Eugene Record of Decision and Resource Management Plan

Acronyms and Abbreviations

Eugene Record of Decision

Eugene District Resource Management Plan Table of Contents:

- Tables

- Maps

- Appendices

Appendix D
Monitoring and Evaluation


Introduction

The monitoring plan for the RMP is tiered to the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for the SEIS Record of Decision. Since the SEIS Monitoring and Evaluation Plan is not yet fully refined, the RMP Monitoring Plan is not complete. BLM has been and will continue to be a full participant in the development of the SEIS Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. Ongoing BLM effectiveness and validation monitoring will continue where relevant to Resource Management Plan (RMP) direction (e.g., stocking surveys, threatened and endangered species studies, and water quality measurements).

The SEIS and RMP monitoring plans will not identify all the monitoring the Eugene District will do. Activity and project plans may identify monitoring needs of their own.

All Land-Use Allocations

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Protection of SEIS special attention species so as not to elevate their status to any higher level of concern.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are surveys for the species listed in Appendix B conducted before ground-disturbing activities occur?
2. Are protection buffers being provided for specific rare and locally endemic species and other species and other species in habitats identified in the SEIS/ROD?
3. Are the sites of amphibians, mammals, bryophytes, mollusks, vascular plants, fungi, lichens, and arthropod species listed in Appendix B being protected?
4. Are the sites of amphibians, mammals, bryophytes, mollusks, vascular plants, fungi, lichens, and arthropod species listed in Appendix B being surveyed as directed in the SEIS/ROD?
5. Are high priority sites for species management being identified?
6. Are general regional surveys being conducted to acquire additional information and to determine necessary levels of protection for arthropods and fungi species that were not classed as rare and endemic, bryophytes, and lichens?

Monitoring Requirements

1. At least 20 percent of all management actions will be examined prior to project initiation and reexamined following project completion to determine if surveys are conducted for species listed in Appendix B, protection buffers are provided for specific rare and locally endemic species and other species in habitats identified in the SEIS/ROD, and sites of species listed in Appendix B are protected.
2. The Annual Program Summary will address Implementation Questions 4, 5, and 6.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are measures taken to protect the SEIS special attention species effective?
2. Is the forest ecosystem functioning as a productive and sustainable ecological unit?

Monitoring Requirements

Deferred to SEIS Monitoring Plan.

Riparian Reserves

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

See Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives.

Provision of habitat for special status and SEIS special attention species.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are watershed analyses being completed before on-the-ground actions are initiated in Riparian Reserves?
2. Is the width and integrity of the Riparian Reserves being maintained? (For Example, did the conditions that existed before management activities change in ways that are not in accordance with the SEIS/ROD Standards and Guidelines, and RMP management direction?)
3. What silvicultural practices are being applied to control stocking, reestablish and manage stands, and acquire desired vegetation characteristics needed to attain Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives?
4. Are management activities in Riparian Reserves consistent with SEIS/ROD Standards and Guidelines, RMP management direction, and Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives?
5. Are new structures and improvements in Riparian Reserves constructed to minimize the diversion of natural hydrologic flow paths, reduce the amount of sediment delivery into the stream, protect fish and wildlife populations, and accommodate the 100-year flood?
6. a. Are all mining structures, support facilities, and roads located outside the Riparian Reserves?
  b. Are those located within the Riparian Reserves meeting the objectives of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy?
  c. Are all solid and sanitary waste facilities excluded from Riparian Reserves or located, monitored, and reclaimed in accordance with SEIS/ROD Standards and Guidelines and RMP management direction?
7. Are new recreation facilities within the Riparian Reserves designed to meet and, where practicable, contribute to Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives? Are mitigation measures initiated where existing recreation facilities are not meeting Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives?

Monitoring Requirements

1. The files on each year's on-the-ground actions will be checked annually to ensure that watershed analyses were completed prior to project initiation and to ensure the concerns identified in the watershed analysis were addressed in the project's Environmental Assessment.
2. At least 20 percent of management activities within each Resource Area will be examined prior to project initiation and reexamined following project completion, to determine whether the width and integrity of the Riparian Reserves were maintained.
3. The Annual Program Summary will report what silvicultural practices are being applied in order to attain Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives.
4. At least 20 percent of the activities that are conducted or authorized within Riparian Reserves will be reviewed in order to identify whether the actions were consistent with the SEIS/ROD Standards and Guidelines, RMP management direction, and Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. In addition to reporting the results of this monitoring, the Annual Program Summary will also summarize the types of activities that were conducted or authorized within Riparian Reserves.
5. All new structures and improvements within a Riparian Reserve will be monitored during and after construction to ensure that it was constructed to minimize the diversion of natural hydrologic flow paths, reduce the amount of sediment delivery into the stream, protect fish and wildlife populations, and accommodate the 100-year flood.
6. All approved mining Plans of Operations will be reviewed to determine the following:
  a. Both a reclamation plan and bond were required.
  b. Structures, support facilities, and roads were located outside of Riparian Reserves, or in compliance with Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives if located inside the Riparian Reserve.
  c. If solid and sanitary waste facilities were excluded from Riparian Reserves or located, monitored, and reclaimed in accordance with RMP management direction.
7. The Annual Program Summary will examine the status of evaluations of existing recreational facilities inside Riparian Reserves to ensure that Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives are met. The Summary will also report on the status of the mitigation measures initiated where the Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives cannot be met.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Is the health of Riparian Reserves improving?
2. Are management actions designed to rehabilitate Riparian Reserves effective?

Monitoring Requirements

Deferred to SEIS Monitoring Plan.

Late-Successional Reserves

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Development and maintenance of a functional, interacting, late-successional, and old growth forest ecosystem in Late-Successional Reserves.

  • Protection and enhancement of habitat for late-successional and old growth forest-related species including the northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. What is the status of the preparation of assessment and fire plans for Late-Successional Reserves?
2. What activities were conducted or authorized within Late-Successional Reserves, and how were they compatible with the objectives of the Late-Successional Reserve assessment? Were the activities consistent with SEIS/ROD Standards and Guidelines, RMP management direction, Regional Ecosystem Office (REO) review requirements, and the Late-Successional Reserve assessment?
3. What is the status of development and implementation of plans to eliminate or control nonnative species that adversely impact late-successional objectives?

Monitoring Requirements

The Annual Program Summary will address Implementation Questions 1-3.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are forest management activities (e.g., Special Forest Product harvesting) within Late-Successional Reserves compatible with the goal of developing and maintaining a functional, interacting, late-successional, and old growth forest ecosystem?
2. Does the harvest of Special Forest Products have adverse effects on Late-Successional Reserve objectives?
3. Is a functional, interacting, late-successional ecosystem maintained where adequate and restored where inadequate?
4. Did the silvicultural treatments benefit the creation and maintenance of late-successional conditions?
5. What is the relationship between levels of management intervention and the health and maintenance of late-successional and old growth ecosystems?

Monitoring Requirements

Deferred to SEIS Monitoring Plan

Adaptive Management Areas

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Utilization of Adaptive Management Areas (AMAs) for the development and application of new management approaches for the integration and achievement of ecological health, and economic and other social objectives.

  • Provision of well-distributed, late-successional habitat outside reserves; retention of key structural elements of late-successional forests on lands subjected to regeneration harvest; restoration and protection of Riparian Zones; and provision of a stable timber supply.

Implementation Monitoring

Question

Are the AMA plans being developed, and do they establish future desired conditions?

Monitoring Requirements

The Annual Program Summary will address Implementation Question 1.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Deferred to SEIS Monitoring Plan and individual AMA management plans.

Matrix

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Production of a stable supply of timber and other forest commodities.

  • Maintenance of important ecological functions, such as dispersal of organisms, carryover of some species from one stand to the next, and maintenance of ecologically valuable structural components such as down logs, snags, and large trees.

  • Assurance that forests in the Matrix provide for connectivity between Late-Successional Reserves.

  • Provision of habitat for a variety of organisms associated with early and late-successional forests.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are suitable numbers of snags, coarse woody debris, and green trees being left in a manner that meets the needs of species and provides for ecological functions in harvested areas as called for in the SEIS/ROD Standards and Guidelines, and RMP management direction?
2. Are timber sales being designed to meet ecosystem goals for the Matrix?
3. Are late-successional stands being retained in fifth-field watersheds in which Federal forest lands have 15 percent or less late-successional forest?

Monitoring Requirements

1. Each year at least 20 percent of regeneration harvest timber sales in each Resource Area will be selected for examination by pre and post-harvest (and after site preparation) inventories to determine snag and green tree numbers, heights, diameters, and distribution within harvest units. The measure of distribution of snags and green trees will be the percent in the upper, middle, and lower thirds of the sale units monitored. Snags and green trees left following timber harvest activities (including site preparation for reforestation) will be compared to those that were marked prior to harvest.

The same timber sales will also be inventoried pre and post-harvest to determine if SEIS/ROD and RMP down log retention direction has been followed.

2. At least 20 percent of the files on each year's timber sales will be reviewed annually to determine if ecosystem goals were addressed in the silvicultural prescriptions.
3. All proposed regeneration harvest timber sales in watersheds with less than 15 percent late-successional forest remaining will be reviewed prior to sale to ensure that a watershed analysis has been completed.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are stands growing at a rate that will produce the predicted yields?
2. Are forests in the Matrix providing for connectivity between Late-Successional Reserves?

Monitoring Requirements

Deferred to the SEIS Monitoring Plan.

Air Quality

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards, and goals for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration and the Oregon Visibility Protection and Smoke Management Plan.

  • Maintenance and enhancement of air quality and visibility in a manner consistent with the Clean Air Act and the State Implementation Plan.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. Were efforts made to minimize the amount of particulate emissions from prescribed burns?
2. Are dust abatement measures used during construction activities and on roads during BLM timber harvest operations and other BLM commodity hauling activities?
3. Are conformity determinations being prepared prior to activities that may contribute to a new violation of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, increase the frequency or severity of an existing violation, or delay the timely attainment of a standard?

Monitoring Requirements

1. Each year at least 20 percent of prescribed burn projects will be randomly selected for monitoring to assess what efforts were made to minimize particulate emissions, and to assess whether the environmental analysis that preceded the decision to burn addressed the questions set forth in the SEIS discussion of Emission Monitoring (pgs. 3 & 4-100).
2. Each year at least 20 percent of the construction activities and commodity hauling activities will be selected for monitoring to determine if dust abatement measures were implemented.
3. The Annual Program Summary will address Implementation Question 3.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. What techniques were the most effective in minimizing the amount of particulate emissions from prescribed burns?
2. Are BLM prescribed burns contributing to intrusions into Class I areas or nonattainment areas?
3. Of the intrusions that the BLM is reported to be responsible for, what was the cause and what can be done to minimize future occurrences?
4. Are BLM prescribed underburns causing adverse air quality impacts to rural communities?
5. Are prescribed fires decreasing the actual or potential impacts from wildfire emissions?

Monitoring Requirements

Deferred to SEIS Monitoring Plan.

Water and Soils

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Restoration and maintenance of the ecological health of watersheds (see Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives).

  • Compliance with State water quality requirements to restore and maintain water quality to protect recognized beneficial uses.

  • Improvement and/or maintenance of soil productivity.

  • Reduction of existing road mileage within Key Watersheds.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are site-specific Best Management Practices (BMP) identified as applicable during interdisciplinary review and carried forward into project design and execution?
2. What watershed analyses have been or are being performed? Are watershed analyses being performed prior to management activities in Key Watersheds?
3. What is the status of identification of instream flow needs for the maintenance of channel conditions, aquatic habitat, and riparian resources?
4. What watershed restoration projects are being developed and implemented?
5. What fuel treatment and fire suppression strategies have been developed to meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives?
6. What is the status of development of road or transportation management plans to meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives?
7. What is the status of preparation of criteria and standards that govern the operation, maintenance, and design for construction and reconstruction of roads?
8. What is the status of the reconstruction of roads and associated drainage features identified in watershed analysis as posing a substantial risk? What is the status of closure or elimination of roads to further Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives and to reduce the overall road mileage within Key Watersheds? If funding is insufficient to implement road mileage reductions, are construction and authorizations through discretionary permits denied to prevent a net increase in road mileage in Key Watersheds?
9. What is the status of review of ongoing research in Key Watersheds to ensure that significant risk to the watershed does not exist?
10. What is the status of evaluation of recreation, interpretive, and user-enhancement activities/facilities to determine their effects on the watershed? What is the status of eliminating or relocating these activities/facilities when found to be in conflict with Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives?
11. What is the status of cooperation with other agencies in the development of watershed-based Research Management Plans and other cooperative agreements to meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives? What is the status of cooperation with other agencies to identify and eliminate wild ungulate impacts that are inconsistent with attainment of Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives?

Monitoring Requirements

1. Each year at least 20 percent of the timber sales and other relevant actions stratified by management category will be randomly selected for monitoring to determine whether Best Management Practices were implemented as prescribed. The selection of management actions to be monitored will be based on beneficial uses likely to be impacted and for which BMPs are being prescribed.
2. Compliance checks will be completed for all agreements entered into with providers of municipal water.
3. The Annual Program Summary will address Implementation Questions 3-11.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Is the ecosystem function of the watersheds improving?
2. Are State water quality criteria being met? When State water quality criteria are met, are the beneficial uses of riparian areas protected?
3. Are prescribed Best Management Practices maintaining or restoring water quality consistent with basin specific State water quality criteria for protection of specified beneficial uses?

Monitoring Requirements

Deferred to SEIS Monitoring Plan

Wildlife Habitat

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Maintenance of biological diversity and ecosystem health to contribute to healthy wildlife populations.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are suitable (diameter, length, and numbers) snags, coarse woody debris, and green trees being left in a manner that meets the needs of species and provides for ecological functions in harvested areas, as called for in the SEIS/ROD Standards and Guidelines, and RMP management direction?
2. Are special habitats being identified and protected?
3. What is the status of designing and implementing wildlife habitat restoration projects?
4. What is the status of designing and constructing wildlife interpretive and other user-enhancement facilities?

Monitoring Requirements

1. Each year at least 20 percent of regeneration harvest timber sales in each Resource Area will be examined by pre and post-harvest (and after site preparation) inventories to determine snag and green tree numbers, heights, diameters, and distribution within harvest units. The measure of distribution of snags and green trees will be the percent in the upper, middle, and lower thirds of the sale units monitored. Snags and green trees left following timber harvest activities (including site preparation for reforestation) will be compared to those that were marked prior to harvest.

The same timber sales will also be inventoried pre and post-harvest to determine if SEIS/ROD and RMP down log retention directions have been followed.

2. Each year at least 20 percent of BLM actions within each Resource Area on lands including or near special habitats will be examined to determine whether special habitats were protected.
3. The Annual Program Summary will address Implementation Questions 3 and 4.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are habitat conditions for late-successional forest associated species maintained where adequate, and restored where inadequate?
2. Are the snags, green trees, and coarse woody debris being left achieving the habitat necessary to attain the desired population at a relevant landscape level?
3. Are BLM actions intended to protect special habitats actually protecting the habitat? Is the protection of special habitats helping to protect the species population?
4. What are the effects of management on species richness (numbers and diversity)?

Monitoring Requirements

Deferred to SEIS Monitoring Plan, which will address a variety of wildlife species such as amphibians, mollusks, neotropical migratory birds, etc.

Fish Habitat

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • See Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives.

  • Maintenance or enhancement of the fisheries potential of streams and other waters consistent with BLM's Anadromous Fish Habitat Management on Public Lands guidance, BLM's Fish and Wildlife 2000 Plan, the Bring Back the Natives initiative, and other nationwide initiatives.

  • Rehabilitation and protection of at-risk fish stocks and their habitat.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are at-risk fish species and stocks being identified?
2. Are fish habitat restoration and enhancement activities being designed and implemented that contribute to attainment of Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives?
3. Are potential adverse impacts to fish habitat and fish stocks being identified?

Monitoring Requirements

1. The Annual Program Summary will report on the status of watershed analysis to identify at-risk fish species and stocks, their habitat within individual watersheds, and restoration project needs.
2. The Annual Program Summary will report on the status of the design and implementation of fish habitat restoration and habitat activities.
3. The Annual Program Summary will report on the status of cooperation with Federal, Tribal, and State fish management agencies to identify and eliminate impacts associated with poaching, harvest, habitat manipulation, and fish stocking that threaten the continued existence and distribution of native fish stocks inhabiting Federal lands. The Summary will also identify any management activities or fish interpretive and other user-enhancement facilities that have detrimental effects on native fish stocks.
4. At least 20 percent of the files on each year's timber sales, and other relevant actions, will be reviewed annually to evaluate documentation regarding fish species and habitat and related recommendations and decisions in light of policy and SEIS/ROD Standards and Guidelines, and RMP management direction. If mitigation is required, review will ascertain whether such mitigation was incorporated in the authorization document and the actions will be reviewed on the ground after completion to ascertain whether the mitigation was carried out as planned.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Is the ecological health of the aquatic ecosystems recovering or sufficiently maintained to support stable and well-distributed populations of fish species and stocks?
2. Is fish habitat, in terms of quantity and quality of rearing pools, coarse woody debris, water temperature, and width to depth ratio, being maintained or improved as predicted?
3. Are desired habitat conditions for listed, sensitive, and at-risk fish stocks maintained where adequate and restored where inadequate?

Monitoring Requirements

Deferred to SEIS Monitoring Plan

Special Status and SEIS Special Attention Species Habitat

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Protection, management, and conservation of Federal listed and proposed species and their habitats to achieve their recovery in compliance with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Bureau special status species policies.

  • Conservation of Federal Candidate and Bureau Sensitive species and their habitats, so as not to contribute to the need to list and recover the species.

  • Conservation of State Listed species and their habitats to assist the State in achieving management objectives.

  • Maintenance or restoration of community structure, species composition, and ecological processes of special status plant and animal habitat.

  • Protection of Bureau Assessment species and SEIS special attention species, so as not to elevate their status to any higher level of concern.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are Special Status Species being addressed in deciding whether or not to go forward with forest management and other actions? During forest management and other actions that may disturb Special Status Species, are steps taken to adequately mitigate disturbances?
2. Are the actions identified in plans to recover species being implemented in a timely manner?
3. What coordination with other agencies has occurred in the management of Special Status Species?
4. What land acquisitions occurred or are under way to facilitate the management and recovery of Special Status Species?
5. What site specific plans for the recovery of Special Status Species were or are being developed?
6. What is the status of analysis that ascertains species requirements or enhances the recovery or survival of a species?
7. What is the status of efforts to maintain or restore the community structure, species composition, and ecological processes of special status plant and animal habitat?

Monitoring Requirements

1. Each year at least 20 percent of all management actions will be selected for examination prior to project initiation and reexamined following project completion to evaluate documentation regarding Special Status Species and related recommendations and decisions in light of ESA requirements, policy, and SEIS/ROD Standards and Guidelines, and RMP management direction. If mitigation is required, review will ascertain whether such mitigation is incorporated in the authorization document,and the actions will be reviewed on the ground after completion to ascertain whether the mitigation was carried out as planned.
2. Review implementation schedule and actions taken annually to ascertain if the actions to recover species were carried out as planned.
3. The Annual Program Summary will address Implementation Questions 3-7.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are trends for Special Status Species meeting the objectives of mitigation and/or conservation actions?
2. Have any Federal Candidate, Bureau Assessment, or Bureau Sensitive species been elevated to higher levels of concern due to BLM management?
3. Were desired habitat conditions for the northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet maintained where adequate and restored where inadequate?

Monitoring Requirements

Deferred to SEIS Monitoring Plan, which will address a variety of special status species including marbled murrelet, bald eagle, northern spotted owl, anadromous fish species.

Special Areas

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Maintenance, protection, and/or restoration of the relevant and important values of the special areas that include Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), Outstanding Natural Areas (ONA), Research Natural Areas (RNA), and Environmental Education Areas (EEA).

  • Provision of recreation uses and environmental education in ONAs. Management of uses to prevent damage to those values that make the area outstanding.

  • Preservation, protection, or restoration of native species composition and ecological processes of biological communities in RNAs.

  • Provision and maintenance of environmental education opportunities in EEAs. Management of uses to minimize disturbances of educational values.

  • Retention of existing Research Natural Areas and existing Areas of Critical Environmental Concern that meet the test for continued designation. Retention of other special areas. Provision of new special areas where needed to maintain or protect important values.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are BLM actions and BLM authorized actions/uses near or within special areas consistent with RMP objectives and management direction for special areas?
2. What is the status of the preparation, revision, and implementation of ACEC management plans?
3. Are interpretive programs and recreation uses being developed and encouraged in ONAs? Are the outstanding values of the ONAs being protected from damage?
4. What environmental education and research initiatives and programs are occurring in the RNAs and EEAs?
5. Are existing BLM actions and BLM authorized actions and uses not consistent with management direction for special areas being eliminated or relocated?
6. Are actions being identified that are needed to maintain or restore the important values of the special areas? Are the actions being implemented?
7. Are protection buffers being provided for specific rare and locally endemic species and other species in the SEIS/ROD?

Monitoring Requirements

1. Annually at least 20 percent of the files on all actions and research proposals within and adjacent to special areas will be reviewed to determine whether the possibility of impacts on ACEC values were considered, and whether any mitigation identified as important for maintenance of ACEC values is required. If mitigation was required, the relevant actions will be reviewed on the ground after completion to ascertain whether it was actually implemented.
2. The Annual Program Summary will address Implementation Questions 2 through 7.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are the implemented management actions designed to protect the values of the special areas effective?
2. Are the special areas managed to restore or prevent the loss of outstanding values and minimize disturbance?

Monitoring Requirements

1. Each special area will be monitored at least every 3 years to determine if the values for which it was designated are being maintained.
2. Each ACEC where proactive management actions have been implemented will be monitored annually for the first 3 years and after that every 3 years or until objectives are met, to determine if these actions met their objectives.

Cultural Resources Including Native American Values

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Identification of cultural resource localities for public, scientific, and cultural heritage purposes.

  • Conservation and protection of cultural resource values for future generations.

  • Provision of information on long-term environmental change and past interactions between humans and the environment.

  • Fulfillment of responsibilities to appropriate Native American groups regarding heritage and religious concerns.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are cultural resources being addressed in deciding whether or not to go forward with forest management and other actions? During forest management and other actions that may disturb cultural resources, are steps taken to adequately mitigate disturbances?
2. What mechanisms have been developed to describe past landscapes and the role of humans in shaping those landscapes?
3. What efforts are being made to work with Native American groups to accomplish cultural resource objectives and achieve goals outlined in existing memoranda of understanding and develop additional memoranda as needs arise?
4. What public education and interpretive programs were developed to promote the appreciation of cultural resources?

Monitoring Requirements

1. At least 20 percent of the files on each year's timber sales and other relevant actions (e.g., rights-of-way, and instream structures) will be reviewed annually to evaluate documentation regarding cultural resources and Native American values and decisions in light of requirements, policy, SEIS/ROD Standards and Guidelines, and RMP management direction. If mitigation were required, review will ascertain whether such mitigation was incorporated in the authorization document, and the actions will be reviewed on the ground after completion to ascertain whether the mitigation was carried out as planned.
2. The Annual Program Summary will address Implementation Questions 2-4.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are sites of religious and cultural heritage adequately protected?
2. Do Native American groups have access to and use of forest species, resources, and places important for cultural, subsistence, or economic reasons, particularly those identified in treaties?

Monitoring Requirements

1. All cultural resource sites, where management and/or mitigation measures are utilized to protect the resource, will be monitored at least once a year to determine if the measures were effective.

The balance is deferred to SEIS Monitoring Plan.

Visual Resources

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Preservation or retention of the existing character of landscapes on BLM administered lands allocated for VRM Class II management; partial retention of the existing character on lands allocated for VRM Class III management; and major modification of the existing character of some lands allocated for VRM Class IV management.

  • Continuation of emphasis on management of scenic resources in selected high-use areas to retain or preserve scenic quality.

Implementation Monitoring

Question

Are visual resource design features and mitigation methods being followed during timber sales and other substantial actions in Class II and III areas?

Monitoring Requirements

Twenty percent of the files for timber sales and other substantial projects in VRM Class II or III areas will be reviewed to ascertain whether relevant design features or mitigating measures were included.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are timber sales and other major actions in Class II and Class III areas meeting or exceeding Visual Resource Management (VRM) objectives?
2. Are Visual Resource Management objectives being met consistently over long periods of time in Class II management areas?

Monitoring Requirements

1. Each year all timber sales and other selected projects in VRM Class II areas and at least 20 percent of sales or projects in Class III areas that have special design features, or mitigating measures for visual resource protection, will be selected for monitoring to evaluate the effectiveness of the practices used to conserve visual resources.
2. In VRM Class II management areas, where 2 or more sales or actions have occurred, impacts will be monitored at a minimum interval of 5 years.

Wild and Scenic Rivers

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Protection of the Outstandingly Remarkable Values (ORV) of designated components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System through the maintenance and enhancement of the natural integrity of river-related values.

  • Protection of the ORVs of eligible/suitable Wild and Scenic Rivers and the maintenance or enhancement of the highest tentative classification pending resolution of suitability and/or designation.

  • Protection of the natural integrity of river-related values for the maintenance or enhancement of the highest tentative classification determination for rivers found eligible or studied for suitability.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are BLM actions and BLM authorized actions consistent with protection of the ORVs of designated suitable and eligible, but not studied, rivers?
2. Are existing plans being revised to conform to Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives? Are revised plans being implemented?

Monitoring Requirements

1. Annually the files on all actions and research proposals within and adjacent to Wild and Scenic River corridors will be reviewed to determine whether the possibility of impacts on the Outstandingly Remarkable Values were considered, and whether any mitigation identified as important for maintenance of the values was required. If mitigation were required, the relevant actions will be reviewed on the ground after completion to ascertain whether it was actually implemented.
2. The Annual Program Summary report will summarize progress on preparation and revision of Wild and Scenic River management plans, their conformance with the Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives, and the degree to which these plans have been implemented.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are the ORVs for which the Wild and Scenic Rivers were designated being maintained?
2. Are the ORVs of the rivers that were found suitable or eligible, but not studied, protected?

Monitoring Requirements

Each Wild and Scenic River that was found suitable or eligible, but was not studied, will be monitored at least once a year to determine if the ORVs are being maintained.

Rural Interface Areas

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Consideration of the interests of adjacent and nearby rural landowners, including residents, during analysis, planning, and monitoring related to managed Rural Interface Areas (RIA). (These interests include personal health and safety, improvements to property, and quality of life.)

  • Determination of how landowners might be or are affected by activities on BLM administered land.

Implementation Monitoring

Question

Are design features and mitigation measures developed and implemented to avoid/minimize impacts to health, life, property, and quality of life and to minimize the possibility of conflicts between private and Federal land management?

Monitoring Requirements

Each year at least 20 percent of all actions within the identified Rural Interface Areas will be selected for examination to determine if special project design features and mitigation measures were included and implemented as planned.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Question

Are the RIA design features and mitigation measures effective in minimizing impacts to health, life, property, and quality of life?

Monitoring Requirement

Each year at least 20 percent of actions within the identified RIAs that had design features or mitigation measures will be selected for examination following completion to assess the effectiveness of the action.

Socioeconomic Conditions

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Contribution to local, State, National, and international economies through sustainable use of BLM managed lands and resources and use of innovative contracting and other implementation strategies.

  • Provision of amenities for the enhancement of communities as places to live and work.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. What innovative strategies and programs have been developed through coordination with State and local governments to support local economies and enhance local communities?
2. Are RMP implementation strategies being identified that support local economies?
3. What is the status of planning and developing amenities (such as recreation and wildlife viewing facilities) that enhance local communities?

Monitoring Requirements

The Annual Program Summary will address Implementation Questions 1, 2, and 3.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. What level of local employment is supported by BLM timber sales and forest management practices?
2. What were O&C and CBWR payments to counties?

Monitoring Requirements

Deferred to SEIS Monitoring Plan.

Recreation

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Provision of a wide range of developed and dispersed recreation opportunities that contribute to meeting projected recreation demand within the planning area.

  • Provision of nonmotorized recreational opportunities and creation of additional opportunities consistent with other management objectives.

Implementation Monitoring

Question

What is the status of the development and implementation of recreation plans?

Monitoring Requirement

The Annual Program Summary will address Implementation Question 1.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Based on the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) supply and demand data and public comments, is the range of recreation opportunities on BLM lands (i.e., roaded vs. unroaded) meeting public needs?
2. Are BLM developed recreation facilities meeting public needs and expectations, including facility condition and visitor safety considerations?
3. Are Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) designations adequate to protect resource values while providing appropriate motorized vehicle recreation opportunities?

Monitoring Requirements

1. Each Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA) will be monitored at least every 3 years to determine if the types of recreation opportunities being provided are appropriate.
2. All developed recreation sites will be monitored annually to determine if facilities are being properly managed and all deficiencies documented.
3. All OHV designations will be reviewed annually to determine if revisions are necessary to protect resource values and resolve user conflicts.

Timber Resources

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Provision of a sustained yield of timber and other forest products.

  • Reduction of the risk of stand loss due to fires, animals, insects, and diseases.

  • Provision of salvage harvest for timber killed or damaged by events such as wildfire, windstorms, insects, or disease, in a manner consistent with management objectives for other resources.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. By land-use allocation, how do timber sale volumes, harvested acres, and the age and type of regeneration harvest stands compare to the projections in the SEIS/ROD Standards and Guidelines, and RMP management objectives?
2. Were the silvicultural (e.g., planting with genetically selected stock, fertilization, release, and thinning) and forest health practices anticipated in the calculation of the expected sale quantity implemented?

Monitoring Requirements

1. The Annual Program Summary will report both planned and nonplanned volumes sold. The report will also summarize annual and cumulative timber sale volumes, acres to be harvested, and stand ages and types of regeneration harvest for General Forest Management Areas (GFMA), Connectivity/Diversity Blocks, and Adaptive Management Areas stratified to identify them individually.
2. An annual Districtwide report will be prepared to determine if the silvicultural and forest health practices identified and used in the calculation of the ASQ were implemented. This report will be summarized in the Annual Program Summary.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Is reforestation achieving desired stocking?
2. Are stands growing at a rate that will produce the predicted yields?
3. Is the long-term health and productivity of the forest ecosystem being protected in the Matrix?

Monitoring Requirements

First, third, and fifth year surveys will be used to determine if reforestation is meeting reforestation objectives.

The balance is deferred to the SEIS Monitoring Plan.

Special Forest Products

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Production and sale of Special Forest Products (SFP) when demand is present and where actions taken are consistent with primary objectives for the land use allocation.

  • Utilization of the principles of ecosystem management to guide the management and harvest of Special Forest Products.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. Is the sustainability and protection of Special Forest Product resources ensured prior to selling Special Forest Products?
2. What is the status of the development and implementation of specific guidelines for the management of individual Special Forest Products?

Monitoring Requirement

The Annual Program Summary will address Implementation Questions 1 and 2.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Question

Are Special Forest Products being harvested at a sustainable level?

Monitoring Requirements

Deferred to SEIS Monitoring Plan.

Noxious Weeds

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Containment and/or reduction of noxious weed infestations on BLM administered land using an integrated pest management approach to improve natural features.

  • Avoidance of the introduction or spread of noxious weed infestations in all areas.

Implementation Monitoring

Question

Are noxious weed control methods compatible with Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives?

Monitoring Requirement

Review the files of at least 20 percent of each year's noxious weed control applications to determine if noxious weed control methods were compatible with Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Question

Are management actions effectively containing or reducing the extent of noxious weed infestations?

Monitoring Requirement

At least 20 percent of the noxious weed sites subjected to treatment will be monitored to determine if the treatment was effective.

Fire/Fuels Management

Expected Future Conditions and Outputs

  • Provision of the appropriate suppression responses to wildfires in order to meet resource management objectives and minimize the risk of large-scale, high intensity wildfires.

  • Utilization of prescribed fire to meet resource management objectives. (This will include, but not be limited to, fuels management for wildfire hazard reduction, restoration of desired vegetation conditions, management of habitat, and silvicultural treatments.)

  • Adherence to smoke management/air quality standards of the Clean Air Act and State Implementation Plan standards for prescribed burning.

Implementation Monitoring

Questions

1. What is the status of the preparation and implementation of fire management plans for Late-Successional Reserves and Adaptive Management Areas?
2. Have additional analysis and planning been completed to allow some natural fires to burn under prescribed conditions?
3. Do wildfire suppression plans emphasize maintaining late-successional habitat?
4. Are Wildfire Situation Analyses being prepared for wildfires that escape initial attack?
5. What is the status of the interdisciplinary team preparation and implementation of fuel hazard reduction plans?

Monitoring Requirements

The Annual Program Summary will address Implementation Questions 1-5.

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring

Questions

1. Are fire suppression strategies, practices, and activities meeting resource management objectives and concerns?
2. Are prescribed fires applied in a manner that retains the amount of coarse woody debris, snags, and duff at levels determined through watershed analysis?
3. Are fuel profiles being modified to lower the potential of fire ignition and rate of spread,and to protect and support land use allocation objectives by lowering the risk of high intensity, stand-replacing wildfires?

Monitoring Requirements

Deferred to SEIS Monitoring Plan.