Other Features of Value Quality

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:

1. 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.
2. 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).
3. 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).

Table 1.6.1—Monitoring question, indicators, measures, and measure type for the Other Features of Value Quality.

Other Features of Value Quality
Monitoring question: What are the trends in unique, site-specific features integral to wilderness character?
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

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:

1. Deterioration or loss of integral cultural features.
2. 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.