Numerous beneficial direct impacts to cave and karst resources may result from proactive management actions under all alternatives. Implementing BMPs to protect water quality within cave and karst areas exhibiting unique underground drainage characteristics would preserve the hydrological and biological characteristics in these areas.
Managing cave and karst resources as ROW avoidance/mitigation areas and limiting motorized vehicle use to designated roads and trails in areas over important caves or cave passages would result in beneficial impacts by reducing potential destruction and minimizing surface disturbance and the potential for excessive or incompatible recreational uses in these areas. Managing the recreational use of caves under a specific management plan would result in beneficial impacts by promoting the significance and importance of cave resources through education; protecting and maintaining cave resources, including wildlife and habitat in and around caves; and enhancing user experiences by managing use levels to be compatible with resource carrying capacity and protection.
Designating the Spanish Point Karst ACEC under all of the alternatives would restrict resource uses and activities that may adversely affect cave and karst resources in this area.
Indirect beneficial impacts would result from management actions under all alternatives that maintain or improve the hydrological, biological, and chemical characteristics of water in cave and karst resources. Under all alternatives, these management actions include controlling water runoff from disturbed or developed sites; implementing local watershed management plans and/or TMDLs with interested stakeholders and the Wyoming DEQ; cooperating with stakeholders to plug unneeded abandoned water wells to prevent groundwater contamination; and cooperating with the EPA, the state of Wyoming, and local governments to develop source water wellhead protection plans (groundwater aquifers can be linked to cave and karst systems, as in the Medicine Lodge area).
Accomplishing cave resource protection and providing for user safety with controls such as timing of use to avoid crowding and closing caves to use during periods of high water runoff would result in beneficial impacts to caves. These actions would provide for the protection of- or reduce the potential degradation of cave resources.
Allowing commercial recreational use of Spirit Mountain cave on a case-by-case basis may result in short-term adverse impacts to this cave resource by increasing human activity and the potential for degradation of geologic or biological features in the cave.
Allowing scientific research of cave and karst areas on a case-by-case basis may result in beneficial impacts by increasing the understanding of cave and karst areas and their associated geological, biological, cultural, paleontological, hydrological, and educational values. An increased understanding of cave and karst characteristics and values may lead to improved management or may lead to the identification of specific values that require additional management to protect the resource.
Managing cave and karst resources as the Worland Cave SRMA, with goals of providing protection for cave resources and informing the public on proper recreational uses, would result in beneficial impacts to recreational opportunities and settings in this area. However, recreational use may result in adverse impacts to cave and karst resources by increasing the potential for damage and degradation.
Designating the Sheep Mountain Anticline and Little Mountain ACECs under Alternative A would result in beneficial impacts to cave and karst resources by placing additional restrictions on activities and resource uses (e.g., minerals development and motorized vehicle use) that may degrade these resources.
Allowing commercial recreational use of Spirit Mountain cave on a case-by-case basis would result in the same impacts as those described under Alternative A.
Scientific research of cave and karst areas would result in similar impacts as those described under Alternative A, though to a greater degree due to management to actively pursue research opportunities. Beneficial impacts to cave and karst resources from scientific research under Alternative B would be greater than the other alternatives.
Managing cave and karst resources under a specific ERMA would result in long-term impacts to these resources. Management as an ERMA would provide custodial oversight of recreational activities in these areas to provide for resource protection and to resolve use and user conflicts, which would result in beneficial impacts to cave and karst resources.
Designating the Sheep Mountain Anticline and Little Mountain ACECs under Alternative B, would result in similar beneficial impacts to cave and karst resources in these ACECs as described under Alternative A, though to a greater degree with more restrictions placed on resource uses and activities that may adversely affect cave and karst resources. The Little Mountain ACEC expansion area may also include more known and yet-to-be discovered cave and karst resources in the ACEC area.
Management of Spirit Mountain Cave would result in similar impacts as those described under Alternative A, but to a greater degree. Encouraging commercial caving tours may increase the number of visitors and the potential degradation of geologic and biological features in caves resulting in greater adverse impacts to this area compared to alternatives A, B, and D.
Allowing scientific research in caves would result in the same beneficial impacts as those described under Alternative A.
Managing cave and karst resources under the general Bighorn Basin ERMA would not provide for the beneficial impacts that would result from designation of cave and karst areas as a separate recreation management area.
The BLM does not designate the Sheep Mountain Anticline and Little Mountain ACECs under Alternative C; therefore, no beneficial impacts would result in these areas by restricting activities and resource uses that may degrade cave and karst resources.
Alternative D allows commercial caving tours of Spirit Mountain Cave, which may increase recreational use of the cave and the potential for adverse impacts more than alternatives A and B. However, impacts would be less than under Alternative C, as Alternative D would allow, but not encourage, commercial caving tours.
Allowing scientific research in caves would result in the same beneficial impacts as those described under Alternative A.
As under Alternative C, management of cave and karst resources under the general Bighorn Basin ERMA would provide less of a beneficial impact to cave and karst resources than alternatives A and B, which manage cave and karst resources as a separate recreation management area.
Alternative D places additional restrictions on activities and resource uses that could degrade cave and karst resource within the Sheep Mountain Anticline and Little Mountain ACECs, resulting in similar beneficial impacts as Alternative A.