Wilderness Character Monitoring in the Forest Service

The Forest Service, an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), manages 154 national forests, 20 national grasslands, and 1 national prairie. These 193 million acres (78 million hectares) of federal land in the National Forest System (NFS) represent a broad diversity of landscapes and ecosystems across the nation. Since the Wilderness Act of 1964 was signed into law, Congress has designated 37 million acres (approximately 15 million hectares) of NFS land as wilderness1, about 19 percent of all the land managed by the Forest Service.

The central mandate of the Wilderness Act is to preserve wilderness character. This affirmative legal obligation applies to all federal wildernesses across the entire National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS), including all Forest Service wildernesses. This legal mandate and Forest Service wilderness policy (Forest Service Manual [FSM] 2330) raise the simple question: are we preserving wilderness character?

The Forest Service can answer this question only by monitoring and assessing the trend in wilderness character over time. This technical guide provides the Forest Service a strategy and methodology for monitoring trends in wilderness character that is consistent with the revised interagency wilderness character monitoring (WCM) strategy published in Keeping It Wild 2: An Updated Interagency Strategy to Monitor Trends in Wilderness Character Across the National Wilderness Preservation System (hereafter, Keeping It Wild 2; Landres et al. 2015) and endorsed in 2015 by the Interagency Wilderness Policy Council. The protocols in this technical guide are designed to be practical and cost effective, and allow the Forest Service to demonstrate accountability for the legal and policy mandates to preserve wilderness character. This updated technical guide supersedes the 2009 Technical Guide for Monitoring Selected Conditions Related to Wilderness Character (Landres et al. 2009) and incorporates the best available scientific information and best practices for monitoring wilderness character.

For wilderness managers and line officers, part 1 of this technical guide provides extensive background information on wilderness character and the Forest Service approach to monitoring and assessing trends in wilderness character. Part 2 of this guide provides detailed protocols for gathering, analyzing, and interpreting WCM data. This technical guide includes the following major sections:

• Part 1 describes essential concepts for understanding the Forest Service

nationwide approach to monitoring and assessing trends in wilderness character, defines each of the five qualities of wilderness character (Untrammeled, Natural, Undeveloped, Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation, and Other Features of Value) and briefly describes each of the measures used in this monitoring along with their relevance to Forest Service WCM. Part 1 is the what and the why of the Forest Service approach to WCM.

• Part 2 describes how this Forest Service WCM will be implemented, with an overview of implementation concepts followed by detailed, step-by-step guidance for every measure in all five qualities.
• Appendices 1 and 2 provide a summary of all the key attributes for implementing WCM for every measure in table form and a description of measures that were considered but not used, respectively.

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this technical guide is to provide Forest Service protocols on how to monitor and assess trends in wilderness character. This monitoring will provide information to show how agency stewardship makes a difference on the ground, and ensure accountability for upholding the legal and policy mandates of preserving wilderness character (Landres et al. 2012). This monitoring will provide information to help answer two key questions about the outcomes of wilderness stewardship:

1. How is agency stewardship affecting wilderness character?
2. Is wilderness character changing over time within a wilderness and across all wildernesses administered by the Forest Service? If so, how and why is it changing?

This technical guide provides detailed protocols for implementing WCM on NFS lands. These protocols establish consistency in WCM across NFS units and with the other wilderness management agencies, increase the credibility of the information collected, and improve the efficiency of the Forest Service WCM. This national consistency allows for determining the trend in wilderness character in a single wilderness, as well as the collective trend in wilderness character across all NFS wildernesses.

The Forest Service WCM strategy is currently being implemented across the NFS and adjustments are anticipated in the future as a result of these activities. For this reason, this technical guide and appendices are being published online to allow the Forest Service to update content that reflects changes or improvements to information and protocols that occur during implementation (e.g., changes in roles and responsibilities for monitoring and evaluating WCM described in section 1.6 or adjustments to the change management process described in section 1.8). The target audience for this guide is local Forest Service unit (national forest or grassland, or ranger district) staff charged with managing wilderness consistent with agency policy; the guide is intended to help them implement WCM. Information derived from this monitoring may also be of use to regional and national staff charged with developing wilderness policy and assessing its effectiveness towards meeting the Wilderness Act’s legal mandate to preserve wilderness character. The results of this monitoring will provide both groups information to improve wilderness stewardship and wilderness policy.

Line officers may use WCM information to assess the effects of past management decisions on wilderness character and to help inform decisions about future actions. Monitoring by itself does not provide guidance for what to do if the trend in wilderness character is degrading; instead, monitoring can signal the need for follow-up actions or decisions, and can ensure that line officers understand the tradeoffs associated with actions or decisions.

Attributes that are integral to the area’s wilderness character, but that are not directly under the jurisdiction of managers, also are included in this monitoring. An example of such an attribute would be air quality. Monitoring these attributes provides a more comprehensive understanding of how wilderness character is changing over time and whether those changes are due to factors within or beyond the agency’s jurisdiction. Such a holistic view of wilderness character informs our understanding of broad-scale, regional, and cumulative impacts to wilderness character.

The scope of this technical guide is intentionally limited in several ways because wilderness character is a complex concept with tangible, intangible, ethical, societal, legal, personal, local, and national dimensions. From its outset, the WCM strategy described in this technical guide was designed to create a pragmatic and effective way to assess trends in wilderness character. To practically limit its scope, this WCM strategy:

• Applies to all areas in which the Forest Service has been directed by Congress to “preserve the wilderness character” of the area. This includes all designated wildernesses and congressionally designated Wilderness Study Areas mandated to preserve wilderness character in their authorizing legislation. The strategy does not apply to other types of protected areas outside the mandate of the Wilderness Act or subsequent wilderness legislation, including lands recommended as wilderness through the forest planning process and congressionally designated Wilderness Study Areas lacking specific direction to preserve wilderness character. WCM may still be useful for assessing on-the ground changes and informing stewardship in areas with future potential for wilderness designation.
• Monitors tangible attributes of the five qualities of wilderness character derived from the Definition of Wilderness, Section 2(c) in the Wilderness Act. This monitoring does not directly monitor the intangible, symbolic, societal, or personal values, meanings, and benefits of wilderness character, although the tangible attributes that are monitored do contribute to these.
• Assesses the trend in wilderness character over time for an entire wilderness,

and does not assess how wilderness character is changing in specific locations within a wilderness, or how wilderness character compares across different wildernesses.

• Supports minimum requirements and National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA) analyses by helping staff organize information on the effects of proposed projects, but does not determine the significance of effects or replace agency decision processes.

• Does not fulfill all the monitoring requirements needed to manage an individual

wilderness, such as monitoring for specific projects or compliance monitoring for special use permits (SUPs).

• Monitors the outcomes of stewardship, as well as selected outside forces acting

on wilderness, and does not monitor the management actions or processes that occur in wilderness (see section 1.3.1 Wilderness Stewardship Performance for discussion about these differences).

1.2 Overview of Forest Service Wilderness Character Monitoring

This Forest Service WCM strategy is based on the interagency strategy described in Keeping It Wild 2, and is organized around a hierarchical framework (see section 1.5.1) that divides wilderness character into successively finer elements of qualities, monitoring questions, indicators, and measures (tables 1.1.1–1.1.5). The qualities, monitoring questions, and indicators used here are consistent with the interagency strategy, whereas the measures are unique to the Forest Service. This technical guide identifies measures required by all wildernesses administered by the Forest Service, these required measures are analogous to the “national core” measures in other Forest Service monitoring protocols. Besides these agency-required measures, locally developed measures to meet wilderness-specific information needs may also be used. The Forest Service WCM strategy is structured as follows:

• The Forest Service uses Keeping It Wild 2’s organizational framework of

qualities, monitoring questions, and indicators to ensure interagency consistency (tables 1.1.1–1.1.5).

• At least one measure must be used for each indicator. For each indicator, this

technical guide describes a required measure, or a set of measures from which at least one must be used (tables 1.1.1–1.1.5).

• In addition to the required measures, optional measures described in this

technical guide may be chosen for a wilderness if they are highly relevant. Additional locally developed measures may be used for a wilderness, and are encouraged to more fully describe trend in wilderness character, as long as they adhere to the guidelines described in section 1.5.3.

• Data are gathered or compiled for each measure by using the best available

information.

• Once there are at least two data points per measure, a trend (improving,

stable, or degrading2) is determined based on agency established rules, or locally developed rules for locally developed measures. Trends in each measure are reported at 5-year intervals even though data for some measures may need to be gathered annually. See section 1.0 in part 2 for details on determining trend.

• If there is more than one measure within an indicator, trends in these measures

are compiled by using consistent rules (see section 1.5.4) to determine the trend in the indicator. Only the trends in the measures, not the data, are compiled. These same rules are then used to determine the trend in each monitoring question, each quality, and ultimately the overall trend in wilderness character.

• Wilderness character is considered “preserved” (i.e., as required by law and

Forest Service policy) when there is a stable or improving trend. Once the trend in wilderness character for each wilderness is determined, the percentage of wildernesses with a stable or improving trend in wilderness character within a region and across the entire Forest Service can be derived.

Caption text

Header text	Header text	Header text
Example	Example	Example
Example	Example	Example
Example	Example	Example

1.2.1 Relationship to Interagency Wilderness Character Monitoring

The Forest Service, the National Park Service (NPS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) use Keeping It Wild 2 as a framework to develop agency-specific WCM programs. All four agencies use the same definition of wilderness character and the same qualities, monitoring questions, and indicators. Each agency also uses the same process for compiling trends across measures to derive a trend in each indicator, monitoring question, quality, and ultimately wilderness character. Use of this nationally consistent interagency framework will allow all four agencies to pool their resulting data to assess trends in wilderness character across the entire NWPS.

Keeping It Wild 2 provides an interagency monitoring strategy, but does not define agency-specific responsibilities for implementing that strategy, ensuring quality control, and fostering interagency consistency into the future. Given their different authorities, policies, and cultures, each agency is responsible for developing its own procedures to ensure implementation of the interagency strategy. This includes determining agency-specific monitoring protocols and processes for training, oversight, use of the online interagency Wilderness Character Monitoring Database (WCMD) reporting, sharing results with the other agencies, and working across all agencies to provide a comprehensive WCM program for the entire NWPS (see section 1.7.3).

The Forest Service currently shares management responsibility for 32 wildernesses (28 with the BLM, 1 with the FWS, and 3 with the NPS). In some cases, the Forest Service manages the majority of the acreage for a wilderness, while in others the agency manages only a small fraction. To implement WCM in an interagency wilderness, the administering agencies may either: (1) each monitor their own portion of the wilderness with agency-specific measures, or (2) agree to follow a single agency’s WCM protocols and share a single set of measures. Under either alternative, interagency wildernesses will report the trend in wilderness character for the entire wilderness. Before implementing the WCM strategy described in this technical guide, in all 32 cases, Forest Service wilderness mangers will need to work with their local counterparts in the other managing agency to determine which alternative is most appropriate. If the local units decide to share a single set of measures for the wilderness, consider developing an interagency memorandum of understanding that outlines respective roles and responsibilities and states which agency’s WCM protocols will be followed. For example, a wilderness could use the measures from the agency that has the majority of the acreage for a wilderness or another arrangement could be developed. Whichever alternative is selected for an interagency wilderness, include documentation of the decision and its rationale as a reference for future managers.

1.3 Relationship to Forest Service Programs, Monitoring, and Policies

This effort to monitor trends in wilderness character integrates with other Forest Service wilderness programs, agency-wide monitoring efforts, as well as laws, regulations, and policies.

1.3.1 Wilderness Stewardship Performance

The Wilderness Program’s performance measure Number of Wildernesses Meeting Baseline Performance for Preserving Wilderness Character, commonly known as Wilderness Stewardship Performance (WSP), tracks the stewardship actions undertaken by the agency to fulfill the Wilderness Act’s mandate to “preserve wilderness character.” It feeds into the geo-enabled Performance Accountability System (gPAS), which annually reports metrics of agency performance to the Department of Agriculture, Congress, and the public. The lead Forest Service unit for a wilderness selects 10 elements, from a possible set of 20, that most closely reflect local stewardship priorities, within prescribed rules. Each element is worth 10 points, and a wilderness is deemed to be managed to an acceptable standard within WSP if it scores 60 points or higher.

The business rules around the selection of elements reinforce the linkages between agency stewardship actions and wilderness character. The elements in WSP are arrayed beneath categories that conform to the five qualities of wilderness character. While local units have some flexibility in the selection of these elements, they must select as least one element for each quality. Not all of the elements under the qualities of wilderness character in WSP track with the placement of measures for wilderness character monitoring because some decisions were made on the organization of WSP prior to the completion of Keeping It Wild 2. Most notably, trails and user-developed sites are under the Undeveloped Quality in WSP and under the Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation Quality in WCM.

There also are two additional categories of elements (Special Provisions and Administration) that do not track directly with wilderness character monitoring but do help evaluate the agency’s ability to steward the wilderness resource. Additionally, one mandatory element focuses exclusively on wilderness character: Wilderness Character Baseline. In two-point increments, this element tracks the completion of the steps needed to establish a baseline for wilderness character and then evaluates trends over time. This element also includes writing a Wilderness Character Narrative to provide a qualitative and holistic description of the tangible and intangible aspects of an area’s wilderness character.

There is a natural and obvious overlap between WSP and WCM. WSP tracks the stewardship actions taken by the agency, whereas WCM monitors the outcomes of those actions, as well as selected outside forces acting on wilderness. Figure 1.1.1 depicts the relationship between WSP and WCM.

IMAGE

For example, WSP tracks whether or not a local unit has developed an invasive species management plan, conducted an inventory, and taken appropriate management actions, whereas WCM evaluates the trend in the acres of nonindigenous plant species. The two work well together to provide a powerful tool to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the Forest Service’s wilderness stewardship program.

1.3.2 Inventory, Monitoring, and Assessment

The Forest Service Inventory, Monitoring, and Assessment (IM&A) Strategy (hereafter IM&A Strategy; USDA Forest Service 2013a) is an agency-wide strategy to improve data and information used to support implementation of the agency mission. As a requirement for sound stewardship of natural resources, the IM&A Strategy places an emphasis on high-quality information resulting from improved IM&A activities. Forest Service WCM follows the principles outlined in the IM&A Strategy and is designed to answer critical management questions at the field level, support collaboration with partners, and provide aggregated data to inform decisions at multiple levels.

This technical guide gathers as much data as possible from well-established and scientifically credible national monitoring programs within and outside the Forest Service. Inside the Forest Service, this technical guide draws as much data as is appropriate and possible from Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA), Natural Resource Manager (NRM), and terrestrial, aquatic, wildlife, and social monitoring programs that are currently being developed and tested. Data from outside the Forest Service used in this technical guide includes data on air pollutants from the National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP) and data on 303(d) listed streams from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and states.

Forest Service inventory and monitoring data are collected by using a variety of methods and systems. A current list of standard protocols and methods for different resource areas is published and maintained on a Forest Service website at http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/rig/protocols/master.shtml (also referred to as the Forest Service “master list” of protocols).

Effective collaboration with states, other federal agencies, and non-governmental organizations will result in selection of programs or protocols that reflect general consensus about the most effective methods to meet WCM objectives. Collaboration will also result in more cost effective WCM. Understanding the data provided by these outside monitoring and assessment programs, as well as their basic structures, will minimize duplication of effort and cost and enhance collaboration to monitor and preserve wilderness character.

1.3.3 Laws, Regulations, and Policies

Several laws, regulations, and policies relate directly to the protection of wilderness character and to the IM&A of wilderness resources.

Relevant Laws

While many laws affect the administration of wilderness in NFS lands, the following principal laws bear directly on the mandate to preserve wilderness character and this technical guide. Laws are listed chronologically by the date of enactment:

• The General Mining Act (1872) declared public lands free and open to mineral

exploration and purchase, and decreed all lands with valuable mineral deposits open for occupancy. It also established the procedures for mining claims and operations. While mining claims filed prior to wilderness establishment are considered to be valid existing rights, development of these claims affects wilderness character.

• The Antiquities Act (1906), the National Historic Preservation Act (1966), and

the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (1979) provide the statutory basis for protecting and managing heritage resources on federal lands. Policies derived from these legal directions seek to balance the need for protecting heritage resources with the need for wilderness to be without permanent developments (as directed in the Wilderness Act).

• The Clean Water Act (1948, 1972, 1977, and 1987) establishes guidelines for

protecting water quality and a shift to holistic watershed-based protection strategies. Under the watershed approach, equal emphasis is placed on protecting healthy waters and restoring impaired watersheds. Water quality and quantity are vital to natural systems and processes within wilderness.

• The Clean Air Act (1963), as amended, directs the Forest Service to protect

Class I air quality standards in certain wildernesses and Class II standards in the remaining wildernesses. It designated all wildernesses larger than 5,000 acres that were in existence as of August 7, 1977, as Class I areas. These designations (Class I and Class II) indicate the degree of air quality protection for areas already considered clean air areas (i.e., already meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards [NAAQS]).

• The Wilderness Act (1964), Section 2(a) Statement of Policy, requires that

wilderness “shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character” (emphasis added). In addition, Rohlf and Honnold (1988) and McCloskey (1999) assert that the statement from Section 4(b) of the Wilderness Act that “… each agency administering any area designated as wilderness shall be responsible for preserving the wilderness character of the area” gives the primary and affirmative management direction for wilderness. Section 4(b) also states that even when the agency administers the area for other purposes, the agency must also “preserve its wilderness character.” The Congressional Record (United States Congress 1983) supports this assertion, stating “The overriding principle guiding management of all wilderness areas, regardless of which agency administers them, is the Wilderness Act (Section 4(b)) mandate to preserve their wilderness character.”

• The National Environmental Policy Act (1970) requires an analysis of the

environmental consequences of proposed management actions on all NFS lands, including management actions taken in wilderness. Analysis of actions within and adjacent to wilderness should consider impacts to wilderness character.

• The Endangered Species Act (1973) provides a program for the conservation of

wildlife and plant species that are threatened or endangered with extinction. It establishes specific procedures to determine which plant and animal species are added or removed from protective status. Loss of animal or plant species directly affects the preservation of natural conditions in wilderness.

• The Eastern Wilderness Areas Act (1975) added 16 national forest areas to the

NWPS and directed that 17 areas in eastern national forests should be studied such that the Secretary of Agriculture should recommend additions to the NWPS within 5 years. Congress debated the issue of designating severely modified areas as wilderness; they ultimately chose to add such areas to the NWPS and declined to establish a separate “Eastern Wilderness” category of designation.