stability of soils is assessed through the 

erosion hazard rating. The analysis timeframe for effects to soil resources related to the proposed 

activities is 10 years. This is because in 10 years, it may be possible to observe changes in the 

chosen indicators related to the proposed actions. Ten years is enough time for soil compaction, 

loss of nutrients, and erosion to occur in new areas (Ampoorter et al. 2010). Ten years is enough 

time for changes to become apparent. Erosion can recover within 10 years through stabilization 

and revegetation. 

However, recovery from soil compaction and nutrient cycling is different. While, revegetation can 

reestablish within 10 years and reduce erosion, effects to soil compaction and nutrient cycling 

take longer to recover (Kolka and Smidt 2004, Froehlich et al. 1985, Webb et al., 1986). The 

analysis area is the project area since it is in this area where soils are affected. 

Soil Compaction and Nutrient Cycling

Nutrient losses and cycling are related to the vegetative and infiltration characteristics of a soil 

(USDA2005). Where soils are bare and compacted, as on a road or trail surface, the process of 

nutrient cycling is not effective since nutrients can’t accumulate. When roads can revegetate and 

begin to recover from soil compaction, nutrients can start to accumulate and cycle through soils 

again. So these two effects are linked. Therefore, the analysis for soil compaction can be used as a 

proxy for nutrient cycling.

There are two measures used to assess effects on soil compaction and nutrient cycling. The first 

measure is the total acres where activities impact soil compaction. The second measure utilizes 

the wheeled off-road vehicle limitation, an interpretation from the TEU data (USDA 2005). A 

severe rating for this interpretation means that soil productivity is at a high risk for impacts and 

off-road vehicle use is likely to result in site degradation. Table 48 shows the result of these 

calculations. 

Table 48. Acres of with potential for increased soil compaction and reduced nutrient 

cycling

Acres/Percent of Analysis Area

Baseline Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4

Wheeled 

off-road 

vehicle 

limitation

Severe

380,599 

54.6%

8,895

1.3%

0

0%

49,172

7.1%

7,390

1.1%

Moderate

309,019

44.3%

16,445

2.4%

0

0%

55,202

7.9%

14,425

2.1%

Slight

7,768

1.1%

133

<.1%

0

0%

173

<.1%

133

<.1%

Total acres with potential for 

increased soil compaction

697,716

100%

25,473

3.7%

0

0%

104,547

15.0%

21,948
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 155

Baseline

For the baseline condition, increased soil compaction and reduced nutrient cycling could continue 

to increase across the entire 697,716-acre project area due to motorized cross-country use. Over 

half (54.6%) of the analysis area has severe limitations for motorized off-road uses, meaning that 

site degradation is likely in these areas and may be already occurring. 

Alternative 1

This alternative would result in 25,473 acres where soil compaction would have the potential to 

increase as the result of new road construction to avoid private land and motorized dispersed 

camping corridors. Of this, 8,895 acres are on soils rated with a severe limitation for wheeled offroad vehicles.

Alternative 2

This alternative does not propose any actions other than closing the project area to motorized 

cross-country use, so there are no additional acres of potential for increased soil compaction 

related to this alternative. 

Alternative 3

This alternative has the potential to increase soil compaction on about 104,547 acres due the 

inclusion of motorized dispersed camping, motorized big game retrieval areas, and new 

construction to avoid private land. About 7.1 percent of the acres with an increased risk for

increased soil compaction and loss of nutrient cycling are rated with a severe limitation for 

wheeled off-road vehicles. 

Alternative 4

Like the other alternatives, this alternative has the potential to decrease soil compaction across the 

project area by prohibiting cross-country motorized use. Motorized dispersed camping and new 

construction to avoid private land has the potential to increase soil compaction on 21,948 acres. 

Of these acres, 7,390 are located on soils with a severe limitation for wheeled off-road vehicles.

Soil Stability – Erosion and Soil Loss

Exposed soil surfaces—such as roads—concentrate runoff which occurs on roads and trails, 

resulting in higher erosion rates and soil loss (Reid and Dunne 1984). Erosion and soil loss are 

components of soil stability. Soil stability is decreased when erosion and soil loss are increased.

Designating routes for travel affects the amount of erosion and sediment by changing the amount 

of use. The amount of motorized use on a road is related to the erosion and sediment yield, with 

the greatest amount of erosion found on the most intensely used road (MacDonald and Stednick 

2003, Zhi-Hua et al. 2009, Håkansson et al. 1988). Therefore, the amount of use on a forest road 

has the potential to affect the soil stability in terms of erosion which can lead to soil loss, 

sediment yields, and sedimentation into drainage channels. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

156 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Alternatives – Soil Stability (Erosion and Soil Loss)

The proposed activities that have the potential to change soil stability are listed in table 49 for 

each alternative. Some of these activities would result in more erosion and soil loss while other 

activities have the potential to reduce erosion and soil loss, thereby increasing soil stability. 

Table 49. Proposed activities by alternative with potential to change soil stability (in 

acres)

Activity Soil Stability 

Effect Baseline Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4

Restrict NFS roads to 

administrative use

Increase 0 378.2 0 367.1 477

Acres open to unrestricted 

motorized cross-country 

travel

Decrease 697,716 0 0 0 0

Designated area open to OHV 

use

Decrease 0 0 0 756 0

Closed roads changed to open 

roads and designated for all 

motorized vehicles

Decrease 0 14.7 0 16.9 10.6

Unauthorized roads added to 

the system and designated for 

all motorized vehicles

Decrease 0 17 0 29.2 17.3

Construct new road for 

reroutes 

Decrease 0 4.5 0 6.4 3.7

Acres open to dispersed 

camping 

Decrease 697,716 25,465.7 0 25,465.7 21,944.1

Designate motorized big 

game retrieval corridors

Decrease 0 0 0 86,683.7 0

The measure for soil stability is acres of increased or decreased soil stability related to the 

activities and miles of road designated on severe erosion hazard soils. Erosion hazard is an 

interpretation derived from the TEU data. Severe erosion hazard indicates that rates of soil loss 

have a high probability of lowering site productivity before mitigating measures can be applied. 

These measures can be found in table 50.

Table 50. Measures for the potential for reduced or improved soil stability

Acres/Percent of Analysis Area

Baseline Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4

Acres with 

potential for 

reduced soil 

stability

Severe

193,550

27.7%

4,096

.5%

0

0%

25,212

3.6%

3,355

.5%

Moderate

263,022

37.7%

6,102

.9%

0

0%

31,951

4.6%

4,964

.7%

Slight

240,814

34.5%

15,309

2.2%

0

0%

47,427

6.8%

13,659

2.0%
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 157

Acres/Percent of Analysis Area

Baseline Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4

Acres with potential for 

improved soil stability

0

0%

647,716

93%

697,716

100%

584,727

84%

675,717

97%

Currently, because the project area is open to motorized cross-country travel, decreased soil 

stability could continue to occur across the entire 697,716 acres of the project area. Within these 

acres, 193,550 acres (27.7 percent) of the area are located on soils with a severe erosion hazard 

rating.

Alternative 1

Soil stability could improve across much of the project area largely by prohibiting motorized 

cross-country travel and designating roads. Restricting travel on 378.2 acres of road to 

administrative use improves soil stability along these roads. Additional proposals of adding new 

roads, designating dispersed camping areas, and new construction in alternative 1 could lead to 

decreased soil stability on 25,507 acres. Of these acres, 4,096 acres are rated with a severe 

erosion hazard and 6,102 acres with a moderate rating. 

Alternative 2 

Prohibition of motorized cross-country travel across the project area would lead to improved soil 

stability. Unlike the other alternatives, this alternative does not propose added activities which 

would further decrease soil stability beyond the baseline condition. While the measure for acres 

with the potential for improved stability shows the entire project area, improvement of soil 

stability would not occur on designated road surfaces. 

Alternative 3 

While the restriction of motorized cross-country travel improves conditions for soil stability 

across the project area, this benefit is reduced by the designation of corridors for motorized 

dispersed camping, motorized big game retrieval, new construction to avoid private lands, a 

designated OHV area, designating closed roads, and unauthorized roads. These activities have the 

potential to reduce soil stability on 104,590 acres. Of these acres, 25,212 acres are located on 

severe erosion hazard rated soils and 31,951 acres with a moderate erosion hazard. 

Alternative 4 

Like alternative 2, this alternative does not proposed motorized big game retrieval or a designated 

OHV area. Motorized cross-country travel would be prohibited across the project area leading to 

overall improved soil stability. Designation of corridors for motorized dispersed camping, new 

construction to avoid private lands, designating closed roads, and unauthorized roads could result 

in 21,978 acres where soil stability could be reduced. Of these acres, 3,355 are located on soils 

rated with a severe erosion hazard rating and 4,964 acres with a moderate rating. 

Cumulative Effects – Soil

Appendix D of this environmental assessment lists the past, present, and reasonable foreseeable 

future activities in the project area. The spatial extend for potential cumulative effects to soil 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

158 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

condition is the entire Magdalena Ranger District. The timing is the recovery period of soil 

condition, at least 10 years since it is within this timeframe that change could become apparent. 

Soil conditions have been affected by multiple activities including the miles of unauthorized 

roads and ground disturbance from unrestricted motorized use. All of the alternatives propose to 

prohibit motorized cross-country travel across the project area. Effective implementation of any 

of the alternatives would lead to improved soil condition in many areas across the project area by 

allowing soils to begin restoration by stabilizing and revegetating.

Fire and Fuels

The following analysis is based on the fire and fuels specialist report prepared by Manual 

Martinez, district fire management officer. This report is on file in the project record.

Effects on fuel and fire conditions will be assessed for the area based upon the referenced 

regulatory framework and best available science. Effects of alternatives on wildfire suppression 

were determined by intuitive reasoning and cause and effect relationship experience, as wildfires 

are unplanned events in somewhat random locations and cannot be correlated to motorized travel. 

Effects on fuels management would also be generalized, as all future fuels treatment projects 

needing motorized access would be assessed by its own NEPA analysis. 

Fire Behavior

Fire behavior is a function of fuels, weather, and topography. Of all the elements influencing fire 

behavior, only fuels can be manipulated. Throughout much of the American Southwest, the fine 

fuels such as grasses, forbs, and pine litter are important fuels that allow fire to spread. In most 

areas, human impacts have had significant effects on the availability of these fuels. 

Fuels Management

Fuels management is a process of managing forest vegetation to successfully lessen the severity 

and risk of a potentially uncharacteristic wildfire. Fuels management treatments are often 

designed to restore and maintain forest heath by providing for a diverse ecological system. The 

objective of fuels management is to manage and maintain landscapes in a resilient condition so 

they have a good chance of surviving drought, fire, insects, and disease. This is done strategically 

through planning and implementing a range of hazardous fuels activities. 

Historical Condition

Fire has played an important role in all ecosystems in the Southwest, but the frequency of this 

important disturbance mechanism has been highly variable. Historically, fires burned throughout 

the area relatively frequently. These fires were ignited by both humans and lightning. A major 

shift occurred around the turn of the 20th century, when land management activities such as fire 

suppression, timber harvesting, and grazing programs affected vegetation and fire regimes within 

the area. 

Ranchers and farmers feared the loss of pasture and agricultural lands, and forest fires threatened 

homes and timber resources. This effect has been most pronounced in forest types that would 

have historically been maintained with frequent, low-intensity fire. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 159

Fire Regime

Fire regime is a description of the role fire plays in an ecosystem in the absence of modern human 

mechanical intervention, including the influence of aboriginal burning (Agee, 1993). Five 

primary fire regime groups have been developed by Hardy et al. (2001) and Schmidt et al. (2002). 

These are coarse scaled and simplified categories that assist in understanding the ecological 

fundamentals of the biotic systems, at different elevations, that occur on the landscape and its 

previous relationship with fire as a process which acted upon them at different frequencies and 

severities for thousands of years. Elevations on the Magdalena Ranger District range from 5,000 

to 11,000 feet.

 Fire Regime I: 0–35 year frequency and low (surface fires most common) to mixed 

severity (less than 75 percent of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced)

 Fire Regime II: 0–35 year frequency and high (stand replacement) severity (greater than 

75 percent of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced)

 Fire Regime III: 35–100+ year frequency and mixed severity (less than 75 percent of the 

dominant overstory vegetation replaced)

 Fire Regime IV: 35–100+ year frequency and high (stand replacement) severity (greater 

than 75 percent of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced)

 Fire Regime V: 200+ year frequency and high (stand replacement) severity

Condition Class

A fire regime condition class (FRCC) is a classification of the amount of departure from the 

natural regime (Hann and Bunnell 2001). Coarse-scale FRCC classes have been defined and 

mapped by Hardy et al.. (2001) and Schmidt et al.. (2001) (FRCC). They include three condition 

classes for each fire regime. The classification is based on a relative measure describing the 

degree of departure from the historical natural fire regime. This departure results in changes to 

one (or more) of the following ecological components: vegetation characteristics (species 

composition, structural stages, stand age, canopy closure, and mosaic pattern); fuel composition; 

fire frequency, severity, and pattern; and other associated disturbances (e.g. insect and disease 

mortality, grazing, and drought). There are no wildland vegetation and fuel conditions or wildland 

fire situations that do not fit within one of the three classes.

The three classes are based on low (FRCC 1), moderate (FRCC 2), and high (FRCC 3) departure 

from the central tendency of the natural (historical) regime (Hann and Bunnell 2001, Hardy et al.. 

2001, Schmidt et al.. 2002). The central tendency is a composite estimate of vegetation 

characteristics (species composition, structural stages, stand age, canopy closure, and mosaic 

pattern); fuel composition; fire frequency, severity, and pattern; and other associated natural 

disturbances. Low departure is considered to be within the natural (historical) range of variability, 

while moderate and high departures are outside.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

160 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Table 51. Fire Regime Condition Class

Condition Class Description Potential Risks

Condition Class 1 Within the natural 

(historical) range of 

variability of vegetation 

characteristics; fuel 

composition; fire frequency, 

severity, and pattern; and 

other associated 

disturbances.

 Fire behavior, effects, and other associated 

disturbances are similar to those that occurred prior to 

fire exclusion (suppression) and other types of 

management that do not mimic the natural fire regime 

and associated vegetation and fuel characteristics.

 Composition and structure of vegetation and fuels are 

similar to the natural (historical) regime.

 Risk of loss of key ecosystem components (e.g. native 

species, large trees, and soil) are low.

Condition Class 2 Moderate departure from the 

natural (historical) regime of 

vegetation characteristics; 

fuel composition; fire 

frequency, severity, and 

pattern; and other associated 

disturbances.

 Fire behavior, effects, and other associated 

disturbances are moderately departed (more or less 

severe).

 Composition and structure of vegetation and fuel are 

moderately altered.

 Uncharacteristic conditions range from low to 

moderate.

 Risk of loss of key ecosystem components are 

moderate.

Condition Class 3 High departure from the 

natural (historical) regime of 

vegetation characteristics; 

fuel composition; fire 

frequency, severity, and 

pattern; and other associated 

disturbances

 Fire behavior, effect, and other associated disturbances 

are highly departed (more or less severe).

 Composition and structure of vegetation and fuel are 

highly altered.

 Uncharacteristic conditions range from moderate to 

high.

 Risk of loss of key ecosystem components are high.

Characteristic vegetation and fuel conditions are considered to be those that occurred within the 

natural (historical) fire regime. Uncharacteristic conditions are considered to be those that did not 

occur within the natural (historical) fire regime, such as invasive species (e.g. weeds, insects, and 

diseases), “high graded” forest composition and structure (e.g. large trees removed in a frequent 

surface fire regime), or repeated annual grazing that maintains grassy fuels across relatively large 

areas at levels that will not carry a surface fire. Determination of amount of departure is based on 

comparison of a composite measure of fire regime attributes (vegetation characteristics; fuel 

composition; fire frequency, severity, and pattern) to the central tendency of the natural 

(historical) fire regime. The amount of departure is then classified to determine the fire regime 

condition class. A simplified description of the fire regime condition classes and associated 

potential risks follow.

Existing Condition

Elevations on the Magdalena Ranger District range from 5,000.to 11,000 feet. Due to the lateserial closed state of existing vegetation, increased fuel loadings, and absence of fire, the majority 

of the project area is at risk for loss of key ecosystem component. Departure from the natural 

regime has occurred across the project area, and current conditions indicate the project area has a 

high degree of departure from the natural regime. 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 161

Vegetation groups have been mapped for the Cibola National Forest and are assimilated with fire 

regimes. The dry mixed conifer forest group including ponderosa pine sites and lower elevation 

conifer is most closely represented by Fire Regime I. Fire Regime II is tied to the hot dry 

shrublands and woodlands including piñon-juniper. The mid-elevation mixed conifer group is 

best represented by Fire Regime III. The middle to high elevation spruce-fir vegetative group is 

represented by Fire Regime IV. Finally, the high elevation shrub group including Gambel oak is 

represented by Fire Regime V.

Much of this is due to overstocked tree densities in today’s forest which are far greater than they 

were historically. Many areas in the project area are characterized as “dog hair” thickets of young 

pines with a heavy fuel load of pine needles and other litter on the forest floor. Now in mixed 

conifer forest, however, they naturally tend to burn hotter but not as often. Climate change could 

also be a contributing factor in today’s large fire growth.

Table 52. Large fires within the last 7 years

Fire Name Year Cause Total Acres

Davenport 2004 Lightning 194

Red 2005 Lightning 19

Turkey Park 2005 Lightning 20

Davenport 2005 Lightning 40

Main 2006 Lightning 50

Wasp 2007 Lightning 40

Burma 2008 Lightning 98

Wild Bull 2008 Lightning 122

Shipman 2008 Lightning 146

Fisher 2009 Lightning 407

Wood 2010 Lightning 22

Total 1,158

Table 53. Fire regimes and existing condition class within the Magdalena 

travel management area

Fire Regime

Group

Historic Fire 

Return Interval

Condition 

Class

Approx. Percentage 

Within Project Area

I 0 – 35 years 2–3 34%

II 0 – 35 years 3 32%

III 35 – 100+ years 3 30%

IV 35 – 100+ years 3 4%

V >200 years 3 0%

The fire program will not be affected by any changes to the transportation system. Road access 

will still be utilized to provide fire resources an efficient wildfire response. The road system could 

also be used for containment lines on both wildfire and prescribed fire situations. Each fuels 

project would still require its own NEPA analysis on the transportation system.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

162 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Risk

Fire hazard is most commonly associated with the difficulty of controlling wildfire events. 

Characteristics of fire behavior such as intensity, rate of spread, and resistance to control are 

generally utilized to determine and describe the hazard. As Brown et al. (2003) indicated, “Fire 

severity is considered an element of fire hazard.” More importantly related to this report, is fire 

risk. Fire risk is the chance of a fire start from an ignition source and is based on the frequency of 

historical fire starts. 

According to data for the past 7 years, human causes account for 10 percent of the fires within the 

project area and lightning accounts for the remaining 90 percent. Human-caused fires have the 

same risk of becoming a uncharacteristic fire as lightning-caused fire. National and regional fire 

management policy gives fire managers opportunities to respond appropriately to all wildfires, 

though the district does not have many human-caused incidents. Table 54 summarizes the number 

of human-caused fires to lightning fires on the district. The project area borders private property, 

State, BLM, and reservation lands. This can also contribute to increased risk of human-caused 

fires. The existing fuel conditions and high values at risk that border the forest dictate fire 

management to make the appropriate response in determining a suppression strategy 

(management discretion on how to manage fires) on all of the fires started on Forest Service 

lands.

Table 54. Total statistical fires on the district

Year Lightning Caused Human Caused Total

2004 12 4 16

2005 10 2 12

2006 35 2 37

2007 23 2 24

2008 15 0 15

2009 11 0 11

2010 5 2 7

Total 111 12 123

Environmental Consequences

The Travel Management Rule (36 CFR 212.51(a)) states that, “Motor vehicle use on National 

Forest System roads, NFS trails, and in areas on NFS lands shall be designated by vehicle class, 

and if appropriate, by time of year, by the responsible official on administrative units or ranger 

districts of the National Forest System.” Once these roads, trails, and areas have been designated 

and identified on a motor vehicle use map (MVUM), motor vehicle use off of the designated 

system will be prohibited (36 CFR 212.50 (a)). 

The following vehicles and uses are exempted from these designations: (1) aircraft; (2) 

watercraft; (3) over-snow vehicles; (4) limited administrative use by the Forest Service; (5) use of 

any fire, military, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle for emergency purposes; (6) authorized 

use of any combat or combat support vehicle for national defense purposes; (7) law enforcement 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 163

response to violations of law; and (8) motor vehicle use that is specifically authorized under a 

written authorization issued under Federal law or regulation (36 CFR 212.51(a)).

It is important to note that fire is boundaryless by nature. There are many elements, some of them 

discussed within this report, that drive fire growth and spread potential. It is, therefore,

understood that cumulative effects, onsite land management practices, and offsite land 

management practices are all co-related and overall risk is shared. 

The Magdalena fire management program will not be greatly impacted by any of the travel 

management alternatives. Motorized access for engines as well as crews is essential for a timely 

response. Wilderness guidelines for suppression activities would not be altered. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

Alternative 1

With the proposal of changing the status of 400.5 miles of open national forest roads to either 

closed (maintenance level 1) or restricted to administrative use only (maintenance level 2), this 

would lower the overall risk of fire. By limiting users to specified roads and designating a 600-

foot-wide corridor, 300 feet on either side of 374.4 miles of designated roads for dispersed 

camping, the risk of human-caused fires may decrease. Construction of 4.5 miles of road on the 

district does not affect the condition of the landscape. The potential for large fire growth is not 

reduced, except in this small affected area.

Alternative 2

Alternative 2 would not change the existing condition. There would be no changes in the 

frequency of wildland fire and no additional effects on fuel reduction projects to those described 

under the existing condition. If unmanaged motorized recreation increases above current levels, 

there may be an increase in human-caused fires on current routes and new user-created routes.

Alternative 3

This alternative would allow for additional motorized access of 804.3 miles of road systems and 

756 acres of motorized recreational opportunities when compared to alternatives 1 and 4. Under 

this alternative, the risk of human-caused fires may increase slightly. With the proposed OHV use 

of 756 acres in the southern part of the San Mateo Mountains in sections 2 and 3, T9S, R5W, this 

would increase patrol times for fire crews, as the proposed area is 2.5 hours from the district

office. This may result in the case of a fire start, a fire increasing in size before any resources can 

get on scene. 

By constructing 6.4 miles of newly constructed road reroutes (on the west side of the San Mateo 

Mountain range), this would provide fire crews access and timely response times to limit fire 

growth.

Alternative 4

This alternative would have the fewest miles (693.8) of open roads among all the alternatives. 

This would not affect fire personnel from responding to fire calls, as roads would be 

administratively authorized for emergency use. However, there could be fewer human-caused fire 

ignitions under this alternative due to less public access. Fuels projects would not be affected and 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

164 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

would continue as planned. This alternative would also provide the least amount of dispersed 

camping (321.2 miles). This would decrease patrol times for fire crews, but would still give initial 

attack forces easier access and quicker response to ignitions in dispersed camping corridors.

Effects Common to All Alternatives 

With the population increase anticipated to continue, it can be expected that use across the district

will increase at an equal rate. Consideration of increased risk could be managed under the Cibola 

fire management plan, which would restrict or close these areas under extreme fire conditions. 

Motorized access to areas for future forest vegetation management projects would require 

separate NEPA analysis for each individual project. 

Cumulative Effects

Effects of motorized vehicle travel to wildfire suppression can’t be quantified. Fires are random 

events in random locations. It would be logical to say that better quality roads and more access 

could help crews with response times for initial attack action. This should generally result in 

smaller fires where there is access by motorized travel. Potential alternatives with more roads, 

however, offer additional areas accessible to people in vehicles and a corresponding higher risk of 

human-caused fires. 

There are no cumulative, irretrievable, or irreversible effects to fire suppression or fuels 

management from any alternative. 

Summary

Action alternatives would not be expected to create unsafe or significantly higher fire danger. The 

primary effects of the action alternatives would be utilizing system routes to provide the best 

experience for the user while providing for safety. 

The decision process has many variables, and consideration of all elements must be weighed. 

Demand for use of the project areas has changed through the centuries and the greatest unknown 

factor involves human activities and influences. Substantial evidence does not exist to determine 

the end risk of the alternative to be selected. 

Consistency with Regulatory Framework

The principal policy document relevant to fire management on the forest is the “Cibola National 

Forest Land and Resource Management Plan” (LRMP), commonly referred to as the Forest Plan. 

The Forest Plan provides standards and guidelines for the management of fuels. The fire 

management plan formally documents the fire program based upon the LRMP. These standards 

and objectives are addressed by implementing the fire management options as allowed in the 

Forest Plan. The objectives and goals expressed in this document are in accordance with the 

framework of the Cibola fire management plan.

Range

The following analysis is based on the range specialist report prepared by Tina Cason, range 

management specialist. This report is on file in the project record.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 165

Affected Environment

The grazing history on the Magdalena Ranger District dates back to before 1906 when the Forest 

Reserves came under the management of the newly formed Forest Service. Historic accounts 

indicate that sheep, cattle, and horses traditionally grazed this area. In 1885, ranchers in eastern 

Arizona and western New Mexico began driving their livestock to the Magdalena Railhead along 

the Magdalena Stock Driveway Trail. The driveway, as the trail came to be known, provided 

forage for trailing herds; however, it was often overused by adjoining ranches and lingering trail 

herds. Unregulated grazing took place until 1934 when the Taylor Grazing Act was signed by 

President Roosevelt. This act intended to “stop injury to the public grazing lands by preventing 

overgrazing and soil deterioration; to stabilize the livestock industry dependent upon the public 

range” (USDI 1988). In the 1940s, ranchers shifted from sheep to cattle, which remains the 

primary livestock being grazed on the district.

The assessment of rangeland for this project was based on best available data sources such as 

invasive weed monitoring and field rangeland utilization assessments. Rangeland understory 

vegetation was assessed using local management knowledge and existing inventory data. 

Motorized recreational activities along with many other public activities have introduced invasive 

plant species onto forest lands. There is no method to determine exactly when or how a certain 

species gained access and establishment on forest lands. Undesired plants or invasive weeds pose 

a serious and increasing threat to New Mexico’s environment and economy. These invasive 

species are tough competitors and can spread rapidly, disrupting native systems and having 

negative impacts on native plant species. While these impacts are species specific, invasive 

species have been documented to cause the following:

 Displacement of native plants and animals

 Increased fire danger

 Increased soil erosion

 Increased flood severity

 Increased soil salinity

 Decreased water quality

Two noxious weeds are known to be on the district: tamarisk and cheatgrass. Tamarisk is found in 

small ephemeral drainages and around springs on the north side of the district. There is also a 

small amount of cheatgrass on the south side. These plants out-compete native plants for water, 

nutrients, light, and space. They can severely affect wildlife habitat, soil stability, and forage 

production if they are not controlled. Invasive/exotic plants are spread through human activities 

such as unrestricted motorized travel, foot traffic, and livestock.

There are 38 active grazing allotments on the Magdalena Ranger District which authorizes both 

seasonal and yearlong term grazing permits. Following National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) review, the term grazing permits are issued for 10 years. Approximately 90 percent of 

allotments on the Magdalena Ranger District have current NEPA decisions. Term grazing permit 

holders are aware of the Travel Management Rule and have participated in the NEPA process by 

providing their input concerning a designated road system. They have identified single purpose 

roads and needs for cross-country travel related to their authorized grazing activities. This 

coordination and consultation with the term grazing permit holders has been done in accordance 

with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Section 402 (d)(e).
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

166 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Term grazing permits fit in under Item 8 of exempted uses (36 CFR 212.51(a)). Motorized travel 

off the designated road system by term grazing permit holders is based on need related to carrying 

out the required management practices in compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit. 

Permittees would continue to use existing roads and trails, along with some off-road travel, to 

manage livestock and maintain range improvements such as fences, corrals, and water 

developments as specified in their permits.

Environmental Consequences

Baseline Conditions

Livestock grazing occurs on 38 allotments on the Magdalena Ranger District. Permittees use 

existing system roads and trails as well as cross-country travel to manage livestock and livestock 

improvements. Management of range improvements currently occurs year round. Since motorized 

cross-country travel is unrestricted outside of wilderness, permittees are allowed to drive where 

necessary to maintain their allotment without this access being specified in the term grazing 

permit.

Alternative 1

If the proposed action is implemented, there would be no effect on the compliance of permittees 

with the terms and conditions of their grazing permit, because motor vehicle use that is 

specifically authorized under a written authorization issued under Federal law or regulations is 

exempt from the travel management designations. Adding roads to the system and changing 

maintenance level 1 roads to maintenance level 2 roads, in the proposed action, would have no 

effect on grazing and grazing permittees, due to the small number of roads and road miles that 

would be brought into the road system. Implementation of the proposed action would limit 

motorized travel to a designated system of roads, resulting in the reduced risk or threat of 

invasive plant species establishing or increasing in population. 

Alternative 2

The existing system alternative would result in no change to the current road system. Under this 

alternative, there would be no effect on grazing and grazing permittees because the roads that are 

currently being used would continue to be in use. The permittees would receive written 

authorization to use nondesignated roads and provide for limited off-road use though the grazing 

permits annual operating instructions (AOI) for the maintenance and construction of range 

improvements. 

Alternative 3

Implementation of this alternative would result in designating more roads for motorized use than 

under alternatives 1 and 4, as well as opening 86,683.7 acres for motorized big game retrieval. 

Reopening 16.9 miles of closed roads, adding 29.2 miles of unauthorized roads to the system and 

designating them for motor vehicle use, and constructing 6.4 miles of new roads to avoid private 

land would not affect management of grazing activities on the district. Permittees would be 

authorized (under permit) to access and maintain range improvement facilities throughout the 

district.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 167

This alternative would potentially have a higher risk to rangeland understory vegetation due to the 

86,683.7 acres that would become open to motorized big game retrieval and the 25,465.7 acres 

for motorized dispersed camping corridors. Adding 6.4 miles of road reroutes to access 

inaccessible areas of the district would also increase the risk to rangeland understory vegetation 

due to opening undisturbed areas to a higher risk of exposure to invasive species which could be 

spread by a vehicle traveling from an area contaminated by invasive species. 

Alternative 4

This alternative would designate fewer roads for motorized use on the district, lowering the 

number of miles designated for motorized dispersed camping corridors and prohibiting motorized 

cross country big game retrieval. This alternative would not affect management of grazing on the 

district, however, it will increase the miles of roads used through permit administration of AOIs. 

This alternative could have the lowest risk to rangeland understory vegetation from invasive 

plants and lowering the miles of motorized dispersed camping corridors on the district. 

Cumulative Effects

Within the foreseeable future (10 years), term grazing permittees will continue to manage 

livestock and range improvements through the terms of their grazing permits on the Magdalena 

Ranger District. This is not likely to change as a result of any foreseeable future projects. There 

are no effects on range management associated with any of the alternatives; therefore, 

implementation of the Travel Management Rule would not contribute to cumulative effects upon 

range management. A reduction in the miles of roads available to motorized use under all 

alternatives would provide for a reduction to the spread of invasion plant species.

Climate Change

The USDA Forest Service Southwestern Regional Office planning program has summarized 

some ecological and socioeconomic effects of climate change (Periman 2008). The following is 

an excerpt of that information. 

The state of knowledge needed to address climate change at the forest scale is still evolving. Most 

global climate models are not yet suitable to apply to land management at the forest scale. This 

limits regional analysis of potential effects especially for a specific project. At a more local scale, 

paleo-environmental studies of changing southwestern climate may provide limited historical 

ecological context for ecosystem variability and climate change. These can provide limited 

knowledge about past climate changes, patterns of precipitation, drought severity, and changes in 

vegetation patterns.

Climate modelers generally agree that the Southwestern United States is experiencing a drying 

trend that will continue into the later part of the 21st century. In the recent past, two droughts 

occurred: one in the 1930s (the Dustbowl) and one in the 1950s (the Southwestern Drought). 

Climate model scenarios suggest that the warming trend observed in the last 100 years may 

continue into the next century with the greatest warming occurring during the winter. Some 

climate models predict 2 to 3 degree temperature changes in the next 20 years. Such a 

temperature change could result in limited water supplies, alter fire regimes, and influence the 

distribution and abundance of animal and plant species.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

168 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Some potential ecological implications of climate change trends include:

 More extreme disturbance events such as wildfires, intense rain and wind events;

 Greater vulnerability to the spread of invasive plant species;

 Long-term shifts in vegetation patterns, such as cold tolerant vegetation moving upslope 

or disappearing in some areas; and

 Changes in wildlife population, diversity, viability, and migration patterns.

Some potential socioeconomic effects of climate change trends include:

 Water shortages and

 Impacts on amenities, and goods and service derived from forest products.

Environmental Consequences

The baseline conditions related to motorized use include the following: there are 697,716 acres 

that are currently open to motorized cross-country travel on the Magdalena Ranger District, 

which represents 88 percent of the Magdalena Ranger District (791,707 acres). As a result of 

unrestricted motorized cross-country travel, there has been a proliferation of unauthorized roads. 

Motorized dispersed camping is currently unrestricted in the areas open to motorized crosscountry travel. 

There are 1,171.4 miles of National Forest System roads on the Magdalena Ranger District open 

to general motorized use. 

Climate change from this project would be difficult to measure, but the trend from this activity 

would likely not affect climate change, although it would reduce the amount of greenhouse gases 

produced on the district. Climate change could impact the project area in the form of lengthening 

the current drought trend. Damage to resources from motorized cross-country travel would be 

exacerbated by climate change, especially drought, if lower precipitation prevented or reduced 

reestablishment of vegetation. Repeated vehicle traffic along unauthorized routes would result in 

the loss of plant cover and the potential for soil erosion. Cross-country travel could increase areas 

of bare ground that are vulnerable to soil movement. Bare soil is also more vulnerable to the 

spread of invasive vegetation.

Effects Common to All Action Alternatives

All action alternatives would reduce the miles of roads available for motorized vehicles and likely 

reduce the introduction and spread of invasive/exotic plants. Climate change could lead to 

changes in vegetation composition and structure. The elimination of cross-country travel in all the 

alternatives would decrease the potential for motorized use to contribute to climate change related 

vegetation composition and structure changes when compared to the baseline conditions.

Alternative 1

Compared to the baseline, alternative 1 reduces the number of miles of system roads designated 

for motor vehicle use. This alternative prohibits all cross-country motorized travel; the 

designation includes the limited use of motor vehicles within 300 feet either side of 374.4 miles 

of certain specified roads for the purpose of motorized dispersed camping. The alternative would 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 169

reduce the limited climate effect of the baseline by designating fewer miles of road and 

establishing dispersed camping corridors where vegetation may be impacted. Although climate 

change could impact the project area in the form of lengthening the current drought trend, 

restricting cross-country travel would allow areas to revegetate.

Alternative 2

Compared to the baseline, alternative 2 increases the number of miles of system roads designated 

for motor vehicle use. This increase is due to the inclusion of road segments on private inholdings 

for which the Forest Service does not have a right-of-way. This alternative would restrict crosscountry travel, allowing for areas that may have lost vegetation from motorized cross-country use 

to recover.

Alternative 3

Compared to the baseline, alternative 3 reduces the number of miles of system roads designated 

for motor vehicle use. This alternative prohibits all cross-country motorized travel, allows for 

374.4 miles of motorized dispersed camping corridors, big game retrieval along 342.5 miles of 

road, and establishes a 756-acre area designated for motor vehicle use. The alternative would 

reduce the limited climate effect of the baseline by designating fewer miles of road and 

establishing dispersed camping corridors where vegetation may be impacted. 

Although climate change could impact the project area in the form of lengthening the current 

drought trend, prohibiting cross-country travel and designating a motor vehicle use area would 

allow areas to re-vegetate. Big game retrieval would have a minimal effect on climate change.

Alternative 4

Compared to the baseline, Alternative 4 reduces the number of miles of system road designated of 

motor vehicle use. This alternative would prohibit all cross-country travel, allowing for areas that 

may have lost vegetation from cross-country use to recover.

Cumulative Effects

Motorized vehicle use will continue on the Magdalena Ranger District. This is not changed as a 

result of any foreseeable future projects. There are no effects on climate change associated with 

any of the alternatives; therefore, implementation of the Travel Management Rule would not 

contribute to cumulative effects upon climate change. 

Inventoried Roadless Areas

Table 55 summarizes the acreages for each of the eight inventoried roadless areas (IRAs) located 

on the Magdalena Ranger District, which total 205,972 acres. Figure 4 shows a map of the 

inventoried roadless areas. Table 56 provides the number of system roads or road segments within 

each of the eight inventoried roadless areas. The eight IRAs are: 

 Bear Gallinas Mountains

○ Goat Spring IRA

○ Scott Mesa IRA 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

170 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

 Datil Mountains

○ Datil IRA 

○ Madre Mountains IRA 

 Magdalena Mountains 

○ Ryan Hill IRA 

 San Mateo Mountains

○ Apache Kid Contiguous IRA

○ San Jose IRA

○ White Cap IRA 

Table 55. Magdalena inventoried roadless areas

Inventoried Roadless Area Acres

Goat Spring 5,757

Scott Mesa 39,534

Datil 13,974

Madre Mountain 19,855

Ryan Hill 34,286

Apache Kid Contiguous 67,570

San Jose 16,957

White Cap 8,039

Total 205,972
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 171

Figure 4. Inventoried roadless areas 
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

172 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Table 56. Number of system roads or segments located within each IRA

Goat Springs IRA

FS Road Numbers

354 354BB 354E1 506AA 506E

354AA 354C 354EE 506AC 506G

354B 354D 506A*D 506B

Scott Mesa IRA

FS Road Numbers

123B 123GB 24CA*B 354WC 506L

123BB 123Q 24CB 467 CR12A*

123F 123QA 24CE 467D CR12B*

123FAB 24A 354P 506 CR12C*

123FB 24BJ 354PA 506I NM169*

123GA 24C 354WB 506K

*These are county or state roads that vacated their rights-of-way, but the numbers never changed to a Forest Service 

road number. They are still within the IRA.

Datil IRA

FS Road Numbers

14*A 505BJ 526 532 534B

Madre Mountain IRA

FS Road Numbers

100Z 409 419*A 434 511*D

1508 412 420 437 512*D

364 416 422AA 440 515A

365 417 424 459B 6

400AA 418A 433 461

Ryan Hill IRA

FS Road Numbers

214 227AA 230 247 37

215 227B 231*B 247A 37–38

217 228 232X 248 38

218 229 234B 249 472B

227
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 173

Apache Kid Contiguous IRA

FS Road Numbers

1010 331A 907 965 977

1011 332 912 965A 978

1012 332A 912A 966 980

1013 337 913 966A 981

1014 377X 917 967 982

1040 378A 918 967A 984

1041 478B 955A 967B 986A

1042 511 958 968 986B

1043 76 959A 969 986C

1108 86 959B 970 991

138A 871 96 971 993

140 873 962 971A 994

140B 874 962A 972 995

225 896A 963 974 996

225Z 905 964 975 997

330 906 964A 976

San Jose IRA

FS Road Numbers

919 921 923 926 944A

920 921A 924 932 945A

920A 922 925 935A 953

920A1 922A 925A 942 955

White Cap IRA

FS Road Numbers

1045 1050 1055 56 873.1

1047 1054 1072 57A

Number of road segments within inventoried roadless areas = 218

Affected Environment

Under the Roadless Area Conservation Final Rule, management actions that do not require the 

construction of new roads will still be allowed, including activities such as timber harvesting for 

clearly defined, limited purposes, development of valid claims of locatable minerals, grazing of 

livestock, and off-highway vehicle use where specifically permitted (page 3,250 of Volume 66, 

No. 9 of the Federal Register (36 CFR Part 29)).
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

174 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

The Roadless Area Conservation Act, Final Rule, identifies nine characteristics that are used in 

defining an inventoried roadless area (36 CFR 294, 11; p 3272). Roadless area characteristics, 

resources, or features that are often present in and characterize inventoried roadless areas include:

1. High quality or undisturbed soil, water, and air;

2. Sources of public drinking water;

3. Diversity of plant and animal communities;

4. Habitat for threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, and sensitive species and for 

those species dependent on large, undisturbed areas of land;

5. Primitive, semiprimitive nonmotorized and semiprimitive motorized classes of dispersed 

recreation;

6. Reference landscapes;

7. Natural appearing landscapes with high scenic quality;

8. Traditional cultural properties and sacred sites; and

9. Other locally identified unique characteristics.

The effects on the nine characteristics are not specifically analyzed in this section. They have 

been analyzed within the different resource areas identified in this chapter.

Action Common to All Alternatives

All open system road segments located within the boundaries of the eight inventoried roadless 

areas would be managed per the requirements and guidance provide in the Roadless Area 

Conservation Final Rule (Volume 66, No. 9 of the Federal Register (36 CFR Part 294)).

Environmental Consequences

Baseline

There are 697,716 acres currently open to motorized cross-country travel on the Magdalena 

Ranger District, which represents 88 percent of the Magdalena Ranger District (791,707 acres). 

Since cross-country travel has been permitted, there has been a proliferation of unauthorized 

roads. Motorized dispersed camping is unrestricted in the areas open to motorized cross-country 

travel. There are 1,171.4 miles of National Forest System roads on the Magdalena Ranger District 

open to general motorized use. 

There are 218 road segments of open system roads located within the boundaries of the 

Magdalena Ranger District’s eight inventoried roadless areas. There are no effects to the roadless 

characteristics under the baseline.

Alternative 1

Compared to the baseline, alternative 1 has fewer miles of system roads within the IRAs. Under 

this alternative, 146 road segments would be designated for motorized use within the IRAs. The 

reduction in the numbers of roads within the IRAs would have a beneficial effect. Under this 

alternative, the following roads would not be designated for motor vehicle use:
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 175

 Goats Springs IRA: FR 354D

 Scott Mesa IRA: FR 123BB, FR 123GA, FR 123GB, FR 24A, FR 506I,CR 12A, CR

12B, and CR 12C.

 Datil IRA: FR 497, FR 532, and FR 537A.

 Madre Mountain IRA: None.

 Ryan Hill IRA: FR 217, FR 247, and FR 38.

 Apache Kid Contiguous IRA: FR 1010, FR 1011, FR 1012, FR 1013, FR 1014, FR 1040, 

FR 1041, FR 1042, FR 1043, FR 1108, FR 138A, FR 140B, FR 225Z, FR 873, FR 874, 

FR 896A, FR 905, FR 906, FR 912, FR 912A, FR 955A, FR 958, FR 963, FR 964A, FR

965A, FR 966A, FR 968, FR 970, FR 971, FR 971A, FR 972, FR 975, FR 976, FR 977, 

FR 978, FR 980, FR 981, FR 982, FR 986A, FR 993, FR 994, FR 996, and FR 997.

 San Jose IRA: FR 919, FR 920A, FR 921, FR 921A, FR 923, FR 924, FR 925A, FR 926, 

FR 935A, FR 953, and FR 955.

 White Cap IRA: FR 1045, FR 1054, and FR 873.1.

Alternative 2

Under this alternative, there would be no change in the number of road segments and miles of 

roads that would be designated for motorized use within the IRAs. Motorized cross-country travel 

would be prohibited across the entire district.

Alternative 3

Compared to the baseline, alternative 3 has fewer miles of system roads within the IRAs. Under 

this alternative, 147 road segments would be designated for motorized use within the IRAs. The 

reduction in the numbers of roads within the IRAs would have a beneficial effect. Under this 

alternative, the following roads would not be designated for motor vehicle use:

 Goat Springs IRA: FR 354D.

 Scott Mesa IRA: FR 123BB, FR 123GA, FR 123GB, FR 24A, FR 506I, CR 12A, CR

12B, and CR 12C.

 Datil IRA: FR 497, FR 532, and FR 537A.

 Madre Mountain IRA: None.

 Ryan Hill IRA: FR 217, FR 247, and FR 38A

 Apache Kid Contiguous IRA: FR 1010, FR 1011, FR 1012, FR 1013, FR 1014, FR 1040, 

FR 1041, FR 1042, FR 1043, FR 1108, FR 138A, FR 140B, FR 225Z, FR 873, FR 874, 

FR 896A, FR905, FR906, FR912, FR912A, FR955A, FR958, FR963, FR964A, FR965A, 

FR 966A, FR968, FR970, FR971, FR971A, FR972, FR975, FR976, FR977, FR978, FR

980, FR 981, FR 982, FR 986A, FR 993, FR 994, FR 996, and FR 997.

 San Jose IRA: FR 919, FR 920A, FR 921, FR 921A, FR 923, FR 924, FR 925A, FR 926, 

FR 935A, FR 953, and FR 955.

 White Cap IRA: FR 1045, FR 1054, and FR 873.1.
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

176 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Alternative 4

Compared to the baseline, alternative 4 has fewer miles of system roads within the IRAs. Under 

this alternative, 135 road segments would be designated for motorized use within the IRAs. The 

reduction in the numbers of roads within the IRAs would have a beneficial effect. Under this 

alternative the following roads would not be designated for motor vehicle use:

 Goat Springs IRA: FR 354D.

 Scott Mesa IRA: FR 123B, FR 123BB, FR 123F, FR 123GB, FR 24A, FR 506I, FR

506K, CR 12A, CR 12B, and CR 12C.

 Datil IRA: FR 497, FR 532, and FR 537A.

 Madre Mountain IRA: None.

 Ryan Hill IRA: FR 214, FR 217, FR 227, FR 247, and FR 38.

 Apache Kid Contiguous IRA: FR 1010, FR 1011, FR 1012, FR 1013, FR 1014, FR 1040, 

FR 1041, FR 1042, FR 1043, FR 1108, FR 138A, FR 140B, FR 225Z, FR 377X, FR 873, 

FR 874, FR 896A, FR 905, FR 906, FR 912, FR 912A, FR 955A, FR 958, FR 963, FR

964A, FR 965A, FR 966A, FR 967, FR 967A, FR 967B FR 968, FR 970, FR 971, FR

971A, FR 972, FR 975, FR 976, FR 977, FR 978, FR 980, FR 981, FR 982, FR 986A, FR

993, FR 994, FR 996, and FR 997.

 San Jose IRA: FR 919, FR 920, FR 920A, FR 921, FR 921A, FR 923, FR 924, FR 925A, 

FR 926, FR 935A, FR 953, and FR 955.

 White Cap IRA: FR 1045, FR 1054, FR 56, and FR 872.1.

Cumulative Effects

Motorized vehicle use will continue on the Magdalena Ranger District. This is not likely to 

change as a result of any foreseeable future projects. There are no effects on inventoried roadless 

areas associated with any of the alternatives; therefore, implementation of the Travel 

Management Rule would not contribute to cumulative effects upon inventoried roadless areas. 

The reduction in the numbers of roads within the IRAs would have a beneficial effect. 

Forest Plan Amendment Analysis

Implementation of the Travel Management Rule (36 CFR Parts 212, 251, 261, and 295) is not a 

discretionary decision—it is mandated by the Travel Management Rule itself. Since 1985, the 

“Cibola National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan” allowed motorized cross-country 

travel and did not incorporate a motor vehicle use map (MVUM) as the enforcement tool for 

motorized travel designation. The Forest Plan must be amended to implement the Travel 

Management Rule. Because this management proposal would be within the current Forest Plan 

direction, there would be insignificant changes in the outputs of goods and services from the 

Cibola National Forest during the remainder of the life of the current Forest Plan. This travel 

management direction would remain in effect until the forest plan revision process examines 

motorized travel management in the context of the potential changes to forestwide goals, 

objectives, and management direction.
EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 177

Chapter 4. Consultation and Coordination

The Forest Service consulted and/or coordinated with the following individuals, Federal, State 

and local agencies, tribes, and non-Forest Service persons during development of this 

environmental assessment.

ID Team Members, Preparers, and Contributors

Core Team Members

Dennis Aldridge................................................... District Ranger

Cliff Nicoll .......................................................... ID Team Leader, Writer/Editor

Dave Heft ............................................................ Wildlife (Retired)

Beverly deGruyter............................................... Wildlife

Amanda Ginithan ................................................ Wildlife (Transferred)

Susan Derosier..................................................... Wildlife

Livia Crowley...................................................... Watershed and Air Resources

Tyler Albers......................................................... Recreation and Visual Resources

Herbert Ray ......................................................... Recreation

Matt Basham........................................................ Heritage (Transferred) 

Cynthia Benedict ................................................. Tribal Consultation

Manual Martinez ................................................. Fire and Fuels

Curtis Youngman ................................................. Rangeland Management (Transferred)

Tina Cason........................................................... Rangeland Management

Susan Schuhardt .................................................. Timber and Vegetation Management 

(Transferred)

Don Hall .............................................................. Lands/Minerals/Special Uses (Retired)

Richard Graves.................................................... Transportation

Cynthia Geuss...................................................... Social-Economics

Natalie Heberling ................................................ Geographic Information Systems

Extended Team Members

Ruth Doyle .......................................................... REALM Staff Officer

Aban Lucero........................................................ Law Enforcement (Transferred)

Delilah Jordahl .................................................... Social Scientist (TEAMS)

Rob Arlowe.......................................................... Geographic Information Systems

Mark Chavez ....................................................... Public Affairs and Media (Transferred)

Ruth Sutton.......................................................... Public Affairs, Media, and Editor

Marsha Hagerdon ................................................ Public Participation/Project Record

Amy Miller.......................................................... Project Record (Re-Assigned)

Keith Baker.......................................................... Forest NEPA Coordinator (Retired)

Cheryl Prewitt...................................................... Forest NEPA Coordinator
Chapter 4. Consultation and Coordination

178 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Consultation and Coordination

Public involvement and collaboration processes are described Chapter 1 of this document. Lists 

of comments received during the public involvement process, including scoping, are available in 

the project record. 

The Forest Service consulted the following individuals, Federal, State, and local agencies, and 

tribes during development of this environmental assessment: 

Bureau of Land Management – Socorro Office

New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office

New Mexico Department of Game and Fish

Catron County Commission

Sierra County Commission

Socorro County Commission

Acoma Pueblo

Zuni Pueblo

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo

Mescalero Apache Tribe

Ft. Sill Chiricahua-Warm Springs Apache Tribe

Navajo Nation

Alamo Chapter of the Navajo Nation
EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 179

Literature Cited

Ampoorter, E., L. Van Nevel, B. De Vos, M. Hermy, and K. Verheyen. 2010. Assessing the 

effects of initial soil characteristics, machine mass, and traffic intensity on forest soil 

compaction. Forest Ecology and Management, 260, 1664–1676.

Bureau of Land Management Web Site, New Mexico – updated 08-06-2007. July 22, 2009. 

http://www.blm.gov/nm/st/en/prog/recreation/recreation_activities/off_highway_vehicles.

html;

http://www.blm.gov/nm/st/en/prog/recreation/socorro/quebradas_backcountry_byway.ht

ml; 

http://www.blm.gov/nm/st/en/prog/recreation/socorro/gordys_hill.html;

http://www.blm.gov/nm/st/en/prog/recreation/roswell/haystack_mountain.html;

http://www.blm.gov/nm/st/en/prog/recreation/roswell/mescalero_sands.html

Chavez and Tynon 2007. Chavez, Deborah J.; Tynon, Joanne F. 2007. Forest Service Law 

Enforcement Officer Report: Nationwide Study. Research Paper PSW-RP-252. Riverside, 

CA: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station.

Cibola National Forest GIS. 2007. Unpublished data from roads and trails inventory. On file with: 

USDA Forest Service, Cibola National Forest, Supervisor’s Office, 2113 Osuna Road, 

NE, Albuquerque, NM 87114.

Clean Water Act of 1977; 33 U.S.C. s/s 7401 et seq.

Cilimburg, Amy, Christopher Monz, and Sharon Kehoe. 2000. Profile: Wildland Recreation and 

Human Waste: A Review of Problems, Practices, and Concerns. Environmental 

Management, 25 (6), 587–598.

Council on Environmental Quality. 1997. Considering Cumulative Effects under the National 

Environmental Policy Act.

Elliot, William J.; Miller, Ina Sue; Audin, Lisa 2010. Cumulative watershed effects of fuel

management in the western United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-231. Fort 

Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research 

Station.

Forman, R., and L. Alexander. 1998. Roads and their major ecological effects. Annual Review of 

Ecology and Systematics, 29, 207–231.

Headwaters Economics. 2008. Economic Profile System. Version date: January 29, 2008.

Jones, J.A. and G.E. Grant. 1996. Peak flow responses to clear-cutting and roads in small and 

large basins, western Cascades, Oregon. Water Resources Research, 32 (4), 959–974.

Lucero, A. 2009. Personal communication. Patrol Captain, Law Enforcement and Investigations 

Staff. USDA Forest Service, Cibola National Forest, Supervisor’s Office, 2113 Osuna 

Road, NE, Albuquerque, NM 87114.

New Mexico Department of Game and Fish. 2008. 2008–2009 Deer Harvest Report. 

http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/recreation/hunting/harvest/documents/DeerHarvestRepor

t.pdf
Literature Cited

180 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

New Mexico Department of Game and Fish. 2008–2009 Elk Harvest Report. 

http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/recreation/hunting/harvest/documents/2008-

09elklharvestreport.pdf

New Mexico Department of Game and Fish 2009. September 12, 2009. 2009–2010 New Mexico 

Game and Fish Drawing Odds Report. 

http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/recreation/hunting/

New Mexico Department of Game and Fish 2009. New Mexico Big Game and Trapper Rules and 

Information, 2009–2010 License Year. http://wildlife.state.nm.us

New Mexico Environmental Department (NMED). 2009. January 29, 2010. 

http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/303d-305b/2008-2010

MacDonald, Lee H. and John D. Stednick. 2003. Forests and Water: A State-of-the-Art Review 

for Colorado. Colorado State University, CWRRI Completion Report No.196.

Periman, Richard. 2008. The Southwest Region and Climate Change. A Summary of Overall 

Ecological and Socioeconomic Conditions Based on Large-scale Syntheses and Regional 

Studies. Southwestern Regional Office. Forest Service. Albuquerque, NM.

Phippen, Stephanie J. and Ellen Wohl. 2003. An assessment of land use and other factors 

affecting sediment loads in the Rio Puerco watershed, New Mexico. Geomorphology, 52, 

269–287.

Romero, Rosemary. 1990. Study of Land Grant Traditional Uses – Unpublished Maps. 

Documents on file at the Cibola National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Albuquerque, NM. 

Scenic Byways. http://www.newmexico.org/explore/scenic_byways/abo_pass.php and 

http://www.newmexico.org/explore/scenic_byways/salt_mission.php

Stalling, D. 1994. “Hide and seek: balancing the needs of elk and hunters.” Bugle. Vol. 12, no. 2.

State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2007. “Trail Planning, Design and 

Development Guidelines.” Trails and Waterways Division, St. Paul, MN. 

State of New Mexico Chapter 73, Article 1-8: Camping, Trailer, Recreation or Motor Vehicle 

Parking Prohibited. 

State of New Mexico Environment Department Integrated CWA §§303(d)/305(b) List and Report

2006-2008. http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/303d-305b/2006-2008/.

Tunnicliff, Brock and Stanley K. Brickler. 1984. Recreational Water Quality Analyses of the 

Colorado River Corridor in Grand Canyon. Applied and Environmental Microbiology,

(48)5, 909-917.

University of New Mexico Bureau of Business and Economic Research (UNM-BBER). 2007. 

Socioeconomic Assessment of the Cibola National Forest.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF 1) 100-Percent Data.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2008. 2005-2007 American Community Survey Public Use Microdata 

Sample File. 

U.S. Department of the Interior, BLM, Executive Order 13443. 2007. Facilitation of Hunting 

Heritage and Wildlife Conservancy. 
Literature Cited

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 181

USDA Forest Service. 1985. Cibola National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as 

amended in 1987, 1990, 1991, and 1996. USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region. 

Albuquerque, NM.

USDA Forest Service. 1990. Soil Management Handbook. FSH 2509.22, R3 Soil and Water 

Conservation Practices Handbook effective 12/3/90.

USDA Forest Service. 2005. 36 CFR Parts 212, 251, 261, and 295. Travel Management: 

Designated Routes and Areas for Motor Vehicle Use; Final Rule.

USDA. 2007. Standard Consultation Protocol for Travel Management Route Designations, 

Appendix I of the Region 3 First Amended Programmatic Agreement Regarding Historic 

Property Protection and Responsibilities. Programmatic Agreement between 

Southwestern Region of the Forest Service, the SHPOs of Arizona, New Mexico, 

Oklahoma, and Texas, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. On file at 

Cibola National Forest, Albuquerque, NM.

USDA Forest Service 2009. Cibola National Forest, Mountainair Ranger District, Travel 

Management, Travel Analysis Process. February 2009 version. 

U.S. General Accounting Office. 2001. “Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo Definition and List of 

Community Land Grants in New Mexico.” GAO Report GAO-01-951. Washington, DC.

Varness, Kevin J, R.E. Pacha, and R.F. Lapen. 1978. Effects of Dispersed Recreational Activities 

on the Microbiological Quality of Forest Surface Water. Applied and Environmental 

Management, 36(1), 95–104.

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 183

Glossary

A

Air Quality: The composition of air with respect to quantities of pollution therein. Used most 

frequently in connection with the standards of maximum acceptable pollution concentrations. Air 

quality classes (I, II, or III) are designations for the level of protection given to geographic areas 

of the country. This classification denotes the increment above which deterioration of air quality 

would be regarded as significant and consequently not allowed.

 Class I allows the least deterioration. National parks, monuments, and wilderness areas

larger than 5,000 acres in size are designated as Class I areas.

 Class II is much less restrictive than Class I.

 Class III is the least restrictive.

Allotment: A designated area available for livestock grazing upon which a specified number, kind 

of livestock, and season of use may be grazed under a term grazing permit. The basic land unit

used to facilitate management of the range resource on National Forest System and associated

lands administered by the Forest Service.

All-terrain vehicle (ATV): A type of off-highway vehicle that travels on three or more lowpressure tires, has handlebar steering, is less than or equal to 50 inches in width, and has a seat 

designed to be straddled by the operator.

Aquatic ecosystem: The stream channel or lakebed, water, or biotic communities, and the habitat 

features that occur there.

Aquifer: A geologic formation, group of formations, or part of a formation that contains 

sufficient saturated permeable material to yield significant quantities of water to wells and 

springs.

Area: A discrete, specifically delineated space that is smaller, and in most cases much smaller, 

than a ranger district.

B

Best management practice (BMP): The method, measure, or practice selected by an agency to 

meet its nonpoint-source pollution control needs. BMPs include, but are not limited to, structural 

controls, operations, and maintenance procedures. BMPs can be applied before, during, or after 

pollution producing activities to reduce or eliminate the introduction of pollutants into the water.

Big game: Those species of large mammals normally managed as a sport hunting resource.

C

Caliche: A sedimentary rock, a hardened deposit of calcium carbonate. This calcium carbonate 

cements together other materials, including gravel, sand, clay, and silt. It is found in aridisol and 

mollisol soil orders. Caliche occurs worldwide, generally in arid or semiarid regions.

Channel: A passage, either naturally or artificially created, that periodically or continuously 

contains moving water, or that forms a connecting link between two bodies of water. River, creek, 
Glossary

184 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

stream, run, branch, and tributary are some of the terms used to describe natural channels. Natural 

channels may be single or braided. Canal and floodway are some of the terms used to describe 

artificial channels.

Climate change: Climate change refers to a statistically significant variation in either the mean 

state of the climate or in its variability, persisting for an extended period (typically 30 years or 

longer). Climate change may be due to natural internal processes or external forces, or to 

persistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the atmosphere or in land use. Note that 

the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in its Article 1, 

defines “climate change” as “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to 

human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to 

natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.” The UNFCCC, thus, makes a 

distinction between “climate change” attributable to human activities altering the atmospheric 

composition, and “climate variability” attributable to natural causes. See also “Climate 

variability.”

Condition survey: A tool used to document the condition of a given road. The roads are measured 

against maintenance objectives and standards for health and safety.

Constructed feature: Anything constructed by the Forest Service or by a permittee for use in 

administering the national forest or grasslands. When used in the context of scenery, the term

refers to anything that is built on the landscape.

Corridor – A set distance from a route where motorized vehicles are authorized to be used for the

purposes of dispersed camping or retrieval of a downed big game animal by an individual who 

has legally taken the animal (36 CFR 212.51(b)).

D

Designated road, trail, or area: A National Forest System road, a National Forest System trail, 

or an area on National Forest System lands that is designated for motor vehicle use pursuant to 36 

CFR 212.51 on a motor vehicle use map (MVUM).

Developed recreation: Recreation that occurs at manmade developments such as campgrounds, 

picnic grounds, or trailheads. Facilities might include roads, parking lots, picnic tables, toilets, 

and buildings. Campgrounds and picnic areas are examples of developed recreation sites.

Developed recreation site: A distinctly defined area where facilities are provided for 

concentrated public use, e.g. campgrounds or picnic areas.

Dispersed camping: Camping outside of a developed camping facility.

Dispersed recreation: That type of outdoor recreation that tends to be spread out over the land 

and in conjunction with roads, trails, and undeveloped waterways. Activities are often day-use 

oriented and include hunting, fishing, hiking, off-road vehicle use, and motor biking.
Glossary

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 185

E

Easement: The right-of-use over the property of another. The land having the right-of-use is 

known as the dominant estate and the land that is subject to the easement is known as the servient 

estate.

Ecosystem: The system formed by the interaction of a group of organisms and their environment.

Eligible scenic river: A river that meets the eligibility criteria for a scenic river but has not been 

evaluated for its suitability. Such rivers are managed to maintain the outstandingly remarkable 

values for which they were determined to be eligible until a suitability evaluation is completed.

Ephemeral streams: Streams that only flow in direct response to precipitation or snowmelt.

Erosion: The wearing away of the land’s surface by running water, wind, ice, or other geological 

agents. It includes detachment and movement of soil or rock fragments by water, wind, ice, or 

gravity.

F

Facility: Structures needed to support the management, protection, and use of the national forests, 

including roads, trails, buildings, utility systems, dams, and other construction features. There are 

three types of facilities: recreation, administrative, and permittee.

Forage: browse and herbage which is available and can provide food for animals or be harvested 

for feeding.

Forb: Any herbaceous broad-leaved plant species.

Foreground: Detailed landscape generally found from the observer to a half mile away.

Forest (wood) products: Any resource derived from trees except lumber. This includes seeds, 

nuts, firewood, biomass, and other related products.

Forest Service Handbook (FSH): The principal source of specialized guidance and instruction 

for carrying out the direction issued in the FSM. Specialists and technicians are the primary 

audience of handbook direction. Handbooks may also incorporate external directives with related 

USDA and Forest Service directive supplements.

Forest Service Manual (FSM): A general guide containing legal authorities, objectives, policies, 

responsibilities, instructions, and guidance needed on a continuing basis by Forest Service line 

officers and primary staff in more than one unit to plan and execute assigned programs and 

activities.

Fragmentation: Habitat fragmentation is a process that occurs wherever a large, contiguous 

habitat is transformed into smaller patches that are isolated from each other by a landscape matrix 

unlike the original. This matrix can differ from the original habitat in either composition or 

structure. The crucial point is that it functions as either a partial or total barrier to dispersal for 

species associated with the original habitat. A clear threat to population viability exists when the 

process of fragmentation occurs that isolates pairs and populations versus fragmentation within 

the home range of the individual pairs.
Glossary

186 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

G

Geographical information system (GIS): Computerized method used for inventory and analysis, 

which can overlay large volumes of spatial data to identify how features interrelate.

Geomorphology: The classification, description, nature, origin, and development of present 

landforms and their relationships to underlying structures; and of the history of geologic changes 

as recorded by these surface features.

Grazing: Consumption of range or pasture herbaceous forage by animals.

Grazing permit: Any document authorizing livestock to use NFS or other lands under Forest 

Service control for the purpose of livestock production. CFR 222.1(a) (5)

Grazing permittee: An individual who has been granted written permission to graze livestock for 

a specific period on a range allotment; the recipient of a grazing permit.

Great Plains: The large grassland in the rain shadow of the Rocky Mountains, about 2,500 miles 

from north to south and 600 miles wide from east to west. In the United States it covers the 

eastern portions of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico; the western portions of 

North Dakota; South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma; and the panhandle of Texas. It 

extends north into the Canadian provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba.

Guidelines: Specifications that (1) contribute to maintaining or achieving desired conditions and 

objectives and (2) would be adopted by a project or activity unless there is a compelling and 

defensible reason to vary from the guidelines. Such variances are only allowed without plan 

amendment if the alternative approach provided by the variance meets the intent of the plan 

guideline. If such a variance is considered appropriate, the responsible official records in the 

project-level document the reasons for that variance and no plan amendment is required. A project 

or activity should be consistent with guidelines.

H

Habitat: The natural conditions and environment in which a plant or animal lives, e.g. forest, 

desert, or wetlands.

Heritage resources: Buildings, sites, areas, architecture, memorials, and objects having scientific, 

prehistoric, historic, or social values.

High-clearance vehicle: A vehicle greater than 60 inches in width designed or modified for use 

“off road” with appropriate clearance, tires, suspension, and undercarriage protection.

Homestead: Land claimed by a settler, particularly under the Homestead Act of 1862.

Hydrologic unit code (HUC): The United States is divided and subdivided into successively 

smaller hydrologic units which are classified into four levels: regions, subregions, accounting 

units, and cataloging units. The hydrologic units are arranged within each other, from the smallest 

(cataloging units) to the largest (regions). Each hydrologic unit is identified by a unique 

hydrologic unit code (HUC) consisting of two to eight digits based on the four levels of 

classification in the hydrologic unit system.
Glossary

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 187

 The first level of classification divides the nation into 21 major geographic areas or

regions.

 The second level of classification divides the 21 regions into 222 subregions. A subregion

includes the area drained by a river system, a reach of a river and its tributaries in that

reach, a closed basin(s), or a group of streams forming a coastal drainage area.

 The third level subdivides many of the subregions into accounting units. These 352 

hydrologic accounting units nest within or are equivalent to the subregions.

 The fourth level of classification is the cataloging unit, the smallest element in the

hierarchy of hydrologic units. A cataloging unit is a geographic area representing part or

all of a surface drainage basin, a combination of drainage basins, or a distinct hydrologic

feature. These units subdivide the subregions and accounting units into smaller areas.

There are 2,150 cataloging units (sometimes called watersheds) in the Nation.

 The fifth level HUC is watersheds between 40,000 and 250,000 acres in size. 

 The sixth level HUC is watersheds between 10,000 and 40,000 acres in size.

Hydrology: The study of the behavior of water in the atmosphere, on the Earth’s surface, and 

underground.

Important bird area (IBA): Sites that provide essential habitat for one or more species of birds. 

IBAs include sites for breeding, wintering, and/or migrating birds. IBAs may be a few acres or 

thousands of acres, but usually they are discrete sites that stand out from the surrounding 

landscape. IBAs may include public or private lands, or both, and they may be protected or 

unprotected. The criteria for and selection of IBAs is administered by the Audubon Society.

Inclusion: A variance in vegetation within a vegetation type due to landform, moisture regime, 

soil type, erosion, or past disturbance.

Income: When “income” is used in this document, it is equivalent to the Bureau of Economic 

Analysis’ definition of personal income which states, “Personal income is the income received by 

persons from participation in production, plus transfer receipts from government and business, 

plus government interest (which is treated like a transfer receipt). It is defined as the sum of wage 

and salary disbursements, supplements to wages and salaries, proprietors’ income with inventory 

valuation and capital consumption adjustments, rental income of persons with capital 

consumption adjustment, personal dividend income, personal interest income, and personal 

current transfer receipts, less contributions for government social insurance.”

Indicator species: A species whose presence, absence, or relative well-being in a given 

environment is indicative of the health of its ecosystem as a whole.

Infiltration: Infiltration is the process of water entering the soil. The rate of infiltration is the 

maximum velocity at which water enters the soil surface.

Infrastructure: The facilities, utilities, and transportation system needed to meet public and 

administrative needs.

Intermittent stream: gets water from the ground seasonally and usually dries up in the summer.
Glossary

188 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Invasive species: A species, including its seed, spores, or other biological material, whose 

introduction does cause or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human 

health (Executive Order 13112).

Inventoried roadless area: On January 12, 2001, the Forest Service issued the Roadless Area 

Conservation Rule (RACR) (36 CFR 294, Subpart B) identifying inventoried roadless areas. The 

September 15, 2000, map for the Cibola National Forest displays the Canadian River IRA in New 

Mexico.

J

Job growth: The number of jobs gained by an area over a period of time. Jobs are counted in the 

same way the Bureau of Economic Analysis counts employment: “a count of jobs, full-time plus 

part-time, by place of work. Full-time and part-time jobs are given equal weight. Employees, 

sole proprietors, and general partners are included, but unpaid family workers and volunteers are

not.”

L

Leasing (oil and gas): A contract right granted by the United States allowing a lessee the right of 

holding a record title and operating right to the leased oil and/or gas in exchange for rent and 

royalty payments. Oil and gas leases will expire in 10 years if they are not put into production; 

otherwise, leases do not expire as long as they are “held by production.”

M

Management indicator species: Plant or animal species or habitat components selected during 

the alternatives analyses stage of an environmental impact statement that are used to monitor the 

effects of planned management activities on populations of wildlife and fish, including those that 

are socially or economically important.

Middle ground: The zone between the foreground and background in a landscape. The area 

located from one-half mile to 4 miles from the observer.

Monitoring: Collecting information to track system conditions and their response to 

management.

Motor vehicle: Any vehicle which is self-propelled, other than: (1) a vehicle operated on rails; 

and (2) any wheelchair or mobility device, including one that is battery powered, that is designed 

solely for use by a mobility impaired person for locomotion, and that is suitable for use in an 

indoor pedestrian area.

Motor vehicle use map (MVUM): A map displaying designated roads, trails, and areas for motor 

vehicle use on an administrative unit or a ranger district of the NFS.

N

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): An act declaring a national policy to encourage 

productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment, to promote efforts which 
Glossary

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 189

will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and the biosphere and stimulate the health 

and welfare of man, to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources 

important to the Nation and to establish a Council on Environmental Quality.

National forest land and resource management plan: A plan developed to meet the 

requirements of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, as 

amended, that guides all resource management activities and establishes management standards 

and guidelines for the NFS lands of a given national forest or national grassland.

National Forest System (NFS) land: Federal lands that have been designated by Executive 

Order or statute as national forest, national grasslands, or purchase units, or other lands under the 

administration of the Forest Service.

National Forest System (NFS) road: A forest road other than a road which has been authorized 

by a legally documented right-of-way held by a state, county, or other public road authority.

National Forest System (NFS) trail: Aforest trail other than a trail which has been authorized by

a legally documented right-of-way held by a state, county, or other public road authority.

National historic trail: National historic trails were authorized under the National Trails System 

Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-543), along with national scenic trails and national recreation trails. 

National scenic trails and national historic trails may only be designated by an act of Congress.

National Register of Historic Places: A list of heritage resources that have local, state, or 

national significance maintained by the Secretary of the Interior.

National Wild and Scenic River System: Rivers with outstanding scenic, recreational, 

geological, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural, or other similar values; designated by Congress 

under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act for preservation of their free-flowing condition.

Nesting platform: An artificial nest structure employed as a habitat improvement practice when 

quality nest sites are a limiting factor to raptor density.

Noxious weed: A legal term applied to plants regulated by Federal and state laws, such as plants 

designated as noxious weeds by the Secretary of Agriculture or by the responsible state official. 

Noxious weeds generally possess one or more of the following characteristics: aggressive and 

difficult to manage, poisonous, toxic, parasitic, a carrier or host of serious insect or disease, and 

being not native or new or not common to the United States or parts thereof. (Forest Service 

Manual 2080.5, Federal Noxious Weed Act of 1974, PL 93-629, as amended.)

O

Off-highway vehicle: Any motor vehicle designed for or capable of cross-country travel on or 

immediately over land, water, sand, snow, ice, marsh, swampland, or other natural terrain. (36 

CFR 212.1)

Off-road motorized vehicle: Any motorized vehicle capable of or designed for travel on or 

immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain. This includes all mechanical means of 

transportation: passenger cars, 4-wheel drive pickups or sport utility vehicles, trail bikes, 
Glossary

190 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

snowmobiles, or other ground transportation vehicles that are capable of traveling over land 

where no roads exist.

Outstandingly remarkable values: Scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, 

cultural, or other similar values which make a river eligible for designation as a wild or scenic 

river.

Overland flow: A condition in which precipitation rate is faster than infiltration rate, and excess 

water runs over the surface of the land.

P

Pasture: A grazing area enclosed and separated from other areas by fencing or other barriers.

Per capita income: This measure of income is calculated as the total personal income of the 

residents of an area divided by the population of the area. Per capita personal income is often used 

as an indicator of consumers’ purchasing power and of the economic well-being of the residents

of an area.

Perennial stream: Stream that flows all the time because it gets water from storage in the ground. 

However, these streams may dry up during extreme droughts.

Playa lakes: Bowl-shaped depressions that are dependent on rainfall and surface runoff for the 

water they impound. They are closed basins and usually do not overflow. They are mostly 

intermittent, with lake evaporation occurring at about 60 inches per year.

Prescribed burn: Fire burning under conditions specified in an approved plan to dispose of fuels, 

control unwanted vegetation, stimulate growth of desired vegetation, change successional stages, 

etc., to meet range, wildlife, recreation, wilderness, watershed, or timber management objectives. 

Prescribed burns occur under specified environmental conditions that allow the fire to safely be 

confined to a predetermined area and produce the fireline intensity and rate of spread required to 

meet management objectives.

R

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS): A framework for stratifying and defining classes of 

outdoor recreation environments, activities, and experience opportunities. The settings, activities, 

and opportunities for obtaining experiences have been arranged along a continuum or spectrum 

divided into six classes: primitive, semiprimitive nonmotorized, semiprimitive motorized, roaded 

natural, rural, and urban.

Right-of-way: A linear strip of land defined for a present or future location of transportation or 

utility right-of-way within its boundaries.

Riparian: An area of vegetation adjacent to an aquatic ecosystem distinguished by a high water 

table, certain soil characteristics, and some vegetation that requires free water or moist soil 

conditions.

Road: A motor vehicle route over 50 inches wide, unless identified and managed as a trail (36 

CFR 212.1, FSM 7705).
Glossary

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 191

Road Maintenance Level Definitions

 Maintenance Level 1. Assigned to intermittent service roads during the time they are

closed to vehicular traffic. The closure period must exceed 1 year. Basic custodial

maintenance is performed to keep damage to adjacent resources to an acceptable level and

to perpetuate the road to facilitate future management activities. Emphasis is normally 

given to maintaining drainage facilities and runoff patterns. Planned road deterioration 

may occur at this level. Roads receiving level 1 maintenance may be of any type, class, or

construction standard, and may be managed at any other maintenance level during the

time they are open for traffic. However, while being maintained at level 1, they are 

generally closed to vehicular traffic but may be available and suitable for use as 

motorized trails or for nonmotorized uses.

 Maintenance Level 2. Assigned to roads open for use by high-clearance vehicles. 

Passenger car traffic is not a consideration. Traffic is normally minor, usually consisting

of one or a combination of administrative, permitted, dispersed recreation, or other

specialized uses. Log haul may occur at this level.

 Maintenance Level 3. Assigned to roads open and maintained for travel by a prudent

driver in a standard passenger car. User comfort and convenience are not considered 

priorities. Roads in this maintenance level are typically low speed, single lane with 

turnouts and spot surfacing. Some roads may be fully surfaced with either native or

processed material.

 Maintenance Level 4. Assigned to roads that provide a moderate degree of user comfort

and convenience at moderate travel speeds. Most roads are double lane and aggregate

surfaced. However, some roads may be single lane. Some roads may be paved and/or dust

abated.

 Maintenance Level 5. Assigned to roads that provide a high degree of user comfort and 

convenience. These roads are normally double lane, paved facilities. Some may be

aggregate surfaced and dust abated.

Roaded natural ROS: Characterized by a predominantly natural appearing environment with 

moderate evidence of human activity. Resource modification and utilization practices are evident 

but harmonize with the natural environment. May have a mosaic of highly modified areas to 

pockets of unmodified lands. Developed sites provide for some user comfort as well as site 

protection, but harmonize with the natural environment.

Roost: A support such as tree limbs, thick tree bark, or brush piles which birds or bats use to rest 

upon or use for cover.

Route: A road or a trail. (FSM 7705, 2350.05)

S

Scenery: General appearance of a place, landscape, and/or its visible features (definition per SMS 

Handbook glossary, slightly revised and shortened for clarity).

Scenery management system (SMS): A process for the inventory and analysis of the aesthetic 

values of national forest lands providing for integration of these values with other biological, 

physical, and social/cultural resources in the planning process.
Glossary

192 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Scenic integrity (high, medium, and low): A measure of the degree to which a landscape is 

visually perceived to be “complete,” and is determined by three factors: dominance, degree of 

deviation, and intactness of the desired landscape character established based on the existing 

condition. Scenic integrity disturbances most typically result from human activities, but can also 

result from natural events which exceed the landscape’s historic range of variability in terms of 

magnitude, duration, or intensity. An exception to this is direct human alterations that have 

become accepted over time as positive landscape character attributes (e.g., historic cabins, farms, 

and ranches).

 High integrity: The valued scenery “appears natural or unaltered,” yet visual 

disturbances are present; however, they remain unnoticed because they repeat the form, 

line, color, texture, pattern, and scale of the valued scenery. When used as a standard or

guideline, this level should be achieved as soon after project completion as possible, or

within 3 years maximum.

 Moderate integrity: The valued scenery “appears slightly altered.” Noticeable 

disturbances are minor and visually subordinate to the valued scenery because they repeat

its form, line, color, texture, pattern, and scale. When used as a standard or guideline, this

level should be achieved as soon after project completion as possible, or within 3 years 

maximum.

 Low integrity: The valued scenery “appears moderately altered.” Visual disturbances are

codominant with the valued scenery and may create a focal point of moderate contrast. 

Disturbances may reflect, introduce, or “borrow” valued scenery attributes from outside

the landscape being viewed (such as the size, shape, edge effect, and pattern of natural

openings; vegetative type changes or socially valued architectural styles). Scenery

attributes borrowed from outside the viewed landscape appear compatible with or

complementary to those within. When used as a standard or guideline, this level should be

achieved as soon after project completion as possible, or within 3 years maximum.

Scenic quality: Degree to which the appearance of a place, landscape, or feature can elicit 

psychological and physiological benefits to individuals and, therefore, to society in general 

(definition per SMS Handbook glossary, revised). Scenic quality is described and measured 

through the landscape character inventory information and the cumulative conditions of the two 

primary SMS indicators described in this glossary, “Scenic integrity” and “Scenic stability.”

Scenic river: Those rivers or sections of rivers that are free of impoundments, with shorelines or 

watersheds still largely primitive, and shorelines largely undeveloped, but accessible in places by 

roads.

Sediment: Solid material, both mineral and organic, that is in suspension, is being transported, or 

has been moved from its site of origin by air, water, gravity, or ice and has come to rest on the 

Earth’s surface either above or below sea level.

Sediment load: Solid material, both mineral and organic, that is in suspension, being transported, 

or has been moved from site of origin by air, water, gravity, or ice.

Sedimentation: The deposition or settling of soil particles suspended in water.

Semiprimitive motorized ROS: Similar setting to the SPNM below, except this area provides a 

motorized back-country experience where trails and primitive roads are designed for high-
Glossary

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 193

clearance, four-wheel-drive vehicles. There is a moderate probability of experiencing solitude. 

High degree of self-reliance and challenge in using motorized equipment. These areas are 

predominantly natural, lacking some human modification except when necessary for site 

protection.

Semiprimitive nonmotorized (SPNM) ROS: A nonmotorized back-country area with a 

predominantly natural appearing environment without evidence of resource modification and 

utilization practices. This type of area provides opportunities for self-reliance and challenge, with 

a low concentration of users and high degree of interaction with the natural environment. 

Recreation developments are rustic and rudimentary and primarily provided for the protection of 

the resources rather than convenience of the users.

Soil compaction: Soil compaction occurs when soil particles are pressed together, reducing the 

pore space between them. This increases the weight of solids per unit volume of soil (bulk 

density). Soil compaction occurs in response to pressure (weight per unit area) exerted by field 

machinery or animals. The risk for compaction is greatest when soils are wet.

Soil productivity: The capacity of a soil to support the growth of specified plants, plant 

communities, or a sequence of plant communities. Soil productivity may be expressed in terms of 

volume or weight per unit, area per year, percent plant cover, or other measures of biomass 

accumulation.

Special use: Those uses and occupancy occurring on more than a transient basis except those 

covered by mining laws or associated with harvesting timber or grazing livestock. These uses 

include roads, all types of utilities, ski areas, cemeteries, electronic sites, and recreation 

residences. Uses are ordinarily covered by either an annual or term permit. Annual permits are for 

relatively short-term use and are revocable by the Forest Service. They are renewable each year 

by payment of a fee. Term permits are used to cover uses of a longer time period (up to 30 years) 

and having a large economic investment. Examples of this permit include large electric 

transmission lines and large recreation resorts and ski areas.

Standard: An absolute requirement to be met in the design of projects and activities. A project or 

activity is consistent with a standard when its design is in accord with the explicit provisions of 

the standard; variance from a standard in any way is not allowed. In sum, a project or activity 

should meet the spirit, if not the letter, of a guideline, but must meet the letter of a standard.

Streambank: The sides of a channel that hold or carry water.

Structure: The presence, size, and physical arrangement of vegetation in a stand. Vertical 

structure refers to the variety of plant heights, from the canopy to the forest floor. Horizontal 

structure refers to the types, sizes, and distribution of trees and other plants across the land 

surface. Grassland lands with substantial structural diversity provide a variety of niches for 

different wildlife species.

Suitability: The appropriateness of applying certain resource management practices to a 

particular area of land, as determined by an analysis of the economic and environmental 

consequences and the alternative uses foregone. A unit of land may be suitable for a variety of 

individual or combined management practices.
Glossary

194 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Sustainability: Sustainability is a goal for economic development and natural resource 

management. Ecosystem sustainability is the capacity of an ecosystem for long-term maintenance 

of ecological processes and functions, biological diversity, and productivity. Social and economic 

sustainability generally refers to land management practices that provide goods and services from 

a resource without degradation of the site quality, and without a decline in the yield of goods and 

services over time.

T

Terrace: A leveled section of a hill cultivated area, designed as a method of soil conservation to 

slow or prevent rapid surface runoff.

Terrestrial ecosystem survey (TES) and terrestrial ecological unit inventory (TEUI): A 

classification of ecological types and mapped terrestrial ecological units using a consistent 

standard throughout NFS lands. Ecological units are categorized to identify land and water areas 

at different levels of resolution based upon similar capabilities and potentials for response to 

management and natural disturbances. Capabilities and potentials derive from multiple elements, 

such as climate, geomorphology, geology, soils, water, and potential vegetation.

Topsoil: The upper, outermost layer of soil, usually the top 2 inches (5.1 cm) to 8 inches (20 cm). 

It has the highest concentration of organic matter and microorganisms and is where most of the 

Earth’s biological soil activity occurs.

Trail: A route 50 inches or less in width or a route over 50 inches wide that is identified and 

managed as a trail (36 CFR 212.1).

Travel Management Rule: Located in 36 CFR 212, Subpart B, Designation of Roads, Trails, and 

Areas for Motor Vehicle Use. The rule requires each national forest or ranger district to designate 

those roads, trails, and areas open to motor vehicles. Designation will include class of vehicle and, 

if appropriate, time of year for motor vehicle use. A given route, for example, could be designated

for use by motorcycles, ATVs, or street legal vehicles. Once designation is complete, the rule will

prohibit motor vehicle use off the designated system or inconsistent with the designations. 

Designations will be shown on a motor vehicle use map. Use inconsistent with the designations

will be prohibited.

U

Unauthorized road or trail: A road or trail that is not a forest road or trail or a temporary road or 

trail and that is not included in a forest transportation atlas. (36 CFR 212.1, FSM 2353.05, FSM 

7705)

Utility corridors: The linear space needed to bury or suspend a produced water line, gas pipeline, 

oil pipeline, electric, or other line(s). It is often, but not always, located along a road.

W

Watershed condition: The state of a watershed based upon physical and biological characteristics

affecting hydrologic and soil functions. It is determined through the synthesis of information
Glossary

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 195

including vegetation types and condition, streambank conditions, range conditions and trend, soil

conditions and erosion potential, and remotely sensed and field observations.

Wetland: Habitat that is transitional between terrestrial and aquatic where the water table is 

usually at or near the land surface, or the land is covered by shallow water. Wetlands have one or 

more of the following characteristics: (1) at least periodically the land supports predominantly 

hydrophytic plants; (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil; and (3) the substrate 

is nonsoil and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at sometime during the 

growing season of each year (FSM 2600).

Woodland: A plant community in which trees are often small, characteristically with a greater 

proportion of their total height being crown more so than clear bole, and having trees spaced far 

enough apart that the canopies of adjacent trees usually do not touch and with the ground 

vegetation being mostly herbaceous, commonly grass (USDA Forest Service 2004).

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 197

Appendix A. Forest Plan Amendment

Cibola National Forest Plan Amendment

For the proposed action to comply with both the “Cibola National Forest Land and Resource 

Management Plan” (Forest Plan) and the requirements of the Travel Management Rule, a plan 

amendment is needed. The amendment would remove inconsistencies and ambiguities in road 

density guidance and remove language that does not comply with the Travel Management Rule 

requirement to close the forest to cross-country travel off of designated roads and trails. This 

amendment applies to all action alternatives.

Road Density Guidance

The ID team compared the proposed action to the guidelines in the Forest Plan to determine if the 

actions are consistent with the Forest Plan. The Forest Plan addresses road density in two places:

forestwide guidance and in the management area guidance for transportation. The forestwide

guidance (page 61-1 of the Forest Plan) provides for a maximum road density of 1.9 miles of road 

per square mile (average) of forest land. The proposed action is consistent with the forestwide

guidance in the Forest Plan for road density (see table A1).

Table A1. Summary of district road densities

Existing Forest Plan 

Direction for Road 

Density (maximum 

miles per sq. mile)

Existing District Road 

System – Open Road 

Density 

(miles per sq. mile)

Minimum Road System 

– Road Density 

(miles per sq. mile)

Proposed Action –

Designate Road 

Density

(miles per sq. mile)

1.9 1.2 0.8 0.1

The management area guidance on road density varies by analysis area, which is a subdivision of 

management areas that are described but not mapped in the Forest Plan. The analysis area road 

density guidelines range from 0.14 to 1.90 miles of road per square mile (see table A2). Many of 

the analysis areas were defined according to the seral stage of the vegetation type or range 

condition. Analysis areas based on vegetation structure change over time and shift across the 

landscape; shifts are caused by management activities and natural disturbances. Because the exact 

location of the analysis area boundaries is unclear and the conditions used to define them have 

changed, it is no longer meaningful to define road densities by analysis area. Because analysis 

areas cannot be mapped consistently over time, there is no way to determine if the proposed 

action road system exceeds the Forest Plan guidance. There is a need to amend the road density 

guidance in the Forest Plan so that it is clear and consistent.

We propose to retain the current forest-wide road density direction (1.9 miles of road per square 

mile, maximum) while eliminating road density guidance for each management area and its 

associated analysis area. We will continue to allow for the temporary increase in road density (2 

to 3 miles of road per square mile) in active vegetation management areas in all management 

areas. For example, this includes areas where administrative access is needed for projects such as 

those under the Healthy Forest Restoration Act (HFRA) to reduce fire risk by creating firebreaks.

In the current Forest Plan, this direction only applies to some management areas.
Appendix A. Forest Plan Amendment

198 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Table A2. Existing plan direction for road densities by management area

Management Area Analysis 

Area

Existing District System Open Road 

Density (miles per sq. mile)

Management Area 11

14 1.90

15 1.20

Management Area 12

16 1.70

17 1.20

Management Area 13 18 0.14

Management Area 15

23 1.90

24 1.00

Cross-Country Travel and Road Obliteration and Maintenance

Since the Forest Plan allows cross-country travel across 168,989 acres on the district, there is a 

need to amend the Forest Plan to comply with the Travel Management Rule.

The Forest Plan also contains some obsolete timeframes for performing road construction, 

reconstruction, or obliteration. The plan was analyzed in 10-year periods (periods 1 through 5) for 

the first 50 years and in 50-year periods (periods 6 through 8) for the following 150 years. 

Implementation of period 1 was expected to begin in Fiscal Year 1986. Since the plan is now in 

its 3rd decade, some of these periods and associated tasks are moot. Other periods specify 

maintenance on more miles of roads than are being proposed for designations. Therefore, all 

language on periods associated with roads under the “Transportation” section is proposed to be 

amended. 

To provide for consistency between the Forest Plan and Travel Management Rule, we propose 

deleting or changing the standards/guidelines listed below, which refer to OHV area closures and 

restrictions, obliteration and maintenance, signing of closed areas (no longer appropriate), or 

specific acreages of OHV closed areas (no longer necessary as all areas outside the designated 

system will be closed). This amendment would be specific to the Magdalena Ranger District. 

Table A3. Forest Plan amendment

Management

Area and/or Page 

Number

Current Forest Plan Direction Change to Forest 

Plan Direction

Page 61-1 i. Water, (1) Quality, (a): Maximum road density of 1.9 miles 

of road per square mile.

Add the following 

text: Open system 

road densities will 

increase temporarily 

to 2 to 3 miles per 

square mile in active 

vegetation 

management areas.
Appendix A. Forest Plan Amendment

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 199

Management

Area and/or Page 

Number

Current Forest Plan Direction Change to Forest 

Plan Direction

Management Area 11

Page 146

Road management will be applied to obliterate poorly located 

or poorly constructed roadways to improve watershed condition 

and reduce soil loss. Management will take the form of 

standard roadway prescriptions for obliteration.

Obliterate roads at the following rates:

94.7 miles of local road in Period 1

Delete text

Management Area 11

Page 147

Manage the following average road densities:

1.9 miles of road per square mile (Analysis Area 14).

1.2 miles of road per square mile (Analysis Area 15).

Road densities will increase temporarily to 2 to 3 miles per 

square mile in active timber harvest areas.

Delete test

Management Area 11

Page 148

Maintain Forest System roads at rates indicated below.

Maintain roads to levels 3, 4, and 5.

460 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Areas 14, 15).

60 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Areas 14, 15).

Perform road maintenance at indicated rates. Maintain road to 

level 2.

230 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 14, 15).

46 miles per period in all periods (Analysis 14, 15).

Delete text

Management Area 12

Pagse 155–156

Road management will be applied to obliterate poorly located 

or constructed roadways to improve watershed condition and 

reduce soil loss. Management will take the form of standard 

roadway prescriptions for obliteration.

Road obliteration will occur at the following rates:

17.4 miles of local roads in Period 1.

Delete text

Management Area 12

Pages 156–157

Maintain roads to levels 3, 4, and 5 in developed recreation 

sites.

Manage the average road densities indicated below:

1.7 miles of road per square mile (Analysis Area 16).

1.2 miles of road per square mile (Analysis Area 17).

2-3 miles of road per square mile (temporary) in active timber 

harvest areas.

Delete text

Management Area 12

Page 157

Maintain Forest System Roads to levels 3, 4, and 5 at the rated 

indicated below.

 130 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 16).

 170 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 17).

Perform road maintenance at rates indicated below:

 60 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 16.)

 320 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 17).

Delete text

Management Area 13

Page 160

Road management will be applied to obliterate poorly located 

or constructed roadways to improve watershed condition and 

reduce soil loss. Management will take the form of standard 

roadway prescriptions for obliteration.

Obliterate roads at the following rates:

 115.3 miles of local roads in Period 1 (Analysis Area 18).

Delete text
Appendix A. Forest Plan Amendment

200 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Management

Area and/or Page 

Number

Current Forest Plan Direction Change to Forest 

Plan Direction

Management Area 13

Page 161

Manage an average road density of 0.4 mile of road per square 

mile (Analysis Area 18).

Delete text

Management Area 13

Page 162

Maintain 35 miles of Forest System roads in each period.

Maintain to levels 3, 4, and 5 (Analysis Area 18).

Do road maintenance at the rate of 17 miles per period in all 

periods. Maintain roads to level 2 (Analysis Area 18).

Delete text

Management Area 16

Page 190

Road management will be applied to obliterate poorly located 

and constructed roadways to improve watershed condition and 

reduce soil loss. Management will take the form of standard 

roadway prescriptions for obliteration.

Obliterate roads at the following rates:

 299 miles in local roads in Period 1.

Delete text

Management Area 16

Page 192

Maintain average road densities indicated below:

 0.3 mile of road per square mile (Analysis Area 25).

 1.0 mile of road per square mile (Analysis Area 26).

 1.4 mile of road per square mile (Analysis Area 27).

 1.0 mile of road per square mile (Analysis Area 28).

 1.0 mile of road per square mile (Analysis Area 29).

 1.3 mile of road per square mile (Analysis Area 30).

Delete text

Management Area 16

Page 192

Maintain Forest System Roads at rates indicated below.

Maintain roads to levels 3, 4, and 5.

 460 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 25).

 150 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 26).

 290 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 27).

 200 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 28).

 720 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 29).

 1,120 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 30).

Delete text

Management Area 16

Page 192

Perform road maintenance at rates indicated below. Maintain 

roads to level 2.

 529 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 25)

 476 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 26)

 350 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 27)

 80 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 28)

 350 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 29)

 1,066 miles per period in all periods (Analysis Area 30)

Delete text
EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 201

Appendix B. Past, Present 

and Foreseeable Future Project

This appendix lists past, present, and foreseeable future projects for use in the cumulative effects 

analysis. 

Past Projects

Project Location Size Type Implementation

Antelope Well 

Turkey 

Rehabilitation 

Project

Sec. 22, T1N, R9W 2 acres Build new fence within 10 

feet of existing fence line, 

replace the existing drinker 

with new water catchment 

and drinker.

Project 

implemented.

Red Canyon Trick 

Tank 

Rehabilitation 

Project

Sec. 24, T1N, R10W 3 acres Build new fence within 50 

feet of existing fence line, 

replace old drinker and 

paint existing catchment.

Project 

implemented.

Strauss Road 

Easement, Road 

Maintenance, and 

Road Reroute

Sec. 5, T2S, R11W

Sec. 21, 22, 27, 28, 32, 

and 33, T1S, R11W

4.2 acres Issuance of a road easement 

for ingress/egress to a 

private inholding. Issuance 

of a road use permit to 

provide for road 

maintenance.

Project 

implemented.

Ryan Hill/Madera 

Grazing Allotment

Sec. 5–8, 17–19, and 

30, T4S, R2W

Sec. 13, 24–26, 34, and 

35, T4S, R3W

Sec. 3, T5S, R3W

5,271 

acres

NEPA completed and a 

new allotment management 

plan developed to address 

grazing management 

practices.

Project 

implemented.

Timber Peak 

Prescribed Burn

Sec. 3–6, T5S, R3W

Sec. 3–10, T4S, R3W

13,968

acres

Prescribed burn to improve 

conditions for wildlife and 

livestock, and reduce the 

risk and spread of 

catastrophic wildfire.

Burton Road 

Easement

Sec. 22, 23, and 27,

T3S, R4W

4 acres Issuance of road easement 

for ingress/egress into 

private inholding. Provides 

for road maintenance.

Project 

implemented.

Limestone Canyon 

Wet Meadow 

Restoration

Sec. 28, T5S, R7W 28 acres Build new fence around wet 

meadow, install low impact 

erosion structures, thin 

encroaching conifers.

Project

implemented.

Morley Tank 

Meadow 

Restoration

Sec. 34, T4S., R7W

Sec. 2 and 3, T5S, 

R7W

28 acres Build fence around wet 

meadow, rebuild berm and 

spillway on existing earthen 

tank, thin ponderosa and 

juniper tree stands.

Project 

implemented.

Bear Grazing 

Allotment Trick 

Tanks

Sec. 13 and 23, T6S, 

R7W

2 acres Installed two 1,500 gallon 

trick tanks and two 

drinkers.

Project 

implemented.
Appendix B. Past, Present and Foreseeable Future Project

202 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Project Location Size Type Implementation

Big Rosa Grazing 

Allotment Pipeline 

Installation and 

Repair

Sec. 28, 29, 32, and 33, 

T5S, R5W

24 acres Project activities included 

the installation of 3 pipeline 

segments and the removal 

and replacement of the 

existing pipeline.

Project 

implemented.

Lizze Lynn Turkey 

Track Slash

Sec. 18, T4S, R7W 2 acres Issuance of a permit for 

water conveyance across FS 

land

Project 

implemented.

Abbe Springs 

Grazing Allotment 

Maintenance

Sec. 18, 19, and 30, 

T1N, R4W

Sec. 1–18, 20–28,

T1N, R5W

Sec. 19, T2N, R4W

12 acres Maintenance of existing 

range improvements.

Project 

implemented.

Bear Mountain 

Allotment 

Extension of Water 

Pipeline

Sec. 4, and 9, T1S, 

R5W

1 mile Existing water pipeline 

extended.

Project 

implemented.

Bear Mountain No. 

14 Wildlife Project

Sec. 11, R1S, R4W 1 acre Replace existing concrete 

pad and rebuild fence.

Project 

implemented.

Sawmill Canyon 

Wildlife Project

Sec. 8, T1S, R6W 2.5 acres Added a second metal 

catchment to an existing 

drinker.

Project 

implemented.

Crosby Trick Tank Sec. 15, T2S, R11W 3 acres Replacement of an existing 

metal catchment and 

expand the existing 

enclosure fence.

Project 

implemented.

Sale of Baldwin 

Cabin

Sec. 33, T1S, R10W 40 acres Sale of a FS administrative 

site.

Project 

implemented.

Hop Canyon 

Allotment

Maintenance of 

Range 

Improvements

Sec. 31, T2S R3W

Sec. 6–8, 17, 19, and 

30, T3S, R3W

Sec. 1–3, 10, 11, 13, 

14, and 24, T3S, R4W

17 

miles

Maintenance of existing 

range improvements.

Project 

implemented.

Kelly Grazing 

Allotment

Maintenance of 

Range 

Improvements

Sec. 30, T3S, R3W

Sec. 10, 11, 13–16, 21, 

22, 24–28, and 33–38, 

T3S, R4W

18 miles Maintenance of existing 

range improvements.

Project 

implemented.

Palome Grazing 

Allotment

Maintenance of 

Range 

Improvements

Sec. 33 and 34, T2S, 

R4W

Sec. 3, 4, 8–11, 15–17, 

20, and 21, T3S, R4W

25 miles Maintenance of existing 

range improvements.

Project 

implemented.

Sawmill Grazing 

Allotment

Maintenance of 

Range 

Improvements

Sec. 28, 29, and 31–34, 

T4S, R3W

Sec. 3–5, T5S, R3W

11 miles Maintenance of existing 

range improvements.

Project 

implemented.
Appendix B. Past, Present and Foreseeable Future Project

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 203

Project Location Size Type Implementation

Tip Top Grazing 

Allotment

Maintenance of 

Range 

Improvements

Sec. 28, 29, and 31-34, 

T4S, R3W

Sec. 3–5, T5S, R3W

16 miles Maintenance of existing 

range improvements.

Project 

implemented.

Puertocito Wildlife 

Project

Sec. 2, T5S, R4W 2.5 acres Replace an existing 

fiberglass water catchment 

and expand fence 

enclosure.

Project 

implemented.

Ducklow Road 

Easement

Sec. 13, 14, 21, 22, and 

23, T4S, R4W

2.16 

miles

Issuance of a road use 

permit for road 

maintenance.

Project 

implemented.

Horse Mountain 

Wildlife Project

Sec. 30, T6S, R5W 2.5 acres Replace existing water 

catchment.

Project 

implemented.

Hughes Wildlife 

Project

Sec. 33, T5S, R7W 2.5 acres Replace existing water 

catchment.

Project 

implemented.

Questa Wildlife 

Project

Sec. 36, T9S, R6W 2 acres Install a concrete rain water 

catchment and two

fiberglass storage tanks.

Project 

implemented.

Penasco Grazing 

Allotment

Maintenance of 

Range 

Improvements

Multiple sections in 

T9S, R4W; T9S, R5W; 

T9S, R6W; T10., 

R4W; T10S, R5W

80 miles Maintenance of existing 

range improvements.

Projects 

implemented.

Steel Hill Grazing 

Allotment

Maintenance of 

Range 

Improvements

Sec. 29, 30, and 32, 

T8S, R4W

4.5 acres Maintenance of existing 

range improvements.

Projects 

implemented.

East Monticello 

Grazing Allotment

Maintenance of

Range 

Improvements

Sec, 30, 31, T9S, R5W

Sec. 23–26, 35, and 36, 

T9S, R6W

Sec. 5–8, 17, and 18, 

T10S, R6W

Sec 1–3 and 10–13, 

T10S, R6W

12 acres 

and 

4.5 

miles

Maintenance of existing 

range improvements.

Projects 

implemented.

Bear Trap Grazing 

Allotment

Maintenance of 

Range 

Improvements

Multiple sections in 

T5S, R6W; T5S, R7W; 

T5S, R8W; T6S, R8W;

T7S, R8W

97 miles Maintenance of existing 

range improvements.

Projects 

implemented.

Whitecap Wildlife 

Project

Sec. 30, T5S, R5W 2.5 acres Replace existing water

catchment and fence.

Project 

implemented.

Council Rock 

Grazing 

AllotmentMaintenance of 

Range 

Improvements

Sec. 8, T1S, R6W 2.5 acres Maintenance of an existing 

water well.

Project 

implemented.
Appendix B. Past, Present and Foreseeable Future Project

204 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Project Location Size Type Implementation

Bear Mountain No. 

14 Quail Guzzler

Sec. 11, T1S, R4W 3 acres Repair existing water 

catchment and enclosure 

fence.

Project 

Implemented.

Bear Mountain No. 

10 Guzzler

Sec. 36, T1S, R4W 2.5 acres Maintain existing water 

development.

Project 

implemented.

Uranium City 

Resources

Sec. 20, 21, and 28-30, 

T2N, R10W

400 

acres

Plan of operations to 

perform exploratory 

drilling.

Project 

implemented.

Gooseberry 

Canyon Spring

Sec. 21, T1N, R10W 2.5 acres Maintain existing spring 

improvement.

Project 

implemented.

Datil Grazing 

Allotment

Maintenance and 

New Construction 

of Range 

Improvements

Sec. 30 and 31, T1S, 

R9W

Sec. 25, 26, 35, and 36, 

T1S, R10W

Sec.6, T2S, R9W

Sec. 1 and 2, T2S, 

R9W

28.6 

acres

Maintain existing range 

improvements and 

construct two storage tanks, 

one water well, one drinker

and 3 miles of water 

pipeline.

Project 

Implemented.

Hydro Resources 

Corp. Road 

Easement

Sec. 12, T3S, R4W

Sec. 7, T3S, R3W

1.5 acres Issue a permit for road use 

and maintenance.

Project 

implemented.

Arrowhead Spring 

Enclosure

Sec. 23, T4S, R4W 3 acres Expand existing fence. Project 

Implemented.

Water Canyon 

Mesa Trick Tank

Sec. 35, T3S, R3W 3 acres Repair storage tank and 

install access ramp.

Project 

implemented.

505 Quail Water Sec. 34, T2S, R3W 3 acres Repair existing concrete 

catchment.

Project 

implemented.

Construct a new 

District Office

Sec. 22, T2S, R4W 2 acres Construction of a new 

office building.

Project 

implemented.

Magdalena Ranger 

District 

Administrative Site 

Improvements

Sec. 33, T2S, R4W 2 acres Demolish existing 

warehouse and construct a 

new warehouse.

Project 

implemented.

Chavez Wildlife 

Water

Sec. 19, T4S, R2W 3 acres Rebuild existing fence. Project 

implemented.

Gap Wildlife 

Water

Sec. 34, T4S, R4W 3 acres Replace current catchment 

with a metal trick tank.

Project 

implemented.

Beartrap 

Campground 

Fence 

Reconstruction

Sec. 12, T5S, R7W 2.5 acres Replace existing fence. Project 

implemented.

Baney Tank 

Reconstruction

Sec. 2, T6S, R8W 3 acres Reconstruct earthen tank. Project 

implemented.

Bolander Wildlife 

Water

Sec. 24, T4S, R7W 2.5 acres Maintain current water 

system.

Project 

implemented.

Dry Spring Sec. 35, T5S, R6W 2.5 acres Replace plumbing on 

existing wildlife drinker.

Project 

implemented.
Appendix B. Past, Present and Foreseeable Future Project

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 205

Project Location Size Type Implementation

Eagle Spring 

Enclosure

Sec. 13, T5S, R7W 2.5 acres Maintain existing water 

system.

Project 

implemented.

Jose Maria Quail 

Enclosure

Sec. 6, T10S, R5W 40 acres Replace existing fence 

enclosure.

Project 

implemented.

Indian Spring 

Enclosure

Sec. 32, T6S, R6W 2.5 acres Maintain current water 

development.

Project 

implemented.

Limestone Turkey 

Water

Sec. 22, T S, R7W 2.5 acres Replace existing water 

development.

Project 

implemented.

Luna Park 

Rockheaders 

Enclosure

Sec. 25, T9S, R6W 2.5 acres Maintain current water 

development.

Project 

implemented.

Monica Well 

Guzzler

Sec. 18, T4S, R6W 2.5 acres Replace current guzzler. Project 

implemented.

Pine Canyon Solar 

Well

Sec. 11, T8S, R7W 3 acres Hook up storage tank for 

drinker.

Project 

implemented.

Pothole Spring 

Enclosure

Sec. 32, T6S, R6W 2.5 acres Maintain current water 

development.

Project 

implemented.

Spring Hollow 

Rockheader

Sec. 4, T6S, R7W 2.5 acres Maintain existing 

rockheaders.

Project 

implemented.

Switch Spring 

Enclosure

Sec. 36, T4S, R7W 2.5 acres Maintain existing water 

development.

Project 

implemented.

Toolbox Spring Sec. 4, T7S, R6W 3 acres Maintain current water 

development.

Project 

implemented.

Withington Land 

Purchase

Sec. 22, T4S, R6W

Sec. 26, T4S, R6W

Sec. 5 and 6, T5S, 

R5W

426 

acres

Negotiate land purchase. Project 

implemented.

Socorro Electric 

Coop. Permit 

Reissuance

Districtwide 46 acres Permit renewal. Project 

implemented.

Penasco Allotment 

New Range 

Improvement

Sec. 5, T10S, R5W

Sec. 11, T11S, R5W

Sec. 8 and 36, T9S, 

R5W

10 acres Construction of new range 

improvements.

Project 

implemented.

Pounds Waterline 

Permit Reissuance

Sec. 10 and 11, T3S, 

R3W

1 mile Issue a special use permit 

for a water distribution line.

Project 

implemented.
Appendix B. Past, Present and Foreseeable Future Project

206 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Present and Foreseeable Future Projects

Project Location Size Type Implementation

Remuda 

Exploratory 

Drilling for 

Uranium

Sec. 36, T2N, 

R10W

4 acres Plan of operation to drill 

four holes and extract cores 

for analysis

Project 

implemented.

Webster 

Exploratory 

Drilling for 

Uranium

Sec. 33, T2N, 

R10W

7 acres Plan of operation to drill 

four holes and extract cores 

for analysis.

Project 

implemented

Homeland 

Security/ Border 

Patrol Installation 

of Facilities at 

Davenport 

Lookout

Sec. 29, T1N, 

R10W

100 sq. ft. Installation of a selfsupporting communication 

tower.

Project

implemented

Buried Fiber Optic 

Line from Datil to 

Pie Town

Sec, 19, 32–34, 

T1S, R10W

Sec. 2, 3, T1S, 

R11W

Sec. 32–35, T1N, 

R11W

6 miles WNMTC requested a 

special use permit to install 

a buried fiber optic line of 

FS lands.

Project 

implemented

Rosedale Forest 

Restoration, Part II

Sec. 2, 11, and 12, 

T6S, R6W

117 acres Forest restoration project to 

maintain forest and 

watershed health, vigor, and 

productivity.

Project proposed 

for FY 2012. Has 

not been 

implemented

Apache Kid 

Heritage Site 

Stabilization

Sec. 35, T8S, R6W 1 acre Determine options to 

preserve the Apache Kid 

gravesite marker.

Project has been 

funded at this time

Springtime 

Campground 

Fence 

Reconstruction

Sec. 36, T8S, R6W 1 acre Construction of a pipe fence 

and the removal of a 

deteriorating wooden fence.

Project 

implemented

Beartrap 

Campground 

Fence 

Reconstruction

Sec. 12, T5S, R7W 150 meters Construction of a pipe fence 

and the removal of a 

deteriorating wooden fence.

Project 

implemented

Bear Mountain No. 

8 Wildlife Guzzler

Sec. 14, T1S, R4W 2.5 acres Perform maintenance and 

repairs on an existing 

wildlife guzzler and fence.

Project

implemented

Bear Mountain No. 

14 Wildlife 

Guzzler

Sec. 11, T1S, R4W 2.5 acres Perform maintenance and 

repairs on an existing 

wildlife guzzler and fence.

Project

implemented

North East Red 

Prescribed Burn

Sec. 3, 5, 7, 8, 17–

20, 29, and 30, T6S, 

R5W

Sec. 9–14, 16, and 

20–24, T6S, R6W

10,400 

acres

Prescribed burn to improve 

conditions for wildlife and 

livestock.

Project in planning. 

Multiple year 

implementations.
Appendix B. Past, Present and Foreseeable Future Project

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 207

Project Location Size Type Implementation

San Juan/Long 

Spring Prescribed 

Burn

Sec. 13, 14, 22–27, 

and 34–36, T7S, 

R5W

Sec. 17–20, and 29–

32, T7S, R4W

Sec. 1–3, 10–15, 23, 

and 24, T8S, R5W

Sec. 5–8, 17–20, 29, 

30, and 32, T8S, 

R4W

20,830 acres Prescribed burn to improve 

conditions for wildlife and 

livestock.

Project in planning. 

Multiple year 

implementations.

Mojave Academy 

Fuels Treatments

Sec. 25 and 36, 

T1N, R11W

Sec. 19, T1N, 

R10W

1,250 acres Reduce fuel loading by 

reducing tree stand density 

using mechanical and 

prescribed fire treatments in 

this wildland-urban 

interface.

Project in planning. 

Multiple year 

implementations.

Treatment for 

Invasive Plants

Districtwide DistrictwideAnalysis of a variety of 

methods for treating 

invasive plants on the 

district.

Multiple year 

implementations.

Rosedale

Ponderosa Pine 

Treatment

Sec. 2, 11, and 12, 

T6S, R6W

320 acres Project to improve 

watershed condition.

Project in planning. 

Multiple year 

implementations. 

Military Tactics 

Training Area

Sec. 27, 28, 29, and 

32–36, T2N, R4W

Sec.1–5, 8–12, 13–

17, 20–24, and 25–

29, T1N, R4W

20,898 acres Analyze effects of a variety 

of training exercises as part 

of environmental analysis.

Project in progress.

Mineral 

Withdrawal of 

Zuni Fleabane 

Habitat

Sec. 4, 9, and 10, 

T1N, R11W

Sec. 36, T2N, 

R11W

Sec. 3, T1N, R10W

1,000 acres Withdrawal from mineral 

entry at four Datil and

Sawtooth Mountain 

locations. Withdrawal 

would prohibit mineral 

development.

Project in progress.

Centennial West 

Clean Line Project

Route has not been 

determined

900 miles: 

multiple 

jurisdictions

Construct a 600 kV 

transmission line to gather 

energy from renewable 

generation project.

Project in initial 

planning stages.

Durfee/Bolander 

Collaborative 

Landscape 

Restoration Project

Sec. 23-26, T4S, 

R8W

Sec. 8–11 and 13–

36, T4S, R7W

Sec. 1–3, T5S, R7W

18,237 acres Forest restoration project to 

maintain forest and 

watershed health, vigor, and 

productivity.

Project in planning. 

Multiple year 

implementations.

Davenport Forest 

Restoration 

(extension for 

2006 proposed 

boundaries)

Sec. 24, T1N, 

R11W

Sec. 19, 20, and 29, 

T1N, R10W

701 acres Forest restoration project to 

maintain forest and 

watershed health, vigor, and 

productivity.

Project in planning. 

Multiple year 

implementations.
Appendix B. Past, Present and Foreseeable Future Project

208 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Project Location Size Type Implementation

Baney Fuels 

Treatment and 

Prescribed Burn

Numerous sections 

in T5S, R8W; T6S, 

R8W; T5S, R7W; 

T6S, R7W.

15,149 

acres

Reduce fuel loading by 

reducing tree stand density 

using mechanical and 

prescribed fire treatments.

Project in planning. 

Multiple year 

implementations.

Bolander Fuels 

Treatments and 

Prescribed Burn

Sec. 9-11, 13–16, 

and 22–24, T4S, 

R7W

Sec. 18, T4S, R6W

4,009 acres Reduce fuel loading by 

reducing tree stand density 

using mechanical and 

prescribed fire treatments.

Project in planning. 

Multiple year 

implementations.

Monica 

Mechanical 

Thinning and 

Prescribed Burn

Sec. 17–21, and 29, 

T4S, R6W

1,804 acres Reduce fuel loading by 

reducing tree stand density 

using mechanical and 

prescribed fire treatments.

Project in planning. 

Multiple year 

implementations.

Continental Divide 

National Scenic 

Trail

Multiple sections in

T1N, R11W; T2N, 

R11W; T2N, R10W

10 miles Develop a new segment of 

the trail.

Project in planning.

Corn Canyon 

Prescribed Burn

Sec. 31, T8S, R5W

Sec. 36, T8S, R6W

Sec. 1–6 and 7–12, 

T9S, R5W

4,760 acres Broadcast prescribed burn 

to improve conditions for

wildlife and livestock.

Project in planning. 

Multiple year 

implementations.

Chavez/Whitecap 

Prescribed Burn

Sec. 5–8, 18–22, 

and 30–34, T5 S, 

R5W

Sec. 5, 24–26, and 

36, T5S, R6W

Sec. 5–8, T6S, R5W

Sec. 1–3, 11, and 

12, T6S, R6W

14,000

acres

Broadcast burn to improve 

conditions for wildlife and 

livestock.

Project in planning. 

Multiple year 

implementations.
EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 209

Appendix C. Roads Designated 

for Administrative Use Only

Alternative 1, Proposed Action, Road Segments Restricted for Administrative Use

FS Road Numbers

1000 1063 123GA 325 537A 699 743 791 862 903 959

1001 1063A 123GB 329 541 6X 744 792 864 905 960

1003A 1064 123OA 331XX 546A 7 745 794 865 906 961A

1004 1065A 123OB 333*BB 571 700 746 796 866 908 963

1006 1065X 123OC 339 60Z 701 747 797 867 908A 964A

1007 1069 123S 343 629 702 748 798 868 908B 965A

101 1071 128EB 350 62A 703A 749 798A 869 912 966A

1010 1080 131DA 354D 635 704 750 799 86B 912A 968

1011 1083 138A 354I 661B 705 752 799A 870 919 970

1012 1084 138B 354U 661BA 706A 756 800 873 920A 971

1013 1085 140A 354XA 663 707 757 801 873.1 921 971A

1014 1086 140B 358G 664 708 758 803 874 921A 972

1015 1087 14Z 363 665 709 758A 804 878 923 973

1019 1089 176 377X 666 710 760 805 879 924 975

1020 1090 180AA 38 667 711 761 806 882A 925A 976

1021 1093 1895 39 668 713A 762 808 883 926 977

1021A 1094 194*A 390 669 713B 763 809 884 930 978

1023 1096 204 392 670 714 763A 819 885A 932X 979

1025 1097 216 411A 671 715 763J 819A 888 934 980

1026A 1098A 217 441D 675A 716 764 820 889 934A 981

1026B 1098B 219B 448A 676 717 765 820A 890 935A 982

1026C 1098C 219D 45 677 718 766 821 890X 936 983

1028 1099 225X 451X 678A 719 767 823 891 936A 985

1028A 1099J 225Y 467C 68 719A 768 825B 891X 936B 986

1029 10AC 225Z 467X 680 720 769 530 892A 936M 986A

1031 10AX 235A 468 681 722 770 833 892B 938 986AA

1032 10ECA 247 47 683 723 773 834 892C 940 988

1033 10EF 24A 472 685 725 774 836 892ZA 941B 989

1035 10GZ 254D 478 685A 726 775 837 892ZB 943 993

1036 1101 256A 493A 685B 729 776 838 893A 944 994

1040 1102 260D 495A 685C 729A 777 839 893B 946 995

1041 1103A 266 496C 685D 729B 777X 84 893C 947 996

1042 1104 267 497 686 72B 778 840 893CA 94AA 997

1043 1105 269 502 687 733 779 844 893J 94BA 998

1044 1106 269A 504B 688 734 780 845 894 94C

County 

Road 

Numbers

1045 1107 271 505B 689 735 781 846 894A 94D

1046 1108 273 505E 690 736 782 853 894B 94E

1048 1109 28 506I 691 737 783 854 894J 94F

1049 111A 282 510 692 738 784 855 895 953 CR12A

1053 113 286 529 693 738A 785 856 895A 954 CR12B

1054 119 292 52B 684 739 786 857 896A 955 CR12C

1056 119B 302 52C 695 73A 787 858 897 955A

1057 123BB 312A 52D 696 740 788 859 897J 956

1059 123FA 316A 532 697 741 789 860 900 957

1062 123FF 319*B 533*D 698 742 790 861 902 958
Appendix C. Roads Designated for Administrative Use Only

210 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

Alternative 3, Road Segments Designated for Administrative Use Only

FS Road Numbers

1000 1064 123S 354D 664 708 758A 809 884 936A

1001 1065A 128EB 354I 665 709 760 819 885A 936M

1003A 1065X 131DA 354XA 666 710 761 819A 888 938

1006 1069 138A 358G 667 711 762 820 889 940

1007 1071 138B 363 668 713B 763 820A 890 941B

101 1080 140A 377X 669 714 763A 821 890X 943

1010 1083 140B 38 670 715 763J 823 891 944

1011 1084 14Z 39 671 716 764 825B 891X 946

1012 1085 176 390 675A 717 765 830 892B 947

1013 1086 180AA 392 676 718 766 833 892C 94AA

1014 1087 1895 411A 677 719 767 834 892ZA 94BA

1015 1089 194*A 441D 678A 719A 768 836 892ZB 94C

1019 1090 204 448A 68 720 769 837 893A 94D

1020 1093 216 451X 680 722 770 838 893B 94E

1021 1094 217 467C 681 723 773 839 893C 94F

1021A 1096 219B 467X 683 725 774 84 893CA 953

1023 1097 219D 468 685 726 775 840 893J 954

1025 1098A 225X 47 685A 729 776 844 894B 955

1026A 1098B 225Y 472 685B 729A 777 845 894J 955A

1026B 1098C 225Z 478 685C 729B 777X 846 895 956

1026C 1099 235A 493A 685D 72B 778 853 895A 957

1028 1099J 247 495A 686 733 779 854 896A 958

1028A 10AC 24A 496C 687 734 780 855 897 959

1029 10AX 254D 497 688 735 781 856 897J 960

1031 10EF 260D 502 689 736 782 857 900 961A

1032 10GZ 266 504B 690 737 783 858 902 963

1033 1101 267 505B 691 738 784 859 903 964A

1035 1102 269 505E 692 738A 785 860 905 965A

1036 1103A 269A 506I 693 739 786 861 906 966A

1040 1104 271 510 694 73A 787 862 908B 968

1041 1105 273 529 695 740 788 864 912 970

1042 1106 28 52B 696 741 789 865 912A 971

1043 1107 282 52C 697 742 790 866 919 971A

1044 1108 286 52D 698 743 791 867 920A 972

1045 1109 292 532 699 744 792 868 921 973

1046 111A 302 533*D 6X 745 794 869 921A 975

1048 113 312A 537A 7 746 796 86B 923 976

1049 119 316A 546A 700 747 799 870 924 977

1054 119B 325 60Z 701 748 799A 873 925A 978

1056 123BB 329 629 702 749 800 873.1 926 979

1057 123GA 331XX 62A 703A 750 803 874 930 980

1059 123GB 333*BB 635 704 752 804 878 932X 981

1062 123OA 339 661B 705 756 805 879 934A 982
Appendix C. Roads Designated for Administrative Use Only

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 211

FS Road Numbers

1063 123OB 343 661BA 706A 757 806 882A 935A 983

1063A 123OC 350 663 707 758 808 883 936 985

986 968AA 989 993 996 997 998 County Road Numbers

CR12A CR12B CR12C

Alternative 4, Road Segments Designated for Administrative Use Only

FS Road Numbers

1000 1063 123FA 273 506I 688 734 780 845 893C

1001 1063A 123FF 28 506K 689 735 781 846 893CA

1003A 1064 123GA 282 510 690 736 782 853 893J

1004 1065A 123GB 286 529 691 737 783 854 894

1006 1065X 123OA 292 52B 692 738 784 855 894A

1007 1069 123OB 302 52C 693 738A 785 856 894B

101 1071 123OC 312A 52D 694 739 786 857 894J

1010 1080 123S 316A 532 695 73A 787 858 895

1011 1083 128EB 319*B 533*D 696 740 788 859 895A

1012 1084 131DA 325 537A 697 741 789 860 896

1013 1085 138A 329 541 698 742 790 861 896A

1014 1086 138B 331XX 546A 699 743 791 862 897

1015 1087 140 333*BB 56 6X 744 792 864 897J

1019 1089 140A 339 571 7 745 794 865 898

1020 1090 140B 343 59A 700 746 796 866 898A

1021 1093 14Z 350 60Z 701 747 797 867 899

1021A 1094 176 354D 629 702 748 798 868 899A

1023 1096 177 354I 62A 703A 749 789A 869 900

1025 1097 180AA 354U 635 704 750 799 86B 902

1026A 1098A 181 354XA 661B 705 752 799A 870 903

1026B 1098B 1895 358G 661BA 706A 756 800 873 904

1026C 1098C 194*A 363 663 707 757 801 873.1 905

1028 1099 204 377X 664 708 758 803 874 906

1028A 1099J 214 38 665 709 758A 804 878 908

1029 10AC 216 39 666 710 760 805 879 908A

1031 10AX 217 390 667 711 761 806 882A 908B

1032 10ECA 219B 392 668 713A 762 808 883 909

1033 10EF 219D 411A 669 713B 763 809 884 910

1035 10GZ 225X 441D 670 714 763A 819 885A 912

1036 1101 225Y 448A 671 715 763J 819A 888 912A

1040 1102 225Z 451X 675A 716 764 820 889 919

1041 1103A 227 467C 676 717 765 820A 890 920

1042 1104 235A 467X 677 718 766 821 890X 920A

1043 1105 247 468 678A 719 767 823 891 921

1044 1106 24A 47 68 719A 768 825B 891X 921A

1045 1107 254D 472 680 720 769 830 892 923

1046 1108 256 478 681 722 770 833 892A 924
Appendix C. Roads Designated for Administrative Use Only

212 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District

FS Road Numbers

1048 1109 256A 493A 683 723 773 834 892B 925A

1049 111A 260D 495A 685 725 774 836 892C 926

1053 113 265 496C 685A 726 775 837 892Z 930

1054 119 266 497 685B 729 776 838 892ZA 932X

1056 119B 267 502 685C 729A 777 839 892ZB 934

1057 123B 269 504B 685D 729B 777X 84 893 934A

1059 123BB 269A 505B 686 72B 778 840 893A 935A

1062 123F 271 505E 687 733 779 844 893B 936

936A 944 94E 957 965A 97 975 981 986AA 996

936B 946 94F 958 966A 970 976 982 988 997

936M 947 953 959 967 971 977 983 989 998

938 94AA 954 960 967A 971A 978 985 993 943

940 94BA 955 961A 967B 972 979 986 994 94D

941B 94C 955A 963 968 973 980 986A 995 956

964A County Road Numbers

CR12A CR12B CR12C
213

Appendix D. Recreation Opportunity 

Spectrum and Visual Quality Objectives 

Maps

Appendix D. Recreation Opportunity Spectrum and Visual Quality Objectives Maps

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 215
Appendix D. Recreation Opportunity Spectrum and Visual Quality Objectives Maps

216 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District
EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 217

Appendix E. Travel 

Management Proposed Maps

The following pages show maps of the baseline and different alternatives for the Magdalena 

Ranger District’s travel management proposal. The maps in this section are:

 Baseline

 Alternative 1 – Proposed Action

 Alternative 2 – Existing System

 Alternative 3

 Alternative 4

For alternative 2, please note that after the baseline data was established, discrepancies in the 

database were discovered. A total of 35.1 miles of road were erroneously identified as National 

Forest System Roads (NFSRs) that should not have been and 8 miles of NFSRs were not 

identified as such. These errors have been accounted for under this alternative by subtracting 

27.1 miles of road from the miles of road that would be designated for motor vehicle use. This 

discrepancy was accounted for under alternatives 1, 3, and 4 under “roads restricted to 

administrative use.” These database errors will be corrected prior to publishing the motor vehicle 

use map.)

Appendix E. Travel Management Proposed Maps

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 219
Appendix E. Travel Management Proposed Maps

220 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District
Appendix E. Travel Management Proposed Maps

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 221
Appendix E. Travel Management Proposed Maps

222 EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District
Appendix E. Travel Management Proposed Maps

EA for Travel Management on the Magdalena Ranger District 223