Other Features of Value Quality - Revision history

Admin at 20:46, 5 March 2023

2023-03-05T20:46:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:46, 5 March 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<div class="noautonum" style="float:right;width:30%;margin-left:15px;">__TOC__</div>		[[Category:USFS]]
			<div class="noautonum" style="float:right;width:30%;margin-left:15px;">
			<div class="toc">
			<div class="center">[[USFS Wilderness Character Monitoring Technical Guide]]</div>
			[[File:Wilderness character monitoring technical guide - rmrs gtr406.pdf.png\|200px\|thumb\|center]]
			<div class="center">
			'''6 {{ PAGENAME }}'''
			</div>
			</div>
			<br>
			__TOC__
			</div>

	The objective of monitoring the Other Features of Value Quality is to assess how the condition of important features of historical, geologic, scenic, and educational value that are integral to wilderness character are changing. This monitoring focuses on cultural features and other features of value determined to be integral to wilderness character.		The objective of monitoring the Other Features of Value Quality is to assess how the condition of important features of historical, geologic, scenic, and educational value that are integral to wilderness character are changing. This monitoring focuses on cultural features and other features of value determined to be integral to wilderness character.

Admin at 17:43, 3 March 2023

2023-03-03T17:43:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:43, 3 March 2023
Line 3:		Line 3:
	The objective of monitoring the Other Features of Value Quality is to assess how the condition of important features of historical, geologic, scenic, and educational value that are integral to wilderness character are changing. This monitoring focuses on cultural features and other features of value determined to be integral to wilderness character.		The objective of monitoring the Other Features of Value Quality is to assess how the condition of important features of historical, geologic, scenic, and educational value that are integral to wilderness character are changing. This monitoring focuses on cultural features and other features of value determined to be integral to wilderness character.

	Section 2(c) of the Wilderness Act defines wilderness as an area that ~~“may~~ also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value.” Including such features, if they exist and play an integral role to defining the meaning and value of the area as wilderness, can provide a more complete picture of wilderness character. Monitoring this quality focuses on specific, tangible features and how the condition of these features change over time; it does not monitor the values derived from these features. By protecting the physical condition of the features, the values associated with them are likely preserved. The primary challenge with this quality lies in determining which features are truly integral to the character of a particular wilderness (refer to section 6.1 in part 2 for guidance on determining which features are integral to wilderness character).		Section 2(c) of the Wilderness Act defines wilderness as an area that "may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value." Including such features, if they exist and play an integral role to defining the meaning and value of the area as wilderness, can provide a more complete picture of wilderness character. Monitoring this quality focuses on specific, tangible features and how the condition of these features change over time; it does not monitor the values derived from these features. By protecting the physical condition of the features, the values associated with them are likely preserved. The primary challenge with this quality lies in determining which features are truly integral to the character of a particular wilderness (refer to section 6.1 in part 2 for guidance on determining which features are integral to wilderness character).

	There are three important distinctions between this quality and the other four qualities:		There are three important distinctions between this quality and the other four qualities:

Admin at 20:09, 2 March 2023

2023-03-02T20:09:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:09, 2 March 2023
Line 11:		Line 11:
	# Where this quality is used, the overall trend in wilderness character will be based on five qualities instead of four—If the Other Features of Value Quality is used, the overall trend in wilderness character is determined by using all five qualities. Because it will be used in determining the overall trend in wilderness character, local unit staff must carefully consider whether a feature truly defines the wilderness character of an area. This consideration is especially critical if a small number of features are included because the trend in condition of an individual feature may determine the trend in the entire quality, thereby influencing the overall trend in wilderness character.		# Where this quality is used, the overall trend in wilderness character will be based on five qualities instead of four—If the Other Features of Value Quality is used, the overall trend in wilderness character is determined by using all five qualities. Because it will be used in determining the overall trend in wilderness character, local unit staff must carefully consider whether a feature truly defines the wilderness character of an area. This consideration is especially critical if a small number of features are included because the trend in condition of an individual feature may determine the trend in the entire quality, thereby influencing the overall trend in wilderness character.

	Threats to this quality result primarily from direct human actions (e.g., looting or vandalism) and indirect human disturbance (e.g., camping or trail use) that creates unintended adverse effects. Although such damage is often associated with visitor use, other management activities (e.g., fire suppression activities or trail work) could also inadvertently contribute to disturbance. Natural processes also contribute to deterioration in the condition of features over time if there is no intervention.		Threats to this quality result primarily from direct human actions (e.g., looting or vandalism) and indirect human disturbance (e.g., camping or trail use) that creates unintended adverse effects. Although such damage is often associated with visitor use, other management activities (e.g., '''fire suppression''' activities or trail work) could also inadvertently contribute to disturbance. Natural processes also contribute to deterioration in the condition of features over time if there is no intervention.

	For the Other Features of Value Quality, a single monitoring question provides the broad context and two indicators provide the structure for this monitoring (summarized in table 1.6.1).		For the Other Features of Value Quality, a single monitoring question provides the broad context and two indicators provide the structure for this monitoring (summarized in table 1.6.1).
Line 42:		Line 42:
	Two indicators are used to address the monitoring question:		Two indicators are used to address the monitoring question:

	# Deterioration or loss of integral cultural features.		# Deterioration or loss of '''integral cultural features'''.
	# Deterioration or loss of other integral site-specific features of value.		# Deterioration or loss of other '''integral site-specific features of value'''.

	The first indicator focuses on cultural features while the second indicator focuses on other site-specific features, such as geologic, paleontological, and other iconic or significant features a local unit determines are integral to wilderness character. Depending on the features that are integral to a wilderness, either one or both indicators may be used.		The first indicator focuses on cultural features while the second indicator focuses on other site-specific features, such as geologic, paleontological, and other iconic or significant features a local unit determines are integral to wilderness character. Depending on the features that are integral to a wilderness, either one or both indicators may be used.

Admin at 17:18, 1 March 2023

2023-03-01T17:18:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:18, 1 March 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
			<div class="noautonum" style="float:right;width:30%;margin-left:15px;">__TOC__</div>

	The objective of monitoring the Other Features of Value Quality is to assess how the condition of important features of historical, geologic, scenic, and educational value that are integral to wilderness character are changing. This monitoring focuses on cultural features and other features of value determined to be integral to wilderness character.		The objective of monitoring the Other Features of Value Quality is to assess how the condition of important features of historical, geologic, scenic, and educational value that are integral to wilderness character are changing. This monitoring focuses on cultural features and other features of value determined to be integral to wilderness character.

Line 12:		Line 14:

	For the Other Features of Value Quality, a single monitoring question provides the broad context and two indicators provide the structure for this monitoring (summarized in table 1.6.1).		For the Other Features of Value Quality, a single monitoring question provides the broad context and two indicators provide the structure for this monitoring (summarized in table 1.6.1).

	{\| class="wikitable"		{\| class="wikitable"
	\|+ Table 1.6.1—Monitoring question, indicators, measures, and measure type for the Other Features of Value Quality.		\|+ Table 1.6.1—Monitoring question, indicators, measures, and measure type for the Other Features of Value Quality.
Line 26:		Line 29:
	\|-		\|-
	\|}		\|}

	~~<div class="noautonum">__TOC__</div>~~

	== 6.1 Monitoring Question ==		== 6.1 Monitoring Question ==

Admin at 23:58, 28 February 2023

2023-02-28T23:58:43Z

Show changes

Admin at 18:00, 28 February 2023

2023-02-28T18:00:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:00, 28 February 2023
Line 44:		Line 44:
	! Indicator !! Measure !! Measure type		! Indicator !! Measure !! Measure type
	\|-		\|-
	\| Deterioration or loss of		\| Deterioration or loss of integral cultural features \|\| Condition index for cultural features \|\| Required if relevant
	integral cultural features \|\| Condition index for cultural features \|\| Required if relevant
	\|-		\|-
	\| Deterioration or loss of other integral site-specific features of value \|\| Condition index for other features \|\| Required if relevant		\| Deterioration or loss of other integral site-specific features of value \|\| Condition index for other features \|\| Required if relevant

Admin at 17:59, 28 February 2023

2023-02-28T17:59:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:59, 28 February 2023
Line 36:		Line 36:

	{\| class="wikitable"		{\| class="wikitable"
	\|+ ~~Caption text~~		\|+ Table 1.6.1—Monitoring question, indicators, measures, and measure type for the Other Features of Value Quality.
	\|-		\|-
	! ~~Header text !! Header text !! Header text~~		! colspan="3"\| Other Features of Value Quality
	\|-		\|-
	\| ~~Example~~ \|~~\| Example \|\| Example~~		\| colspan="3"\| Monitoring question: What are the trends in unique, site-specific features integral to wilderness character?
	\|-		\|-
	\| ~~Example~~ \|\| ~~Example~~ \|\| ~~Example~~		! Indicator !! Measure !! Measure type
			\|-
			\| Deterioration or loss of
			integral cultural features \|\| Condition index for cultural features \|\| Required if relevant
			\|-
			\| Deterioration or loss of other integral site-specific features of value \|\| Condition index for other features \|\| Required if relevant
	\|-		\|-
	~~\| Example \|\| Example \|\| Example~~
	\|}		\|}

Admin at 00:08, 28 February 2023

2023-02-28T00:08:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:08, 28 February 2023
Line 20:		Line 20:
	qualities:		qualities:

	# Use of this quality is not required—Unlike the other qualities that apply to		# Use of this quality is not required—Unlike the other qualities that apply to every wilderness, the Section 2(c) definition notes that other features may be present; they are not required to be present. However, if features exist that are truly integral to wilderness character, then use of this quality is required.
	every wilderness, the Section 2(c) definition notes that other features may be		# This quality focuses on site-specific features—Unlike the other qualities that apply to the entirety of a wilderness, the features monitored within this quality usually occur only at specific sites, although some features, such as cultural landscapes and certain geological or paleontological formations may occur over larger areas (Cowley et al. 2012; Meyer 2013). Additionally, for some features, there is not one site-specific feature that adequately represents the feature of value, but rather a collection of individual site-specific features that together are considered integral to wilderness character (e.g., multiple prehistoric vision quest sites).
	present; they are not required to be present. However, if features exist that are		# Where this quality is used, the overall trend in wilderness character will be based on five qualities instead of four—If the Other Features of Value Quality is used, the overall trend in wilderness character is determined by using all five qualities. Because it will be used in determining the overall trend in wilderness character, local unit staff must carefully consider whether a feature truly defines the wilderness character of an area. This consideration is especially critical if a small number of features are included because the trend in condition of an individual feature may determine the trend in the entire quality, thereby influencing the overall trend in wilderness character.
	truly integral to wilderness character, then use of this quality is required.
	# This quality focuses on site-specific features—Unlike the other qualities that
	apply to the entirety of a wilderness, the features monitored within this quality
	usually occur only at specific sites, although some features, such as cultural
	landscapes and certain geological or paleontological formations may occur over
	larger areas (Cowley et al. 2012; Meyer 2013). Additionally, for some features,
	there is not one site-specific feature that adequately represents the feature of
	value, but rather a collection of individual site-specific features that together
	are considered integral to wilderness character (e.g., multiple prehistoric vision
	quest sites).
	# Where this quality is used, the overall trend in wilderness character will be
	based on five qualities instead of four—If the Other Features of Value Quality
	is used, the overall trend in wilderness character is determined by using all five
	qualities. Because it will be used in determining the overall trend in wilderness
	character, local unit staff must carefully consider whether a feature truly
	defines the wilderness character of an area. This consideration is especially
	critical if a small number of features are included because the trend in condition of an individual feature may determine the trend in the entire quality,
	thereby influencing the overall trend in wilderness character.

	Threats to this quality result primarily from direct human actions (e.g., looting or		Threats to this quality result primarily from direct human actions (e.g., looting or

Admin: Created page with "The objective of monitoring the Other Features of Value Quality is to assess how the condition of important features of historical, geologic, scenic, and educational value tha..."

2023-02-28T00:05:32Z

Created page with "The objective of monitoring the Other Features of Value Quality is to assess how the condition of important features of historical, geologic, scenic, and educational value tha..."

New page

The objective of monitoring the Other Features of Value Quality is to assess how the
condition of important features of historical, geologic, scenic, and educational value
that are integral to wilderness character are changing. This monitoring focuses on
cultural features and other features of value determined to be integral to wilderness
character.

Section 2(c) of the Wilderness Act defines wilderness as an area that “may also contain
ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical
value.” Including such features, if they exist and play an integral role to defining the
meaning and value of the area as wilderness, can provide a more complete picture of
wilderness character. Monitoring this quality focuses on specific, tangible features and
how the condition of these features change over time; it does not monitor the values
derived from these features. By protecting the physical condition of the features,
the values associated with them are likely preserved. The primary challenge with
this quality lies in determining which features are truly integral to the character of a
particular wilderness (refer to section 6.1 in part 2 for guidance on determining which
features are integral to wilderness character).

There are three important distinctions between this quality and the other four
qualities:

# Use of this quality is not required—Unlike the other qualities that apply to
every wilderness, the Section 2(c) definition notes that other features may be
present; they are not required to be present. However, if features exist that are
truly integral to wilderness character, then use of this quality is required.
# This quality focuses on site-specific features—Unlike the other qualities that
apply to the entirety of a wilderness, the features monitored within this quality
usually occur only at specific sites, although some features, such as cultural
landscapes and certain geological or paleontological formations may occur over
larger areas (Cowley et al. 2012; Meyer 2013). Additionally, for some features,
there is not one site-specific feature that adequately represents the feature of
value, but rather a collection of individual site-specific features that together
are considered integral to wilderness character (e.g., multiple prehistoric vision
quest sites).
# Where this quality is used, the overall trend in wilderness character will be
based on five qualities instead of four—If the Other Features of Value Quality
is used, the overall trend in wilderness character is determined by using all five
qualities. Because it will be used in determining the overall trend in wilderness
character, local unit staff must carefully consider whether a feature truly
defines the wilderness character of an area. This consideration is especially
critical if a small number of features are included because the trend in condition of an individual feature may determine the trend in the entire quality,
thereby influencing the overall trend in wilderness character.

Threats to this quality result primarily from direct human actions (e.g., looting or
vandalism) and indirect human disturbance (e.g., camping or trail use) that creates
unintended adverse effects. Although such damage is often associated with visitor use,
other management activities (e.g., fire suppression activities or trail work) could
also inadvertently contribute to disturbance. Natural processes also contribute to
deterioration in the condition of features over time if there is no intervention.

For the Other Features of Value Quality, a single monitoring question provides
the broad context and two indicators provide the structure for this monitoring
(summarized in table 1.6.1).

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Caption text
|-
! Header text !! Header text !! Header text
|-
| Example || Example || Example
|-
| Example || Example || Example
|-
| Example || Example || Example
|}

== 6.1 Monitoring Question ==

A single monitoring question is used in monitoring the Other Features of Value
Quality: What are the trends in the unique features that are tangible and integral to
wilderness character?

The monitoring question is intended to address the trend in the condition of specific,
tangible features that are integral to wilderness character (i.e., those features that
define the meaning and significance of the area). The monitoring does not focus on the
scientific, educational, scenic, or historical values derived from these features. Values
are difficult, if not impossible, to monitor reliably over time. However, by protecting
the physical condition of these features, the values associated with the feature are
likely preserved. For example, unique geological and paleontological features may
occur in a wilderness and these features may have a wide array of scientific and
educational values (Gordon et al. 2017).

WCM assesses the condition of these physical features, whereas the scientific and
educational values or benefits derived from these features will not be evaluated by
this monitoring. Likewise, intangible resources such as spiritual values, traditional
practices, and traditional and historical stories are important aspects of this quality,
but only the condition of associated tangible features is included in this monitoring.
For most wildernesses, this quality focuses on tangible features of unique geological,
historical, or prehistoric value, such as lava beds, cave formations, dinosaur tracks,
cliff dwellings, or rock art (i.e., petroglyphs and pictographs). However, there are
situations where iconic natural or physical features may be appropriately monitored
under this quality. Such situations arise where site-specific features truly define and
distinguish a wilderness but the complexity of separating natural from human-caused
change makes determining the trend in measure data difficult or impossible, thus
preventing inclusion within the Natural Quality (see section 6.1 in part 2 for more
information).

Features included in this quality are, by definition, truly integral to wilderness
character; therefore, damage, disturbance, or decline to any feature assessed under
this quality should always be interpreted as degrading wilderness character. While
it is anticipated that the trends in measures in this quality may often be stable or
degrading, projects to improve the condition of features (e.g., successfully removing
graffiti from an integral natural feature) could lead to an improving trend in this
quality.

Two indicators are used to address the monitoring question:

# Deterioration or loss of integral cultural features.
# Deterioration or loss of other integral site-specific features of value.

The first indicator focuses on cultural features while the second indicator focuses
on other site-specific features, such as geologic, paleontological, and other iconic
or significant features a local unit determines are integral to wilderness character.
Depending on the features that are integral to a wilderness, either one or both
indicators may be used.

== 6.2 Indicator: Deterioration or Loss of Integral Cultural Features ==

This indicator captures the trend in the condition of specific, tangible cultural features
that are integral to wilderness character (i.e., those features that define the meaning
and significance of the area). Cultural is defined broadly to include both prehistoric
and historical features. Only those features determined to be integral to wilderness
character are included in this monitoring. A decline in the condition of cultural
features is viewed as degrading wilderness character.

=== 6.2.1 Measure: Condition Index for Integral Cultural Features ===

This measure is an index that aggregates the condition rating for each cultural feature
(or collection of similar cultural features) determined to be integral to wilderness
character. The condition rating for each feature focuses on disturbance caused by
human activity, but may include some deterioration related to natural processes (e.g.,
natural weathering, erosion); this rating provides a reliable, accurate, and simple
means of describing the overall condition of a feature. A decrease in the measure
value indicates an improving trend for this measure. Because cultural features are
irreplaceable and the condition classes are relatively broad, small changes in the
measure value are considered significant.

This measure is required if relevant—that is, it is required if cultural features integral
to wilderness character have been identified. Any change in the measure value
will result in a change in trend for this measure. An increase in the measure value
corresponds with a degrading trend.

Refer to part 2, section 6.2.1, for more detailed guidance on data sources and
compilation protocols, analysis, data adequacy, and interpreting the threshold for
meaningful change.

== 6.3 Indicator: Deterioration or Loss of Other Integral Site-Specific Features of Value ==

This indicator captures the condition of other site-specific features determined to
be integral to wilderness character. This indicator is intended to provide additional
flexibility for local units to monitor wilderness character using locally relevant
information to capture the trend in certain natural or other features that may be iconic
to a wilderness and give it meaning and significance. Paleontological sites, geologic
features, glaciers, or iconic plants and animals are examples of features that may be
included under this indicator.

=== 6.3.1 Measure: Condition Index for Other Features ===

This measure is an index that aggregates the condition rating for each site-specific
feature (or collection of similar site-specific features) determined to be integral
to wilderness character. While the condition rating for each feature should focus
on disturbance caused by human activity, it may include some disturbance where
the causal factor is unclear. For example, the decline of an iconic plant species
included under this measure may be related to natural or human-caused change
or some combination of the two causes. A decrease in the measure value indicates
an improving trend for this measure. Because other features of value are often
irreplaceable and the condition classes are relatively broad, small changes in the
measure value are considered significant.

This measure is required if relevant—that is, it is required if other site-specific features integral
to wilderness character have been identified. Any change in the measure value will result
in a change in trend for this measure. An increase in the measure value corresponds with a
degrading trend.

Refer to part 2, section 6.3.1, for more detailed guidance on data sources and compilation
protocols, analysis, data adequacy, and interpreting the threshold for meaningful change.