Under all alternatives, any surface-disturbing activity, including fire and fuels management, paleontological and cultural excavations, ROWs and renewable energy development, and the maintenance of existing facilities may result in adverse impacts to wilderness characteristics in LWCs. Hazardous fuels treatment and activities to control wildland fire, such as the construction of fire breaks, result in surface disturbance that may result in adverse impacts to wilderness characteristics in LWCs. Motorized vehicle use can also disturb vegetation and contribute to the spread of invasive species that degrade native vegetation communities and diminish wilderness characteristics. Livestock grazing can also contribute to the spread of invasive species, and concentrated livestock grazing can compact soils and degrade riparian/wetland areas. Facilities maintenance can require the use of mechanized equipment and vehicles and can alter the natural state of vegetation and affect wilderness characteristics.
Under alternatives A and C, LWCs do not have special management prescriptions and would therefore not affect other resources and resource uses. The types of impacts to wilderness characteristics in LWCs projected due to management under alternatives A and C are similar. However, the intensity of impacts to wilderness characteristics would vary. The analysis of alternatives B and D focuses on the impact of special management prescriptions for Wild Lands to other resources and resource uses. Under all alternatives, management actions are subject to valid existing rights. The exercise of valid existing rights may be incompatible with protection of wilderness characteristics and may result in impact to wilderness characteristics. Valid existing rights include, but are not limited to, mining claims and oil and gas leases.
Management actions under Alternative A are projected to result in approximately 136,415 acres of short‐term and 15,710 acres of long-term surface disturbance on BLM‐administered land over the life of the plan. Adverse impacts may increase with the amount of total Planning Area surface disturbance, as LWCs do not have any special management prescriptions under Alternative A. Surface disturbance is likely to result in adverse impacts to these lands by compromising wilderness characteristics.
Alternative A does not contain specific management for LWCs that would constrain resource use; however, the management of certain resource uses under Alternative A may cause impacts to wilderness characteristics in these lands. Table 4–16 provides a summary of acreages and allocations associated with resources and resource uses in these lands that have the potential to affect wilderness characteristics. Management under Alternative A includes the second largest amount of area open to mineral materials disposal and available for mineral leasing, the largest amount of area open to ROW authorizations, and the greatest amount of area where motorized vehicle use is limited to existing roads and trails. Opening LWCs to mineral development, managing areas as open to ROW and renewable energy authorizations, and designating less restrictive travel management would result in adverse impacts to wilderness characteristics in these areas. In general, because of the intensity and extent of allowable resource uses under Alternative A, management under this alternative would result in adverse impacts to wilderness characteristics, although these characteristics are still in existence since the last wilderness review 30 years ago.
Special designations that overlap LWCs may result in beneficial impacts to these lands by restricting resource uses and surface-disturbing activities that can degrade wilderness characteristics, or by requiring additional mitigation for allowable activities. ACECs, WSRs, and NHTs and Other Historic Trails overlap some LWCs under Alternative A, and some of these specially designated areas include management that would reduce adverse impacts to wilderness characteristics (e.g., VRM, management of surface-disturbing activities, travel designations, etc.). Resource protections provided by the management of these areas would be beneficial to wilderness characteristics in certain lands, though these impacts would vary by location and designations. Under Alternative A, 10,778 acres of WSR eligible waterway segments and 29,794 acres of ACEC designations would overlap LWCs.
Table 4.16. Acres of Management in Lands with Wilderness Characteristics by Alternative
| Alternative | Mineral Closures (acres) | Rights-of-Way (acres) | Visual Resource Management Class (acres) | Travel Management (acres) | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Minerals Material Closure | Administratively Unavailable for Mineral Leasing | Exclusion | Avoidance/Mitigation | Open | Class I | Class II | Class III | Class IV | Closed | Limited to Designated | Limited to Existing | Open | Seasonal Restrictions | |
| Alternative A2 | 17,108 | 6,099 | 14,901 | 150,888 | 405,499 | <1 | 137,496 | 137,709 | 295,962 | 3,095 | 176,691 | 386,703 | 0 | 4,798 |
| Alternative B (Wild Lands)3 | 565,867 | 570,821 | 51,166 | 520,122 | 0 | 6,3061 | 564,513 | 160 | 1 | 10,563 | 517,160 | 0 | 0 | 43,565 |
| Alternative C2 | 7,920 | 3,295 | 757 | 132,834 | 437,697 | 1 | 121,605 | 125,530 | 323,845 | 3,365 | 178,802 | 345,264 | 0 | 43,858 |
| Alternative D2 all LWCs/LWCs designated as Wild Lands | 22,697/ 13,167 | 47,574/ 47,574 | 6,103/ 5,018 | 452,047/ 47,467 | 113,138/ 0 | 4/0 | 198,094/ 52,438 | 169,527/ 47 | 203,638/ 0 | 3,365/ 3,294 | 321,363/ 32,019 | 221,908/ 0 | 0/0 | 24,648/ 16,958 |
Source: BLM 2009a
1 Due to differing scales of analysis, numbers do not add to the total acreage for LWCs in the Planning Area.
2 Alternatives A, and C do not contain specific management for any identified LWCs; however, the areas identified as LWCs during the inventory conducted for this Resource Management Plan Revision Project would retain that classification unless subsequent reviews or inventories indicate they no longer contain wilderness characteristics.
3 The numbers presented for alternative B and D reflect the management of LWCs based on geographic information system data; due to other resource considerations, the management of certain areas in these lands may be more restrictive than the overall management Wild Lands.
| < | Less than |
| LWC | Lands with Wilderness Characteristics |
Fire and fuels management may result in adverse impacts if mechanical fuels treatments and prescribed fire result in surface disturbance or changes in the structure of vegetation that degrades wilderness characteristics. However, fuels treatments and prescribed fire may reduce the potential for future larger-scale wildfires that would result in adverse impacts to primitive and unconfined recreation in LWCs before an area recovers. The adverse impacts to wilderness characteristics in these lands would increase with the amount of treatment.
Under Alternative A, the BLM would manage visual resources in LWCs primarily as VRM Class IV (Table 4-16). In areas managed as VRM Class IV, modification of the natural environment would be allowed (via increased tolerance for surface disturbance and fewer requirements related to facility location and other types of mitigating design modifications) and there would be adverse impacts to the identified wilderness characteristics of the areas.
Alternative A does not include specific management for LWCs or make Wild Land designations..
Under Alternative B, the BLM would manage designated all LWCs as Wild Lands (571,288 acres) and would manage these areas for naturalness, outstanding opportunities for solitude, and primitive and unconfined recreation and would prescribe management actions that affect various resources, resource uses, and special designations.
Under Alternative B, surface disturbance in Wild Lands would be less than under alternatives A, C, and D. Management actions under Alternative B are projected to result in approximately 46 percent less short-term and 31 percent less long-term surface disturbance on BLM-administered land than Alternative A. Restrictions on minerals, ROWs, vegetative treatments, and other resource uses in Wild Lands under Alternative B would further reduce the potential for surface disturbance in these areas more than the other alternatives. Reductions in surface disturbance would result in beneficial impacts to the wilderness characteristics in these lands by leaving these areas in a more natural, unmodified state.
Management for Wild Lands under Alternative B designed to protect naturalness and outstanding opportunities for solitude and primitive and unconfined recreation would result in adverse impacts to other resource uses as described below, but would be beneficial to the protection of wilderness characteristics. Restrictions on mineral development, timber harvest practices, mechanical vegetation treatments, motorized vehicle use, ROWs, and rangeland improvements under Alternative B would result in beneficial impacts by maintaining wilderness characteristics in these lands. However, these restrictions may displace some resource uses and activities, such as minerals development or motorized vehicle use, which would potentially adversely affect resources (e.g., wildlife and vegetation) in areas outside of Wild Lands.
Under Alternative B, Wild Lands are administratively unavailable for oil and gas and solid mineral leasing, and closed to mineral materials disposal. This management would result in greater adverse impacts to these resources than the other alternatives (see Table 4-16), particularly in areas with development potential, because new leasing or disposal would be prohibited. The BLM would consider measures to minimize impacts to wilderness characteristics in project level analysis. Wild Lands encumbered with valid existing rights would be impacted where development of those rights is incompatible with protection of wilderness characteristics.
Under Alternative B, Wild Lands also are closed to commercial and personal-use wood cutting, which may adversely affect forest products by reducing the area open to timber harvest compared to the other alternatives.
Under Alternative B, the BLM limits motorized vehicle use to designated roads and trails in all Wild Lands and places more restrictions on motorized vehicle use than the other alternatives (see Table 4-16), adversely affecting travel opportunities. These lands also are closed to new road construction under Alternative B, which may adversely affect CTTM by restricting the development of new routes if access issues are discovered.
Under Alternative B, the BLM would manage Wild Lands as ROW avoidance/mitigation areas, which would result in greater adverse impacts to the ability to grant ROW authorizations on these lands compared to the other alternatives (see Table 4-16).
Special designations cover a larger percentage of the Planning Area under Alternative B compared to the other alternatives. Special designations would benefit Wild Lands over a larger area than the other alternatives by restricting resource uses that could adversely affect naturalness and outstanding opportunities for solitude and primitive and unconfined recreation. Under Alternative B, the area of WSR suitable waterway segment overlap is the same as under Alternative A, while acres of ACEC and Wild Lands overlap would be greater than under Alternative A (104,208 acres). However, because the characteristics of these areas are already protected under Alternative B, the magnitude of the impact would be smaller than under alternatives A and D.
Under Alternative B, resources adversely affected by surface-disturbing activities or motorized vehicle use would benefit from the restriction on these activities in the Wild Lands. Resources that would benefit from management under this alternative include recreation and related opportunities and experiences derived from primitive-based settings, soil, water, wildlife and special status species, and cultural and visual resources. Under Alternative B, the BLM would manage all Wild Lands as VRM Class I or II. Alternative B manages for more VRM Class I and II in these lands than any other alternative. A larger area of more restrictive VRM Class I and II areas would affect the design and occurrence of actions that result in surface disturbance, and would provide increased protection for wilderness characteristics compared to the other alternatives.
Fire and fuels management would be more restricted in Wild Lands under Alternative B than under the other alternatives. Although the BLM allows prescribed fire in these lands, it allows mechanical vegetation treatments only to restore natural resource systems. Because fuels reduction through thinning is more restricted than under other alternatives, there may be more risk of catastrophic wildfires in these areas compared to other alternatives.
Surface disturbance would result in impacts to wilderness characteristics in inventoried LWCs similar to Alternative A, although to a greater extent because Alternative C involves more projected surface disturbance. Management actions under Alternative C are projected to result in approximately 80 percent more short-term (245,783 acres) and 164 percent more long-term (41,545 acres) surface disturbance on BLM-administered land than Alternative A. Adverse impacts are likely to increase with the amount of total Planning Area surface disturbance, because LWCs do not have any special management prescriptions under Alternative C. Adverse impacts to wilderness characteristics from surface disturbance in these lands would be the greatest under Alternative C.
The impacts from resource uses to wilderness characteristics in LWCs under Alternative C would generally be similar in extent to Alternative A and would result from the same types of resource use. Table 4-16 summarizes acreages and allocations associated with resources and resource uses in these lands that have the potential to affect wilderness characteristics. Management under Alternative C includes the largest areas open to mineral materials disposal and available for mineral leasing, and the second largest area open to ROW authorizations and where motorized vehicle use is limited to existing roads and trails. Alternative C is generally the least restrictive alternative in terms of allowable resource uses and resource protection, and although the extent of impacts would be similar to Alternative A, the intensity of these impacts under this alternative may result in the greatest adverse impacts to wilderness characteristics in inventoried lands.
Special designations that overlap LWCs may result in beneficial impacts to wilderness characteristics by restricting resource uses and surface-disturbing activities or requiring additional mitigation. Due to the limited extent of lands with special designations under Alternative C, the potential beneficial impacts to wilderness characteristics in these lands would be lowest under this alternative. Under Alternative C, 4,857 acres of ACEC designations overlap LWCs.
Impacts to wilderness characteristics in LWCs from fire and fuels management would result in impacts similar to those under Alternative A, although to a greater extent. In general, the extent and intensity of fuels treatment under Alternative C are greater than under the other alternatives. Adverse impacts to wilderness characteristics in these lands would be proportional to the amount of treatment.
Under Alternative C, LWCs include more VRM Class III and IV areas and less VRM Class I and II areas than any other alternative. Visual management in these lands under Alternative C would have the greatest potential to result in adverse impacts to wilderness characteristics compared to the other alternatives.
Alternative C does not include specific management for LWCs.
Under Alternative D, the BLM would designate nine LWCs as Wild Lands (52,485 acres) and would manage these areas for naturalness, outstanding opportunities for solitude, and primitive and unconfined recreation and would prescribe management actions that affect various resources, resource uses, and special designations. Similar to alternatives A and C, LWCs not managed as Wild Lands under Alternative D would not be managed to preserve the areas’ wilderness characteristics. Some Alternative D Wild Lands are smaller than the original inventoried LWC area to improve manageability considering valid existing rights, land status within and surrounding the LWC, and other elements of Alternative D, such as ACECs, Management Areas, and Recreation Management Areas.
Similar to Alternative A, surface disturbance would result in adverse impacts to wilderness characteristics in LWCs not designated as Wild Lands, although to a slightly greater extent because Alternative D involves more projected surface disturbance. Management actions under Alternative D are projected to result in approximately 3 percent more short-term (140,508 acres) and 17 percent more long-term (18,443 acres) surface disturbance on BLM-administered land than Alternative A. Adverse impacts are likely to increase with the amount of total Planning Area surface disturbance, because the majority of LWCs do not have any special management prescriptions under Alternative D.
In LWCs designated as Wild Lands, restrictions on minerals, ROWs, vegetative treatments, and other resource uses under Alternative D would reduce the potential for surface disturbance in these areas, and would result in impacts similar to Alternative B, though to a lesser extent as less acreage is designated as Wild Lands.
LWCs not designated as Wild Lands under Alternative D would, similar to alternatives A and C, not constrain resource uses, which may result in adverse impacts to wilderness characteristics in these lands; however, similar to Alternative B, this alternative contains more restrictive management for nine LWCs designated as Wild Lands. Table 4-16 summarizes acreages and allocations associated with resources and resource uses in LWCs and Wild Lands that have the potential to affect these characteristics. Management under Alternative D includes the second smallest amount of area open to mineral materials disposal and the second smallest amount of area available for mineral leasing. ROW authorizations would be constrained in LWCs and Wild Lands through the designation of ROW avoidance/mitigation and exclusion areas on 458,150 acres, and the second most area would be limited to designated roads and trails for motorized vehicle use. Recreation management areas where they contain LWCs and/or Wild Lands, especially the Absaroka Mountain Foothills SRMA and Tatman Mountains RMZ containing 3,043 and 24,017 acres, respectively, would beneficially affect wilderness characteristics by preserving the back country RSCCs in these areas.
In general, management of resource uses in LWCs under Alternative D is similar to that under Alternative A, although more mitigation and reclamation requirements under Alternative D would limit impacts to wilderness characteristics. Management of resource uses in Wild Lands would be similar, though less restrictive, than management under Alternative B and would protect wilderness characteristics in these areas.
Several special designations overlap LWCs and/or Wild Lands under Alternative D. In LWCs not designated as Wild Lands, restrictions on surface disturbance and constraints on resource uses from overlapping special designations would limit adverse impacts to wilderness characteristics. These beneficial impacts to LWCs would be similar to those described under Alternative A, although to a greater extent due to the larger area of overlapping ACECs (52,418 acres).
Impacts to wilderness characteristics in LWCs not designated as Wild Lands from fire and fuels management would result in impacts similar to those under Alternative A, while impacts in Wild Lands would be the same as under Alternative B.
Under Alternative D, the BLM would manage more acreage in all LWCs as VRM Class I and II than under alternatives A and C, but less than Alternative B. Wild Lands are managed as VRM Class II under Alternative D, and benefits to wilderness characteristics from this management would be the same as under Alternative B, though to a lesser extent due to the smaller number of designated Wild Lands.