Year: 2012
Inventory Unit Number/Name: OR-010-123 / Calderwood Reservoir
FORM 1
DOCUMENTATION OF BLM WILDERNESS INVENTORY FINDINGS ON RECORD
1. Is there existing BLM wilderness inventory information on all or part of this area?
No
(go to Form 2) Yes ___X____ (if more than one unit is within the area,
list the names/numbers of those units.)
a) Inventory Source: U.S. Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management,
Oregon, Wilderness Review - Initial Inventory: Proposed Decision on Public Lands
Obviously Lacking Wilderness Characteristics, April, 1979 (p. 14).
b) Inventory Unit Name(s)/Number(s): 1-123 / Calderwood Reservoir
c) Map Name(s)/Number(s): U.S. Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land
Management, Oregon, Wilderness Review - Initial Inventory: Proposed Decision on
Public Lands Obviously Lacking Wilderness Characteristics, April, 1979.
d) BLM District(s)/Field Office(s): Lakeview District, Lakeview Resource Area
2. BLM Inventory Findings on Record
Existing inventory information regarding wilderness characteristics (if more than one
BLM inventory unit is associated with the area, list each unit/acreage and answer each
question individually for each inventory unit):
Unit #
Size
(acres)
1-123
Calderwood
Reservoir
6,200 acres
Natural
Condition?
Y/N
Outstanding
Solitude?
Y/N
N
NE
Outstanding
Primitive &
Unconfined
Recreation?
Y/N
NE
Supplemental
Values?
Y/N
NE
Summarize any known primary reasons for prior inventory findings listed in this table:
In 1979, this unit was of sufficient size, and was described as containing broken rims and
dry lake bottoms. While native vegetation included sagebrush, over 2,500 acres of the unit
had been sprayed and seeded with crested wheatgrass. Because of these land treatments,
BLM determined that the unit was dominated by man’s work. Solitude, primitive
recreation, and supplemental values were not evaluated at that time.
1
FORM 2
DOCUMENTATION OF CURRENT WILDERNESS INVENTORY CONDITIONS
a. Unit Number/Name: OR-010-123 / Calderwood Reservoir
(1) Is the unit of sufficient size? Yes
X
No
In 2005, the BLM received a citizen proposal from the Oregon Natural Desert Association
(ONDA) for a 424,570-acre area they referred to as Hart Mountain Proposed Wilderness Study
Area (WSA). ONDA included in their information a narrative report, maps, photos, photo and
route logs, and GIS data. All of these materials were considered during the BLM’s wilderness
inventory update for this area. The photos submitted by ONDA were taken in 2004. They
identified this large area as having no interior routes which met the BLM wilderness inventory
definition of a road (see Map, p. 96 of ONDA 2005).
Between 2008 and 2012, members of BLM’s staff conducted field inventory in the area as part
of a process to update both its road and wilderness inventories and to gather additional
information to supplement ONDA’s wilderness information. This included driving and
collecting photo documentation of the routes and human disturbances in the area. Using both
ONDA and BLM photos, field logs, and staff field knowledge, a BLM inter-disciplinary (ID)
team completed an analysis of the main routes within the area and made boundary
determinations in 2012.
The BLM ID team determined that several of the routes ONDA identified as “ways” are, in fact,
roads defining inventory unit boundaries. For this reason, the BLM found that the proposed
WSA is not one large roadless unit, but is instead comprised of several smaller inventory units, 8
of which met the size criteria and numerous others that did not (see Map 2). The 8 units which
met the size criteria must be evaluated individually.
This evaluation focuses on the Calderwood Reservoir unit (OR-015-123) which is bounded by
BLM Roads 6152-00 and 6132-00 on the north and east, and 6152-A0 on the west. Refer to the
route analysis forms, photos, photo logs, and BLM ID team meeting notes in the wilderness
inventory file for additional supporting information regarding these boundary determinations.
Additional background on the process that the BLM ID team followed during this evaluation is
contained in the document, Wilderness Inventory Maintenance Process for the Lakeview
Resource Area, BLM, contained in the wilderness inventory file.
DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT CONDITIONS:
The unit is located approximately 7 miles northeast of the town of Adel, Oregon (Map 1). The
topography can be described as relatively flat fault blocks, slightly tilted to the southwest with
one larger escarpment running through the center of the unit. The unit is approximately 7 miles
long and 2 miles wide and encompasses about 7,335 acres (Map 2).
(2) Is the unit in a natural condition? Yes
No __X___ N/A
2
In 2005, ONDA found the much larger Hart Mountain proposal to be in a natural condition,
primarily affected by the forces of nature (p. 92-93). However, for the reasons described above,
the BLM ID team determined that this proposal is not one large, contiguous roadless area, but is
comprised of several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually.
Since the initial inventory was completed in 1979, the impacts of man have increased within the
Calderwood Reservoir inventory unit. Today, there are about 9.7 miles of fencing, 12 livestock
water developments, 1 wildlife guzzler, 1 mile of livestock water pipeline, 12.5 miles of
primitive motorized routes, 0.4 miles of motorized trails, 2.7 miles of reclaiming routes, and 46
acres of seeding. These features are scattered relatively evenly across the unit (Map 2). Overall,
the total quantity of existing disturbances, along with the juxtaposition of these disturbances,
makes it difficult for one to avoid the impacts of man’s work anywhere within the unit.
For these reasons, the BLM ID team concluded that the natural character of the unit has not
changed substantially since the previous inventory was completed. The impacts of man’s work
in the unit are widespread and substantially noticeable, and therefore, the area remains in an
unnatural condition.
(3) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
solitude? Yes
No
N/A___X_____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as having a more
diverse landscape than the previously inventoried units contained individually. Further, ONDA
felt the sheer size of the larger proposal provided visitors with an outstanding sense of solitude
(p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one
large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated
individually. The BLM ID team determined that solitude opportunities within the Calderwood
Reservoir inventory unit did not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness
criteria.
(4) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
primitive and unconfined recreation? Yes
No
N/A___X_____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as offering outstanding
opportunities for horseback riding, hiking, backpacking, hunting, photography, and wildlife
viewing due to the sheer size of the proposal (p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID
team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller
inventory units that each must be evaluated individually. The BLM ID team determined that
primitive and unconfined recreation opportunities within the Calderwood Reservoir inventory
unit did not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness criteria.
(5) Does the unit have supplemental values? Yes
3
No
N/A__X____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as containing
supplemental values including cultural, wildlife, and botanical values (p. 93-94). However, as
noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area,
but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually. Further,
the BLM ID team determined that supplemental values within the Calderwood Reservoir
inventory unit did not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness criteria.
Summary of Findings and Conclusion
Unit Name and Number: OR-015-123 / Calderwood Reservoir
Summary Results of Analysis:
1. Does the area meet the size requirements?
__X _Yes _ _ _No
2. Does the area appear to be natural?
_
_ Yes __ X _No ___ N/A
3. Does the area offer outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and
unconfined type of recreation?
__ __ Yes ____No __X_ N/A
4. Does the area have supplemental values?
__
_ Yes ____No __X _ N/A
Conclusion (Check One):
__ ___ The area- or a portion of the area- has wilderness character:
(items 1, 2 and 3 must be checked “yes”).
__X_ _ The area does not have wilderness character: (any of items 1, 2 and 3 are
checked “no”).
4
Prepared by (ID Team Member Names and Titles):
!o/! :/~1<--
Date
l2 j;;w 12-­
r
Paul Whitman: Planning Coordinator
1o
i
Date
Les Boothe: Range Con~rvationist
f~31j2oiJ.
D e
II/;( ;Jo 1d-.___
Brennan Hank: Weed Specialist
Date
Glenn Lorton: Wildlife Biologist
~
til,
ll.L.
Approved by:
Thomas R. Rasmussen
Field Manager
Date
/
This form documents information that constitutes an inventory finding on wilderness characteristics. It does not
represent a formal/and use allocation or a final agency decision subject to administrative remedies under either
43 CFRparts 4 or 1610.5-2.
Year: 2012
Inventory Unit Number/Name: OR-010-124 / Fisher Canyon
FORM 1
DOCUMENTATION OF BLM WILDERNESS INVENTORY FINDINGS ON RECORD
1. Is there existing BLM wilderness inventory information on all or part of this area?
No
(go to Form 2) Yes ___X____ (if more than one unit is within the area,
list the names/numbers of those units.)
a) Inventory Source: Wilderness Inventory Oregon & Washington: Final Intensive
Inventory Decisions, November 1980, pages 86-87.
b) Inventory Unit Name(s)/Number(s): 1-124 / Fish Canyon South
c) Map Name(s)/Number(s): U.S. Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land
Management, Oregon, Intensive Wilderness Inventory: Final Decisions, November 1980.
d) BLM District(s)/Field Office(s): Lakeview District, Lakeview Resource Area
2. BLM Inventory Findings on Record
Existing inventory information regarding wilderness characteristics (if more than one
BLM inventory unit is associated with the area, list each unit/acreage and answer each
question individually for each inventory unit):
Unit #
1-124 Fish
Canyon South
Size
(acres)
8,160
Natural
Condition?
Y/N
Outstanding
Solitude?
Y/N
Y
N
Outstanding
Primitive &
Unconfined
Recreation?
Y/N
N
Supplemental
Values?
Y/N
None
Summarize any known primary reasons for prior inventory findings listed in this table:
In 1980, the Fish Canyon South unit was described as having a fault block running through
the middle with a steep escarpment on the east side. Below the escarpment was a narrow
basin. The western side dipped gently to the southwest. Vegetation consisted of big
sagebrush along the southern tip and some juniper stands along the eastern edge of the unit.
There were four miles of ways and five small lakebed pits. With the exception of the pits,
the unit appeared natural. The unit did not offer any outstanding opportunities for solitude
due to the limited amount of topographic and vegetative screening and the narrow shape of
the unit. The unit did offer some potential opportunities for hiking, hunting, and wildlife
observation, however, the size and shape of the unit limited these opportunities and they
were not outstanding. No supplemental values were identified.
1
FORM 2
DOCUMENTATION OF CURRENT WILDERNESS INVENTORY CONDITIONS
a. Unit Number/Name: OR-015-124 / Fisher Canyon
(1) Is the unit of sufficient size? Yes
X
No
In 2005, the BLM received a citizen proposal from the Oregon Natural Desert Association
(ONDA) for a 424,570-acre area they referred to as Hart Mountain Proposed Wilderness Study
Area (WSA). ONDA included in their information a narrative report, maps, photos, photo and
route logs, and GIS data. All of these materials were considered during the BLM’s wilderness
inventory update for this area. The photos submitted by ONDA were taken in 2004. They
identified this large area as having no interior routes which met the BLM wilderness inventory
definition of a road (see Map, p. 96 of ONDA 2005).
Between 2008 and 2012, members of BLM’s staff conducted field inventory in the area as part
of a process to update both its road and wilderness inventories and to gather additional
information to supplement ONDA’s wilderness information. This included driving and
collecting photo documentation of the routes and human disturbances in the area. Using both
ONDA and BLM photos, field logs, and staff field knowledge, a BLM inter-disciplinary (ID)
team completed an analysis of the main routes within the area and made boundary
determinations in 2012.
The BLM ID team determined that several of the routes ONDA identified as “ways” are, in fact,
roads defining inventory unit boundaries. For this reason, the BLM found that the proposed
WSA is not one large roadless unit, but is comprised of several smaller inventory units, 8 of
which met the size criteria and numerous others that did not (see Map 2). The 8 units which met
the size criteria must be evaluated individually.
This evaluation focuses on the Fisher Canyon unit (OR-015-124) which is currently bounded by
a combination of private and state lands and BLM Roads 6152-00 and 6132-00 on the west,
Roads 6152-00 and 6152-B0 on the north, Roads 6152-B0 and 6162-00 on the east, and Roads
6152-00, interim road 6162-E, and private lands on the south. In addition, much of road 6152-00
forms a cherrystem boundary which runs through the center of the unit. Refer to the route
analysis forms, photos, photo logs, and BLM ID team meeting notes in the wilderness inventory
file for additional supporting information regarding these boundary determinations. Additional
background on the process that the BLM ID team followed during this evaluation is contained in
the document, Wilderness Inventory Maintenance Process for the Lakeview Resource Area,
BLM, contained in the wilderness inventory file.
DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT CONDITIONS:
The unit is located approximately 9 miles northeast of the town of Adel, Oregon (Map 1). The
topography can be described as relatively flat fault blocks, slightly tilted to the southwest with
one larger escarpment running through the center of the unit. Historic unit 1-124 and adjacent
2
lands have been combined during the current analysis to create a unit that is approximately 8.5
miles long and 4.5 miles wide and encompasses about 11,772 acres.
The High Lakes Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) was established in 2003 and a
narrow sliver overlaps the eastern edge of the inventory unit (Map 2). The ACEC was
established to protect unique cultural values.
(2) Is the unit in a natural condition? Yes
No __X___ N/A
In 2005, ONDA found the much larger Hart Mountain proposal to be in a natural condition,
primarily affected by the forces of nature (p. 92-93). However, for the reasons described above,
the BLM ID team determined that this proposal is not one large, contiguous roadless area, but is
comprised of several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually.
Since the inventory was completed in 1980, the impacts of man have increased within the unit.
There are currently 20 water developments, 7.7 miles of primitive motorized routes, 1.0 miles of
trails, 0.95 miles of reclaiming routes, and about 12 miles of pasture division fence within the
unit. BLM Road 6152-00 runs through the center of the unit and though most of it is “cherry­
stemmed” outside the unit boundary, it still represents a disturbance that is substantially
noticeable from the interior of the unit. In addition, about 803 acres along the western boundary
were seeded with crested wheatgrass after a wildfire in 1984. These features are scattered
relatively evenly across the unit (Map 2). Overall, these existing disturbances, along with the
juxtaposition of these disturbances, make it difficult for one to avoid the impacts of man’s work
anywhere within the unit.
For these reasons, the BLM ID team concluded that the natural character of the unit has changed
substantially since the previous inventory was completed. The impacts of man’s work in the unit
are widespread and substantially noticeable, and therefore, the area does not meet the naturalness
criteria.
(3) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
solitude?
Yes
No
N/A___X_____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as having a more
diverse landscape than the previously inventoried units contained individually. Further, ONDA
felt the sheer size of the larger proposal provided visitors with an outstanding sense of solitude
(p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one
large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated
individually. The BLM ID team determined that solitude opportunities within the Fisher Canyon
South inventory unit did not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness
criteria.
(4) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
primitive and unconfined recreation? Yes
No
N/A___X_____
3
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as offering outstanding
opportunities for horseback riding, hiking, backpacking, hunting, photography, and wildlife
viewing due to the sheer size of the proposal (p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID
team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller
inventory units that each must be evaluated individually. The BLM ID team determined that
primitive and unconfined recreation opportunities within the Fisher Canyon South inventory unit
did not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness criteria.
(5) Does the unit have supplemental values? Yes
No
N/A__X____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as containing
supplemental values including cultural, wildlife, and botanical values (p. 93-94). However, as
noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area,
but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually. Further,
the BLM ID team determined that supplemental values within the Fisher Canyon South
inventory unit did not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness criteria.
Summary of Findings and Conclusion
Unit Name and Number: OR-015-124 / Fisher Canyon South
Summary Results of Analysis:
1. Does the area meet the size requirements?
__X _Yes _ _ _No
2. Does the area appear to be natural?
_
_ Yes __ X _No ___ N/A
3. Does the area offer outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and
unconfined type of recreation?
__ __ Yes ____No __X_ N/A
4. Does the area have supplemental values?
__
_ Yes ____No __X _ N/A
Conclusion (Check One):
__ ___ The area- or a portion of the area- has wilderness character:
(items 1, 2 and 3 must be checked “yes”).
__X_ _ The area does not have wilderness character: (any of items 1, 2 and 3 are
checked “no”).
4
Prepared by (ID Team Member Names and Titles):
!o/! :/~1<--
Date
l2 j;;w 12-­
r
Paul Whitman: Planning Coordinator
1o
i
Date
Les Boothe: Range Con~rvationist
f~31j2oiJ.
D e
II/;( ;Jo 1d-.___
Brennan Hank: Weed Specialist
Date
Glenn Lorton: Wildlife Biologist
~
til,
ll.L.
Approved by:
Thomas R. Rasmussen
Field Manager
Date
/
This form documents information that constitutes an inventory finding on wilderness characteristics. It does not
represent a formal/and use allocation or a final agency decision subject to administrative remedies under either
43 CFRparts 4 or 1610.5-2.
Year: 2012
Inventory Unit Number/Name: OR-010-128 / Long Lake
FORM 1
DOCUMENTATION OF BLM WILDERNESS INVENTORY FINDINGS ON RECORD
1. Is there existing BLM wilderness inventory information on all or part of this area?
No
(go to Form 2) Yes ___X____ (if more than one unit is within the area,
list the names/numbers of those units.)
a) Inventory Source: Wilderness Inventory Oregon & Washington: Final Intensive
Inventory Decisions, November 1980, Pages 89-90.
b) Inventory Unit Name(s)/Number(s): 1-128 / Long Lake
c) Map Name(s)/Number(s): U.S. Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land
Management, Oregon, Intensive Wilderness Inventory: Final Decisions, November 1980.
d) BLM District(s)/Field Office(s): Lakeview District, Lakeview Resource Area
2. BLM Inventory Findings on Record
Existing inventory information regarding wilderness characteristics (if more than one
BLM inventory unit is associated with the area, list each unit/acreage and answer each
question individually for each inventory unit):
Unit #
Size
(historic
acres)
1-128 /
Long Lake
9,000 acres
Natural
Condition?
Y/N
Outstanding
Solitude?
Y/N
N
N
Outstanding
Primitive &
Unconfined
Recreation?
Y/N
N
Supplemental
Values?
Y/N
N
Summarize any known primary reasons for prior inventory findings listed in this table:
In 1980, this unit was described as a sagebrush flat with low hills providing minor
topographic relief. The unit contained a number of manmade features including four miles
of ways, five miles of fence line, and eight constructed reservoirs. The unit was affected by
the works of man and did not meet the naturalness criteria. The narrow shape and
relatively small size of the unit, in conjunction with its limited topography and lowgrowing vegetation, made it difficult to avoid the sights and sounds of others. As a result,
the unit offered only a limited opportunity for solitude. The unit offered some
opportunities for hiking, hunting, and horseback riding, however, these were not found to
be outstanding. The unit offered some potential for the presence of archaeological values,
but none were specifically identified at the time.
1
FORM 2
DOCUMENTATION OF CURRENT WILDERNESS INVENTORY CONDITIONS
a. Unit Number/Name: OR-015-128 / Long Lake
(1) Is the unit of sufficient size? Yes
X
No
In 2005, the BLM received a citizen proposal from the Oregon Natural Desert Association
(ONDA) for a 424,570-acre area they referred to as Hart Mountain Proposed Wilderness Study
Area (WSA). ONDA included in their information a narrative report, maps, photos, photo and
route logs, and GIS data. All of these materials were considered during the BLM’s wilderness
inventory update for this area. The photos submitted by ONDA were taken in 2004. They
identified this large area as having no interior routes which met the BLM wilderness inventory
definition of a road (see Map, p. 96 of ONDA 2005).
Between 2008 and 2012, members of BLM’s staff conducted field inventory in the area as part
of a process to update both its road and wilderness inventories and to gather additional
information to supplement ONDA’s wilderness information. This included driving and
collecting photo documentation of the routes and human disturbances in the area. Using both
ONDA and BLM photos, field logs, and staff field knowledge, a BLM inter-disciplinary (ID)
team completed an analysis of the main routes within the area and made boundary
determinations in 2012.
The BLM ID team determined that several of the routes ONDA identified as “ways” are, in fact,
roads defining inventory unit boundaries. For this reason, the BLM found that the proposed
WSA is not one large roadless unit, but is comprised of several smaller inventory units, 8 of
which met the size criteria and numerous others that did not (see Map 2). The 8 units which met
the size criteria must be evaluated individually.
This evaluation focuses on the Long Lake unit (OR-015-128) which is bounded by a
combination of BLM Roads 6162-00 and 6162-B0 and private lands. Refer to the route analysis
forms, photos, photo logs, and BLM ID team meeting notes in the wilderness inventory file for
additional supporting information regarding these boundary determinations. Additional
background on the process that the BLM ID team followed during this evaluation is contained in
the document, Wilderness Inventory Maintenance Process for the Lakeview Resource Area,
BLM, contained in the wilderness inventory file.
DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT CONDITIONS:
The unit is located approximately 12 miles northeast of the town of Adel, Oregon (Map 1). The
topography can be described as large sagebrush flats with low hills providing some minor
topographic relief. There are several small open ephemeral lakebeds that occur as shallow
depressions. The unit is approximately 6 miles long and 2.5 miles wide and currently
encompasses about 7,552 acres.
2
The High Lakes Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) was established in 2003 and
overlaps the entire unit (Map 2). The ACEC was established to protect unique cultural values.
(2) Is the unit in a natural condition? Yes
No __X___ N/A
In 2005, ONDA found the much larger Hart Mountain proposal to be in a natural condition,
primarily affected by the forces of nature (p. 92-93). However, for the reasons described above,
the BLM ID team determined that this proposal is not one large, contiguous roadless area, but is
comprised of several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually.
Since the initial inventory was completed in 1980, the impacts of man have increased within the
Long Lake unit. Today, there are about 6.5 miles of open motorized routes, 1.3 miles of
primitive trails, 3.7 miles of closed routes, 0.5 miles of open reclaiming routes, 11.3 miles of
pasture division fence, and 27 water developments within the unit. These features are scattered
relatively evenly across the unit. Overall, the number of existing disturbances, along with the
juxtaposition of these disturbances, make it difficult for one to avoid the impacts of man’s work
anywhere within the unit.
For these reasons, the BLM ID team concluded that the natural character of the unit has not
changed substantially since the previous inventory was completed. The impacts of man’s work
in the unit are widespread and substantially noticeable, and therefore, the area remains in an
unnatural condition.
(3) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
solitude?
Yes
No
N/A___X_____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as having a more
diverse landscape than the previously inventoried units contained individually. Further, ONDA
felt the sheer size of the larger proposal provided visitors with an outstanding sense of solitude
(p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one
large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated
individually. The BLM ID team determined that solitude opportunities within the Long Lake
inventory unit did not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness criteria.
(4) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
primitive and unconfined recreation? Yes
No
N/A___X_____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as offering outstanding
opportunities for horseback riding, hiking, backpacking, hunting, photography, and wildlife
viewing due to the sheer size of the proposal (p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID
team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller
inventory units that each must be evaluated individually. The BLM ID team determined that
primitive and unconfined recreation opportunities within the Long Lake inventory unit did not
need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness criteria.
3
(5) Does the unit have supplemental values? Yes
No
N/A__X____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as containing
supplemental values including cultural, wildlife, and botanical values (p. 93-94). However, as
noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area,
but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually. Further,
the BLM ID team determined that supplemental values within the Long Lake inventory unit did
not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness criteria.
Summary of Findings and Conclusion
Unit Name and Number: OR-015-128 Long Lake
Summary Results of Analysis:
1. Does the area meet the size requirements?
__X _Yes _ _ _No
2. Does the area appear to be natural?
_
_ Yes __ X _No ___ N/A
3. Does the area offer outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and
unconfined type of recreation?
__ __ Yes ____No __X_ N/A
4. Does the area have supplemental values?
__
_ Yes ____No __X _ N/A
Conclusion (Check One):
__ ___ The area- or a portion of the area- has wilderness character:
(items 1, 2 and 3 must be checked “yes”).
__X_ _ The area does not have wilderness character: (any of items 1, 2 and 3 are
checked “no”).
4
Prepared by (ID Team Member Names and Titles):
!o/! :/~1<--
Date
l2 j;;w 12-­
r
Paul Whitman: Planning Coordinator
1o
i
Date
Les Boothe: Range Con~rvationist
f~31j2oiJ.
D e
II/;( ;Jo 1d-.___
Brennan Hank: Weed Specialist
Date
Glenn Lorton: Wildlife Biologist
~
til,
ll.L.
Approved by:
Thomas R. Rasmussen
Field Manager
Date
/
This form documents information that constitutes an inventory finding on wilderness characteristics. It does not
represent a formal/and use allocation or a final agency decision subject to administrative remedies under either
43 CFRparts 4 or 1610.5-2.
Year: 2012
Inventory Unit Number/Name: OR-010-129 / Jack Lake
FORM 1
DOCUMENTATION OF BLM WILDERNESS INVENTORY FINDINGS ON RECORD
1. Is there existing BLM wilderness inventory information on all or part of this area?
No
(go to Form 2) Yes ___X____ (if more than one unit is within the area,
list the names/numbers of those units.)
a) Inventory Source: Wilderness Inventory Oregon & Washington: Final Intensive
Inventory Decisions, November 1980, pages 90-91.
b) Inventory Unit Name(s)/Number(s): 1-129 / Jack Lake
c) Map Name(s)/Number(s): U.S. Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land
Management, Oregon, Intensive Wilderness Inventory: Final Decisions, November 1980.
d) BLM District(s)/Field Office(s): Lakeview District, Lakeview Resource Area
2. BLM Inventory Findings on Record
Existing inventory information regarding wilderness characteristics (if more than one
BLM inventory unit is associated with the area, list each unit/acreage and answer each
question individually for each inventory unit):
Unit #
1-129 /
Jack Lake
Size
(acres)
10,000
Natural
Condition?
Y/N
Outstanding
Solitude?
Y/N
N
N
Outstanding
Primitive &
Unconfined
Recreation?
Y/N
N
Supplemental
Values?
Y/N
N
Summarize any known primary reasons for prior inventory findings listed in this table:
In 1980, this unit was described as flat sagebrush country below (south of) Hart Mountain
Refuge. The unit had minor topographic relief located along faults. The unit contained a
number of manmade features including12 miles of ways and 7 lakebeds with numerous
constructed pits and dikes. These intrusions were determined to be substantially noticeable
due to the small size of the unit and lack of topographic relief. Due to the narrow shape
and relatively small size of the unit, in conjunction with its limited topography and lowgrowing vegetation, it would be difficult to avoid the sights and sounds of others. As a
result, the unit did not offer an outstanding opportunity for solitude. The unit offered low
potential for hiking and good hunting opportunities. However, the unit did not offer
outstanding opportunities for primitive and unconfined recreation. The unit offered some
potential for the presence of archaeological values, but none were specifically identified at
the time.
1
FORM 2
DOCUMENTATION OF CURRENT WILDERNESS INVENTORY CONDITIONS
a. Unit Number/Name: OR-015-129 / Jack Lake
(1) Is the unit of sufficient size? Yes
X
No
In 2005, the BLM received a citizen proposal from the Oregon Natural Desert Association
(ONDA) for a 424,570-acre area they referred to as Hart Mountain Proposed Wilderness Study
Area (WSA). ONDA included in their information a narrative report, maps, photos, photo and
route logs, and GIS data. All of these materials were considered during the BLM’s wilderness
inventory update for this area. The photos submitted by ONDA were taken in 2004. They
identified this large area as having no interior routes which met the BLM wilderness inventory
definition of a road (see Map, p. 96 of ONDA 2005).
Between 2008 and 2012, members of BLM’s staff conducted field inventory in the area as part
of a process to update both its road and wilderness inventories and to gather additional
information to supplement ONDA’s wilderness information. This included driving and
collecting photo documentation of the routes and human disturbances in the area. Using both
ONDA and BLM photos, field logs, and staff field knowledge, a BLM inter-disciplinary (ID)
team completed an analysis of the main routes within the area and made boundary
determinations in 2012.
The BLM ID team determined that several of the routes ONDA identified as “ways” are, in fact,
roads defining inventory unit boundaries. For this reason, the BLM found that the proposed
WSA is not one large roadless unit, but is comprised of several smaller inventory units, 8 of
which met the size criteria and numerous others that did not (see Map 2). The 8 units which met
the size criteria must be evaluated individually.
This evaluation focuses on the Jack Lake unit (OR-015-129) which is bounded by BLM Roads
7136-00 and 6106-00 on the north and east, Road 7136-B0 on the south, and Roads 6162-00 and
6162-B0 on the west. Refer to the route analysis forms, photos, photo logs, and BLM ID team
meeting notes in the wilderness inventory file for additional supporting information regarding
these boundary determinations. Additional background on the process that the BLM ID team
followed during this evaluation is contained in the document, Wilderness Inventory Maintenance
Process for the Lakeview Resource Area, BLM, contained in the wilderness inventory file.
DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT CONDITIONS:
The unit is located approximately 15 miles northeast of the town of Adel, Oregon (Map 1). The
topography can be described as large flat sagebrush county with minor topographic relief along
faults.. There are several ephemeral lakebeds that occur as shallow depressions. Jack Lake is
the largest of these. The unit is approximately 8 miles long and 2.5 miles wide and currently
encompasses about 11,475 acres (Map 2).
2
The High Lakes Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) was established in 2003 and
overlaps the majority (10,295 acres) of this unit (Map 2). The ACEC was established to protect
unique cultural values.
(2) Is the unit in a natural condition? Yes
No __X___ N/A
In 2005, ONDA found the much larger Hart Mountain proposal to be in a natural condition,
primarily affected by the forces of nature (p. 92-93). However, for the reasons described above,
the BLM ID team determined that this proposal is not one large, contiguous roadless area, but is
comprised of several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually.
Since the initial inventory was completed in 1980, the impacts of man have increased within the
Jack Lake inventory unit. Today, there are about 13.7 miles of pasture fence, 11 miles of open
primitive motorized routes, 5.4 miles of closed routes, and 18 water developments within the
unit. These features are scattered relatively evenly across the unit (Map 2). Overall, the total
quantity of existing disturbances, along with the juxtaposition of these disturbances, makes it
difficult for one to avoid the impacts of man’s work anywhere within the unit.
For these reasons, the BLM ID team concluded that the natural character of the unit has not
changed substantially since the previous inventory was completed. The impacts of man’s work
in the unit are widespread and substantially noticeable, and therefore, the area remains in an
unnatural condition.
(3) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
solitude? Yes
No
N/A___X_____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as having a more
diverse landscape than the previously inventoried units contained individually. Further, ONDA
felt the sheer size of the larger proposal provided visitors with an outstanding sense of solitude
(p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one
large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated
individually. The BLM ID team determined that solitude opportunities within the Jack Lake
inventory unit did not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness criteria.
(4) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
primitive and unconfined recreation? Yes
No
N/A___X_____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as offering outstanding
opportunities for horseback riding, hiking, backpacking, hunting, photography, and wildlife
viewing due to the sheer size of the proposal (p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID
team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller
inventory units that each must be evaluated individually. The BLM ID team determined that
3
primitive and unconfined recreation opportunities within the Jack Lake inventory unit did not
need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness criteria.
(5) Does the unit have supplemental values? Yes
No
N/A__X____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as containing
supplemental values including cultural, wildlife, and botanical values (p. 93-94). However, as
noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area,
but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually. Further,
the BLM ID team determined that supplemental values within the Jack Lake inventory unit did
not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness criteria.
Summary of Findings and Conclusion
Unit Name and Number: OR-015-129 Jack Lake
Summary Results of Analysis:
1. Does the area meet the size requirements?
__X _Yes _ _ _No
2. Does the area appear to be natural?
_
_ Yes __ X _No ___ N/A
3. Does the area offer outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and
unconfined type of recreation?
__ __ Yes ____No __X_ N/A
4. Does the area have supplemental values?
__
_ Yes ____No __X _ N/A
Conclusion (Check One):
__ ___ The area- or a portion of the area- has wilderness character:
(items 1, 2 and 3 must be checked “yes”).
__X_ _ The area does not have wilderness character: (any of items 1, 2 and 3 are
checked “no”).
4
Prepared by (ID Team Member Names and Titles):
!o/! :/~1<--
Date
l2 j;;w 12-­
r
Paul Whitman: Planning Coordinator
1o
i
Date
Les Boothe: Range Con~rvationist
f~31j2oiJ.
D e
II/;( ;Jo 1d-.___
Brennan Hank: Weed Specialist
Date
Glenn Lorton: Wildlife Biologist
~
til,
ll.L.
Approved by:
Thomas R. Rasmussen
Field Manager
Date
/
This form documents information that constitutes an inventory finding on wilderness characteristics. It does not
represent a formal/and use allocation or a final agency decision subject to administrative remedies under either
43 CFRparts 4 or 1610.5-2.
Year: 2012
Inventory Unit Number/Name: OR-010-130 / Little Reservoir
FORM 1
DOCUMENTATION OF BLM WILDERNESS INVENTORY FINDINGS ON RECORD
1. Is there existing BLM wilderness inventory information on all or part of this area?
No
(go to Form 2) Yes ___X____ (if more than one unit is within the area,
list the names/numbers of those units.)
a) Inventory Source: Wilderness Inventory Oregon & Washington: Final Intensive
Inventory Decisions, November 1980, pages 91-92.
b) Inventory Unit Name(s)/Number(s): 1-130 / Little Reservoir
c) Map Name(s)/Number(s): U.S. Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land
Management, Oregon, Intensive Wilderness Inventory: Final Decisions, November 1980.
d) BLM District(s)/Field Office(s): Lakeview District, Lakeview Resource Area
2. BLM Inventory Findings on Record
Existing inventory information regarding wilderness characteristics (if more than one
BLM inventory unit is associated with the area, list each unit/acreage and answer each
question individually for each inventory unit):
Unit #
1-130 / Little
Reservoir
Size
(acres)
24,280
Natural
Condition?
Y/N
Outstanding
Solitude?
Y/N
N
N
Outstanding
Primitive &
Unconfined
Recreation?
Y/N
N
Supplemental
Values?
Y/N
N
Summarize any known primary reasons for prior inventory findings listed in this table:
In 1980, this unit was described as a broad, sagebrush flat with a slight rise towards Little
Juniper Mountain in the north. On the east side of the unit there was a north-south fault
scarp and a basin along Jack Creek which formed a broad bottomed valley about 5 miles in
length and a half mile wide. Vegetation is dominated by sagebrush with scattered western
juniper located along Jack Creek. The unit contained a number of manmade features
including 18 miles of ways and 7 constructed reservoirs. These intrusions were
substantially noticeable due to their size and widespread distribution across the unit. The
flat topography and low-growing vegetation did not offer an outstanding opportunity for
solitude. The unit offered some opportunities for hunting, but no outstanding opportunities
were identified. The unit offered some potential for the presence of archaeological values,
but none were specifically identified at the time.
1
FORM 2
DOCUMENTATION OF CURRENT WILDERNESS INVENTORY CONDITIONS
a. Unit Number/Name: OR-015-130 / Little Reservoir
(1) Is the unit of sufficient size? Yes
X
No
In 2005, the BLM received a citizen proposal from the Oregon Natural Desert Association
(ONDA) for a 424,570-acre area they referred to as Hart Mountain Proposed Wilderness Study
Area (WSA). ONDA included in their information a narrative report, maps, photos, photo and
route logs, and GIS data. All of these materials were considered during the BLM’s wilderness
inventory update for this area. The photos submitted by ONDA were taken in 2004. They
identified this large area as having no interior routes which met the BLM wilderness inventory
definition of a road (see Map, p. 96 of ONDA 2005).
Between 2008 and 2012, members of BLM’s staff conducted field inventory in the area as part
of a process to update both its road and wilderness inventories and to gather additional
information to supplement ONDA’s wilderness information. This included driving and
collecting photo documentation of the routes and human disturbances in the area. Using both
ONDA and BLM photos, field logs, and staff field knowledge, a BLM inter-disciplinary (ID)
team completed an analysis of the main routes within the area and made boundary
determinations in 2012.
The BLM ID team determined that several of the routes ONDA identified as “ways” are, in fact,
roads defining inventory unit boundaries. For this reason, the BLM found that the proposed
WSA is not one large roadless unit, but is comprised of several smaller inventory units, 8 of
which met the size criteria and numerous others that did not (see Map 2). The 8 units which met
the size criteria must be evaluated individually.
This evaluation focuses on the Little Reservoir unit (OR-015-130) which is bounded by a
combination of BLM Roads 6106-00, 7136-00, 7136-A0, interim road 6106-AB, and private and
state lands on the east, Road 7136-B0 on the north, Roads 6122-00 and 6162-B0 on the west, and
the U.S. Highway 140 right-of-way and private lands on the south. Refer to the route analysis
forms, photos, photo logs, and BLM ID team meeting notes in the wilderness inventory file for
additional supporting information regarding these boundary determinations. Additional
background on the process that the BLM ID team followed during this evaluation is contained in
the document, Wilderness Inventory Maintenance Process for the Lakeview Resource Area,
BLM, contained in the wilderness inventory file.
DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT CONDITIONS:
The unit is located approximately 13 miles east of the town of Adel, Oregon (Map 1). The
topography can be described as broad sagebrush flat with a slight rise toward Juniper Mountain
in the north. There is a long fault scarp along Jack Creek that forms a broad valley about 5 miles
long and 0.5 mile wide. The unit contains two large lakebeds and drops off sharply on the east
2
side into Guano Valley. The unit is approximately 8 miles long and 6 miles wide and currently
encompasses about 25,559 acres (Map 2).
The High Lakes Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) was established in 2003 and
overlaps approximately half (14,660 acres) of this unit (Map 2). The ACEC was established to
protect unique cultural values.
(2) Is the unit in a natural condition? Yes
No __X___ N/A
In 2005, ONDA found the much larger Hart Mountain proposal to be in a natural condition,
primarily affected by the forces of nature (p. 92-93). However, for the reasons described above,
the BLM ID team determined that this proposal is not one large, contiguous roadless area, but is
comprised of several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually.
Since the initial inventory was completed in 1980, the impacts of man have increased within the
Little Reservoir inventory unit. Today, there are about 18.8 miles of pasture fence, 30 miles of
open motorized routes, 6 miles of closed routes, 2.7 miles of reclaiming routes, 0.4 miles of
motorized trails, and 19 water developments within the unit. These features are scattered across
the unit. These features are scattered relatively evenly across the unit (Map 2). Overall, the total
quantity of existing disturbances, along with the juxtaposition of these disturbances, makes it
difficult for one to avoid the impacts of man’s work anywhere within the unit.
For these reasons, the BLM ID team concluded that the natural character of the unit has not
changed substantially since the previous inventory was completed. The impacts of man’s work
in the unit are widespread and substantially noticeable, and therefore, the area remains in an
unnatural condition.
(3) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
solitude?
Yes
No
N/A___X_____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as having a more
diverse landscape than the previously inventoried units contained individually. Further, ONDA
felt the sheer size of the larger proposal provided visitors with an outstanding sense of solitude
(p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one
large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated
individually. The BLM ID team determined that solitude opportunities within the Little
Reservoir inventory unit did not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness
criteria.
(4) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
primitive and unconfined recreation? Yes
No
N/A___X_____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as offering outstanding
opportunities for horseback riding, hiking, backpacking, hunting, photography, and wildlife
3
viewing due to the sheer size of the proposal (p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID
team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller
inventory units that each must be evaluated individually. The BLM ID team determined that
primitive and unconfined recreation opportunities within the Little Reservoir inventory unit did
not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness criteria.
(5) Does the unit have supplemental values? Yes
No
N/A__X____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as containing
supplemental values including cultural, wildlife, and botanical values (p. 93-94). However, as
noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area,
but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually. Further,
the BLM ID team determined that supplemental values within the Little Reservoir inventory unit
did not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the naturalness criteria.
Summary of Findings and Conclusion
Unit Name and Number: OR-015-130 Little Reservoir
Summary Results of Analysis:
1. Does the area meet the size requirements?
__X _Yes _ _ _No
2. Does the area appear to be natural?
_
_ Yes __ X _No ___ N/A
3. Does the area offer outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and
unconfined type of recreation?
__ __ Yes ____No __X_ N/A
4. Does the area have supplemental values?
__
_ Yes ____No __X _ N/A
Conclusion (Check One):
__ ___ The area- or a portion of the area- has wilderness character:
(items 1, 2 and 3 must be checked “yes”).
__X___ The area does not have wilderness character: (any of items 1, 2 and 3 are
checked “no”).
4
Prepared by (ID Team Member Names and Titles):
!o/! :/~1<--
Date
l2 j;;w 12-­
r
Paul Whitman: Planning Coordinator
1o
i
Date
Les Boothe: Range Con~rvationist
f~31j2oiJ.
D e
II/;( ;Jo 1d-.___
Brennan Hank: Weed Specialist
Date
Glenn Lorton: Wildlife Biologist
~
til,
ll.L.
Approved by:
Thomas R. Rasmussen
Field Manager
Date
/
This form documents information that constitutes an inventory finding on wilderness characteristics. It does not
represent a formal/and use allocation or a final agency decision subject to administrative remedies under either
43 CFRparts 4 or 1610.5-2.
Year: 2012
Inventory Unit Number/Name: OR-010-133A / Shirk Rim
FORM 1
DOCUMENTATION OF BLM WILDERNESS INVENTORY FINDINGS ON RECORD
1. Is there existing BLM wilderness inventory information on all or part of this area?
No
(go to Form 2) Yes ___X____ (if more than one unit is within the area,
list the names/numbers of those units.)
a) Inventory Source: Wilderness Inventory Oregon & Washington: Final Intensive
Inventory Decisions, November 1980 pages 94-95, .
b) Inventory Unit Name(s)/Number(s): 1-133 / Guano Lake West
c) Map Name(s)/Number(s): U.S. Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land
Management, Oregon, Intensive Wilderness Inventory: Final Decisions, November 1980.
d) BLM District(s)/Field Office(s): Lakeview District, Lakeview Resource Area
2. BLM Inventory Findings on Record
Existing inventory information regarding wilderness characteristics (if more than one
BLM inventory unit is associated with the area, list each unit/acreage and answer each
question individually for each inventory unit):
Unit #
1-133 /
Guano Lake
West
Size
(acres)
13,480
Natural
Condition?
Y/N
Outstanding
Solitude?
Y/N
Y
N
Outstanding
Primitive &
Unconfined
Recreation?
Y/N
N
Supplemental
Values?
Y/N
N
Summarize any known primary reasons for prior inventory findings listed in this table:
In 1980, this unit was described as containing a basalt upthrust on the west side known as
Shirks Rim, that is approximately 6 miles long, a half mile wide, and 500 feet high. The
south end of the unit contained broken rims and narrow basins. The unit contained
approximately 7 miles of ways, and 2 reservoirs that were substantially unnoticeable.
Overall, the unit appeared natural. The shape and topography of the unit left one exposed
to the presence of others in the unit. For this reason, the unit did not offer any outstanding
opportunities for solitude. The unit offered some potential for wildlife observation and
hunting, but did not offer an outstanding primitive and unconfined recreation opportunity.
1
FORM 2
DOCUMENTATION OF CURRENT WILDERNESS INVENTORY CONDITIONS
a. Unit Number/Name: OR-015-133A / Shirk Rim
(1) Is the unit of sufficient size? Yes
X
No
In 2005, the BLM received a citizen proposal from the Oregon Natural Desert Association
(ONDA) for a 424,570-acre area they referred to as Hart Mountain Proposed Wilderness Study
Area (WSA). ONDA included in their information a narrative report, maps, photos, photo and
route logs, and GIS data. All of these materials were considered during the BLM’s wilderness
inventory update for this area. The photos submitted by ONDA were taken in 2004. They
identified this large area as having no interior routes which met the BLM wilderness inventory
definition of a road (see Map, p. 96 of ONDA 2005).
Between 2008 and 2012, members of BLM’s staff conducted field inventory in the area as part
of a process to update both its road and wilderness inventories and to gather additional
information to supplement ONDA’s wilderness information. This included driving and
collecting photo documentation of the routes and human disturbances in the area. Using both
ONDA and BLM photos, field logs, and staff field knowledge, a BLM inter-disciplinary (ID)
team completed an analysis of the main routes within the area and made inventory unit boundary
determinations in 2012.
The BLM ID team determined that several of the routes ONDA identified as “ways” are, in fact,
roads defining inventory unit boundaries. For this reason, the BLM found that the proposed
WSA is not one large roadless unit, but is comprised of several smaller inventory units, 8 of
which met the size criteria and numerous others that did not (see Map 2). The 8 units which met
the size criteria must be evaluated individually.
This evaluation focuses on the Calderwood Reservoir unit (OR-015-123) which is bounded by
BLM Roads 7136-00 on the west, 6106-00 on the north, and interim numbered roads 6106-P0
and 6106-O on the south and east. Refer to the route analysis forms, photos, photo logs, and
BLM ID team meeting notes in the wilderness inventory file for additional supporting
information regarding these boundary determinations. Additional background on the process
that the BLM ID team followed during this evaluation is contained in the document, Wilderness
Inventory Maintenance Process for the Lakeview Resource Area, BLM, contained in the
wilderness inventory file.
DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT CONDITIONS:
The unit is located approximately 16 miles east of the town of Adel, Oregon (Map 1). The
topography can be described as a narrow high plateau with exposed rims along the east and west
sides. Vegetation is predominantly low sagebrush and grasses. The unit is approximately 5
miles long and 1.5 miles wide and currently encompasses about 5,324 acres (Map 2).
2
The High Lakes Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) was established in 2003 and
overlaps a small portion of the northwest corner (540 acres) of this unit (Map 2). The ACEC
was established to protect unique cultural values.
(2) Is the unit in a natural condition? Yes
X
No __X___ N/A
In 2005, ONDA found the much larger Hart Mountain proposal to be in a natural condition,
primarily affected by the forces of nature (p. 92-93). However, for the reasons described above,
the BLM ID team determined that this proposal is not one large, contiguous roadless area, but is
comprised of several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually.
The historic Guano Lake West unit (1-133) was found to be in a natural condition in 1980. Since
the initial inventory was completed, the historic Guano Lake West unit (1-133) was split into two
units (Shirk Rim and Guano Lake West) by the interim numbered roads 6106-P, 6106-OB and
6106-O. These routes were bladed to serve as fire lines for prescribed fire operations in 1985.
The impacts of man on the current Shirk Rim inventory unit have not increased substantially
since 1980. Today, there are about 3.5 miles of pasture fence, 1.3 miles of motorized trails, 1.2
miles of old fire line created by a bulldozer, and two water developments (Map 2). These
features are mostly restricted to the outer edges of the unit and are substantially unnoticeable.
For these reasons, the BLM ID team concluded that the natural character of this inventory unit
has not changed substantially since the previous inventory was completed in 1980. The area
remains primarily in a natural condition.
(3) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
solitude?
Yes
No
X
N/A________
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as having a more
diverse landscape than the previously inventoried units contained individually. Further, ONDA
felt the sheer size of the larger proposal provided visitors with an outstanding sense of solitude
(p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one
large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated
individually.
The larger historic unit 1-133 did not have outstanding opportunities for solitude in 1980.
Dividing this historic unit into two smaller units has further decreased the opportunities for
solitude. The slopes surrounding Shirk Rim lack tall vegetative cover or topographic screening,
and combined with the long narrow nature of the unit would leave one exposed to the sights and
sounds of others with in the unit. For these reasons, the BLM ID team determined that solitude
opportunities within the Shirk Rim inventory unit have not improved since 1980 and the unit
continues to lack outstanding opportunities for solitude.
(4) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
primitive and unconfined recreation? Yes
No
X
N/A________
3
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as offering outstanding
opportunities for horseback riding, hiking, backpacking, hunting, photography, and wildlife
viewing due to the sheer size of the proposal (p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID
team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller
inventory units that each must be evaluated individually.
The larger historic unit 1-133 did not offer any outstanding opportunities for primitive and
unconfined recreation in 1980. Dividing this historic unit into two smaller units has further
decreased opportunities for primitive and unconfined recreation. Although opportunities for
hunting, wildlife viewing, hiking, and backpacking are potentially present within the unit, the
current unit’s small size and narrow shape would not provide an unconfined recreation
experience. Further, these opportunities are similar to those available on surrounding public
lands. The unit does not offer a single unique primitive recreational opportunity or a unique
diversity of primitive recreation opportunities. For these reasons, the BLM ID team determined
that the Shirk Rim inventory unit continues to lack an outstanding opportunity for primitive and
unconfined recreation.
(5) Does the unit have supplemental values? Yes
No
N/A__X____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as containing
supplemental values including cultural, wildlife, and botanical values (p. 93-94). However, as
noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area,
but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually. Further,
the BLM ID team determined that supplemental values within the Shirk Rim inventory unit did
not need to be evaluated, as the unit failed to meet the minimum wilderness criteria described
above.
4
Summary of Findings and Conclusion
Unit Name and Number: OR-015-133A / Shirk Rim
Summary Results of Analysis:
1. Does the area meet the size requirements?
__X _Yes _ _ _No
2. Does the area appear to be natural?
_ X Yes __ _No ___ N/A
3. Does the area offer outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and
unconfined type of recreation?
__ __ Yes __X__No __ _ N/A
4. Does the area have supplemental values?
__
_ Yes __X__No __ _ N/A
Conclusion (Check One):
__ ___ The area- or a portion of the area- has wilderness character:
(items 1, 2 and 3 must be checked “yes”).
__X_ _ The area does not have wilderness character: (any of items 1, 2 and 3 are
checked “no”).
5
Prepared by (ID Team Member Names and Titles):
!o/! :/~1<--
Date
l2 j;;w 12-­
r
Paul Whitman: Planning Coordinator
1o
i
Date
Les Boothe: Range Con~rvationist
f~31j2oiJ.
D e
II/;( ;Jo 1d-.___
Brennan Hank: Weed Specialist
Date
Glenn Lorton: Wildlife Biologist
~
til,
ll.L.
Approved by:
Thomas R. Rasmussen
Field Manager
Date
/
This form documents information that constitutes an inventory finding on wilderness characteristics. It does not
represent a formal/and use allocation or a final agency decision subject to administrative remedies under either
43 CFRparts 4 or 1610.5-2.
Year: 2012
Inventory Unit Number/Name: OR-010-133B / Guano Lake West
FORM 1
DOCUMENTATION OF BLM WILDERNESS INVENTORY FINDINGS ON RECORD
1. Is there existing BLM wilderness inventory information on all or part of this area?
No
(go to Form 2) Yes ___X____ (if more than one unit is within the area,
list the names/numbers of those units.)
a) Inventory Source: Wilderness Inventory Oregon & Washington: Final Intensive
Inventory Decisions, November 1980, pages 94-95.
b) Inventory Unit Name(s)/Number(s): 1-133 / Guano Lake West
c) Map Name(s)/Number(s): U.S. Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land
Management, Oregon, Intensive Wilderness Inventory: Final Decisions, November 1980.
d) BLM District(s)/Field Office(s): Lakeview District, Lakeview Resource Area
2. BLM Inventory Findings on Record
Existing inventory information regarding wilderness characteristics (if more than one
BLM inventory unit is associated with the area, list each unit/acreage and answer each
question individually for each inventory unit):
Unit #
1-133 /
Guano Lake
West
Size
(acres)
13,480
Natural
Condition?
Y/N
Outstanding
Solitude?
Y/N
Y
N
Outstanding
Primitive &
Unconfined
Recreation?
Y/N
N
Supplemental
Values?
Y/N
N
Summarize any known primary reasons for prior inventory findings listed in this table:
In 1980, this unit was described as containing a basalt upthrust on the west side known as
Shirks Rim, that is approximately 6 miles long, a half mile wide, and 500 feet high. The
south end of the unit contained broken rims and narrow basins. The unit contained
approximately 7 miles of ways, and 2 reservoirs that were substantially unnoticeable.
Overall, the unit appeared natural. The shape and topography of the unit left one exposed
to the presence of others in the unit. For this reason, the unit did not offer any outstanding
opportunities for solitude. The unit offered some potential for wildlife observation and
hunting, but did not offer an outstanding primitive and unconfined recreation opportunity.
1
FORM 2
DOCUMENTATION OF CURRENT WILDERNESS INVENTORY CONDITIONS
a. Unit Number/Name: OR-015-133B / Guano Lake West
(1) Is the unit of sufficient size? Yes
X
No
In 2005, the BLM received a citizen proposal from the Oregon Natural Desert Association
(ONDA) for a 424,570-acre area they referred to as Hart Mountain Proposed Wilderness Study
Area (WSA). ONDA included in their information a narrative report, maps, photos, photo and
route logs, and GIS data. All of these materials were considered during the BLM’s wilderness
inventory update for this area. The photos submitted by ONDA were taken in 2004. They
identified this large area as having no interior routes which met the BLM wilderness inventory
definition of a road (see Map, p. 96 of ONDA 2005).
Between 2008 and 2012, members of BLM’s staff conducted field inventory in the area as part
of a process to update both its road and wilderness inventories and to gather additional
information to supplement ONDA’s wilderness information. This included driving and
collecting photo documentation of the routes and human disturbances in the area. Using both
ONDA and BLM photos, field logs, and staff field knowledge, a BLM inter-disciplinary (ID)
team completed an analysis of the main routes within the area and made boundary
determinations in 2012.
The BLM ID team determined that several of the routes ONDA identified as “ways” are, in fact,
roads defining inventory unit boundaries. For this reason, the BLM found that the proposed
WSA is not one large roadless unit, but is comprised of several smaller inventory units, 8 of
which met the size criteria and numerous others that did not (see Map 2). The 8 units which met
the size criteria must be evaluated individually.
This evaluation focuses on the Guano Lake West unit (OR-015-133B) which is bounded by
BLM Road 7136-00 and interim roads 6106-OB and 6106-O on the west, Rod 6106-00 on the
east and north. Refer to the route analysis forms, photos, photo logs, and BLM ID team meeting
notes in the wilderness inventory file for additional supporting information regarding these
boundary determinations. Additional background on the process that the BLM ID team followed
during this evaluation is contained in the document, Wilderness Inventory Maintenance Process
for the Lakeview Resource Area, BLM, contained in the wilderness inventory file.
DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT CONDITIONS:
The unit is located approximately 16 miles east of the town of Adel, Oregon (Map 1). The
topography can be described as a flat high plateau with a large exposed rim along the east side of
the unit sloping down into Guano Valley. Vegetation is predominantly low sagebrush and
grasses. The unit is approximately 8 miles long and 1.5miles wide and currently encompasses
approximately 5,998 acres (Map 2).
2
(2) Is the unit in a natural condition? Yes
X
No __X___ N/A
In 2005, ONDA found the much larger Hart Mountain proposal to be in a natural condition,
primarily affected by the forces of nature (p. 92-93). However, for the reasons described above,
the BLM ID team determined that this proposal is not one large, contiguous roadless area, but is
comprised of several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually.
The historic Guano Lake West unit (1-133) was found to be in a natural condition in 1980. Since
the initial inventory was completed, the historic Guano Lake West unit (1-133) was split into two
units (Shirk Rim and Guano Lake West) by interim numbered roads 6106-P, 6106-OB and 6106­
O. These routes were bladed to serve as fire lines for prescribed fire operations in 1985.
The impacts of man on the current Guano Lake West unit have increased slightly since 1980.
Today, there are about 3.6 miles of pasture fence, 3.8 miles of primitive motorized routes, and 5
water developments (Map 2). These features are mostly restricted to the outer edges of the unit
and the impact of man’s work is substantially unnoticeable. For these reasons, the BLM ID team
concluded that the natural character of this inventory unit has not changed substantially since the
previous inventory was completed in 1980. The area remains primarily in a natural condition.
(3) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
solitude?
Yes
No
X
N/A________
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as having a more
diverse landscape than the previously inventoried units contained individually. Further, ONDA
felt the sheer size of the larger proposal provided visitors with an outstanding sense of solitude
(p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one
large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated
individually.
The larger historic unit 1-133 did not have outstanding opportunities for solitude in 1980.
Dividing this historic unit into two smaller units has further decreased the opportunities for
solitude. The east-facing slope leading down to Guano Valley and lack of either tall vegetative
cover or topographic screening, combined with the long narrow nature of the unit would leave
one exposed to the sights and sounds of others in the unit. For these reasons, the BLM ID team
determined that solitude opportunities within the Shirk Rim inventory unit have not improved
since 1980 and the unit continues to lack outstanding opportunities for solitude.
(4) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
primitive and unconfined recreation? Yes
No
X
N/A________
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as offering outstanding
opportunities for horseback riding, hiking, backpacking, hunting, photography, and wildlife
viewing due to the sheer size of the proposal (p. 93). However, as noted previously the BLM ID
3
team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area, but is in fact several smaller
inventory units that each must be evaluated individually.
The larger historic unit 1-133 did not offer any outstanding opportunities for primitive and
unconfined recreation in 1980. Dividing this historic unit into two smaller units has further
decreased opportunities for primitive and unconfined recreation. Although opportunities for
hunting, wildlife viewing, hiking, and backpacking are potentially present within the unit, the
current unit’s small size and narrow shape would not provide an unconfined recreation
experience. Further, these opportunities are similar to those available on surrounding public
lands. The unit does not offer a single unique primitive recreational opportunity or a unique
diversity of primitive recreation opportunities. For these reasons, the BLM ID team determined
that the Shirk Rim inventory unit continues to lack an outstanding opportunity for primitive and
unconfined recreation.
(5) Does the unit have supplemental values? Yes
No
N/A__X____
In 2005, ONDA’s inventory identified the larger Hart Mountain proposal as containing
supplemental values including cultural, wildlife, and botanical values (p. 93-94). However, as
noted previously the BLM ID team determined that the proposal is not one large roadless area,
but is in fact several smaller inventory units that must each be evaluated individually. Further,
the BLM ID team determined that supplemental values within the Guano Lake West inventory
unit did not need to be evaluated, as the unit to meet the minimum wilderness criteria described
above.
4
Summary of Findings and Conclusion
Unit Name and Number: OR-015-133B / Guano Lake West
Summary Results of Analysis:
1. Does the area meet the size requirements?
__X _Yes _ _ _No
2. Does the area appear to be natural?
_ X Yes __ _No ___ N/A
3. Does the area offer outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and
unconfined type of recreation?
__ __ Yes __X__No __ _ N/A
4. Does the area have supplemental values?
__
_ Yes __X__No __ _ N/A
Conclusion (Check One):
__ ___ The area- or a portion of the area- has wilderness character:
(items 1, 2 and 3 must be checked “yes”).
__X___ The area does not have wilderness character: (any of items 1, 2 and 3 are
checked “no”).
5
Prepared by (ID Team Member Names and Titles):
!o/! :/~1<--
Date
l2 j;;w 12-­
r
Paul Whitman: Planning Coordinator
1o
i
Date
Les Boothe: Range Con~rvationist
f~31j2oiJ.
D e
II/;( ;Jo 1d-.___
Brennan Hank: Weed Specialist
Date
Glenn Lorton: Wildlife Biologist
~
til,
ll.L.
Approved by:
Thomas R. Rasmussen
Field Manager
Date
/
This form documents information that constitutes an inventory finding on wilderness characteristics. It does not
represent a formal/and use allocation or a final agency decision subject to administrative remedies under either
43 CFRparts 4 or 1610.5-2.
Year: 2012
Acres
Inventory Unit Number/Name: Hart Mountain South Area Units <5,000
FORM 1
DOCUMENTATION OF BLM WILDERNESS INVENTORY FINDINGS ON RECORD
1. Is there existing BLM wilderness inventory information on all or part of this area?
No
(go to Form 2) Yes ___X____ (if more than one unit is within the area,
list the names/numbers of those units.)
a) Inventory Source: Wilderness Review - Initial Inventory: Final Decision on Public
Lands Obviously Lacking Wilderness Characteristics and Announcement of Public Lands
to be Intensively Inventoried for Wilderness Characteristics, August, 1979; Wilderness
Inventory Oregon and Washington: Final Intensive Inventory Decisions, November 1980.
b) Inventory Unit Name(s)/Number(s): 1-122 Greaser Reservoir, 1-125 Horsehead
Lake, 1-127 Wool Lake, 1-129 Jack Lake, 1-130 Little Reservoir, 1-131 Clover Swale
and 1-133 Guano Lake West
c) Map Name(s)/Number(s): U.S. Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land
Management, Oregon, Final Decision – Initial Wilderness Inventory, August 1979.
U.S. Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management, Oregon, Intensive
Wilderness Inventory: Final Decisions, November 1980.
d) BLM District(s)/Field Office(s): Lakeview District, Lakeview Resource Area
2. BLM Inventory Findings on Record
Existing inventory information regarding wilderness characteristics (if more than one
BLM inventory unit is associated with the area, list each unit/acreage and answer each
question individually for each inventory unit):
Unit #
Size
(acres)
Natural
Condition?
Y/N
Outstanding
Solitude?
Y/N
Outstanding
Primitive &
Unconfined
Recreation?
Y/N
N/A
Supplemental
Values?
Y/N
1-122
7,000
N
N/A
1-125
12,000
N
N
N
N/A
1-127
5,360
N
N
N
N/A
1
N/A
1-129
10,000
N
N
N
N/A
1-130
24,280
N
N
N
N/A
1-131
7,640
Y
N
N
N/A
1-133
13,480
Y
N
N
N
Summarize any known primary reasons for prior inventory findings listed in this table:
In 1979, unit 1-122 was eliminated relatively early in the review process as clearly and
obviously lacking wilderness character due to its relatively small size, additional
inventoried roads and clear impacts of man’s influence on the naturalness of the area.
In 1980, units 1-125, 1-127, 1-129, and 1-130 were found to be of sufficient size, but were
clearly unnatural due to the influences of man’s work on the landscape. Much of these
areas have relatively open terrain that would not isolate one from the sights and sounds of
man. The units did have some potential for primitive and unconfined recreation, but these
were not determined to be outstanding.
In 1980, units 1-131 and 1-133 were found to be predominantly in natural condition, but
the shape of these units, combined with the relatively flat open terrain and limited
vegetative cover, left one exposed to the sights and sounds of others in the units. These
units did not offer any outstanding opportunities for solitude. The units did have some
potential for primitive and unconfined recreation, but these were not determined to be
outstanding.
FORM 2
DOCUMENTATION OF CURRENT WILDERNESS INVENTORY CONDITIONS
a. Unit Number/Name: Hart Mountain South Area Units <5,000 Acres
(1) Is the unit of sufficient size? Yes
No
X
In 2005, the BLM received a citizen proposal from the Oregon Natural Desert Association
(ONDA) for a 424,570-acre area they referred to as Hart Mountain Proposed Wilderness Study
Area (WSA). ONDA included in their information a narrative report, maps, photos, photo and
route logs, and GIS data. All of these materials were considered during the BLM’s wilderness
inventory update for this area. The photos submitted by ONDA were taken in 2004. They
identified this large area as having no interior routes which met the BLM wilderness inventory
definition of a road (see Map, p. 96 of ONDA 2005).
Between 2008 and 2012, members of BLM’s staff conducted field inventory in the area as part
of a process to update both its road and wilderness inventories and to gather additional
information to supplement ONDA’s wilderness information. This included driving and
collecting photo documentation of the routes and human disturbances in the area. Using both
2
ONDA and BLM photos, field logs, and staff field knowledge, a BLM inter-disciplinary (ID)
team completed an analysis of the main routes within the area and made inventory unit boundary
determinations in 2012.
The BLM ID team determined that several of the routes ONDA identified as “ways” are, in fact,
roads defining inventory unit boundaries. For this reason, the BLM found that the proposed
WSA is not one large roadless unit, but is instead comprised of several smaller inventory units, 8
of which met the size criteria and 20 others that did not (see Map 2). The 8 units which met the
size criteria have been evaluated separately.
These units are bounded by Highway 140 right-of-way, BLM Roads 6122-00, 6122-B0, 6132­
00, 6132-A0, 6132-B0, 6152-00, 6152-A0, 6152-AA, 6152-B0, 6162-00, 6162-A0, 6162-B0,
6162-C0, 6106-00, 6106-A0, 7136-00, 7136-A0, and interim numbered roads 6162-E, 6122-C,
6106-AB, 6106-P, 6106-O, 6106-OB, and private and state lands (see Map 2).
This evaluation focuses on the 20 units which the BLM ID team identified were less than 5,000
acres in size and did not meet any of the exceptions to the size criteria.
Refer to the route analysis forms, photos, photo logs, and BLM ID team meeting notes in the
wilderness inventory file for additional supporting information regarding these boundary
determinations. Additional background on the process that the BLM ID team followed during
this evaluation is contained in the document, Wilderness Inventory Maintenance Process for the
Lakeview Resource Area, BLM, contained in the wilderness inventory file.
DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT CONDITIONS:
The 20 inventory units are comprised of BLM-administered lands located approximately 5 to 12
miles east of the town of Adel, Oregon (Maps 1 and 2). The topography can be described as
relatively flat table tops or gently sloping ridges with mixed rims and valley bottoms. The
dominant vegetation in the area is predominantly low sagebrush with alternating mixed areas
with big sage and some greasewood flats.
(2) Is the unit in a natural condition? Yes
No _____ N/A
X
The current natural character of these units was not evaluated because they failed to meet the
minimum size requirement.
(3) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
solitude?
Yes
No
N/A___X_____
The current opportunities for solitude within these units were not evaluated because they failed
to meet the minimum size requirement.
3
(4) Does the unit (or the remainder of the unit if a portion has been excluded due to
unnaturalness and the remainder is of sufficient size) have outstanding opportunities for
primitive and unconfined recreation? Yes
No
N/A___X_____
The current opportunities for recreation within these units were not evaluated because the units
failed to meet the minimum size requirement.
(5) Does the unit have supplemental values? Yes
No
N/A___X_____
Supplemental value was not evaluated within these units because they failed to meet the size
criteria.
Summary of Findings and Conclusion
Unit Name and Number: Hart Mountain South Area Units <5,000 Acres
Summary Results of Analysis:
1. Does the area meet the size requirements?
___Yes _ X__No
2. Does the area appear to be natural?
___Yes ____No __X_ N/A
3. Does the area offer outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and
unconfined type of recreation?
____Yes ____No __X_ N/A
4. Does the area have supplemental values?
___Yes ____No __X_ N/A
Conclusion (Check One):
_____ The area- or a portion of the area- has wilderness character:
(items 1, 2 and 3 must be checked “yes”).
__X__ The area does not have wilderness character: (any of items 1, 2 and 3 are
checked “no”).
4
Prepared by (ID Team Member Names and Titles):
!o/! :/~1<--
Date
l2 j;;w 12-­
r
Paul Whitman: Planning Coordinator
1o
i
Date
Les Boothe: Range Con~rvationist
f~31j2oiJ.
D e
II/;( ;Jo 1d-.___
Brennan Hank: Weed Specialist
Date
Glenn Lorton: Wildlife Biologist
~
til,
ll.L.
Approved by:
Thomas R. Rasmussen
Field Manager
Date
/
This form documents information that constitutes an inventory finding on wilderness characteristics. It does not
represent a formal/and use allocation or a final agency decision subject to administrative remedies under either
43 CFRparts 4 or 1610.5-2.
HART MOUNTAIN SOUTH AREA
Calderwood Reservoir (OR-015-123) 7,335 acres
Wildfire
Seeding
Fences
Guzzlers
Water Developments
Pipelines
Motorized Routes
Motorized Trails
Reclaiming Routes
210 ac
46 ac
9.7 miles
1
10 (6 Waterhole / 2 dams/ 2 water troughs/ 1 well)
1 mile
12.5 miles
0.4 miles
2.7 miles
Fisher Canyon South (OR-015-124) 11,772 acres
Wildfire
Seeding
Fences
Water Developments
Motorized Routes
Motorized Trails
Reclaiming Routes
916 ac
803 ac
12 miles
20 (2 dams/ 9 Reservoirs / 7 Waterholes/ 2 developed springs)
7.7 miles
1.3 miles
0.95 miles
Long Lake (OR-015-128) 7,552 acres
Fences
Water Developments
Motorized Routes
Motorized Trails
Reclaiming Routes
Closed Routes
11.3 miles
27 (16 Reservoir / 10 Waterhole / 1 Dam)
6.5 miles
1.3 miles
0. 5 miles
3.7 miles
Jack Lake (OR-015-129) 11,475 acres
Fences
Water Developments
Motorized Routes
Closed Routes
13.7 miles
18 (7 Reservoir / 10 Waterhole / 1 spring)
11 miles
5.4 miles
Little Reservoir (OR-015-130) 25,559 acres
Fences
Water Developments
Motorized Routes
Motorized Trails
Reclaiming Routes
Closed Routes
18.8 miles
19 (11 Reservoir / 8 Waterhole)
30 miles
0.4 miles
2.7 miles
6 miles
Shirk Rim (OR-015-133A) 5,324 acres
Fences
Water Developments
Cat Lines
Motorized Trails
3.5 miles
2 Waterholes
1.2 miles
1.3 miles
Guano Lake West (OR-015-133B) 5,998 acres
Fences
Water Developments
Motorized Routes
3.6 miles
5 (4 Waterholes / 1 spring)
3.8 miles
D
D
D
61 06 -0
0
61 06 -A 0
D
D
0154
D
0153
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D D
D
D
D
D D
D
D
D
D
D
D
LB
D
6176-00
61 76 -00
61 76 -00
6176 -NA
-N C
61 7
6
D
-A 0
71 3
6
A
0150
D
D
6106-00
0
61
12
-0
0
61
12
-0
61
76
-
0
61
06
-B
D
D
N
DD
61
76
-
D
D
D
61 06 -B C
D
61 76 -00
6106 -00
D D
-B F
D
71 3
6
D D
D
D
6122-00
00
61
22
-
71 36 -A
6122-B A
61 76 -00
C0
61
06
-
0
61 06 -C
D D
D
61 0
6
61 06 -P
61 06 -O
-J
71 3
6
-B A
7136-B0
B0
61
62
-
6106-C0
D
-00
F
61 62
-B
D
D
61 0
6
61
D06 -Q
D
71 3
6
D
6162-B C
D
D
-D 0
D
00
61
62
-
00
61
62
-
61 62 -00
D
61 22
-C
-00
61 5
2
-00
61
06
-C
D
0
D
D
-00
6102-C0
-B
D
-C C
61 62
-C
615D
2-00
61
D 52 -00
D D
D
61 52 -0
0
61
62
-
D
D
D
D
D
61
52 D
-D
A
D
01
71
6112-B B
01 73
6152-BD
D
D
6152-A 0
D
BB
61
32
-
D
D6152-00
61 52
-00
6152 -00 D
D
DD D
61
32
-00
-B 0
61 3
2
61 6
2
D
D
D D
D
DD
D
D
6132 -00
-I
D
61 3
2
D
D
D
61 32 -F
D
D D
OR-015-0000
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
01 6
9
61 5
2
D
D
D
DD
D
6142-B A
D
-JA
D
61 0
2
D
D D
D D
D
D
D
DD
D
D
D
D
D
H
D
D
D DD
D
D DD
D
D
D D
D D
D
D
D
D
D D
61
82
-
D
D
D
D
D
D
61 8
2
D D
D
D
-00
D
D
61 8
2
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
61
82
-I
D
D
D
DDD
D
D
D
D
D D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D DD
D
DD
D
D
D
D
DD
D
D
DD
D
D
D
6182-BF
D
OR-015-0000
/
""
/
D
D
D D
D
D
D !
Cnty 3-15
D
D D DD
01 44
D
D
Cnty 3-15
D
D D
DD
D D
D
D
D
D
D
DD D
D
D
OR-015-0000
"
/
D
Cnty 3-15
D
"
/
D
6176 -00
D
D
D
D
6182-B I
D
-00
D
D
6
61 7
OR-015-0000
D
6176-1I
D76 -00D
61
A
D
Map 2 - Wilderness Characteristics in Hart
Mountain South Area
D D
D DD
01
45
D
D
D
D
D
D
E
E
D
D D
01
67
-
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
61 06 -B
61 72
-00
D D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
61 06 -AC
D
D
-B
D
61
16
-I
"
/
"
/
"
/
D
D
01 6
7
D
D
D
D
D
D
10
D D
D
61 72 -00
D
D
D
D
D
3-
D
D
D
DD
D
Cnty 3-10 Cn
ty
D
D D
D D D
DDD D
D
D
Cnty 3-10
D
D
D
D
D
DD
01 51
6176-1J
D
-A B
61 06 D
D
6102 -A0
D
OR-015-0000
D
D
D DD
A0
D
-A B
61 06 D
D
D
D
61
16
-C
H
D
D D D
D
D
D
D
01 52
0
-N
76
61 D
D
D
D
DD D
D
6106-E
6176 -00
-G
G
06 -0 -00
61 06 -00 Old 61
6 -00
71 3
D
61 06 -A B
67
01
D D
OR-015-0000
-00
36
71
D
B
D
D
OR-015-0000
-A C 6
1 02
61 02
-A
J
D
61
12
-B
06
61
6 -H
61 0 D
OR-015-0000
D
K
D
NB
D
D
DD
-A
71 36
D
61
02
-
-D
A0
2 -A B
61 0
02
61
D
D
D
D
D
-G
OR-015-0000
D
D
61
02
-N
OR-015-0000
D
61 0
2
D
02
61
-00
D
2
61 4
D
61 82
DA
71 36
-00
D
D
0
61
76
-
C
D
6
61 0
D
D
0
D
DD D
D
-C
02
61
D
D
D
76
61
-N
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D D
G
D
D
D
61
42
-A
D
D
-B D D
61 06 -L
-00
36
71
D
-B
61 62
-F
0
61 22 -0
D
A
D
-A
61
02
-
6112-A
61 22 -E
61 76
-N
6176-N0
OR-015-133B
D
D
OR-015-130
0
6
61 0
D D
D
D
6106-OD
-OE
D
D
D D
-K
61 06
D
6
61 0
D
A
D D
D
D
D
B0
D
2
61 2
D
61 22 -C
-C
61 22
EA
A
H
-L0
D D D
D
D
D
00
D
C
D
22
61
22
61
-B
06
61
LB
I
22
61
61 52 -00
-B 0
2 -H
61 2
61
22
-G
D
OR-015-0000
-B B
61 06
6106 -BA
D
D
22
61
-D
D
61 4
2
6122-B0
B0
6 -LE
61 7
D
D
D
06
61
-N
61 06
OR-015-0000
OR-015-0000
OC
76
61
OR-015-0000
6106-O
61
06
-O
B
OR-015-0000
6 -P
61 0
36
71
D
2
61 5
22
61
6
61 7
D D
6106-CB
B0
71
36
-
D
6 -LA
61 7
D
36
71
-B B
D
D
C
6162-A0
-B
61 22
D
OR-015-0000
0
6 -0
3D
6
71 3
D
-E
61 52 -H
D
2 -G
D DD 615
D
D
0
D
-OA
0
High Lakes
2 -B
D 71
71 36 -C
-B A
D D DD
0
D -B
61 62
D
71
36
-B
D
61 06
-00
06
61
-00
71 36
A
6
71 3
D
D
D
D
D
61 06 -0
0
PA
-C
71 36
D
D
D
D0
D
DD
00
OR-015-133A
D
D
D DD
OR-015-0000
OR-015-0000
D D
D
OR-015-0000 61 6
61
06
-
61 0
6
7136 -BA
D D D
D
BA
D
D
D
D
-LC
D D
00
0
71 36 -0
D
62
61
D
D
OR-015-0000
D
DA
61
06
-
D
G
-00
2
61 6
2
61 6
D
B
D6106-D
Guano Creek-Sink Lakes
D
D
61
62
-
D0
D
61
06
-D
61 7
6
D
61
0
D 6-
D
06
61
-00
D
D
-00
D
D
DD
B
61 0
6
D
D
0
61 62 -00
D
2
61 3
D
61
OR-015-129
D
D
0
D
-B
62
61
D
61 52 -00
D
D
D
D
D D
"
)
D
OR-015-128
OR-015-0000
OR-015-0000
Spanish Lake
61 62 -B 0
D
0
61 62 -0
D
D
D
OR-015-0000
D D D
0
D D D 6 -D 0
D
D
D
00
D
D DD
-E B
D
-I
62
61
-00
52
61
DD
52 -I
D
D
D
D
-D0
6D1 06 D
D
K
61 62
B0
D
D
B 61
-C B
DD
DD
D
DD
0
1.3
Miles
D
D
-A
72
61
0 0.3250.65
D
-A 2D
7 D D
01
DD
D
U.S. Forest Service
2
61 6
6 -D
61 0
D
BE
61 62 -F
D D
2
61 2
42
61
62
61
D
A
OR-015-0000
2
01 7
State Agency
-E
Rahill
lly
U.S.y-Grave
Fish and Wildlife Service
01 43
Bureau of Land Management
D
D
-P
72
61
D
D
Other
D
D
/
"
"
/
"
/
ACEC
Oregon WSA
-B C
Wildfires
D
D
Prescribed Fire (Post-1980)
OR-015-0000
Wilderness Characteristics
D
A
61
52
-00
DD
D
D DD
D
OR-015-0000
D D DD D D D
D
D6142- "
)
61
82
D 00 D
D
61 8
D
-K
2 -B
DD
A
D
D
D
D
Seeding Treatments
D
D
Mineral Pits
2
61 8
"
/
"
/
52
61
01
68
D
D
Locatable Mining Disturbances
C
D
Abandoned Mine Sites
0
-0
72 D
61
"
/
46
01
LVRA Distribution Lines
-B
61 82
D
D
!
"
)
01 4
7
G
D
D52
61
B
-A
52
61 61
52
-A
0
D
6162-B
D
"
/
"
/OR-015-0000
B
D
Water Developments
-0-
D
61 82
-B
"
/
Water Devel opments
9
01 6
D
2
61 8
D
D
61 82 -B L
6182-B M
OR-015-0000
Pipelines
D
D D
D
5
3 -1 D
Reclaiming Routes
D
D D
/
OR-015-0000 "
Closed Routes
Fences
D
D
D
Cnty
Motorized and Non-Mot orized Trails
Guzzlers
01 70
2
61 3
-DB
61 52
DA
D
1
01 7
D
D
Cnty 3-15
D
DD
-00
32
61
D
-I
61 52
0
OR-015-123
DD
OR-015-0000
Mot orized Routes
00
-C
61 32
D D
D
Highways
32
61
A
D!
DD
D
M
D D D
6152-A0
OR-015-0000
OR-015-0000
OR-015-124
32
61
-A 0
D!
D
-10
D !D
Cnty 3
D
E
D
-K
61 32
61 32 -C
D
D!
61 52 -A
OR-015-0000
D
D
D D
Legend
D
-J
61 32
D
!
D
D
D
-I
51
61
D
D
D DD
!
D
61 52
D
0
0
61 52 -A
61 52 -A 6152 -A0
61 52 -A 0
0
D D D
-0
32D
D
61
DD D D D D
D
6132-B B
D
D
D
D
D D
D D 174
D 0 DD
D
D
D
D
D D
D 2 -D
0
2 -B
13
61 3
D DD
A 6 01 75
D D
D
2 -D
D
D D
D 6D13
D
D
D D
DD
D DD
2 -E D D
D
61 3
D
D DD D
D D D D D D
D
D D D
6132-00
0
CB
52
61
D
OR-015-0000
D
D
-00
32
61D OR-015-0000
61 D
D 32-H
-C
62
61
B0
R
D615D2-S
OR-015-0000
D D
D
61
52
-
61
62
-
62
61
00
52
61
D
D D
-T
61 52
-00
D
D
3 -1
!0
!
D
D! D !D
D D
! D!
D
D
D
OR-015-0000
D
61 5
2
Q
D D
D
D D
61
52
-
OR-015-0000
52
61
Cnty
!D
"
/D
D
B
D D
D D
OR-015-0000
0
3 -1
!
D
D
-P
D D D6152
ty
3 -10D!CnD
CntyD!
!
«
D
D
D
D
D D
D
D D
D
D
D
D
-B
61 52
OR-015-0000
D
!
D DD
D
D
D
OR-015-0000
D
!
D
­
OR-015-124
OR-015-129
OR-015-133A
OR-015-128
OR-015-123
OR-015-133B
OR-015-130
Legend
Wilderness Characteristics Inventory Unit
Juniper Density Class
High
Medium
Low
Lakeview District Slope
Value
0-2
2.1 - 15
15.1 - 35
35.1 - 60
>60
0
0.75
1.5
3 Miles
Map 3 - Screening in Hart Mountain South Inventory Units
No warranty is made by the Bureau of Land Management as to the accuracy,
reliability, or completeness of these data for individual or aggregate
use with other data. Original data were compiled from various sources.
This information may not meet National M ap Accuracy Standards. This
product was developed through digital means and may be updated without
notification.