i

BUREAU OF LAND 

MANAGEMENT

Transportation 

Connections 2040

U.S. Department of the Interior

A National Long Range 

Transportation Plan for the 

Bureau of Land Management

May 2021
ii
iii

Transportation Connections 2040:

National Long Range Transportation Plan for the 

Bureau of Land Management

A Joint Effort By

National Conservation Lands and Community Partnerships (HQ400)

and

Business Management and Administration (HQ700)

U.S. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Land Management

Approved by:

____________________________________________________________________ _____________

Nada Wolff Culver Date

Deputy Director, Policy and Programs
iv

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments vi

Acronyms vii

Prologue viii

Introduction 2

1.1 Importance of Transportation for BLM and the Nation 3

1.2 What is Transportation Connections 2040? 6

Vision, Goals, and Objectives 10

Transportation Funding 14

3.1 BLM Appropriations for Transportation 15

3.2 Federal Lands Transportation Program (FLTP) 17

3.3 Grants and Other Partnership Funding Sources 19

The BLM Travel and Transportation Management Planning Process 20

Baseline Conditions and Trends 24

5.1 Access, Connectivity, & Experience 25

5.2 Transportation Asset Management 33

5.3 Collaborative Partnerships 39

5.4 Natural, Cultural, & Historic Resources 49

5.5 Safety 55

Implementation Plan 66

Monitoring Plan 76

Final Thoughts 80
v

Figures & Tables

Figure 1. How the BLM’s Transportation Program supports other BLM Program Areas 4

Figure 2. BLM-managed Public Lands 5

Figure 3. BLM NLRTP Development Timeline 9

Figure 4. BLM Appropriation and FLTP Spending, 2013 to 2017 15

Figure 5. BLM FLTP Funding, 2013 to 2019 18

Figure 6. BLM Visitation Data for Recreational, Partnership, and Dispersed Sites 26

Figure 7. Checkerboard Nature of BLM-Managed Public Lands (Example Location near 

Crescent Valley and Carlin, Nevada) 27

Figure 8. Overall Quality of Experience Reported by BLM Site Visitors in 2018 28

Figure 9. Georeferenced Map of El Malpais National Conservation Area, New Mexico 30

Table 3. Roads and Trails Mileage and Bridge and Culvert Counts from FAMS (2019) by 

BLM Administrative Region 36

Figure 10. Typical External Partnership Objectives and Types 40

Figure 11. 18 Mile Road before construction of improvements in Colorado 46

Figure 12. Strutting Greater Sage-Grouse 51

Figure 13. Petroglyphs at Nine Mile Canyon, Utah 54

Figure 14. BLM Sign at Billings Canyon Jeep Trail in Grand Junction, Colorado 56

Figure 15. BLM Fatal Roadway Crashes, 2012 to 2016* 61

Figure 16. IMARS Vehicular Accidents by Mode, October 2013 to September 2018 63

Figure 17. Road Condition Rating as a Percent of Total Mileage 65

Figure 18. Bridge Condition Rating as a Percent of Total Road Bridges 65

Table 1. BLM Annual Maintenance (AM) Spending by Transportation Asset, 2016 to 2018 16

Table 2. BLM Deferred Maintenance (DM) and Capital Improvements Spending by Asset, 2016 to 2018 16

Table 3. Roads and Trails Mileage and Bridge and Culvert Counts from FAMS (2019) by 

BLM Administrative Region 36

Table 4. Summary of BLM Key Partners Identified by State 41

Table 5. Number and Miles of National Historic Trails and National Scenic Trails by State 53

Table 6. FARS Data Summary, 2012 to 2016 60

Table 7. IMARS Vehicular Accidents by Mode, October 2013 to September 2018 63

Table 8. Alignment between BLM National Transportation Goals and U.S. DOT National Goals 

(23 USC 150(b)) 81

Table 9. U.S. DOT National Performance Management Measures supported by BLM’s 

Transportation Connections 2040 Performance Measures and Strategies 82
vi

Acknowledgments

Bureau of Land Management Contact

Rosemarie Spano

Transportation Program Manager

Bureau of Land Management

rspano@blm.gov

202-313-2860

Federal Highway Administration Contact

Aung Gye

Lead Planner

Federal Lands Highway Division

Aung.Gye@dot.gov

202-366-2167

Development Team

The John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems 

Center

Special Thanks

The Federal Highway Administration and the 

Federal Lands Highway Divisions

The development of this national-level inclusive 

and interdisciplinary plan would not have been 

possible without the continued dedication, support 

and engagement of the BLM National Long Range 

Transportation Plan Core Team and Advisory 

Committee members listed below:

BLM NLRTP Core Team

• Monica Geopferd

• Evan Glenn

• Terry Heslin

• Dave Jeppesen

• Mark Kougl

• Jack Placchi

• Mellissa Rutkowski

• Rosemarie Spano

BLM Advisory Committee

• John Beck

• Dennis Byrd

• Randy Chatterton

• TJ Clifford

• Aaron Curtis

• Scott Debock

• Seth English-Young, FHWA-WFLHD

• Chris Knauf

• Elaine Lopez

• Geoff McManus

• Dorothy Morgan

• Jacob Palma

• Heather Sauls
vii

Acronyms

21CSC – 21st Century Conservation Service Corps 

ACE – Access, Connectivity, Experience

ACHP – Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

Alaska DOT&PF – Alaska Department of Transportation 

and Public Facilities

AM – Annual Maintenance

BLM – Bureau of Land Management

CP – Collaborative Partnerships

CVTS – Collaborative Visitor Transportation Survey

DART – Disturbance Automated Reference Toolset 

DM – Deferred Maintenance

DO – District Office

DOI – Department of the Interior

DOT – Department of Transportation 

EMS – Emergency Medical Services

ESA – Endangered Species Act 

FAMS – Facility and Asset Management System

FARS – Fatality Analysis Reporting System

FAST – Fixing America’s Surface Transportation 

FHWA – Federal Highway Administration

FLAP – Federal Lands Access Program

FLECC – Federal Law Enforcement Communication 

Center 

FHWA-FLH – Federal Highway Administration 

Office of Federal Lands Highway

FLMA – Federal Land Management Agency

FLTP – Federal Lands Transportation Program

FO – Field Office

FWS – Fish and Wildlife Service

GIS – Geographic Information Systems 

GPRA – Government Performance Results Act 

GQTE – Guidelines for a Quality Trail Experience 

GTLF – Ground Transportation Linear Features

HQ – Headquarters

ID – Interdisciplinary (Team)

IMARS – Incident Management Analysis and Reporting 

System 

IMBA – International Mountain Biking Association 

LRTP – Long Range Transportation Plan

MAP-21 – Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century

MLR – Management of Land and Resources

MPO - Metropolitan Planning Organization

NBI – National Bridge Inventory 

NCH – Natural, Cultural, Historical

NEPA – National Environmental Policy Act 

NLRTP – National Long Range Transportation Plan

NOC – National Operations Center 

NOHVCC – National Off-Highway Vehicle Conservation 

Council

OHV – Off-Highway Vehicle

OST – Office of the Secretary

PASER – Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating

RAR – Route Assessment Review

RMA – Recreation Management Area

RMIS – Recreation Management Information System 

RMP – Resource Management Plan

ROD – Record of Decision

RSA – Roadway Safety Audit

SHPO – State Historic Preservation Officer

SLV GO – San Luis Valley Great Outdoors 

SO – State Office

TAM – Transportation Asset Management

TAP – Transportation Assistance Program

TM – Transportation Management

TMA – Travel Management Area

TRB – Transportation Research Board 

TTM – Travel and Transportation Management

TTMP – Travel and Transportation Management Plan

U.S. – United States

WASHTO – Western Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials

WFLHD – Western Federal Lands Highway Division
viii

Prologue

After two years of planning and analysis, the Bureau 

of Land Management (BLM) is pleased to provide 

Transportation Connections 2040: A National 

Long Range Transportation Plan for the BLM. This 

document is the culmination of a collaborative, 

interdisciplinary planning process including staff 

from the BLM’s Headquarters Office, State Offices, 

and Field Offices, as well as the Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) Office of Federal Lands 

Highway. 

Public lands managed by the BLM are recognized 

as America’s Great Outdoors, and a “Backyard to 

Backcountry” treasure. More than 120 urban centers 

and thousands of tribal and rural communities 

are located within 25 miles of BLM-managed 

public lands.1

 The BLM’s transportation system is 

in many ways an “unsung hero” in supporting the 

achievement of the agency’s mission, providing 

access to BLM-managed public lands across 

the country “to sustain the health, diversity, 

and productivity of public lands for the use and 

enjoyment of present and future generations.” 

The BLM’s roads, primitive roads (i.e., roads that 

are typically used by four-wheel drive or highclearance vehicles and do not customarily meet any 

BLM road design standards), trails, and bridges 

provide connections to BLM-managed lands 

used for economic development, recreation, and 

conservation. 

Transportation Connections 2040 is the BLM’s 

first National Long Range Transportation Plan. 

This plan fulfills the long range transportation 

planning requirements for Federal Land 

Management agencies in the Fixing America’s 

Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, and it 

establishes a holistic, strategic vision for the BLM’s 

transportation program. The BLM’s ultimate 

goal is to use this plan to invest its limited 

transportation funds wisely to benefit its many 

users and to enhance connections with neighboring 

communities. This plan includes a set of goals and 

objectives for the transportation program and a 

performance-based framework for implementation 

and monitoring. 

This plan supports the Department of the Interior’s 

priorities by providing a strategic approach to 

1 Bureau of Land Management. 2020. Recreation Programs website.

https://www.blm.gov/programs/recreation/recreation-programs

managing and developing the BLM’s transportation 

system. Specifically, the BLM aligns with these 

priorities through the following efforts:

• Provide access to responsible development of 

renewable energy on public lands and waters; 

• Strengthen government-to-government 

relationships with sovereign Tribal nations 

through transportation partnerships; 

• Make transportation investments that support 

the creation of jobs and local economic 

development;

• Support land and water conservation 

by providing access to public lands for 

conservation and restoration projects 

and minimizing resource impacts from 

transportation systems; and 

• Promote equity and environmental justice 

through partnerships with communities 

of color, low-income families, rural, and 

indigenous communities to enhance public 

lands access and connectivity. 

This plan has a variety of audiences. For national, 

regional, and local BLM staff, Transportation 

Connections 2040 communicates the importance 

of the transportation program to a wide range of 

BLM programs and identifies actions to help the 

BLM reach its transportation goals. However, the 

BLM cannot achieve these goals alone. The BLM’s 

transportation system connects to transportation 

networks managed by States, Counties, Tribal 

governments, and municipalities. The BLM 

leverages funding from the FHWA, state and local 

grants, and business and non-profit partners to 

achieve more than it can with its funds alone. 

Communities throughout the U.S. also support 

the BLM through collaborative maintenance 

agreements and volunteer projects to maintain and 

enhance access to the resources where Americans 

work and play. As such, this plan is a resource to 

increase understanding of the BLM’s transportation 

program to support future collaboration. 

This plan is meant to be a living document that can 

and should be updated over time, guiding future 

BLM investments for the benefit of current and 

future generations. 
1

Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail, Arizona

Bureau of Land Management Mission

The Bureau of Land Management’s mission is to sustain the health, diversity, 

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

future generations.
1 2

Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area, Nevada

Introduction
3

1.1 Importance of 

Transportation for BLM 

and the Nation

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 

transportation system is essential to fulfilling 

its multi-use mission of sustaining the health, 

diversity, and productivity of public lands for 

the use and enjoyment of present and future 

generations. The BLM’s roads, primitive roads 

(i.e., roads that are typically used by fourwheel drive or high-clearance vehicles and do 

not customarily meet any BLM road design 

standards), and trails provide unique access 

to recreational opportunities, such as offhighway vehicle (OHV) use, mountain biking, 

hiking, and other recreational uses. The BLM’s 

transportation system also provides sole access 

to a large portion of the nation’s clean energy 

and minerals, oil and gas extraction, cattle 

grazing, and timber harvesting. Because BLMmanaged public lands are often interspersed 

among other landowners, many BLM routes 

also support everyday public travel purposes, 

such as commuting routes, postal and school 

bus routes, and connections to Tribal and rural 

communities.

1 Bureau of Land Management. 2019. The BLM: A Sound Investment for America 2019. 

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/SoundInvest2019-6pages-FINAL-083019.pdf

2 Ibid.

The BLM transportation system provides the 

following benefits:

• Economic Generation: the public lands

managed by the BLM generate significant

and quantifiable benefits for the United

States (U.S.) by providing clean energy

and mineral resources, grazing and

timber resources, and more recreational

opportunities than lands managed by

any other Federal agency. In 2018, the

economic output of coal, oil and gas,

solid minerals, geothermal, wind, solar,

recreation, grazing, and timber on the

public lands amounted to $105 billion and

supported 471,000 jobs, more than any

other Bureau within the Department of the

Interior (DOI).1

• Recreation Access: the BLM

transportation system is essential for the

public to access its 2,959 recreation sites.

In 2018, BLM-managed lands received

over 68 million visits. This visitation

produced $6.8 billion in economic output

related to recreation (camping, picnicking,

landscape and wildlife viewing, hiking and

backpacking, boating, bicycling, hunting,

fishing, and motorized recreation).2

• Disaster Response and Evacuation: the

BLM’s roads, primitive roads, bridges, and

trails provide critical access for interagency

wildfire mitigation activities and response,

as well as evacuation routes for the general

public.

• Tribal and Rural Community

Connections: the BLM transportation

system often provides important

connectivity to State, county, and local

routes in tribal and rural communities and

supports economic development, access to

recreation, and community spaces.
4

The ways the BLM’s Transportation Program supports each of the BLM’s program areas are summarized 

in Figure 1.

Figure 1. How the BLM’s Transportation Program supports other BLM Program Areas
5

The BLM manages nearly one-eighth of all the 

land area in the U.S., making the BLM the single 

largest land holder in the nation (Figure 2). The 

BLM’s transportation system consists of about 

90,000 miles of linear transportation features 

across the U.S., including approximately 45,000 

miles of roads, 30,000 miles of primitive roads, 

15,000 miles of trails, 915 bridges, and 654 major 

culverts. The vast network of connections across 

these lands forms a complex transportation 

system influenced by many years of changing 

public uses. With the growing U.S. population, 

the increase in demand for energy, the growth 

in recreational activities, and ongoing fire risks, 

the BLM’s transportation system will become 

even more important over time.

The BLM’s transportation system is highly 

Figure 2. BLM-managed public lands
6

connected to the transportation networks 

of its partners, including those facilities 

owned and maintained by other Federal 

Land Management Agencies (FLMAs), State 

Departments of Transportation (DOTs), 

county governments, Tribal governments, and 

private landowners. These linkages include 

connections to road systems, but also to 

multimodal transportation networks, including 

trails and partner-operated transit service. 

Because of this connectivity, it is important 

for the BLM to collaborate with a diverse set 

of partners to coordinate transportation data 

collection, planning, and asset management to 

promote seamless transportation for the public 

across jurisdictions. The DOI Good Neighbor 

Authority supports collaboration by providing 

an environment and legal means to enable the 

BLM to work across jurisdictional boundaries in 

a cooperative manner to solve shared challenges.

1.2 What is Transportation 

Connections 2040?

The purpose of Transportation Connections 

2040 is to provide a National Long Range 

Transportation Plan (NLRTP) for the BLM with 

a guiding vision and set of long-term, Bureauwide goals, objectives, and strategies for the 

BLM’s transportation system and transportation 

planning program. This NLRTP will inform 

future transportation decisions over the next 

20 years to continue to provide safe, reliable 

access to BLM-managed public lands, resources, 

and recreational opportunities. As a national 

level plan, the intent of the BLM NLRTP is to 

offer a programmatic framework. It is a living 

document the BLM will monitor and update 

periodically to reflect changing conditions. 

Although the BLM aims to achieve all of the 

3 President Biden’s Administration, Conserving and Restoring America the Beautiful 2021:

https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/report-conserving-and-restoring-america-the-beautiful-2021.pdf

4 Definitions adapted from FHWA, 2013, Performance-Based Planning and Programming Guidebook: 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/performance_based_planning/pbpp_guidebook/page00.cfm

elements in this NLRTP within the 20-year 

planning horizon, implementation will depend 

on available BLM staff and financial resources. 

In addition, as with any planning initiative, 

unforeseen factors could affect implementation 

of this NLRTP.

Transportation Connections 2040 supports 

the Biden Administration’s goals, described in 

Conserving and Restoring America the Beautiful 

2021.

3

The BLM NLRTP vision statement is, “Work 

collaboratively to manage a multi-modal 

transportation system that supports the 

equitable access, connectivity, and safety 

needs of multiple uses while ensuring 

natural, cultural, and historic resources are 

maintained for present and future use.”

Transportation Connections 2040 is 

consistent with state-wide and metropolitan 

transportation planning practices as part of a 

continuing, comprehensive, and cooperative 

(3C) transportation planning process. It 

establishes a framework for implementation 

and performance monitoring that feeds into 

future NLRTP updates. The Transportation 

Connections 2040 framework includes the 

following performance-based elements. 

• Goal: a broad statement that describes a 

desired end state. 

• Objectives: specific, measurable 

statements that support achievement of a 

goal.

• Strategies: specific actions for BLM to 

make progress towards the NLRTP goals 

and objectives. 

• Performance Measures: indicators that 

BLM can use to assess progress toward a 

goal.4
7

1.2.1 Plan Scope and Scale

The scope of this plan is the strategic 

management of the BLM’s national 

transportation program, and the goals, 

objectives, and strategies in this plan are 

programmatic. This plan neither selects 

individual transportation construction or 

maintenance projects, nor includes any project 

decisions. As such, this plan does not require 

analysis under the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA).5

This NLRTP considers the entirety of the BLM’s 

transportation system, including the different 

types of transportation assets and funding 

sources used to construct and maintain those 

assets. Transportation funding sources that 

support the BLM’s transportation planning goals 

include the BLM’s appropriations and U.S. DOT 

and other partner funds as further discussed in 

Section 3, Transportation Funding.

In most cases, implementation of the goals, 

objectives, and strategies in this nationallevel plan will occur within existing planning, 

programming, or investment processes. For 

example, a strategy in this NLRTP may include 

recommended updates to the BLM’s Travel and 

Transportation Management (TTM) Manual 

(BLM Manual Section 1626) or TTM Handbook 

(H-8342). 

1.2.2 Plan Audience

This NLRTP has multiple audiences, including 

BLM staff, BLM partners, and the public. 

BLM staff at Headquarters (HQ), State Office 

(SO), District Office (DO), and Field Office 

(FO) levels can use this plan to guide their 

transportation decisionmaking. BLM partners 

– including other Federal agencies, State DOTs, 

Counties, Tribes, and local governments – 

can use this plan to identify opportunities to 

collaborate with the BLM on projects of mutual 

benefit. The public can also use this plan to 

5 23 USC 201(c)(1); 23 USC 134(q); 23 USC 135(k)

better understand the BLM’s transportation 

program and how the BLM’s transportation 

planning process works to support the BLM’s 

mission and provide public access to BLMmanaged public lands and resources. 

1.2.3 Plan Structure

The BLM NLRTP is organized into the following 

sections that establish a framework for 

implementation and performance monitoring 

for future NLRTP updates.

1. Introduction

The introduction discusses the purpose and 

background for the BLM NLRTP. 

2. Vision, Goals, and Objectives

This section presents the NLRTP’s vision, 

five strategic goal areas, and associated 

objectives. The BLM developed the goals and 

objectives through an iterative process of inperson workshops and discussions with BLM 

leadership and other stakeholders. 

The NLRTP strategic goals are:

 - Access, Connectivity, and Experience

 - Transportation Asset Management

 - Collaborative Partnerships

 - Natural, Cultural, and Historic Resources

 - Safety

3. Transportation Funding

This section describes the general trends 

in transportation funds that Congress 

appropriates directly to the BLM, as 

well as funding provided to the BLM for 

transportation from the U.S. DOT and other 

discretionary funding sources. This section 

also discusses the BLM’s transportation 

funding needs and challenges.

4. BLM TTMP Process

This section summarizes BLM’s Travel and 

Transportation Management Planning 

(TTMP) process and how it relates to the 
8

goals and priorities of BLM’s Transportation 

Program.

5. Baseline Conditions and Trends

This section summarizes baseline conditions

for each goal area, documenting the current

trends, challenges, and opportunities

6. Implementation Plan

This section includes a list of specific

strategies to address the goals and objectives

identified in the plan. The strategies are

categorized by goal area and prioritized

based on discussions with BLM staff and

stakeholders. Since this is a national,

Bureau-wide plan, the scopes of these

strategies are largely either national-level or

programmatic.

7. Monitoring Plan

This section includes a summary of

performance measures the BLM has

identified to measure progress on achieving

the five strategic NLRTP goal areas. The

monitoring plan specifies data sources and

a responsible party for each performance

measure.

Throughout the plan are “Highlights” that 

summarize noteworthy practices. 

The Plan also includes “Strategy Links” that link 

the NLRTP’s strategies to the discussion in the 

narrative.

The NLRTP’s strategies are specific action 

items that the BLM Transportation Program 

has identified as important to reaching the 

NLRTP goals and objectives. All of the NLRTP 

goals, objectives and strategies are listed in the 

Implementation Plan section.

1.2.4 Plan Development Process

The NLRTP references findings from recent 

transportation studies and plans, including 

the BLM’s most recent Five Year TTM Strategy 

(2018), as well as discussions with BLM HQ, 

SO, DO, and FO staff; Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) Office of Federal 

Lands Highway (FLH) staff; and other 

stakeholders. At the outset of this effort, the 

BLM convened a Core Team and Advisory 

Committee made up of BLM HQ, SO, DO, 

and FO staff as well as representatives from 

the FHWA-FLH. The Core Team consisted of 

the key agency representatives and planning 

partners that actively participated in the 

NLRTP development. The Advisory Committee 

provided meaningful input and guidance to 

the Core Team during the NLRTP development 

through webinars, teleconferences, and 

document review. 

The BLM NLRTP effort officially kicked off with 

the Core Team and Advisory Committee on July 

10, 2018. The accompanying timeline provides a 

summary of key activities and milestones during 

the development of the NLRTP (Figure 3).
9

July 10, 2018

July 31-Aug. 2, 2018

Sept. 11, 2018

Kick-Off (Webinar)

BLM NLRTP kick-off webinar with core team and advisory committee.

Workshop

BLM NLRTP core team workshop in Denver, Colorado to develop a 

draft set of goals and objectives.

Content Review (Webinar)

BLM NLRTP webinar with core team and advisory committee to review 

the draft goals and objectives.

Fall 2018 Content Development

BLM NLRTP team developed existing conditions and trends reports for 

each goal area. 

Feb. 8, 2019 Content Review (Webinar)

BLM NLRTP webinar with core team and advisory committee to review 

draft existing conditions and trends reports.

Winter/Spring 2019 Content Development

BLM NLRTP team developed a set of strategies and performance 

measures.

March 19-21, 2019 Workshop

BLM NLRTP core team workshop in Salt Lake City, Utah to review and 

refine the draft strategies and performance measures.

May 6, 2019

Content Review (Webinar)

BLM NLRTP webinar with core team and advisory committee to 

review the draft implementation plan, including the strategies and 

performance measures. 

June 9-12, 2019

Content Review (Stakehold Engagement)

BLM NLRTP team conducted outreach to western state DOTs and 

other partners regarding the NLRTP during the Western Association of 

State Highway Transportation Officials (WASHTO) conference.

Summer 2019 Content Development

BLM NLRTP team developed initial draft NLRTP.

June 28, 2019

Content Review (Meeting)

BLM NLRTP team held a meeting with BLM Leadership to review and 

solicit feedback on the draft plan focusing on the overall themes, 

goals, and objectives.

Fall 2019 Content Development

BLM NLRTP team revised the BLM NLRTP.

Winter 2019/2020

Content Review (Stakehold Engagement)

BLM and other external stakeholders reviewed the BLM NLRTP draft.

Spring 2021 Plan Complete

BLM NLRTP published.

Figure 3. BLM NLRTP Development Timeline

BLM NLRTP Timeline (2018 - 2021)
2 10

Vision, Goals, and Objectives

Dalton Highway, Alaska
11

BLM NLRTP Vision

Work collaboratively to manage a multi-modal transportation system 

that supports the equitable access, connectivity, and safety needs of 

multiple uses while ensuring natural, cultural, and historic resources 

are maintained for present and future use.

Merwin Canyon, Utah
12

Access, Connectivity, and Experience (ACE) 

ACE Goal: Manage the BLM’s transportation system to provide 

seamless public access to support the BLM’s multi-use mission.

• ACE Objective 1: Build relationships with BLM’s gateway 

communities and the traveling public to ensure access, 

connectivity, and recreational experience needs are being met.

• ACE Objective 2: Identify linear assets that are part of the BLM 

transportation system and their connection with the adjacent 

transportation network.

Transportation Asset Management (TAM)

TAM Goal: Strategically invest funding to sustainably maintain BLM 

transportation assets.

• TAM Objective 1: Develop and maintain a comprehensive 

inventory of BLM-owned transportation assets.

• TAM Objective 2: Identify the condition and funding needs 

associated with BLM transportation assets.

• TAM Objective 3: Strategically leverage BLM and partner 

funding sources to operate and maintain transportation assets 

based on asset priority and need.

• TAM Objective 4: Design, build, and maintain BLM 

transportation assets to be resilient and protect natural, 

cultural, and historic resources.
13

Collaborative Partnerships (CP)

CP Goal: Develop and maintain collaborative partnerships for a 

transportation system that connects communities to public lands.

• CP Objective 1: Engage external partners that should be involved 

in BLM Travel and Transportation Management planning and 

implementation processes, including Federal, Tribal, State, county, 

and local stakeholders to support transportation connectivity.

• CP Objective 2: Actively participate in external transportation 

planning and implementation with Federal, Tribal, State, county, 

and local processes to support the BLM mission.

• CP Objective 3: Share and exchange current transportation data 

with external partners for transportation planning.

Natural, Cultural, and Historical Resources (NCH)

NCH Goal: Manage the BLM’s transportation system to protect resources 

while providing appropriate access.

• NCH Objective 1: Ensure that natural, cultural, and historical 

resource inventories are performed efficiently and comprehensively, 

as critical components of the TTMP process at the land use and 

implementation planning levels.

• NCH Objective 2: Implement TTMP route designations based on 

available funding and staff resources.

Safety (S) 

S Goal: Provide safe and appropriate multimodal transportation access for 

all users of BLM-managed lands.

• S Objective 1: Conduct education and outreach for travelers to 

prepare for safe travel on BLM-managed lands consistent with the 

purpose of the route.

• S Objective 2: Implement TTMP route designations based on 

available funding and staff resources.

• S Objective 3: Support coordinated and rapid emergency response 

with local first responders and enhance communication of 

conditions affecting BLM-managed public lands.
14

Transportation Funding

3 Basin and Range National Monument, Nevada
15

To support the BLM’s transportation system, the 

Bureau relies upon a variety of funding sources:

• BLM’s congressional appropriations.

• Competitive funding through the FHWA

Federal Lands Transportation Program

(FLTP).

• Grants and other partnership funding

sources, such as the Federal Lands Access

Program (FLAP).

BLM’s transportation funding needs far exceed 

current available funding. BLM’s annual 

transportation funding from congressional 

appropriations and FLTP funding is about 

$30–$40 million per year (Figure 4). The current 

funding need for projects that have been 

deferred for more than one year, or the current 

deferred maintenance (DM) backlog, is about 

$3.6 billion.

3.1 BLM Appropriations

for Transportation

Each fiscal year, Congress appropriates the 

BLM annual funding for management of 

land and resources (MLR) and many other 

activities, including the BLM’s transportation 

system. The general funding that the BLM 

uses for transportation provides resources 

for capital projects, operational expenses, 

annual and deferred maintenance, and other 

transportation-related costs. Between fiscal 

years 2016 and 2018, the BLM expended 

an average of approximately $26 million 

appropriated by Congress per year for the BLM 

transportation system. This funding included 

approximately $20.5 million per year for roads, 

$4.1 million per year for trails, and $1.6 million 

per year for bridges. The following subsections 

provide additional detail regarding these 

expenditures. 

Figure 4. BLM Appropriation and FLTP Spending, 2013 to 2017
16

3.1.1 Appropriations for 

Annual Maintenance and 

Operational Costs 

The BLM’s appropriation for annual 

maintenance and operational costs funds 

necessary functions for transportation 

and facilities maintenance. BLM’s annual 

maintenance (AM) spending for the 

transportation system, which funds annual 

maintenance and operational costs, is about 

$20.5 million per year (Table 1). BLM road 

assets utilize about 80 percent of the annual 

maintenance and operational costs funding, 

while trail assets utilize about 15 percent this 

funding. 

Bridge assets utilize the least amount of annual 

maintenance and operational costs funding. 

BLM bridge replacement or rehabilitation 

funding has historically come from the limited 

amount of BLM deferred maintenance and 

capital improvements funding, which is 

described in Table 1.

Fiscal Year AM Bridges AM Roads AM Trails AM Total

2016 $650,000 $16,455,310 $3,320,639 $20,425,949

 2017 $965,503 $16,942,752 $3,468,447 $21,376,702

 2018 $830,950 $16,266,815 $2,711,346 $19,809,111

Annual Average

(2016 to 2018) $815,484 $16,554,959 $3,166,811 $20,537,254 

Table 1. BLM Annual Maintenance (AM) Spending by Transportation Asset, 2016 to 2018

3.1.2 Appropriations for 

Deferred Maintenance and 

Capital Improvements

DM and capital improvement funding is used 

for projects that have been deferred for more 

than one year. Despite BLM’s considerable 

transportation DM backlog of about $3.6 billion 

and capital improvement needs, funding for 

DM has steadily decreased in recent years. 

Consequently, BLM’s transportation-related 

DM and capital improvements spending has 

also decreased from $7.2 million in fiscal year 

(FY) 2016 to $4.6 million in FY 2018 (Table 2). 

This reduction is due to transportation assets 

competing for limited DM funding with other 

assets, such as buildings.

To exacerbate this issue, BLM’s bridges are aging 

and gradually nearing the end of their useful 

lives. As a result, more bridges are coming due 

for replacement each year.

Fiscal Year DM Bridges DM Roads DM Trails DM Total

2016 $597,229 $5,846,227 $790,540 $7,233,996

 2017 $485,727 $3,267,625 $1,433,446 $5,186,798

 2018 $1,213,833 $2,771,178 $683,936 $4,668,947

Annual Average

(2016 to 2018) $765,596 $3,961,677 $969,307 $5,696,580 

Table 2. BLM Deferred Maintenance (DM) and Capital Improvements Spending by Asset, 2016 to 2018
17

3.2 Federal Lands 

Transportation Program 

(FLTP)

In 2012, the Moving Ahead for Progress in 

the 21st Century (MAP-21) Act established 

the FLTP, which provides funding to improve 

the transportation infrastructure owned and 

maintained by FLMAs, including the BLM. 

The FHWA-FLH distributes FLTP funding 

to eligible FLMAs. While the National Park 

Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and 

U.S. Forest Service receive defined annual FLTP 

funds based on statute, the BLM, U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, 

and other eligible FLMAs compete for limited 

FLTP funding using a performance management 

model.

Although over 45,000 miles of BLM-managed 

roads are potentially eligible for funding under 

FLTP, the BLM prioritized approximately 1,150 

miles of its managed roads as its initial FLTP 

designated inventory for which it will spend 

FLTP funds. The BLM thoroughly vetted its 

inventory to select FLTP roads that provide 

access to one of the following: 

• Significant Federal Economic 

Generation: provide significant 

employment and economic output through 

oil and gas, renewable energy, minerals, 

coal, recreation, grazing, and timber 

extraction.

• High-Use Federal Recreation Sites:

premier destinations contained within 

BLM Special Recreation Management 

Areas, National Lands Conservation Areas, 

National Monuments, or destinations 

where the annual visitation significantly 

exceeds the intended capacity of the 

location.

Lost Coast Headlands, California
18

Figure 5. BLM FLTP Funding, 2013 to 2019

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Continue to maintain existing project prioritization 

system for use of Federal Lands Transportation 

Program (FLTP) funds on BLM roads. (TAM 3.1)

Identify BLM and partner funding sources (e.g., 

U.S. DOI, U.S. DOT, State, and local funding 

programs) and their applicability for BLM 

transportation assets. (TAM 3.2)

Provide a mechanism (e.g., website) for 

disseminating funding opportunity information to 

State, District, and Field Offices. (TAM 3.3)

Between 2013 and 2019, BLM received about $60 

million in FLTP funding. FLTP funding allocated 

to the BLM increased from $9.6 million in 2013 

to $11.4 million in 2014, but then decreased 

each year until 2017 to about $7 million. In 

2018 and 2019, the BLM received $7.3 million 

and $7.1 million, respectively (Figure 5). This 

overall decline in funding was largely due to the 

eligibility of additional agencies to receive FLTP 

funding after passage of the Fixing America’s 

Surface Transportation (FAST) Act in 2015. 

For BLM, it is difficult to perform long-term 

transportation planning without consistent 

FLTP funding levels. The BLM currently has 

over $200 million of shovel-ready projects on the 

1,150 miles of its FLTP designated inventory.
19

3.3 Grants and Other 

Partnership Funding 

Sources

The BLM relies on partnerships for many of 

its transportation-related funding needs. The 

U.S. DOT FLAP is one of the most important 

partnership opportunities for improving access 

to BLM-managed public lands and is described 

in the context of funding availability below. 

FLAP and other partnership opportunities 

are also discussed further in Section 5.3, 

Collaborative Partnerships. 

3.3.1 Federal Lands Access 

Program (FLAP)

The FLAP provides funding to nonFederal partners for projects that improve 

transportation facilities that connect to and 

access Federal lands. These projects may include 

roads, bridges, trails, or transit systems that are 

owned or maintained by State, County, Tribal, 

or local governments. Non-federally owned 

land and transportation networks, particularly 

county roads, provide critical access to BLMmanaged public lands. Therefore, FLAP funds 

are integral for creating seamless connections 

and improving access to public lands. Since the 

establishment of the FLAP in 2013, applicants 

have received over $215 million in FLAP funding 

for more than 60 projects that access BLMmanaged public lands.

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Conduct outreach and provide up-to-date 

resources to State, District, and Field Offices on 

Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) and BLM 

access priorities. (ACE 2.3)

Tucson Field Office, Arizona
20

The BLM Travel and Transportation 

Management Planning Process

4 Las Cienegas National Conservation Area, Arizona
21

The BLM makes travel and transportation 

management planning decisions at two 

distinct levels: land use level plan decisions 

and implementation level plan decisions. Land 

use level plan decisions, such as those made 

within Resource Management Plans (RMPs) 

provide over-arching management guidance 

for land areas within a FO or DO planning area. 

Implementation level plan decisions made 

within subsequent TTMPs provide management 

direction for individual routes. 

During land use level planning conducted for a 

RMP, DO and FO staff evaluate land uses and 

resources and designate land areas as open, 

closed, or limited to OHVs and consider nonmotorized vehicular use, as appropriate:6

• Lands designated “open” to OHVs allow

travel of all types of vehicle use anywhere

and anytime subject only to the BLM’s

operating regulations and vehicle

standards.

• Lands designated “closed” to OHVs

prohibit all OHV use, typically protect

resources, promote visitor safety, or reduce

user conflicts. Motorized vehicles exempt

from the OHV definition are not restricted

in closed areas.

6 OHV area and route designation are guided by the U.S. Code 43 CFR 8340.05 and Code 43 CFR 8342.

• Lands designated as “limited” to

OHVs offer flexibility in how travel

and transportation use is restricted to

meet specific public land management

objectives. Limited areas are the focus of

subsequent implementation level TTMPs,

which provide more site specific guidance,

including restrictions and allowable uses

on specific routes.

BLM FO and DO staff are responsible for 

developing TTMPs that describe travel 

management decisions to support a 

comprehensive approach to managing and 

administering travel and transportation 

networks. TTMPs provide the opportunity to 

designate areas for recreational activities while 

protecting and conserving other areas. As part 

of the TTMP development process, BLM FO and 

DO resource staff coordinate with the public 

and local partners to evaluate public access to 

and travel activities on BLM-managed public 

lands based on natural resource management 

needs, road and trail design and conditions, and 

recreation and non-recreation uses of roads and 

trails. 

The TTMP process supports and documents 

decisions regarding whether and to what 

Iditarod National Historic Trail, Alaska
22

extent to maintain, expand, or decommission 

transportation facilities.7 The TTMP process is 

used to:

• Inventory, document, and map existing 

transportation facilities, routes, and areas;

• Verify routes that require authorizations, 

such as any clearances or easements 

needed by the BLM, or rights of-way issued 

by the BLM;

• Designate BLM-managed routes as Open, 

Limited or Closed to OHV use;

• Classify designated routes as roads, 

primitive roads, or trails, specify the modes 

of travel for each route, and designate 

maintenance standards; and

• Provide guidance for how new public or 

permitted routes should be considered, 

addressed, and evaluated in conformance 

with the RMP.

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Use the TTMP process to develop a sustainable 

transportation system in an effort to reduce 

resource impacts and maintenance needs.

(TAM 4.2)

Through the TTMP process, clarify ownership, 

purpose(s), and use(s), and determine if linear 

travel features serve BLM’s multi-use mission. 

(ACE 2.1)

To improve transportation planning, integrate the 

engineering functions into the TTM Handbook 

(H-8342), including engineering input during the 

route designation step of the TTMP process. 

(ACE 2.2)

7 These activities are consistent with BLM laws, regulation, and policy.

The TTMP process is meant to be 

comprehensive, interdisciplinary, collaborative, 

and outcome-based. At the beginning of the 

TTMP process, DO and FO staff create an 

inventory of all existing transportation-related 

linear features, such as potential roads, primitive 

roads, and trails using maps, surveys, and 

satellite imagery. This information is compiled 

in the BLM’s geodatabase. Information on the 

current authorized uses and characteristics 

of each route is also collected and verified. 

Following the inventory and verification process, 

the TTMPs designate specific transportation 

routes, identify route management objectives, 

and establish maintenance intensity for those 

routes.

Although the TTMP process does not 

include decisions on non-BLM routes, 

the BLM recognizes the need to consider 

connectivity with regional and local 

travel routes. Therefore, many BLM FOs 

have taken a more holistic approach to 

understanding traveler needs in the TTMPs 

by considering the relationship of BLM and 

non-BLM routes.

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Identify Federal, Tribal, State, county, and local 

stakeholders to participate in BLM TTMP 

processes. Maintain a State Office checklist of 

stakeholders to consider (e.g., Department of 

Transportation, Department of Defense). (CP 1.1)

Leverage the knowledge and experience of 

interdisciplinary teams during the TTMP process 

to designate transportation systems that 

conserve natural, cultural, and historic resources 

while providing appropriate access. (NCH 1.1)
23

TTMPs require specific guidance on signage, 

enforcement, monitoring, closed route 

rehabilitation/restoration, and communication 

of TTMP decisions with public land users 

(development of public maps, responsible-use 

education, etc.). Another important component 

of an implementation plan is the ongoing 

maintenance of the databases housing the 

geospatial and tabular information for each 

route.

BLM’s noncontiguous managed lands and 

routes impact wayfinding in the form of 

route numbering systems, and SOs have 

not handled this in a uniform manner. This 

often requires various route segments on 

a given roadway to have different route 

numbers, which can be confusing to the 

user. Some SOs have handled this standard 

by numbering routes similarly to the U.S. 

Interstate System (e.g., Route 3708-BLM, 

3708-private, etc.) using linear referencing 

in GIS. Others have simply emphasized 

working with partners to ensure that the 

on-the-ground experience is continuous, 

using a simple route name for all segments, 

even if the planning numbers do not match 

in the BLM’s Facility and Asset Management 

System (FAMS) database. It is important 

for BLM recreation and engineering staff to 

work together to ensure consistent route 

numbering. Since visitors to BLM-managed 

public lands appreciate consistency 

and a route numbering system that is 

implemented at a broader scale, ensuring 

consistent route numbering will greatly 

improve visitor experience and safety.

One challenge for the BLM is the absence of 

a comprehensive funding source for TTMP 

planning or implementation. Instead, the BLM 

has to leverage funds from a variety of programs, 

such as engineering and recreation, and funds 

dedicated generally to resource management 

or to special programs (e.g., Greater SageGrouse conservation). BLM staff often have to 

be proactive in identifying funding sources that 

can support TTMP-related activities based on 

the particular resource protection needs of a 

location. Identifying and securing funding for 

TTMP implementation can require considerable 

staff time and can extend the timeline for 

initiating and completing TTMPs. In light of 

this, BLM offices with staff dedicated to TTMP 

implementation are often more successful in 

carrying out their plans. 

The narrative in this section was adapted from 

BLM’s 2018 Five-Year Travel and Transportation 

Management Strategy. The BLM’s TTMP process 

is formally documented and described in more 

detail in the TTM Manual (Section 1626) and 

Handbook (H-8342).

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Keep TTM Manual 1626, Handbook (H-8342), and 

related training current. (NCH 1.2)

Prioritize implementation of designated routes to 

address critical resource impacts. (NCH 2.1)

Identify partners and leverage resources to 

achieve TTMP implementation. (NCH 2.2)

Identify long-term funding and staff resources 

needed for TTMP implementation. (NCH 2.3)
24

Baseline Conditions and Trends

5 Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area, Nevada
25

5.1 Access, Connectivity, & Experience

ACE Goal: Manage the BLM’s transportation system to provide seamless 

public access to support the BLM’s multi-use mission.

• ACE Objective 1: Build relationships with BLM’s gateway communities 

and the traveling public to ensure access, connectivity, and recreational 

experience needs are being met.

• ACE Objective 2: Identify linear assets that are part of the BLM 

transportation system and their connections with the adjacent 

transportation network.

Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail, California
26

The BLM’s visitation data show that visitation 

to BLM-managed public lands has increased 

steadily over the past two decades from 52 

million visitors in 2001 to over 67 million 

visitors in 2017 (Figure 6). As the number of 

recreational visitors to BLM-managed lands 

increases, other traveler needs must also be 

balanced. As discussed in the Prologue and 

Section 1 Introduction, BLM routes are used by 

a variety of users with different needs.

A transportation network’s effectiveness can 

be measured by its access and connectivity: 

how well travelers move from where they are 

to where they want to go. Maintaining an 

interconnected network of transportation 

assets is critical to ensure BLM facilitates 

access, connectivity, and experience while 

achieving the Bureau’s priorities for recreation, 

economic generation, disaster response and 

evacuation, and tribal and rural community 

connections as described within the 

Introduction in Section 1.1.

Roads and trails on BLM-managed lands should 

not only form connections with other BLM 

transportation assets, but also with adjacent 

transportation networks which may be owned 

and operated by State or local governments or 

other FLMAs. Due to the noncontiguous nature 

of BLM-managed lands, BLM’s transportation 

assets have a uniquely complex relationship 

with regional transportation networks (Figure 

7). Without carefully considering regional 

connectivity, the BLM may not fully realize the 

access needs of BLM-managed public lands 

and may also underestimate the variety and 

intensity of uses on its systems. 

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Refine the BLM’s inventory of multimodal 

access to BLM-managed public lands by 

identifying traveler/user types, preferred 

experience settings, and the desired modes of 

transportation for BLM routes during the TTMP 

process. (ACE 1.1)

Figure 6. BLM Visitation Data for Recreational, Partnership, and Dispersed Sites

(Source: BLM Public Land Statistics for years 2002 through 2017, https://www.blm.gov/about/data/public-land-statistics)
27

BLM’s TTMP process, described more 

in Section 4, is important to refine the 

BLM’s inventory of multimodal access to 

BLM-managed public lands by identifying 

traveler/user types, preferred experience 

settings, and the desired modes of 

transportation for BLM routes during the 

TTMP process.

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Through the TTMP process, clarify ownership, 

purpose(s), and use(s) and determine if linear 

travel features serve BLM’s multi-use mission. 

(ACE 2.1)

Figure 7. Checkerboard Nature of BLMManaged Public Lands (Example Location near 

Crescent Valley and Carlin, Nevada)

The following subsections highlight some of 

the most important factors related to access, 

connectivity, and experience:

• Access limitations

• Congestion management

• Access and use data

• Agreements

• Wayfinding

• Related BLM initiatives that improve 

Nada, and experience

5.1.1 Access Limitations

A common issue for the BLM is restricted 

access in part due to the nature of BLM’s 

patchwork land ownership pattern (Figure 7). 

When adjacent land owners restrict public 

use of the roads on their land, access to BLMmanaged lands become restricted. This creates 

fragmented linear transportation features of 

access, where parts of the road are open to the 

public and other parts of the road are closed. 

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Highlight success stories related to improving 

access to BLM-managed public lands. (ACE 1.2)
28

5.1.2 Congestion Management

Due to the remoteness of many of BLMmanaged lands, roadway congestion is not a 

particular issue for most BLM-managed lands. 

However, as both the U.S. population and 

demand for the types of experiences BLMmanaged lands provide increases, congestion at 

recreation areas presents a growing challenge 

for the BLM that requires consideration of user 

access, connectivity, and experience. 

5.1.3 Access and Use Data

Data for evaluating how travelers on BLM’s 

transportation system access and use BLMmanaged lands is important for improving 

transportation planning. The BLM uses the 

Recreation Management Information System 

(RMIS) database to measure recreational 

visitation to its various units, but this database 

does not capture non-recreational visits. 

RMIS relies on a variety of sources for visitor 

estimates, including reservations and fees 

at campground and fee-based recreation 

sites; road and trail counters where available; 

visitor surveys; and field staff estimates. RMIS 

visitation data is typically more accurate 

for developed recreation sites than it is for 

dispersed sites. 

The most comprehensive survey about 

BLM visitor experience is the annual Visitor 

Satisfaction Survey, which is required by the 

Government Performance Results Act (GPRA) 

and focuses on BLM developed recreation 

sites and facilities nation-wide. Of 1,904 

respondents at twelve BLM recreation sites 

in 2018, 96 percent said their experience was 

“good” or “very good” (Figure 8).8

8 Washington State University. 2018. BLM 2018 GPRA Report. 

http://psu.sesrc.wsu.edu/blm/reports/FY18/blm-GPRA18.pdf.

There are opportunities to improve the 

BLM’s understanding of the types of 

transportation uses and visitation demand 

through recreational visitor estimates, 

traffic volume data, and other sources. 

Some BLM units have recently deployed 

traffic counters to measure the level of 

use for specific route locations. This 

information helps accurately track the 

number of visitors in particular areas over 

time, which can inform staff decisions 

about recreation management.

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Investigate opportunities to improve the BLM’s 

understanding of the types of transportation 

uses and visitation demand through recreational 

visitor estimates, traffic volume data, and other 

sources. (ACE 1.3)

Figure 8. Overall Quality of Experience 

Reported by BLM Site Visitors in 2018

(Source: Washington State University. 2018. BLM 2018 GPRA Report. 

http://psu.sesrc.wsu.edu/blm/reports/FY18/blm-GPRA18.pdf)
29

Alaska Collaborative Visitor 

Transportation Survey

In addition to the national Visitor Satisfaction Survey, BLM 

SOs, DOs, and FOs deploy visitor surveys in specific locations 

to evaluate the success of recreation management objectives 

or to inform local planning efforts. One notable example is the 

Alaska Collaborative Visitor Transportation Survey (CVTS), 

which BLM staff developed in collaboration with other FLMAs, 

FHWA-FLH, the Alaska Department of Transportation and 

Public Facilities (Alaska DOT&PF), and the University of AlaskaFairbanks. Through this survey, the FLMAs created a common 

set of transportation-related questions for visitors to allow for 

a State-wide understanding of how visitors access Federal 

lands as well as their needs and expectations. The survey 

team designed the questionnaire to be applicable nationwide as well as in Alaska, and the participants obtained Office 

of Management and Budget generic clearance to provide a 

streamlined resource from which other BLM staff can benefit.
30

5.1.4 Agreements

The BLM can use agreements with adjacent 

land or road owners to enhance access, 

connectivity, and experience. These agreements 

may address maintenance, access, or rights-ofway. For example, BLM may seek easements 

to protect resources and trails in multi-use 

areas, and outside groups may agree to assume 

management responsibility for certain roads 

or trail segments. Ownership, rights-of-way, 

easements, and maintenance agreements 

related to transportation are stored in BLMmanaged lands and realty database, LR2000. 

See the Collaborative Partnerships chapter in 

Section 5.3.2 for more detail on Agreements.

5.1.5 Wayfinding

The BLM provides traveler information in 

the form of maps, signage and wayfinding 

for travelers to locate their destinations and 

recognize BLM-managed public lands.

5.1.5.1 Traveler Maps

To help ensure visitors have an enjoyable 

experience on BLM-managed public lands, 

BLM produces traveler information maps 

for the public that locate key facilities and 

attractions (Figure 9). The BLM historically 

produced a series of hard copy 1:100,000 

maps through its National Operations Center 

(NOC). Due to the popularity of electronic 

based maps, many FOs have stopped offering 

these hard copy maps. Most publication and 

sharing of route data is currently carried out 

at the SO-level. The process of creating maps 

and maintaining the data that inform BLM 

maps can be expensive and time consuming. 

The BLM has hired contractors to collect and 

improve BLM datasets; however, additional 

funding is needed for a more comprehensive 

approach. 

The BLM works with some web-based and 

smartphone-based mapping companies to 

9 Bureau of Land Management. 2019. “Georeferenced PDF Maps.” https://www.blm.gov/maps/georeferenced-PDFs

provide digital maps to the public. Some 

georeferenced PDF maps are provided online 

by Avenza and are compatible with any 

georeferenced mobile map application. The 

BLM has also worked with the application 

On X Maps to provide data about roads that 

are accessible to the public and public land 

boundaries. On X Maps primarily focuses on 

the needs of hunters, but the information is 

useful to other recreational users.9 Having 

reliable maps available through electronic 

devices that travelers bring with them to 

BLM-managed public lands improves visitor 

experience and safety, but it is also important to 

maintain non-electronic forms of information 

since many BLM-managed public lands are 

in remote areas without cell phone coverage, 

though an increasing number of maps are now 

available to download beforehand. In addition, 

it is important for the BLM to communicate the 

appropriate expectations that travelers should 

have when visiting or recreating in different 

(Source: BLM 2016: https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/

documents/files/NM_ElMalpais_NM_0.pdf)

Figure 9. Georeferenced Map of El Malpais 

National Conservation Area, New Mexico
31

areas so they know what they need to prepare 

in advance of a trip. As the BLM becomes more 

familiar with using a range of types of visitation 

and safety data, it will have a greater ability to 

improve visitor experience and safety. 

Maps are an essential part of the traveler 

experience; however, maps are only as good as 

the data that support them. The TTMP process 

provides an important opportunity to update 

and improve transportation system data for 

specific TMAs. 

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

To enhance visitor safety, provide wayfinding 

signage, downloadable maps, or kiosks with sitespecific travel information where feasible. (S 1.2)

5.1.5.2 Signage

The BLM has developed a cohesive look and 

feel for its signage, which has helped BLM 

offices across the U.S. implement a consistent 

message. In 2016, the BLM published a 

National Sign Handbook 9130-1,

10 which 

describes the planning processes for developing 

and implementing signage, as well as design 

standards and principles. As discussed in 

Chapter 4, one challenge that the BLM faces 

is national consistency in route numbering; 

through implementation of the strategies in 

this plan, the BLM hopes to provide more 

cohesive and consistent wayfinding in the 

future.

5.1.5.3 Trip Planning Information

The BLM currently provides trip planning 

information for recreational travelers. The BLM 

is developing a national visitor information 

program, Know Before You Go. This visitor 

information program will provide information 

through the BLM national website as well as 

local information, such as motorized access to 

10 Bureau of Land Management. 2016. National Sign Handbook.

https://www.blm.gov/documents/national-office/handbook-public-room/handbook/national-sign-handbook

11 Bureau of Land Management. 2019. “Know Before You Go.” 

https://www.blm.gov/programs/recreation/know-before-you-go

sites and trails, through BLM DOs and FOs.11

The BLM also works with other agencies to 

centralize traveler information by posting 

resources online at Recreation.gov. In 

addition to the reservation information 

currently available at Recreation.gov, the 

participating agencies are working to add 

geospatial information, including roads, 

trails, and trailhead amenities. The BLM has 

also partnered with other agencies to make 

information about popular cross-jurisdictional 

routes more easily available to travelers. For 

example, the BLM integrated its data with 

the data of other land management agencies 

to provide more complete information on 

National Historic and Scenic Trails and some 

Backcountry Byways. Having access to pretrip planning information allows travelers to 

feel more prepared for their trip and thereby 

improves visitor experience and safety on BLMmanaged public lands. 

5.1.5.4 Visitor Information Campaigns 

Certain programs are in place at the BLM to 

promote behaviors that can help improve 

visitor experience and safety. Leave No Trace

and Tread Lightly! have provided materials 

for BLM travelers for decades, so many are 

The BLM does not have a dedicated 

funding source for signage and wayfinding. 

Instead, the BLM funds wayfinding using 

a variety of programs or through external 

partnerships, Recreational Trails Program 

funds, or Section 1232 (permits). In 

addition, BLM may seek grants to improve 

signage and visual continuity. Some SOs 

have a sign coordinator to guide signage 

strategy and consistency.
32

familiar with them. However, promotion of 

these campaigns varies across FOs. There is an 

opportunity for the BLM to be more consistent 

in dissemination of these stewardship 

campaigns to create a safer and more consistent 

visitor experience across BLM units. 

The BLM has been successful in 

communicating to the public that they 

should keep their vehicles on roads and trails 

unless they are in a travel management area 

designated as open for cross-country vehicle 

travel. In some States, BLM staff localize the 

message by encouraging people to “use their 

power responsibly” and stay on specific trails 

and roads. 

In addition to national-level campaigns like 

Leave No Trace, some States have created 

their own programs. For example, Colorado 

developed the Stay the Trail program to 

reinforce and highlight responsible OHV use 

and minimize safety risks and resource damage 

on public lands. The Stay the Trail campaign 

includes information on where to ride and 

Know Before You Go, which encourages visitors 

to understand and read about the places they 

intend on visiting before they actually visit the 

site. The Stay the Trail campaign also highlights 

stewardship partnerships.12

5.1.6 Related BLM Initiatives 

that Improve Access, 

Connectivity, and Experience

The BLM aims to be inclusive of the wide range 

of populations that use the Bureau’s lands. 

For example, many BLM FOs will translate 

their brochures, maps, and signage into 

other languages to increase accessibility. At a 

national-level, there are educational programs 

translated into multiple languages. This type 

of expanded outreach is outlined in the BLM’s 

National Recreation Strategy, “Connecting with 

Communities,” which has specific plans related 

to SO-level efforts. 

12 Colorado Office of the Bureau of Land Management. 2019. “Stay the Trail.” http://www.staythetrail.org/

One of the BLM’s new efforts is “Backyard to 

Backcountry,” which aims to promote the ease 

of accessibility of some BLM-managed public 

lands to locations where people carry out their 

day to day lives. This initiative has an inherent 

tie to the BLM transportation program because 

visitors rely on BLM and partner transportation 

networks to provide the connections between 

BLM-managed public lands and nearby 

communities.

The BLM has also partnered with the National 

Off-Highway Vehicle Conservation Council 

(NOHVCC) to develop the Top Recreation 

Opportunities Mapping Series, designed to 

provide and promote a greater awareness of 

recreational opportunities on BLM-managed 

public lands.

In many cases, the BLM roads themselves 

provide a recreational experience. For example, 

the BLM developed the Back Country Byway 

program to complement the National Scenic 

Byways program. As an integral part of the 

larger Scenic Byway system, these roads show 

travel enthusiasts some of the best iconic 

landscapes that the Western States have to offer 

in a trip off the beaten path.

As new modes of travel emerge, the BLM must 

also update its policies on use and access. 

A recent example is the rising popularity 

of electric bicycles, or e-bikes. In October 

2019, the Secretary of the Interior issued 

Secretary’s Order 3376 Increasing Recreational 

Opportunities through the use of Electric 

Bikes. In response to the Secretarial Order, 

a rule making effort to provide updated 

definitions and direction for management of 

e-bikes was completed in December of 2020. 

Following that effort, Information Bulletin 

2021-013 was issued to provide internal 

guidance; and an external webpage was 

developed to provide up-to-date guidance for 

the public.
33

5.2 Transportation Asset Management

TAM Goal: Strategically invest funding to sustainably maintain BLM 

transportation assets.

• TAM Objective 1: Develop and maintain a comprehensive inventory of 

BLM-owned transportation assets.

• TAM Objective 2: Identify the condition and funding needs associated with 

BLM transportation assets.

• TAM Objective 3: Strategically leverage BLM and partner funding sources 

to operate and maintain transportation assets based on asset priority and 

need.

• TAM Objective 4: Design, build, and maintain BLM transportation assets to 

be resilient and protect natural, cultural, and historic resources.

Saint Anthony Sand Dunes, Idaho
34

BLM’s asset management program involves 

the inventory, condition assessment, 

and maintenance of facilities integral to 

implementing the Bureau’s core mission. In the 

context of transportation, asset management 

focuses on transportation linear features that 

enable commercial and recreational visitors, 

as well as administrative personnel, to move 

across BLM-managed lands. The BLM’s broad 

mandate to manage its land for economic 

uses, recreational activities, and resource 

conservation means transportation needs 

vary widely. From the backcountry paths used 

by backpackers through wilderness areas to 

heavily trafficked paved roads and bridges 

carrying mineral extraction equipment, the 

BLM must ensure its transportation assets 

meet user needs. As a part of maintaining its 

transportation system, the BLM considers 

the climate resiliency of these assets. The 

following transportation asset inventory 

and transportation asset data subsections 

summarize some of the most important factors 

for Transportation Asset Management.

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Use BLM design standards, approved partner 

guidelines, training resources, and best practices 

to retrofit and maintain transportation assets to 

reduce long-term maintenance costs, improve 

climate resiliency, and protect resource function.

(TAM 4.1)

.

13 Bureau of Land Management. 2017. Guidelines for a Quality Trail Experience. 

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/Guidelines-for-a-Quality-Trail-Experience-2017.pdf

14 Bureau of Land Management (BLM). September 27, 2016. 1626 – Travel and Transportation Management Manual 

(Public). https://www.blm.gov/policy/manuals

15 “Transportation System” is defined in Technical Note 422 as “The sum of the BLM’s recognized inventory of linear 

features (roads, primitive roads, and trails) formally recognized and approved as part of the BLM’s transportation system.” 

https://www.blm.gov/documents/national-office/blm-library/technical-note/roads-and-trails-terminology

16 Bureau of Land Management (BLM). September 27, 2016. 1626 – Travel and Transportation Management Manual 

(Public). https://www.blm.gov/policy/manuals

17 Facility and Asset Management System (FAMS): the BLM’s database of record for transportation and all other BLM 

assets. https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/uploads/mediacenter_blmpolicymanual9107.pdf

.

The BLM recently began creating design 

guidelines to help DO and FO staff maintain 

trails to meet the expectations of their 

users. One example is the Guidelines for 

a Quality Trail Experience (GQTE), which 

provides direction on how to create 

mountain biking trails that closely match 

the expectations of mountain bikers for 

their trail experience. The GQTE prioritizes 

the quality of the trail experience while also 

ensuring that the design of the trail meets 

the resource protection needs around the 

trail.13

5.2.1 Transportation Asset 

Inventory

The BLM categorizes its transportation assets 

according to formal definitions in the TTM 

Manual14 and the BLM’s Technical Note 422, 

“Roads and Trails Terminology.”15 Technical 

Note 422 defines BLM transportation assets 

as the roads, primitive roads, and trails that 

comprise the BLM Transportation System. 

These assets are inventoried through the TTMP 

process16 and are included in the Facility and 

Asset Management System (FAMS)17, the BLM’s 

database of record:
35

• Road: a linear route declared a road 

by the owner, managed for use by lowclearance vehicles which have four or 

more wheels and are maintained for 

regular and continuous use.18

• Primitive Road: a linear route managed 

for use by four-wheel-drive or highclearance vehicles. These routes do not 

customarily meet any BLM road design 

standards. Unless specifically prohibited, 

primitive roads can also include other 

uses such as hiking, biking, and horseback 

riding.19

• Trail: a linear route managed for humanpowered, stock, or off-road vehicle 

forms of transportation or for historical 

or heritage values. The BLM does not 

generally manage trails for use by fourwheel-drive or high-clearance vehicles.20 

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Provide appropriate policy (e.g., through the TTM 

Manual Section 1626 and Handbook (H-8342)), 

training, and staffing to establish and maintain 

BLM’s transportation asset inventory (including 

primitive roads and trails) in FAMS and Ground 

Transportation Linear Feature (GTLF). (TAM 1.2)

18 Bureau of Land Management (BLM). September 27, 2016. 1626 – Travel and Transportation Management Manual 

(Public). https://www.blm.gov/policy/manuals

19 Ibid.

20 Ibid.

21 Bureau of Land Management. 2017. 5-Year Travel and Transportation Management Strategy (2018-2022). 

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/documents/files/TTM_5YearStrategy_03132018.pdf

22 NBI is a program administered by the FHWA that sets bridge inspection standards and tracks the condition of bridge 

infrastructure in the U.S., with the goal of eliminating hazards posed by structural deficiency.

Table 3 provides a summary of FAMS assets by 

state. However, the BLM estimates that there 

are more than 400,000 additional route miles 

of motorized and non-motorized travel routes 

(primarily primitive roads and trails) left to 

survey, inventory, and evaluate for potential 

inclusion in FAMS.21 The BLM prioritized 

approximately 1,122 miles of its roads as 

its initial inventory for the U.S. DOT FLTP 

designated inventory as shown in Table 3.

The BLM’s 915 bridges provide recreational, 

commercial, and administrative access to 

economic generating opportunities. Bridges 

are critical transportation features for the BLM. 

Bridges traverse otherwise impassable terrain 

and vary in type, from single-lane timber 

bridges and foot bridges for trail access to 

heavy-duty concrete and steel girder bridges. 

More than half of the BLM’s bridges are part 

of the National Bridge Inventory (NBI).22 Of 

the BLM’s 915 bridges, about two-thirds are 

road bridges and one-third are trail bridges. 

These bridges provide connectivity throughout 

the vast BLM-managed landscape and require 

maintenance to provide safe access.
36

State Roads 

(miles)

FLTP 

Roads 

(miles)*

Primitive 

Roads 

(miles)

Trails 

(miles)

Bridges FLTP 

Bridges*

Major 

Culverts

FLTP 

Culverts*

AK 25 18 5 1,246 16 2 3 3

AZ 965 58 1,071 634 2 1 6 5

CA 2,078 114 2,771 2,302 211 1 33 0

CO 1,724 16 1,896 1,327 22 0 11 0

ID 3,465 7 5,101 3,069 52 1 7 0

MT, ND, SD 1,560 53 2,152 304 39 1 7 1

NM, KS, TX, OK 4,135 79 848 257 4 0 6 1

NV 5,892 118 4,135 684 10 3 5 0

OR, WA 19,162 556 2,398 1,407 490 84 559 67

UT 2,861 57 5,421 2,446 20 0 2 0

WY 2,672 43 1,602 63 41 0 14 0

Total** 44,539 1,122 27,400 13,740 907 93 653 77

Table 3. Roads and Trails Mileage and Bridge and Culvert Counts from FAMS (2019) by BLM 

Administrative Region

*FLTP roads, FLTP bridges, and FLTP culverts are a subset of the roads, bridges, and culverts columns, respectively. 

**The rows in the table may not sum to the column totals due to rounding.

 (Source: FAMS)
37

5.2.2 Transportation Asset Data: 

FAMS and GTLF

The BLM currently utilizes two transportation 

databases that were designed for different 

purposes: 

• FAMS is the BLM’s database of record 

for all assets maintained by the BLM, 

including those related to transportation. 

• GTLF is the BLM’s database to inventory 

transportation linear features as part of 

the TTMP process. 

5.2.2.1 Facility and Asset Management 

System (FAMS)

The BLM enters transportation assets into 

FAMS, the database of record, following 

the TTMP process, which includes route 

inventory and evaluation phases to identify 

and categorize transportation features. The 

TTMP Record of Decision (ROD) finalizes 

the list of transportation assets for a given 

travel management area (TMA). Once the 

ROD is signed, planning and engineering 

staff enter those features and their associated 

attributes (asset classification, length, width, 

surface type, condition, and whether the BLM 

has maintenance responsibility) into FAMS. 

See Section 4 for more details on the TTMP 

process.

In 2018, the BLM began performing road 

condition assessments based on the University 

of Wisconsin’s Pavement Surface Evaluation 

and Rating (PASER) method to align with 

FHWA-FLH methodology and other bureaus 

within the DOI. The BLM is performing PASER 

condition assessments on all FLTP roads as 

well as all aggregate and asphalt surfaced 

roads, totaling approximately 15,000 miles 

over a five-year period. The BLM is applying a 

prototypical PASER condition to the remaining 

approximately 30,000 miles of natural roads.

The PASER condition assessments provide a 

comprehensive and representative estimate 

of BLM road condition and corresponding 

DM needs. However, there is no current 

mechanism for identifying funding needs for 

BLM’s primitive roads and trails. Although 

these assets require much less maintenance 

than roads and bridges, funding is often still 

required for these types of assets. 

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Continue to perform road condition 

assessments and store results in FAMS to 

update funding needs, including Deferred 

Maintenance. (TAM 2.1)

Identify a funding needs mechanism for primitive 

roads and trails. (TAM 2.2)

Investigate opportunities to collect crowdsourced information on asset condition.

(TAM 2.2)
38

5.2.2.2 GTLF Database

The BLM developed the GTLF database in 

2015 as a geospatial system for reporting the 

number of miles of routes open to OHV use. 

The GTLF has evolved to provide geospatial 

data for transportation linear assets and meet 

an expanded set of transportation planning 

needs. Issued by BLM Memorandum No. 2015-

061, the GTLF database is a geospatial dataset 

of transportation linear features. In addition 

to roads, primitive roads, and trails, GTLF also 

includes primitive routes and project-oriented 

temporary routes. Features include those 

owned and/or managed by BLM and some 

States that are maintained by other entities, 

such as county governments. In addition to 

storing feature geometry, GTLF data contain 

other attributes such as surface type, primary 

observed mode of travel, asset classification 

and name, OHV designation, and whether the 

BLM has jurisdiction over the feature. 

Transportation Data Synchronization 

Initiative: Although FAMS and GTLF each 

have their advantages and disadvantages, 

a major concern is the inconsistencies 

between the two databases. Efforts 

are currently underway to develop a 

synchronization tool for the FAMS and 

GTLF data, ensuring consistency between 

the two databases, geo-enabling FAMS 

data, and triggering automatic attribute 

updates in both databases. This will help 

ensure that all staff use consistent and the 

most up-to-date transportation features 

data when making decisions.

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Create a link to allow continuous updates 

between GTLF and FAMS, and ensure all 

necessary attributes are included and consistent 

across the two databases. (TAM 1.1)
39

5.3 Collaborative Partnerships

CP Goal: Develop and maintain collaborative partnerships for a transportation 

system that connects communities to public lands.

• CP Objective 1: Engage external partners that should be involved in BLM 

Travel and Transportation Management and implementation processes, 

including Federal, Tribal, State, county, and local stakeholders to support 

transportation connectivity.

• CP Objective 2: Actively participate in external transportation planning and 

implementation with Federal, Tribal, State, county, and local processes to 

support the BLM mission.

• CP Objective 3: Share and exchange current transportation data with 

external partners for transportation planning.

Gila Box Riparian National Conservation Area, Arizona
40

Multi-agency coordination and partnerships 

are important for management of BLM’s 

transportation system particularly due to 

the noncontiguous nature of BLM-managed 

lands as described in Section 5.1. FLMA 

partnerships with other entities have become 

even more important because of state and local 

government budget constraints. The following 

subsections summarize factors important for 

collaborative partnerships:

• Partnership Types

• Agreements

• Data Sharing

• Communication and Coordination

5.3.1 Partnership Types

Typical BLM partners include other FLMAs, 

Tribal governments, State DOTs, counties, local 

communities, private entities, and nonprofit 

organizations (Figure 10). BLM internal 

partnerships are also important for sharing 

information across program areas as well as 

collaborating on projects such as TTMPs where 

contributions from multiple program areas 

create a more holistic plan.

External partners are important at all levels. 

State-level partnerships are particularly 

important for leveraging funding for largerscale projects and programs. Some of the 

BLM’s key State-level partners are summarized 

in Table 4. In addition to having strong 

partnerships with BLM SOs, many of these 

organizations also have HQ level BLM 

partnerships. BLM partnerships at the HQ 

level are more policy based, such as BLM’s 

participation on the Transportation Research 

Board (TRB) Committee on Transportation 

Needs of National Parks and Public Lands. 

BLM DO and FO partnerships are critical for 

TTMP development of on-the-ground planning 

and implementation. 

Figure 10. Typical External Partnership Objectives 

and Types

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Promote internal and external understanding 

of travel and transportation planning and 

how it supports BLM’s mission through up-todate communications materials and training 

opportunities. (CP 1.2)

Establish and maintain good relationships 

with external Federal, Tribal, State, county, 

and local partners to coordinate planning 

and programming activities; Provide a list of 

common external partner planning processes 

and updating BLM contact list to share with 

external partners. (CP 2.1)

Use partnerships to increase and improve 

access to inaccessible public lands. (CP 2.2)
41

Table 4. Summary of BLM Key Partners Identified by State

State* Key partners

Alaska Alaska DOT&PF, other State agencies and FLMAs, Tribal governments.

Arizona Arizona DOT, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Arizona Off-Highway 

Vehicle (OHV) Coalition, Arizona State Parks, local governments.

California

California DOT, California Department of Parks and Recreation: OHV 

Division, Friends of Jawbone, Friends of El Mirage, Friends of Dumont 

Dunes, American Sand Association, IMBA.

Colorado

Colorado DOT, Colorado Parks and Wildlife, U.S. Forest Service, local 

communities, Colorado OHV Coalition, Colorado Mountain Club, 

Bicycle Colorado, IMBA, Volunteers for Outdoor Colorado, Colorado 

Youth Corps Association, Stay The Trail Education and Stewardship 

Alliance, Local and State government agencies, Non-Profit Friends 

Groups.

Idaho

Idaho DOT, county governments, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Idaho Parks & Recreation Department, Idaho 

Department of Fish & Game.

Montana/Dakotas Montana DOT, South Dakota DOT, North Dakota DOT, NOHVCC, 

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, U.S. Forest Service – Region 1.

Nevada Nevada DOT, Nevada State OHV Commission, OHV user groups.

New Mexico

New Mexico DOT, New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, New 

Mexico OHV Alliance, Tribal governments, neighborhood associations, 

recreation users, NPS.

Oregon/Washington

Oregon DOT, Oregon All-Terrain Vehicle (ATV) Grant Committee, 

U.S. Forest Service (with which the Oregon BLM shares 1,100 miles 

of border), Oregon Recreation Trails Program Grant Committee, 

Association of Oregon Counties, IMBA, Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA).

Utah Utah DOT, Interagency Natural Resources Coordination Council, Utah 

State Parks, Utah 4 Wheel Drive Association, Tread Lightly!

Wyoming

Wyoming DOT, Wyoming State agencies and counties, ranchers, IMBA, 

Wyoming Recreation Action Team, BLM Wyoming Resource Advisory 

Council, Cooperators.

*Note that this table is not comprehensive; adapted from: Bureau of Land Management. 2017. 5-Year Travel and Transportation 

Management Strategy (2018-2022). 

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/documents/files/TTM_5YearStrategy_03132018.pdf
42

5.3.1.1 Partnerships with National 

Organizations

Partnering with national organizations offers 

consistency in messages and services across 

the BLM. The BLM has partnerships with 

several national organizations such as Tread 

Lightly!, Leave No Trace, National Off-Highway 

Vehicle Conservation Council (NOHVCC), 21st 

Century Conservation Service Corps (21CSC), 

International Mountain Biking Association 

(IMBA), and National Environmental 

Education Foundation. Partnerships may 

provide funding opportunities for general 

support or contracting for specific services. 

Partnerships with these national organizations 

may occur at the BLM HQ, SO, DO, or FO level.

Campbell Tract Special Recreation 

Management Area, A Best Practice in 

State DOT/BLM State Office Partnership: 

The BLM’s Campbell Tract is a 730-acre 

Special Recreation Management Area 

located in the middle of Anchorage, Alaska. 

It provides a 12-mile non-motorized trail 

system that winds through the woods. The 

BLM partnered with the Alaska DOT&PF, 

using FLAP and FLTP funds, to realign the 

intersection leading to Campbell Tract, 

which is a state road and the BLM road 

within the Tract. This project will improve 

safety and access for motorized and 

nonmotorized visitors.

Sacramento River, California
43

Example partnerships with 

national-level organizations:

• Tread Lightly!: BLM’s partnership with Tread Lightly! is an example of a partnership 

where the BLM provides funding for general support from an outside organization. The 

message and materials produced by Tread Lightly! are used across BLM FOs as tools 

to communicate the message about reducing impacts to natural areas by staying on 

trails, avoiding sensitive areas with recreation use, sharing space with other users, and 

not leaving trash behind. 

• Leave No Trace: For many years, the BLM has supported the principles and programs 

of Leave No Trace, an outdoor ethics program for all levels of public lands users. There 

are three levels of Leave No Trace courses, leading to master educators and trainers 

who conduct Awareness Workshops, which are designed for the general public to 

learn, practice and promote Leave No Trace.

• NOHVCC: While BLM has a relationship with NOHVCC at a national-level, generally 

partnerships with NOHVCC pertain to specific State plans and are developed at 

the DO/FO level with a local agreement. For example, NOHVCC is currently helping 

to develop a motorized recreation action strategy for each State. Through this 

partnership, the strategies developed for each State will be able to help guide BLM in 

both future TTMPs and RMPs. 

• 21CSC: 21CSC provides opportunities for returning veterans and young adults to 

learn new skills while contributing to the overall improvement of public Federal lands. 

BLM’s partnership with 21CSC helps to complete on-the-ground work for various 

maintenance and improvement projects, including projects for transportation assets, 

which help to reduce the backlog of maintenance needs in a cost-effective manner. 

• International Mountain Bicycling Association (IMBA): The BLM collaborated with 

IMBA and other partners to develop the “Guidelines for a Quality Trail Experience” 

(GQTE), published in 2017. More than 3.5 million mountain bikers ride the trails that are 

available on public lands managed by the BLM each year. These guidelines will help 

improve the design, construction, and management of mountain bike trails all across 

the country. 

• National Environmental Education Foundation: The BLM partners with the National 

Environmental Education Foundation to organize National Public Lands Day and other 

volunteer events. Many of these events are projects to maintain or improve BLM trails.
44

5.3.1.2 Local Partnerships

Local partnerships are generally created at the 

DO/FO levels and occur in three primary ways: 

• Local partners/stakeholders participate

in BLM planning efforts and trainings to

help others gain a better understanding

of BLM mission and goals while also

obtaining important community feedback

that informs better transportation

planning decisions.

• BLM participates actively in external

partner/stakeholder meetings to engage

in their planning efforts and represents

BLM interests and mission.

• BLM and local partners work together

to implement transportation plans,

including conducting trail construction/

maintenance, restoration, and improving

signage and visitor information.

Example local-level partnerships:

Trail Mix – Grand County, UT: Grand 

County, UT, coordinates a Trail Mix 

Committee, which develops and maintains 

trails in Grand County for non-motorized 

use. The volunteer committee is composed 

of various stakeholders such as BLM, 

U.S. Forest Service, Utah State Parks, 

county/city council liaisons, and people 

representing a variety of non-motorized 

recreational interests such as bicycling, 

hiking, climbing, skiing, and equestrian 

activities.

San Luis Valley Great Outdoors (SLV 

GO) – San Luis Valley, CO: SLV GO is a 

regional cooperative engaged in providing 

long-term planning and recreational 

opportunities over a six-county region. 

SLV GO produced a trail master plan for 

the region and toolkits on topics such as 

hosting recreational events, funding trails, 

promoting trails, and connecting youth with 

the outdoors. BLM is an engaged partner 

in SLV GO’s efforts to improve the local 

economy through recreational tourism and 

to improve local quality of life by providing 

recreational opportunities to current 

residents.
45

Local Partnerships and the Federal Lands 

Access Program (FLAP)

As discussed within Section 3.3, the U.S. DOT 

FLAP supplements State and local resources 

for roads accessible to the public, trails, transit 

systems, and other transportation facilities that 

are not owned or maintained by the Federal 

government, with an emphasis on high-use 

recreation sites and economic generators.23 The 

BLM transportation system is, in most cases, 

interconnected with non-Federally owned land 

and transportation networks; therefore, the 

FLAP is an important opportunity to create 

strong connections with local communities and 

improve access to BLM-managed public lands.

FHWA-FLH represents BLM’s interests in 

the FLAP project selection process. FHWAFLH meets with BLM and other FLMAs to 

rank projects that FHWA-FLH takes to the 

Programming Decisions Committee (PDC) in 

each State. The PDC ultimately selects FLAP 

projects based on input from FHWA-FLH, 

counties, and the respective State DOTs. While 

FLAP proposals are initiated at the locallevel and submitted by local governments, 

FOs should work with local governments to 

identify high-priority access projects, develop 

proposals, and make FLAP recommendations 

so that projects have the greatest mutual 

benefit for both BLM and the local community. 

All FLAP proposals concerning BLM-managed 

public lands must be signed by a BLM 

representative to demonstrate BLM’s support 

for the project.

In 2018, there were 58 FLAP projects underway 

or planned that provide access to BLMmanaged public lands. These projects are 

located in 11 States and take place on facilities 

owned or maintained by State DOTs, counties, 

local governments, or Tribal governments. 

Twelve of the 58 projects that provide access 

23 U.S. DOT, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Federal Lands Highway. Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP). 

https://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/flap/

to BLM-managed public lands also provide 

access to other FLMAs, creating a multi-agency 

benefit.

5.3.2 Agreements

As discussed in Section 5.1.4, agreements 

provide a more formalized partnership often 

between BLM FOs and local entities. 

5.3.2.1 Maintenance Agreements

Because many BLM-managed public lands 

are interspersed with other public and private 

lands, travel to and through BLM-managed 

public lands often requires movement on routes 

managed by other road owners, including State 

DOTs, counties, local governments, Tribal 

governments, and private entities. Maintenance 

agreements can help ensure a seamless travel 

experience by reducing patchwork projects 

when right-of-way ownership, for example, 

varies on a single stretch of public roadway. 

Maintenance agreements are generally with 

a local government, such as a county, where 

the partner agency maintains roads for BLM 

and in return BLM makes a payment or 

maintains some of the partner’s roads. It is 

more effective from a management and cost 

perspective for one entity to maintain a single 

roadway. Agreements, however, may not all 

be solidified and documented on paper. In 

some cases, legacy agreements have continued 

over the years; such informal agreements 

pose challenges for record management 

and understanding the complete scope of 

maintenance agreements that exist with the 

BLM.
46

Partnering with local communities

to fund access improvements

FLAP provides an important opportunity to construct infrastructure 

improvements, connecting BLM-managed public lands to local 

communities. One example of a project with strong local support is 

the 18 Road project that provides access to the North Fruita Special 

Management Area in western Colorado. This project will widen and 

improve 18 Road and is the result of a community-driven effort with 

many partners: the Town of Fruita, a local mountain bike group, and 

the Grand Valley Trail Alliance. These partners all recognized the 

value of the work and collaborated to find funding for construction, 

which is scheduled for 2021-2022.

Figure 11. 18 Mile Road before construction of improvements in Colorado
47

5.3.2.2 Financial Assistance Agreements

The BLM provides financial assistance 

agreements to public or private organizations 

for specific services. Financial assistance 

agreements can be grants or cooperative 

agreements that provide opportunities for 

partner organizations to carry out stewardship 

projects that achieve land management goals. 

Examples include agreements with local clubs, 

counties, Conservation Corps, and others 

to install signage, maintain trails, remove 

vegetation, and help restore watersheds.

5.3.3 Data Sharing

As described in Section 5.2.2.2., GTLF data 

include ground transportation features and 

improve BLM’s transportation planning as well 

as numerous other BLM programs affected 

by transportation (e.g., water and air quality, 

wildlife habitat fragmentation, engineering, 

realty, cultural resources). GTLF data also 

support better coordination and collaboration 

with partner agencies. While GTLF is a 

national data standard for the BLM, the data 

are produced and managed within each SO’s 

geographic information system (GIS). Each 

SO is at a different level with regard to how 

it uses GIS and GTLF. The goal is for all SOs 

to transition to the GTLF format so that the 

data can be used and analyzed at a national 

level and more effectively shared with external 

partners. 

GTLF data stewards are responsible for 

data quality control and adherence to GTLF 

standards. This responsibility involves working 

closely with GIS staff to monitor progress 

of the database, facilitating communication 

between recreation planners and GIS staff, and 

leveraging funds to provide the staffing needed 

to update and add data to the GTLF database.

The BLM also benefits from data shared 

by others. This may include U.S. DOT and 

State DOT data on roads and trails. Such 

data can inform the BLM of the location of 

agencies’ transportation assets. Data sharing 

of existing and proposed transportation 

system assets between the BLM and partner 

agencies allows for better planning and 

identification of opportunities such as places 

to close transportation network gaps, locations 

for new connections, and prioritization of 

improvements of existing transportation 

system assets. 

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Establish business rules for replication of BLM 

State GIS into GTLF to ensure consistency 

across the Bureau for sharing GTLF with external 

partners. (CP 3.1)

State GTLF data stewards should continue to 

coordinate with GIS staff to ensure quality and 

current data. (CP 3.2)

Build partnerships with Federal, State, county, 

and local partners to identify transportation data 

sharing opportunities. (CP 3.1.)

Example of the benefits of data sharing:

Colorado Trail System Map: The Colorado 

Trail System Map (https://cts.state.co.us/

cotrex/desktop/) is a multi-agency data 

sharing collaboration where the Colorado 

Department of Natural Resources and 

Colorado Parks and Wildlife coordinate 

data to produce a web map of all the 

motorized and non-motorized public trails 

within the State of Colorado. This is a 

useful resource for including trail planning 

as a part of the transportation system 

and also provides public land users with 

valuable trip planning information. The BLM 

contributes GTLF data for all approved and 

open routes.
48

5.3.4 Communication and 

Coordination

It is important for communication and 

coordination to occur both internally 

and externally for the BLM to meet its 

transportation system needs as well as those 

of surrounding communities and partner 

agencies. DO- and FO-level communication 

with State DOTs, counties, and other local 

agencies varies across the BLM. This can 

include learning about and participating in 

external stakeholder transportation system 

planning efforts and representing BLM 

interests, as well as inviting stakeholders to 

participate in BLM transportation planning 

efforts. 

5.3.4.1 Communication and 

Coordination through TTMPs

BLM FOs actively engage partners during 

the TTMP process through one-on-one 

meetings, group meetings, field trips, open 

public meetings, or inviting external partners 

to attend national TTMP courses. The BLM 

also often identifies certain agencies and local 

governments as “Cooperating Agencies” that 

provide feedback throughout the planning and 

decisionmaking process. By engaging external 

agencies and other stakeholders the BLM gains 

a better understanding of the needs for specific 

road or trail segments. 

24 Bureau of Land Management. 2018. Bureau of Land Management Transportation Brochure. 

https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/36057

25 Bureau of Land Management. 2018. 5-Year Travel and Transportation Management Strategy (2018-2022). 

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/documents/files/TTM_5YearStrategy_03132018.pdf

26 Bureau of Land Management. 2019. Travel and Transportation. 

https://www.blm.gov/programs/recreation/recreation-programs/travel-and-transportation

5.3.4.2 Telling the BLM’s Transportation 

Story

Communicating the importance of BLM’s 

transportation system in sustaining its mission 

to BLM staff, partners, Congress, and the 

public is critical to focus attention and funding 

toward necessary improvements for the BLM’s 

transportation system. The BLM has begun to 

communicate this message through a variety 

of resources, such as the BLM Transportation 

Brochure, 5-Year Travel and Transportation 

Management Strategy (2018-2022), externally 

facing TTMP website and other communication 

materials such as videos and fact sheets.24, 25, 26

The comprehensiveness of the data available 

on the BLM’s transportation system is an 

important factor to communicate the full 

story of the BLM’s transportation system. 

Additional efforts such as PASER are helping to 

add a new depth of information by providing 

more detailed condition data on roads. One 

challenge, however, is that FAMS, BLM’s 

database of record for transportation assets, 

does not capture all transportation assets. 

This is in part due to the fact that many routes 

have not yet been inventoried and designated 

through the TTMP process. Section 5.2.2 

within the chapter on Transportation Asset 

Management provides more details on FAMS 

and ongoing BLM efforts to improve data 

collection and management.
49

5.4 Natural, Cultural, & Historic Resources

NCH Goal: Manage the BLM’s transportation system to protect resources while 

providing appropriate access.

• NCH Objective 1: Ensure that natural, cultural, and historical resource 

inventories are performed efficiently and comprehensively, as critical 

components of the TTMP process at the land use and implementation 

planning levels.

• NCH Objective 2: Implement TTMP route designations based on available 

funding and staff resources.

Wolfman Panel, Utah
50

Unmanaged transportation infrastructure can 

have adverse impacts on natural, cultural, and 

historic resources on BLM-managed lands. For 

example, without careful planning, roads and 

trails can fragment wildlife habitats, result in 

wildlife collisions, disrupt passage of aquatic 

organisms, reduce watershed quality, and 

impact historic and cultural sites. Through 

TTMPs, the BLM works to minimize and 

mitigate these potential adverse impacts to 

natural, cultural, and historic resources when 

making transportation decisions. TTMP 

implementation is critical for realizing these 

resource protection benefits by designating 

areas for recreational opportunities that are 

separate from protected conservation areas. 

See Section 4 for more details on the TTMP 

process.

BLM-managed public lands contain 

remarkable geologic formations; 

relatively undisturbed native plant and 

animal communities; wilderness areas; 

wild and scenic rivers; historic trails; 

and an abundance of paleontological, 

archaeological, and historical sites. These 

resources are important for their scientific, 

ecological, cultural, educational, and 

recreational significance to the nation’s 

natural and cultural heritage.27

27 Bureau of Land Management. 2017. Public Lands Statistics. 

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/PublicLandStatistics2017.pdf

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Leverage the knowledge and experience of 

interdisciplinary teams during the TTMP process 

to designate transportation systems that 

conserve natural, cultural, and historic resources 

while providing appropriate access. (NCH 1.1)

Keep TTM Manual 1626, Handbook (H-8342), 

and related training current. (NCH 1.2)

Highlight success stories for streamlining the 

SHPO consultation and Cultural and Historical 

Resource Inventory process. (NCH 1.3)

Prioritize implementation of designated routes to 

address critical resource impacts. (NCH 2.1)

Identify partners and leverage resources to 

achieve TTMP implementation. (NCH 2.2)

Identify long-term funding and staff resources 

needed for TTMP implementation. (NCH 2.3)

The following subsections highlight some of 

the relationships among BLM’s transportation 

system and natural, cultural, and historic 

resources.
51

One priority species for wildlife conservation on BLM-managed public lands is the Greater 

Sage-Grouse (Figure 12). The BLM manages much of the best remaining sagebrush habitat 

for the Greater Sage-Grouse, on which some 350 other species of plants and wildlife also 

depend. The BLM is actively improving sagebrush steppe in the West through conifer 

and invasive species removal, fuel breaks, and habitat protection and restoration. These 

practices improved nearly 1.5 million acres in 2018. BLM roads and primitive roads have 

also been found to improve the sagebrush steppe as they serve as fuel breaks for wildland 

fires. 

Transportation planning is an important element of the BLM’s strategy to protect Greater 

Sage-Grouse habitat by keeping public users on designated routes. In some States with 

Greater Sage-Grouse habitat, such as Wyoming and Montana, the BLM uses density 

calculation tools to measure the level of habitat disturbance from existing transportation 

routes. The BLM is in the process of developing a Disturbance Automated Reference Toolset 

(DART) for use nationally. DART uses a standardized definition of “road” for disturbance 

calculations which does not include primitive roads or trails.

Figure 12. Strutting Greater Sage-Grouse

BLM’s strategy to protect

the Greater Sage-Grouse habitat

(Photo Source: BLM 2018: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mypubliclands)

(Source: BLM 2018: https://www.blm.gov/programs/fish-and-wildlife/sage-grouse)
52

5.4.1 Natural Resources

As stewards of the nation’s largest mass 

of federal lands, BLM seeks to conserve 

these resources for multiple uses through 

conservation for present and future 

generations. The BLM manages its 

transportation system to align with identified 

objectives of areas with special designations. 

These include designations such as Threatened 

or Endangered Species habitat, Wilderness 

Area, Wilderness Study Area (places that 

have wilderness characteristics and could be 

designated as Wilderness in the future), Areas 

of Critical Environmental Concern, Research 

Natural Areas, and National Conservation 

Areas.28 The BLM manages diverse ecosystems 

as components to the National Wilderness 

Preservation System, ranging from colorful 

desert lands to alpine peaks, coastal shores 

to river ecosystems, and forests to grasslands. 

There are currently more than 10 million acres 

of Wilderness Area and more than 11.6 million 

acres of Wilderness Study Area. The BLM 

manages habitat for more than 480 wildlife, 

fish, and plant species listed as threatened or 

endangered under the Federal Endangered 

Species Act (ESA), and at least 31 species 

identified as candidates for listing.29

28 Ibid.

29 Bureau of Land Management. 2018. “Threatened and Endangered Species.” 

https://www.blm.gov/programs/fish-and-wildlife/threatened-and-endangered

30 National Trust for Historic Preservation. 2015. “Statement of the National Trust for Historic Preservation.” 

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/AP/AP06/20150318/102895/HHRG-114-AP06-Wstate-SpragueS-20150318.pdf

31 Ibid.

32 Bureau of Land Management. 2017. Public Land Statistics. 

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/PublicLandStatistics2017.pdf

33 Bureau of Land Management. 2018. “National Scenic and Historic Trails.” 

https://www.blm.gov/programs/national-conservation-lands/national-scenic-and-historic-trails

5.4.2 Historic and Cultural 

Resources

The BLM is a steward for the Federal 

government’s largest and most diverse body 

of cultural resources.30 The petroglyphs in 

Figure 13 are an example of a cultural resource. 

As of 2017, this included more than 391,240 

documented cultural sites.31 The BLM’s 

stewardship is regulated primarily by two 

Federal statutes: the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA) and Section 110 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act. NEPA 

requires the BLM to assess the environmental 

impacts of its projects, including impacts 

to historic and cultural resources. Section 

106 requires the BLM to consider the effect 

of projects on historic and archaeological 

resources. To help comply with these statutes, 

the BLM’s cultural resource management 

program continuously works to locate, 

evaluate, and inventory cultural resources on 

public lands under its jurisdiction.32

National Scenic and Historic Trails are 

signature components of the National Trails 

System, and are protected by the BLM as a part 

of the National Conservation Lands. The BLM 

protects nearly 6,000 miles of 18 designated 

trails in 15 States (Table 5).33
53

National Historic Trails National Scenic Trails

Statew Number BLM Miles Number BLM Miles

Alaska 1 149 0 0

Arizona 2 76 1 46

California 3 423 1 189

Colorado 1 85 1 1

Idaho 4 439 1 13

Maryland 2 4 1 2

Montana 2 347 1 11

Nevada 3 1,147 0 0

New Mexico 2 156 1 192

Oregon 2 24 1 44

Utah 3 583 0 0

Virginia 1 1 1 1

Washington 0 0 1 12

Wyoming 5 1,644 1 172

Totals 13* 5,078 5* 683

Table 5. Number and Miles of National Historic Trails and National Scenic 

Trails by State

*Trails cross State lines. Each trail is counted only once toward the total tally.

(Source: BLM 2018 National Conservation Lands Maps and Data: 

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/Trails%20Summary%20Table_Q1_2017.pdf)
54

The BLM recently developed guidance for 

DOs and FOs on how to consider cultural 

and historic resources in transportation 

planning to meet the requirements of their 

State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs) 

and the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation (ACHP). As a result, DOs and FOs 

are improving their ability to identify areas 

with high potential for discovery of historic 

or cultural resources. This identification 

saves time and money by allowing the BLM 

to focus its initial surveying on locations 

with high potential for historic or cultural 

resources, rather than surveying the entirety 

of the planning area. This is especially 

important because compliance with the 

requirements of Section 106 is funded through 

benefiting programs, which can delay TTMPs 

implementation.

A significant amount of BLM-managed public 

land has yet to be surveyed, so a lack of data 

about the location and number of historic and 

cultural resources should not be presumed 

to mean there is a lack of resources on BLMmanaged public lands. The BLM currently 

conducts surveys and inventories cultural 

resources as part of TTMPs and project-level 

environmental compliance. However, the BLM 

does not publish cultural resource inventory 

data. This is to protect sensitive cultural and 

archaeological sites from looting. The BLM also 

has protocols in place for data management to 

protect against this possibility.

Figure 13. Petroglyphs at Nine Mile Canyon, Utah

(Source: BLM 2018: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mypubliclands)
55

5.5 Safety

S Goal: Provide safe and appropriate multimodal transportation access for all 

users of BLM-managed lands.

• S Objective 1: Conduct education and outreach for travelers to prepare 

for safe travel on BLM-managed public lands consistent with the purpose 

of the route.

• S Objective 2: Implement TTMP route designations based on available 

funding and staff resources.

• S Objective 3: Support coordinated and rapid emergency response 

with local first responders and enhance communication of conditions 

affecting BLM-managed public lands.

Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail, Montana
56

Transportation safety for the BLM includes 

safe travel through BLM-managed public lands 

for a range of administrative, commercial, 

and recreational uses. On many BLM routes, 

commercial and recreational users often 

share routes with larger vehicles, such as 

freight trucks, which can create opportunities 

for conflicts. BLM transportation safety 

also includes unique challenges due to the 

remoteness and unpaved nature of the BLM’s 

system. 

Transportation safety includes consideration of 

the four E’s of safety: Education, Engineering, 

Enforcement, and Emergency Response. The 

level of maintenance and surface treatment 

of each component of the transportation 

system varies based on a route’s purpose. It 

is important to maintain routes to standards 

consistent with their purpose and to 

communicate the route’s purpose to travelers 

in order to ensure the safety of the users. 

Roads and the transportation network play an 

important role in providing both ingress and 

egress for emergency vehicles and for users to 

evacuate depending on the situation. 

The following subsections summarize some of 

the important factors for safety:

• Expectations for safety on BLM-managed

public lands

• Current BLM efforts related to safety

• Safety data

5.5.1 Expectations for Safety on 

BLM-Managed Public Lands

One unique challenge for the BLM is how 

to improve safety within the context of the 

unique experiences that the BLM provides. 

Many travelers visit BLM-managed public 

lands to participate in transportation-related 

activities with inherent safety risks, such as 

riding OHVs or mountain biking on natural, 

unpaved surfaces. For many of these travelers, 

the remote, minimally developed nature of 

the landscape, roads, and trails provides the 

recreational value they seek. This presents 

a challenge for the BLM to develop and 

implement design standards that minimize 

safety hazards but are also appropriate to 

the designated purpose and use for a given 

route. Educating travelers on route purpose 

and condition is a key element to improving 

safety, by ensuring that users understand the 

risks associated with their planned travel. The 

BLM primarily delivers safety education for 

travelers through on-site signage or handouts 

in recreational areas notifying travelers of 

location-specific safety hazards (Figure 14). 

Travelers accustomed to paved roads may 

not consider the additional hazards of BLM’s 

unpaved or primitive roads. For example, 

clay roads become impassable when they 

get wet. The current maps of the BLM road 

system are an important navigational aid for 

the numbered road system, but they do not 

include individual road warnings and safety 

tips. Additional signage and notations on trip 

pre-planning resources can improve traveler 

awareness. More information on wayfinding in 

the context for visitor experience and safety is 

provided in Section 5.1.5.

Figure 14. BLM Sign at Billings Canyon Jeep 

Trail in Grand Junction, Colorado
57

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Educate travelers on the inherent risks 

associated with traveling on public lands utilizing 

digital and hard-copy resources. (S 1.1)

To enhance visitor safety, provide wayfinding 

signage, downloadable maps, or kiosks with sitespecific travel information where feasible. (S 1.2)

5.5.2 Current BLM Efforts 

Related to Safety

5.5.2.1 FLTP Route Assessment Reviews 

and Project Prioritization

BLM currently addresses safety on its FLTP 

routes by performing Route Assessment 

Reviews (RAR) and prioritizing safety 

improvements in project selection criteria for 

DM and FLTP funds. RARs are inspections of 

FLTP routes performed by a HQ team for FO 

and DO staff to identify the range of project 

work for a route. The team categorizes the work 

as safety improvements, design deficiencies, 

and DM. The results of the RAR are used to 

design and evaluate FLTP projects. 

Of the $200 million of current shovel ready 

FLTP projects for which BLM has performed 

an RAR, approximately 60 percent of the 

work will include safety improvements and 

design upgrades. The remaining 40 percent 

of the work reduces DM. To date, the BLM 

has performed RARs and identified safety 

deficiencies on 515 miles, or 46 percent, of the 

FLTP routes. Because the BLM uses the FHWAFLH to design and contract FLTP projects, 

FHWA-FLH engineers will scope projects to 

verify the safety deficiencies in BLM FLTP 

roads prior to design.

Safety is the highest weighted criterion that the 

BLM uses to score and rank upcoming FLTP 

projects. This priority is important to 

34 BLM. 2018. Bureau of Land Management Federal Lands Transportation Program Investment Strategy, Fiscal Years 

2019-2021.

assure projects that address significant safety 

deficiencies are funded as soon as possible.34

In 2017, BLM HQ staff attended a road 

safety assessment course sponsored by 

the U.S. Forest Service to determine how 

to improve BLM staff’s ability to identify 

safety deficiencies on BLM’s FLTP roads. 

BLM has applied the skills learned at the 

road safety assessment training to improve 

BLM assessments when performing RARs.

5.5.2.2 Roadway Safety Audits

In corridors with known safety hazards, the 

BLM may undertake a Road Safety Audit 

(RSA). RSAs consider the safety of a road 

for all potential road users and focuses 

recommendations on the four Es of safety 

(Education, Engineering, Enforcement, and 

Emergency Response) utilizing a multidisciplinary assessment team. RSAs typically 

include staff from FHWA-FLH in addition to 

BLM staff. These audits are more extensive than 

the safety considerations included in a RAR and 

are undertaken in particularly critical corridors. 

To date, the BLM has conducted several RSAs, 

including Cow Creek Back Country Byway and 

Nestucca River Back Country Byway, both in 

Oregon.

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Identify route safety data needs, and identify 

available route safety data. (S 2.2)

Determine how safety data may be used 

for effective safety analysis, planning, and 

implementation. (S 2.3)
58

Cow Creek Back Country Byway is an FLTP road that had safety deficiencies, 

including tight curves and insufficient sight lines. To address these issues, 

BLM conducted an RSA with FHWA-FLH’s Western Federal Lands (WFL) 

Division Office. One recommended improvement from the RSA that BLM 

has implemented is the realignment of a tight radius curve to improve sight 

distance for roadway travelers and reduce vehicle roadway departures. 

Cow Creek Back Country Byway Realignment (see the tree in the middle of 

the photo for reference) 

Cow Creek Back Country Byway, Oregon

Before: After:
59

5.5.2.3 Design Standards and Review

The BLM uses established design standards 

and guidance documents to incorporate 

safety into the design of new infrastructure 

or improvements to existing transportation 

assets. BLM Manual Sections 9113 and 9114 

and corresponding Handbooks 9113-1 and 

9114-1 address road and trail design standards, 

respectively. These standards apply to all road 

and trail projects on BLM-managed public 

lands, whether constructed by BLM, FHWAFLH, or permittees such as industry users. 

While the BLM generally does not build new 

roads, it does reconstruct or rehabilitate 

existing roads. Many roads on BLM-managed 

public lands were initially constructed by 

industry for access to mineral and timber 

extraction and other economic activities. As 

such, they often were not designed for general 

public use and may require improvements 

for safety if they become popular routes for 

recreational travel. 

The BLM prioritizes road safety improvements 

for roads in areas that are experiencing more 

travel demand than the current facilities can 

safely handle. Such hot spots generally occur 

around recreational opportunities and may 

require formalizing a recreation site with 

adequate parking and circulation and providing 

facilities that are separated from active use 

areas to reduce conflicts between different uses. 

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Use BLM design standards, approved partner 

guidelines, and best practices to incorporate 

safety considerations into route design. (S 2.1)

5.5.2.4 Emergency Response

In counties with BLM-managed lands, BLM law 

enforcement staff regularly work with county 

emergency management and law enforcement 

personnel. In the event of an emergency, 

county law enforcement is often first notified. 

County law enforcement notifies the BLM of 

emergencies on BLM-managed lands when 

additional BLM law enforcement or other 

support is needed.

When BLM law enforcement officers are the 

first responders to an emergency, they will 

generally call the Federal Law Enforcement 

Communication Center (FLECC), and FLECC 

staff will contact the appropriate local agency 

to respond. In circumstances where BLM 

manages only a small amount of land within 

a county, local law enforcement typically 

handles the incidents. In some of these cases, 

the BLM and the local government establish 

an agreement or contract where the BLM uses 

recreation fee revenues to reimburse first 

responder services.

The BLM’s road system plays a crucial role in 

supporting access for emergency response. The 

BLM’s road system GIS data is an important 

resource for understanding how to access a 

location in the event of an emergency and 

how to deploy resources where needed. The 

BLM has an in-house fire response team, 

which utilizes these data for fire response 

emergencies. 

As discussed in Section 5.2.2.2, these GTLF 

data are an important BLM geospatial 

transportation data source. Each SO maintains 

its own dataset and submits updates to the 

national GTLF database on a monthly basis. 

Increasing the number of roads mapped, 

including primitive roads, with accurate 

attributes is important to support first 

responders and other transportation system 

users. The digital data are critical because not 

all roadways have signs in the field.

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Provide up-to-date mapping and GIS information 

to expedite emergency response. (S 3.1)

Investigate opportunities to develop a process 

for real time communications during emergency 

route closures. (S 3.2)
60

5.5.3 Safety Data

While there is no single source of safety 

data, the following data sources can provide 

valuable insight for prioritizing changes 

and improvements to assets in the BLM 

transportation system: 

• Fatality Analysis Reporting System

(FARS), maintained by the National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration

(NHTSA);

• BLM’s Incident Management Analysis and

Reporting System (IMARS);

• BLM’s Facility Asset Management System

(FAMS); and

• FHWA’s National Bridge Inventory (NBI).

NLRTP Implementation Strategy Links

Identify route safety data needs, and identify 

available route safety data. (S 2.2)

Determine how safety data may be used 

for effective safety analysis, planning, and 

implementation. (S 2.3)

5.5.3.1 Fatality Analysis Reporting 

System (FARS)

FARS is a nation-wide census program run by 

NHTSA that tracks fatal crashes and data about 

each crash such as location, time of day, and 

number of fatalities associated with each crash. 

States are required to report all fatal vehicle 

crashes on roads that are accessible to the 

public, based on law enforcement reporting. 

BLM-managed public lands are unique 

compared to other FLMA lands because they 

are typically very open and have multiple 

entrances and exits. In addition, not all roads 

that traverse BLM-managed public lands are 

owned and managed by the BLM. FARS data 

summarized in Table 6 show an average of 200 

fatal crashes per year on roadways within BLM 

boundaries, however, only an average of three 

fatal crashes per year are on BLM roads. This 

illustrates that fatal vehicular crashes on BLM 

roads are rare, and the vast majority of fatal 

vehicular crashes on BLM-managed public 

land occur on State, county or local roads. 

Higher roadway volume on non-BLM roads 

may contribute to the greater number of fatal 

crashes, among other factors.

Year U.S. Total

Fatal Crashes

Fatal Crashes

in BLM Boundaries

Fatal Crashes

on BLM Roads*

2016 34,440 243 1

2015 32,540 209 2

2014 30,057 201 6

2013 30,203 183 3

2012 31,007 185 4

Table 6. FARS Data Summary, 2012 to 2016

*In addition, there was one fatal accident in both 2012 and 2015 and two fatal accidents in 2014 at the

intersection of a BLM and non-BLM road.

(Source: FARS)
61

The few fatal crashes that occurred on BLM 

roads between 2012 and 2016 were widely 

distributed across the Western States and not 

concentrated in one particular location (Figure 

15). The occurrence of a fatal crash does not 

necessarily signify a roadway is unsafe. There 

are numerous human factors that impact driver 

behavior. For example, based on the attributes 

collected in the FARS dataset, 45 percent of the 

fatal accidents on BLM roads involved alcohol.

Figure 15. BLM Fatal Roadway Crashes, 2012 to 2016*

*Alaska omitted from the map. There were no fatal crashes reported on BLM roads in Alaska between 2012 and 2016.

(Source: FARS)
62

5.5.3.2 Incident Management Analysis 

and Reporting System (IMARS)

Unlike FARS, which only tracks data associated 

with vehicular crash fatalities nation-wide, 

IMARS is an internal system specific to the 

DOI used to track a wider range of incidents 

by DOI law enforcement. The benefit of 

IMARS is that it is a centralized dataset of 

incidents on BLM-managed public lands. One 

of the challenges of IMARS as a reliable data 

source for trend analysis on BLM-managed 

public lands is that when 911 is called for an 

incident, the State, County, or local Emergency 

Medical Services (EMS) will respond to 

the incident as dispatched from the 911 call 

service. EMS responds to incidents regardless 

of land jurisdiction. In many cases, local law 

enforcement does not notify BLM when an 

incident occurs on BLM-managed public 

lands, but records the incident within the 

responding agency’s tracking system. If BLM 

law enforcement is present for an incident to 

assist the responding agency, then information 

about the incident will be reported into both 

IMARS and the responding agency’s system. 

Although motor vehicles are involved in the 

majority of vehicular incidents reported in 

IMARS, 38 percent of the reported incidents 

involve another mode (Table 7; Figure 16). 

OHVs account for a significant number of 

incidents as the BLM tends to be more involved 

in responding to off-roadway incidents such 

as trail crashes (including OHVs used in 

motorized recreation) and search and rescue. 

The data reported in IMARS do not capture 

the complete picture of incidents on BLMmanaged public lands and may be skewed in 

two ways. First, the reported motor vehicle 

incidents include all incidents involving BLMowned vehicles, but not all public incidents if 

another agency responds. As a result, the data 

may indicate a ratio of incidents involving 

BLM-operated vehicles to all other incidents 

that is higher than reality. Second, due to 

the remoteness of the BLM-managed lands 

there is likely an under-reporting of crashes 

not involving fatalities or serious injuries. For 

example, minor incidents may be handled by 

the parties involved, and persons with nonlife threatening injuries may be transported 

by someone in their party to a medical facility 

without formally reporting the incident. As a 

result, accident types reported in IMARS may 

skew toward more serious incidents where 

emergency services are needed at the site of the 

incident. 
63

Accident Type Total Motor 

Vehicle

Motorcycle Bicycle OHV Other* Unknown

Fatal 94 22 0 1 27 13 31

Non-Fatal 150 56 7 2 36 8 41

Property Damage Only 97 72 0 1 12 4 8

Other 59 43 0 1 2 4 9

Total 400 193 7 5 77 29 89

Table 7. IMARS Vehicular Accidents by Mode, October 2013 to September 2018

*Includes 14 airplane (8 fatal), 3 helicopter, 2 paraglider (1 fatal), 4 train, and 6 watercraft (4 fatal) incidents.

(Source: IMARS)

Figure 16. IMARS Vehicular Accidents by Mode, October 2013 to September 2018
64

To get a more comprehensive picture of safety 

on BLM roads and public lands, FARS and 

IMARS data could be supplemented with 

State-level incident data. Generally, local 

responding agencies report incidents and 

statistics up to the State-level. The type of data 

and level of detail collected by each SO will 

vary, but when the incident data are available 

and contain precise locational data (latitude 

and longitude) a more comprehensive review 

of incidents and safety trends occurring across 

BLM-managed public lands can be evaluated. 

Having comprehensive incident data is 

important for making decisions about safety 

improvements and educating the public about 

BLM’s transportation system, its intended uses, 

and how to best be prepared for their travel 

experience. 

BLM is participating with other DOI 

agencies to geospatially map FARS data to 

the FLTP road network of each DOI agency. 

The current effort geospatially displays 

FARS incidents from 2009 to 2017 on the 

FLTP road network in an effort to visualize 

trends in fatal accidents which can inform 

safety and policy decisions. Future work 

may include integration of IMARS and other 

agency incident data to provide a more 

comprehensive look at incidents across 

BLM-managed public lands.

Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail, 

Oregon
65

5.5.3.3 Asset Condition

Transportation safety can also be impacted by 

asset condition. BLM’s FAMS is one resource 

to establish baseline conditions on BLM roads 

where roads are reported as either good, fair, 

or poor. The condition of many BLM roads has 

degraded over time due to insufficient funding 

to perform annual maintenance. As a result, 

the majority of BLM roads are currently in 

poor (65%) or fair (33%) condition (Figure 17). 

FAMS includes both year-round and seasonal 

primary roads. However, primitive roads and 

trails are only partially documented. More 

information regarding FAMS is provided in 

the Transportation Asset Management chapter 

within Section 5.2.2.1. 

The NBI is a resource that can be used to 

evaluate BLM bridge condition. The NBI is a 

national database documenting the condition 

of all bridges that are more than 20 feet in 

length and intended for vehicular traffic. With 

two-thirds of BLM’s 915 bridges being road 

bridges, the NBI is an important resource 

(Figure 18).

Figure 17. Road Condition Rating as a 

Percent of Total Mileage

Figure 18. Bridge Condition Rating as a 

Percent of Total Road Bridges

(Source: PASER)

(Source: NBI, includes 496 bridges)
66

Implementation Plan

6 Dalton Highway, Alaska
67

This first NLRTP, Transportation Connections 

2040, establishes a strategic framework for 

implementing transportation investment and 

monitoring transportation system performance 

over the next 20 years. BLM staff at HQ, SOs, 

DOs, and FOs must make transportation 

investment and maintenance decisions on a 

regular basis; Transportation Connections 2040 

provides guidance to align their decisions with 

the national goals and objectives for the BLM’s 

transportation system. Because transportation 

influences many different programs within the 

BLM, this NLRTP reflects the input of subject 

matter experts from across the BLM to define 

common goals, objectives, strategies, and 

performance measures. 

Transportation Connections 2040 is 

consistent with state-wide and metropolitan 

transportation planning practices as part of a 

continuing, comprehensive, and cooperative 

(3C) transportation planning process. It 

establishes a framework for implementation 

and performance monitoring that feeds into 

future NLRTP updates. The Transportation 

Connections 2040 framework includes the 

following performance-based elements: 

• Goal: a broad statement that describes a

desired end state.

• Objectives: specific, measurable

statements that support achievement of a

goal.

• Strategies: specific actions for BLM to

make progress towards the NLRTP goals

and objectives.

• Performance Measures: indicators that

BLM can use to assess progress toward a

goal.35

35 Definitions adapted from FHWA, 2013, Performance-Based Planning and Programming Guidebook: 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/performance_based_planning/pbpp_guidebook/page00.cfm.

 Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument, 

Oregon
68

Transportation Connections 2040, including its 

goals, objectives, strategies, and performance 

measures, is aspirational in that it will be used 

to inform future planning priorities and policies. 

The BLM will achieve the elements of this 

NLRTP where feasible, based on BLM’s staff and 

financial resources. 

In this section, each goal area is broken 

down into a set of objectives and supporting 

strategies. Each strategy includes the following 

characteristics:

• Status: the state of the activity, identified 

as:

• Existing Activity: a strategy that the 

BLM is currently wholly performing;

• Expanded Activity: a strategy that the 

BLM is currently partially performing, 

but has aspects that are new; or

• New Activity: a strategy that the BLM 

is not yet performing.

• Responsible Division: the entity/entities 

charged with overseeing achievement of 

the strategy. The first entity is identified 

as the lead for monitoring progress on the 

strategy.

• Implementation Horizon: the planning 

timeframe for implementing the strategy, 

identified as:

• Short-term: within five years of the 

publication of this NLRTP;

• Medium-term: within five to ten years 

of publication of this NLRTP;

• Long-term: within ten to twenty years 

of publication of this NLRTP or

• Ongoing: the strategy is an existing 

activity that is expected to continue.

 Ojito Wilderness Area, New Mexico
69

ACE Objective 1: Build relationships with BLM’s gateway communities and the traveling public to 

ensure access, connectivity, and recreational experience needs are being met.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

ACE 1.1 Refine the BLM’s inventory of multimodal access 

to BLM-managed public lands by identifying 

traveler/user types, preferred experience settings, 

and the desired modes of transportation for BLM 

routes during the TTMP process.

Expanded 

Activity

Transportation

Management 

(TM)/GIS/ 

Recreation

Medium-term

ACE 1.2 Highlight success stories related to improving 

access to BLM-managed public lands. Expanded 

Activity TM Short-term

ACE 1.3 Investigate opportunities to improve the BLM's 

understanding of the types of transportation uses 

and visitation demand through recreational visitor 

estimates, traffic volume data, and other sources.

Expanded 

Activity Recreation Short-term

Access, Connectivity, & Experience (ACE)

ACE Goal: Manage the BLM’s transportation system to provide seamless public 

access to support the BLM’s multi-use mission.

ACE Objective 2: Identify linear assets that are part of the BLM transportation system and their 

connections with the adjacent transportation network.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

ACE 2.1 Through the TTMP process, clarify ownership, 

purpose(s), and use(s), and determine if linear travel 

features serve BLM’s multi-use mission. Existing 

Activity

Travel 

Management 

(TM)

Ongoing

ACE 2.2 To improve transportation planning, integrate the 

engineering functions into the TTM Handbook (H8342), including engineering input during the route 

designation step of the TTMP process.

Expanded 

Activity

TM / 

Engineering Short-term

ACE 2.3 Conduct outreach and provide up-to-date resources 

to State, District, and Field Offices on Federal Lands 

Access Program (FLAP) and BLM access priorities. Expanded 

Activity

Engineering / 

TM Medium-term
70

TAM Objective 1: Develop and maintain a comprehensive inventory of BLM-owned transportation assets.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

TAM 1.1 Create a link to allow continuous updates between 

GTLF and FAMS, and ensure all necessary 

attributes are included and consistent across the 

two databases.

Expanded 

Activity

TM / 

Engineering / 

GIS

Medium-term

TAM 1.2 Provide appropriate policy (e.g., through the TTM 

Manual Section 1626 and Handbook (H-8342)), 

training, and staffing to establish and maintain 

BLM’s transportation asset inventory (including 

primitive roads and trails) in FAMS and GTLF.

Existing 

Activity

TM / 

Engineering / 

GIS

Ongoing

Transportation Asset Management (TAM)

TAM Goal: Strategically invest funding to sustainably maintain BLM 

transportation assets.

TAM Objective 2: Identify the condition and funding needs associated with BLM transportation assets.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

TAM 2.1 Continue to perform road condition assessments 

and store results in FAMS to update funding needs, 

including Deferred Maintenance. Existing 

Activity Engineering Ongoing

TAM 2.2 Identify a funding needs mechanism for primitive 

roads and trails.

New 

Activity

Engineering /

TM Medium-term

TAM 2.3 Investigate opportunities to collect crowd-sourced 

information on asset condition. New 

Activity

TM / 

Recreation /

Engineering

Short-term
71

TAM Objective 3: Strategically leverage BLM and partner funding sources to operate and maintain 

transportation assets based on asset priority and need.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

TAM 3.1 Continue to maintain existing project prioritization 

system for use of Federal Lands Transportation 

Program (FLTP) funds on BLM roads. 

Existing 

Activity Engineering Ongoing

TAM 3.2 Identify BLM and partner funding sources (e.g., U.S. 

DOI, U.S. DOT, State, and local funding programs) 

and their applicability for BLM transportation 

assets.

Expanded 

Activity

TM / 

Engineering Medium-term

TAM 3.3 Provide a mechanism (e.g., website) for 

disseminating funding opportunity information to 

State, District and Field Offices.

Expanded 

Activity

TM / 

Engineering Medium-term

TAM Objective 4: Design, build, and maintain BLM transportation assets to be resilient and protect natural, 

cultural, and historic resources.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

TAM 4.1 Use BLM design standards, approved partner 

guidelines, training resources, and best practices 

to retrofit and maintain transportation assets to 

reduce long-term maintenance costs, improve 

climate resiliency, and protect resource function.

Expanded 

Activity

Engineering / 

TM / Recreation Medium-term

TAM 4.2 Use the TTMP process to develop a sustainable 

transportation system in an effort to reduce 

resource impacts and maintenance needs.

Existing 

Activity TM Ongoing
72

CP Objective 1: Engage external partners that should be involved in BLM Travel and Transportation 

Management planning and implementation processes, including Federal, Tribal, State, county, and local 

stakeholders to support transportation connectivity.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

CP 1.1 Identify Federal, Tribal, State, County, and 

local stakeholders to participate in BLM TTMP 

processes. Maintain a State Office checklist of 

stakeholders to consider (e.g., Department of 

Transportation, Department of Defense).

Existing 

Activity TM Medium-term

CP 1.2 Promote internal and external understanding 

of travel and transportation planning and 

how it supports BLM’s mission through up-todate communications materials and training 

opportunities.

Expanded 

Activity

TM/

Engineering Long-term

Collaborative Parnerships (CP)

CP Goal: Develop and maintain collaborative partnerships for a transportation 

system that connects communities to public lands.

CP Objective 2: Actively participate in external transportation planning and implementation with Federal, 

Tribal, State, county, and local processes to support the BLM mission.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

CP 2.1 Establish and maintain good relationships with 

external Federal, Tribal, State, County and local 

partners to coordinate planning and programming 

activities; Provide a list of common external partner 

planning processes and updating BLM contact list 

to share with external partners.

Expanded 

Activity TM Medium-term

CP 2.2 Use partnerships to increase and improve access 

to inaccessible public lands. 

Expanded 

Activity

Realty / GIS / 

Recreation Short--term

CP Objective 3: Share and exchange current transportation data with external partners for transportation 

planning.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

CP 3.1 Establish business rules for replication of BLM 

State GIS into GTLF to ensure consistency across 

the Bureau for sharing GTLF with external partners. 

New 

Activity TM / GIS Medium-term

CP 3.2 State GTLF data stewards should continue to 

coordinate with GIS staff to ensure quality and 

current data.

Existing 

Activity TM / GIS Ongoing

CP 3.3 Build partnerships with Federal, State, County, 

and local partners to identify transportation data 

sharing opportunities.

Expanded 

Activity

TM / 

Engineering / 

GIS 

Medium-term
73

NCH Objective 1: Ensure that natural, cultural, and historical resource inventories are performed efficiently 

and comprehensively, as critical components of the TTMP process at the land use and implementation 

planning levels.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

NCH 1.1 Leverage the knowledge and experience of 

interdisciplinary teams during the TTMP process 

to designate transportation systems that conserve 

natural, cultural, and historic resources while 

providing appropriate access.

Existing 

Activity

TM / Natural 

and Cultural 

Resource 

Specialists / 

Engineering

Ongoing

NCH 1.2 Keep TTM Manual 1626, Handbook (H-8342), and 

related training current. Existing 

Activity TM Ongoing

NCH 1.3 Highlight success stories for streamlining the SHPO 

consultation and Cultural and Historical Resource 

Inventory process.

New 

Activity

TM / Natural 

and Cultural 

Resource 

Specialists

Short-term

NCH Objective 2: Implement TTMP route designations based on available funding and staff resources.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

NCH 2.1 Prioritize implementation of designated routes to 

address critical resource impacts. Existing 

Activity TM Ongoing

NCH 2.2 Identify partners and leverage resources to achieve 

TTMP implementation. Expanded 

Activity TM Medium-term

NCH 2.3 Identify long-term funding and staff resources 

needed for TTMP implementation. Expanded 

Activity TM Medium-term

Natural, Cultural, & Historical Resources (NCH)

NCH Goal: Manage the BLM’s transportation system to protect resources while 

providing appropriate access.
74

S Objective 1: Conduct education and outreach for travelers to prepare for safe travel on BLM-managed 

public lands consistent with the purpose of the route.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

S 1.1 Educate travelers on the inherent risks associated 

with traveling on public lands utilizing digital and 

hard-copy resources.

Existing 

Activity Recreation Ongoing

S 1.2 To enhance visitor safety, provide wayfinding 

signage, downloadable maps, or kiosks with sitespecific travel information where feasible.

Expanded 

Activity

GIS / 

Recreation Medium-term

Safety (S)

S Goal: Provide safe and appropriate multimodal transportation access for all users 

of BLM-managed lands.

S Objective 2: Implement TTMP route designations based on available funding and staff resources.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

S 2.1 Use BLM design standards, approved partner 

guidelines, and best practices to incorporate safety 

considerations into route design. Existing 

Activity

Engineering / 

Recreation Ongoing

S 2.2 Identify route safety data needs, and identify 

available route safety data. 

Expanded 

Activity GIS / TM Short-term

S 2.3 Determine how safety data may be used 

for effective safety analysis, planning, and 

implementation.

Expanded 

Activity

Engineering 

/ TM / GIS Long-term

S Objective 3: Support coordinated and rapid emergency response with local first responders and enhance 

communication of conditions affecting BLM-managed public lands.

Strategy Status Responsible 

Division

Implementation 

Horizon

S 3.1 Provide up-to-date mapping and GIS information 

to expedite emergency response. Existing 

Activity GIS Ongoing

S 3.2 Investigate opportunities to develop a process 

for real time communications during emergency 

route closures.

Expanded 

Activity

Recreation 

/ Law 

Enforcement / 

Engineering

Short-term
75

Snake River-Mormon Basin Back Country Byway, Oregon
76

Monitoring Plan

7 Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail, Montana
77

Performance measures are useful tools to help 

staff ascertain the impact of their actions on 

the transportation system. The performance 

measures summarized below were established 

by the BLM NLRTP Core Team and Advisory 

Committee through an iterative process. The 

BLM established this set of performance 

measures to minimize the data collection 

and monitoring burden while ensuring that 

progress on achieving the NLRTP goals can be 

monitored. This set of performance measures 

will be reviewed and updated as the BLM 

transportation program matures over time to 

ensure effective performance monitoring. 

Monitoring these measures on a regular basis 

ensures programmatic consistency and provides 

BLM transportation program managers with 

a clearer understanding of the functioning of 

the transportation system. This information 

is essential to the program’s data-driven 

decisionmaking processes, which inform 

how, when, and where the transportation 

program should focus its activities to address 

a specific goal area. These processes are also 

helpful in fulfilling the BLM’s commitment 

to measure and monitor performance of the 

transportation system over time and provide 

strategic investments. This section defines the 

performances measures for each goal area, 

including the data sources and responsible 

divisions. The BLM plans to establish baselines 

and targets for the performance measures as 

part of the implementation of this NLRTP.

McInnis Canyons National Conservation Area, Colorado
78

Access, Connectivity, and Experience (ACE) 

ACE Goal: Manage the BLM’s transportation system to provide seamless public access to support the 

BLM’s multi-use mission.

Performance Measure Data Source Responsible Division

ACE PM1 Number of transportation projects that leverage 

multiple funding sources.

FHWA FLAP 

reporting, data call

TM / Recreation 

/ Procurement / 

Engineering

ACE PM2 Percent of Government Performance and Results 

Act (GPRA) transportation-related survey results 

that are above average.

GPRA survey data Recreation

ACE PM3 Number of completed TTMPs. TTMP list TM

Transportation Asset Management (TAM)

TAM Goal: Strategically invest funding to sustainably maintain BLM transportation assets.

Performance Measure Data Source Responsible Division

TAM PM1 Number of FAMS road segments that are 

included in the GTLF.

GTLF, FAMS TM

TAM PM2 Total mileage of designated linear transportation 

assets (roads, primitive roads, and trails) in GTLF.

GTLF TM

TAM PM3 DM backlog for BLM roads reported in FAMS. FAMS; Condition 

assessment (PASER) 

data

Engineering
79

Transportation Asset Management (TAM)

TAM Goal: Strategically invest funding to sustainably maintain BLM transportation assets.

Performance Measure Data Source Responsible Division

CP PM1 Number of active, documented transportation 

agreements with partners. Procurement Office 

assistance agreement 

lists, State Office 

agreement lists, RMIS

Recreation / State 

Office Leads / 

Engineering / Field 

Managers

CP PM2 Number of completed TTMPs.

TTMP list TM 

Natural, Cultural, and Historical Resources (NCH)

NCH Goal: Manage the BLM’s transportation system to protect resources while providing appropriate 

access.

Performance Measure Data Source Responsible Division

NCH PM1 Number of completed TTMPs. TTMP list TM 

Safety (S)

S Goal: Provide safe and appropriate multimodal transportation access for all users of BLM-managed 

lands.

Performance Measure Data Source Responsible Division

S PM1 Percentage of BLM Field Offices with maps that 

include safety information and georeferenced 

PDF maps that are available online to the public.

Partner group maps / 

BLM maps

GIS / TM / Recreation

S PM2 Establishing baseline data of transportationrelated fatalities on BLM roads.

FARS and other data 

sources

TM

S PM3 Percentage of structurally deficient bridges. National Bridge 

Inventory

Engineering
80

Final Thoughts

8 Alsea Falls Recreational Site, Oregon
81

Congress tasked the BLM with a mandate to 

manage public lands for a variety of uses such 

as energy development, including renewable 

energy, livestock grazing, recreation, and timber 

harvesting while ensuring natural, cultural, 

and historic resources are conserved for present 

and future use. Achieving this mission is not 

possible without a transportation system that 

can effectively and sustainably move people and 

equipment to and through BLM-managed lands. 

The routes on these lands are often a complex 

network of unpaved legacy roads that originated 

for purposes that have shifted over time, no 

longer meeting the safety, access or other needs 

of current users. Portions of these roads are 

owned and maintained by the BLM while others 

are owned or maintained by County, State, 

other government, or private entities. As such, 

the BLM depends on partnerships to plan and 

implement transportation improvements and 

leverage limited funding.

The BLM developed Transportation Connections 

2040, the BLM’s first national long range 

transportation plan, to be a springboard for 

collaboration among the BLM transportation 

program and its partners. The BLM established 

its national transportation goals, objectives, 

strategies, and performance measures in this 

plan to respond to the BLM’s unique challenges, 

needs, and opportunities. Yet many of the 

actions proposed in this plan are mutually 

beneficial to the Bureau’s partners. For example, 

each of the BLM’s five priority goal areas are 

aligned with the U.S. DOT’s national goals for 

the Federal-Aid Highway Program (Table 8). 

Therefore, many of the strategies in this plan are 

intended to address the same goals that State 

DOTs, Metropolitan Planning Organizations 

(MPOs), and others are working toward 

achieving.

Table 8. Alignment between BLM National Transportation Goals and U.S. DOT National Goals 

(23 USC 150(b))

Relevant U.S. DOT 

National Goals

Supporting Transportation 

Connections 2040 Goals

SAFETY. To achieve a significant reduction in 

traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public 

roads.

Safety: Provide safe and appropriate multimodal 

transportation access for all users of BLMmanaged lands.

INFRASTRUCTURE CONDITION. To maintain the 

highway infrastructure asset system in a state 

of good repair.

Transportation Asset Management: Strategically 

invest funding to sustainably maintain BLM 

transportation assets.

FREIGHT MOVEMENT AND ECONOMIC 

VITALITY. To improve the National Highway 

Freight Network, strengthen the ability of 

rural communities to access national and 

international trade markets, and support 

regional economic development.

Access, Connectivity and Experience: Manage 

the BLM’s transportation system to provide 

seamless public access to support the BLM’s 

multi-use mission.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY. To 

enhance the performance of the transportation 

system while protecting and enhancing the 

natural environment.

Natural, Cultural, and Historic Resources: 

Manage the BLM’s transportation system to 

protect resources while providing appropriate 

access.
82

In addition, many of the performance measures 

and strategies that the BLM establishes in this 

plan help make progress toward the State DOTs’ 

and MPOs’ safety and asset condition related 

performance targets for federally required 

performance management measures (Table 9). 

A common theme among the BLM’s safety and 

asset condition related performance measures 

and strategies is increasing the quality of data 

to better understand safety and condition of the 

transportation system. Once these data sets are 

established and improved, the BLM will be even 

better positioned to support State DOTs, MPOs, 

and other partners in achieving goals for the 

larger transportation network.

Table 9. U.S. DOT National Performance Management Measures supported by BLM’s Transportation 

Connections 2040 Performance Measures and Strategies

Relevant U.S. DOT National 

Performance Management 

Measures

Supporting Transportation Connections 

2040 Performance Measures and Strategies

National performance management 

measures for the Highway Safety 

Improvement Program (23 CFR 

490.207):

• Number of fatalities;

• Rate of fatalities;

• Number of serious injuries;

• Rate of serious injuries; and,

• Number of non-motorized

fatalities and non-motorized

serious injuries.

Safety

• S PM2: Establishing baseline data of transportation-related

fatalities on BLM roads.

• S 1.1: Educate travelers on the inherent risks associated

with traveling on public lands utilizing digital and hard-copy

resources.

• S 1.2: To enhance visitor safety, provide wayfinding signage,

downloadable maps, or kiosks with site-specific travel

information where feasible.

• S 2.1: Use BLM design standards, approved partner

guidelines, and best practices to incorporate safety

considerations into route design.

• S 2.2: Identify route safety data needs, and identify available

route safety data.

• S 2.3: Determine how safety data may be used for effective

safety analysis, planning, and implementation.

• S 3.1: Provide up-to-date mapping and GIS information to

expedite emergency response.

• S 3.3: Investigate opportunities to develop a process for real

time communications during emergency route closures.

National performance management 

measures for assessing pavement 

condition (23 CFR 490.307) and 

bridge condition (23 CFR 490.407):

• Percentage of pavements of

the Interstate System in Good

condition; and percentage of

pavements of the Interstate

System in Poor condition;

• Percentage of pavements of

the non-Interstate NHS in Good

condition; and percentage of

pavements of the non-Interstate

NHS in Poor condition.

(Row continues on next page)

Transportation Asset Management

• TAM PM2: Total mileage of designated linear transportation

assets (roads, primitive roads, and trails) in GTLF.

• TAM PM3: DM backlog for BLM roads reported in FAMS.

• TAM 1.1: Create a link to allow continuous updates between

GTLF and FAMS, and ensure all necessary attributes are

included and consistent across the two databases.

• TAM 1.2: Provide appropriate policy (e.g., through the TTM

Manual Section 1626 and Handbook (H-8342)), training, and

staffing to establish and maintain BLM’s transportation asset

inventory (including primitive roads and trails) in FAMS and

GTLF.

• TAM 2.1: Continue to perform road condition assessments

and store results in FAMS to update funding needs, including

Deferred Maintenance.
83

Relevant U.S. DOT National 

Performance Management 

Measures

Supporting Transportation Connections 

2040 Performance Measures and Strategies

(Row continued from previous page)

• Percentage of NHS bridges 

classified as in Good condition; 

and percentage of NHS bridges 

classified as in Poor condition.

• TAM 2.2: Identify a funding needs mechanism for primitive 

roads and trails.

• TAM 2.3: Investigate opportunities to collect crowd-sourced 

information on asset condition.

• TAM 4.1: Use BLM design standards, approved partner 

guidelines, training resources, and best practices to retrofit 

and maintain transportation assets to reduce long-term 

maintenance costs, improve climate resiliency, and protect 

resource function.

• TAM 4.2: Use the TTMP process to develop a sustainable 

transportation system in an effort to reduce resource 

impacts and maintenance needs.

Safety

• S PM3: Percentage of structurally deficient bridges.

• S 2.1: Use BLM design standards, approved partner 

guidelines, and best practices to incorporate safety 

considerations into route design.

• S 2.2: Identify route safety data needs, and identify available 

route safety data.

In addition to the direct links between the 

performance elements of this plan and those 

required for State DOTs and MPOs, this plan 

also includes Collaborative Partnerships as 

one of its five fundamental goals. This goal 

and associated objectives, strategies, and 

performance measures are intended to:

• Foster better shared understanding of BLM 

and partner transportation planning and 

programming processes. 

• Build capacity for transportation 

improvements through leveraging shared 

resources.

• Increase connections and the value of 

BLM-managed lands to communities 

through better understanding of shared 

needs.

One of the performance measures for the 

Collaborative Partnerships goal area is the 

number of completed TTMPs. Since TTMPs 

are inherently collaborative in nature and 

are the BLM’s mechanism for engaging with 

partners on local transportation planning and 

programming, this metric is a strong indicator 

of collaboration at the local level.

This plan was titled Transportation 

Connections 2040 to emphasize that 

transportation is about making connections 

to BLM-managed public lands for the wide 

range of travelers that use those lands for 

work, enjoyment, or inter-community travel. 

The BLM’s transportation system includes 

particularly important connectors for many 

tribal and rural communities throughout the 

U.S. The BLM hopes that this plan provides the 

strategic direction to improve these physical 

connections on the land. This plan also aspires 

to build and strengthen the virtual connections 

on which the BLM’s transportation program 

relies, both between program areas within 

the BLM and with the many local, state, and 

national partners that allow the BLM to achieve 

more than it can on its own.