1
2
PROJECT AGREEMENNT
FOR
WILDERNESS AND BACKCOUNTRY MANAGEMENT PLAN
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
EL MALPAIS NATIONAL MONUMENT
APRIL 3, 2003
Outlined by: ______Suzanne Stutzman Date
Landscape Architect/Planner, Intermountain Support Office
Prepared by: ______
Herschel Schulz Date
Chief Ranger RM & VP, ELMA
Recommended by: ______
Date
Approved by: ______
John Lujan Date
Superintendent, ELMA
PROJECT AGREEMENT
WILDERNESS AND BACKCOUNTRY MANAGEMENT PLAN
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
EL MALPAIS NATIONAL MONUMENT
Purpose
Develop a Wilderness and Backcountry Management Plan to guide the park in managing the wilderness resource in El Malpais National Monument to preserve the natural and cultural resources, scenic beauty, wilderness values, and provide for the enjoyment of the wilderness by the public.
Wilderness Resources
El Malpais has approximately 97, 428 acres of recommended wilderness. As directed by the enabling legislation, the general management plan recommended the suitability and non-suitability of all roadless areas of the monument, except those lands within the areas identified as “potential development areas” on the map referenced in section 101. It remains up to Congress to act on the recommendations, but by NPS policies all lands determined to be suitable for wilderness designation will be managed under the provisions of the Wilderness Act and NPS management policies (DO-41) to maintain wilderness characteristics and values.
Authorities and Mandates
General - Federal Government:
The Wilderness Act 1964
The National Environmental Policy Act 1969
Clean Air Act 1977
Clean Water Act 1972, 1977, 1987
The Endangered Species Act 1973
The Americans with Disabilities Act 1990
The National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act 1968
The National Sites Act 1935
The National Trust Act 1949
The National Historic Preservation Act 1966, 1976, 1980
The Archaeological and Historical Preservation Act 1974
The Archaeological Resources Protection Act 1979
National Park Service:
The National Park Service Organic Act 1916
Redwoods Act 1978
NPS Management Policies 2000
NPS-41 Wilderness Management Guidelines
NPS-77 Natural Resources Management Guidelines
Aircraft Overflights Act 1987
Wilderness Task Force recommendations 1994
Memorandum for Director 1994 (ensure parks have wilderness/backcountry plans completed by the year 2000)
El Malpais National Monument:
El Malpais enabling legislation, December1987
El Malpais General Management Plan / Wilderness Suitability Study, October 1990
Statement for Management, April 1993
Purpose and Need for a Plan(s)
The purpose of the plan will be to serve as 1) a public document that explains wilderness management policies and actions used at El Malpais National Monument; 2) a means to identify the parks Wilderness vision, long range management goals, intermediate objectives, and actions and options to meet those objectives; 3) a working guide for staff who manage the wilderness resource; (4) fulfill NPS policy and Intermountain Region goals.
The need for the plan includes, but is not limited to the following:
· Plan will address management of both wilderness and non-wilderness backcountry
· Articulate consistent management of wilderness for park staff and visitors
· Accountability – how wilderness management is integrated into park operations
· Identify wilderness opportunities for visitors
· Address concerns of American Indian groups regarding traditional use and access
· Strive to coordinate management and visitor use for maximum consistency with adjacent BLM wilderness where possible, explain agency differences to public where different
· Caves – ELMA has many and most are in wilderness. ELMA has a cave permit system covered by compendium. Ensure cave management and wilderness management fit together.
· Fire management plan completed 2001 with BLM NCA (which has fully designated wilderness. Ensure fire management and wilderness management fit together
· Access and corridors will be of interest – main visitor trail, hunting access to BLM lands
· Coordinate with adjacent BLM land – look for continuity where possible, articulate differences
· Improve mapping, identify needs for official boundary survey, determine appropriate delineation on the ground
· Removal of man made structures (primarily from grazing)
· Issues not expected to arise:
o Grazing has been terminated – only occasional trespass grazing
o No horseback use – topography limits this activity
o No oil and gas issues, other than one potential inholder
o Dogs – self limiting
o Climbing – compendium issue
o Research – managed by permits
· Mountain bikes – only in specified area of backcountry (not wilderness)
· IBP-only one – backcountry (necessary and appropriate)
· The wilderness and backcountry contains extensive cultural resources, vulnerable to loss from visitor activities
· Visitors are drawn to sensitive natural areas in the wilderness and backcountry, such as caves, kipukahs
· Visitor safety in wilderness and backcountry is a concern (including climate, navigation, cracks, caves, unexploded ordinance)
· Geocaching
· Aircraft use (primarily internal)
· Protecting dark night sky
· Knowledge of day use and overnight use, trends
Plan Design and Objectives
The planning process will be based on NPS Management Policies 2000 and related wilderness management reference manuals, the completed Rocky Mountain National Park Backcountry / Wilderness Management Plan, the draft wilderness stewardship handbook / template, and emerging guidance from the Intermountain Region. The plan will be founded on a wilderness vision, management goals and objectives for the park. The process will include developing a range of alternatives, as selecting and recommending a preferred alternative. The key products will be a zoning scheme (management classes, opportunity classes, or other similar tool), and a minimum requirement tool. General objectives include:
· Identify and protect most significant wilderness resources at ELMA, including but not limited to:
o Archeology
o Ethnographic use
o Caves
o Kipukahs
o Unique visitor experiences
· Achieve desired conditions for resource conditions and visitor opportunities and provide for visitor safety with the least restrictive management
· Identify indicators, standards and a range of management actions for achieving desired conditions using VERP, LAC, or other logical process
· Identify appropriate methods for research, monitoring, and management activities
· Identify the appropriate role for interpretation and education
Data Needs
DATA
/ Needed? / GIS? / Available? / NotesBoundary / recommended wilderness, potential wilderness, inholdings or other rights / yes / x / Can be produced / Start with fire management plan
Adjacent land use (tribal land, BLM, wilderness / yes / x / yes / Fire management plan
Aerial photography / yes / yes / Multiple years
Topographic maps, DOQQs / yes / x / yes / In arcview
Archeology – sensitive sites / yes / x / yes / More underway – will not be published but used for analysis
Historic sites, NR properties / yes / x / some / NR properties, more needed
Cultural landscapes / no / no / All of monument
Sensitive /important ethnographic areas / yes / yes / Ethnographic overview and assessment – will not be published but used for analysis
Caves / lava tubes / yes / x / some / Learning more
Other sensitive natural areas / yes / yes
Species of concern / yes / yes / About 7 T&E
Floodplains/wetlands / yes / yes / Basically, are none that fit definition
Scenic vistas / viewpoints / viewsheds / yes / yes / Could make viewshed maps
Photographs – esp. with people / yes / yes / Have some, will get more
Night sky / yes / soon / Pecos assisting with ambient readings
Visitor use data / yes / some / Gross scale, use light; really don’t know backcountry; need visitor use survey – plan should identify more specific needs
Visitor safety, law enforcement issues, vandalism / yes / yes / Incident reports, staff discussion
Routes, visitor access points, trail / yes / yes
Related plans (BLM, etc) / GMP, RMP, FMP, CIP, BLM NCA plan, LPP, SFM, GPRA,
Inventory and monitoring data, vital signs, research / yes / various
Consultation and Public Involvement Strategy
Consultation and public involvement is an important part of the wilderness management planning process and fulfillment of the National Environmental Policy Act. Public involvement will keep it clear that this is planning for existing recommended wilderness, not creating new wilderness. Key times for consultation and public involvement will occur during scoping (identify framework or constraints, purpose of wilderness management, examples of issues), development of alternatives (optional, depends on response in scoping), a review of a draft plan, and review of a final plan.
· American Indian Consultation. Associated tribes include the Pueblo of Acoma, Pueblo of Laguna, Pueblo of Zuni, and the Ramah Navajo Chapter. Scoping important. Describe methods of consultation.
· Agency Consultation. Related state and federal agencies will be consulted, including the U. S. Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office. Consultation letters for USFWS, SHPO. Meetings with BLM…participation in team… Describe methods of consultation.
· Public involvement. Identify interested and affected public, including adjacent land owners, wilderness organizations, county and local governments, partners, civics and tourism, businesses, universities, park visitors, other organizations, and the Congressional delegation. A mailing list will be based on the FMP plan, may be expanded to include additional national organizations. Methods of interaction will include:
o Newsletters – (scoping)
o Planning web site – (maintain throughout plan) link to park site
o Public meetings (draft plan, unless otherwise indicated)
o News releases (throughout plan)
Compliance
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) - an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement is needed to develop a Wilderness and Backcountry Management Plan. Based on preliminary scoping and the attached environmental screening form, the plan will be prepared with an environmental assessment. This decision will be revisited following public scoping to see if any changes warrant preparation of an environmental impact statement.
Wilderness Management Planning Team, Support, and Contacts
ELMA
John Lujan, Superintendent 505-285-4641
Herschel Schulz, Chief Ranger RM &VS (Team Leader) 505-285-4641x25
Leslie DeLong, Chief of Interpretation 505-285-4641x18
Jim Kendrick, Archeologist 505-285-4641x40
David Langley, Fire Management Officer 505-285-4641x14
Peer Reviewers
Karen Beppler-Dorn, Chief, Resources Management, Petrified Forest National Park
Bill Wellman, Superintendent, Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument
Intermountain Support Office
Wayne Gardner, Chief, Planning and EQ 303-969-2833
Overall strategy, planning guidance
Lori Kinser, Visual Information Specialist 303-969-2917
Assistance with graphics, newsletters, publications
Chris Marvel, Landscape Architect / Planner 303-969-2840
Assistance with web development, planning tools
Kerry Mish, GIS Specialist (Albuquerque) 505-346-2885x259
Develop and analyze GIS data layers (confirm with Theresa Ely)
Suzy Stutzman, Landscape Architect / Planner 303-987-6671
Assistance with scoping project, facilitation at key points, planning advice
Chris Turk, Environmental Quality 303–969-2832
Environmental compliance advice
IMR Wilderness Coordinator
Jim Walters 505-988-6022
Advice on wilderness policy, wilderness template
Other Parks (involved in wilderness management plans)
Judy Alderson, Planner, Alaska 907-257-2635
Karen Beppler, Chief, Resource Management, PEFO 928-524-6228x263
Tim Devine, Wilderness Coordinator, ROMO 970-586-1244
Ruth Scott, Chief, Resource Management, OLYM 360-565-3071
Bill Wellman, Superintendent, ORPI 520-387-6849
Contract editor? Through Denver?
Prototype Tracking
Because this plan is vital to developing methods, tools, and a prototype for guiding wilderness management throughout the Intermountain Region, ELMA will track expenditures and staff time in the development of this plan, and help other parks with “lessons learned” as the effort progresses.
WMP PLANNING PROCESS AND SCHEDULE
Budget
Available from IMDE-PE FY 03 (set aside primarily for travel, printing) $20,000
Projected expenditures
Travel
Schulz $200
Stutzman $800
Marvel $800
Future trips?
Printing
Meeting materials $120
Newsletters $500 each time
Documents estimate number of copies (paper, CD)
$2,000-$4,000 draft, final
GIS plotting
Contract editing $1,000
10