UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Cabeza Prieta National
Wildlife Refuge A Report on Wilderness Character Monitoring
Molly McCarter
October 2011
This document was created as part of the FWS National Wildlife Refuge System Wilderness Character
Monitoring Program of 2011. This pilot program is part of a national strategy for wilderness inventory and monitoring. Accompanying this report is a Wilderness Character Monitoring Database program with
entries specific to this refuge.
“Thousands of tired, nerve-shaken, over-civilized people are beginning
to find out that going to the mountains is going home; that wildness is a
necessity; that mountain parks and reservations are useful not only as
fountains of timber and irrigating rivers, but as fountains of life.”
- John Muir
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 1
CONTENTS
Setting of the Refuge Wilderness ..............................................................................................2
Geographic setting ...................................................................................................................2
Ecological setting ....................................................................................................................3
History of establishing the wilderness ......................................................................................6
Refuge purposes ......................................................................................................................6
Documents Consulted ...............................................................................................................8
Staff Consulted ..........................................................................................................................8
Process used for identifying measures ......................................................................................9
Measures used ......................................................................................................................... 10
Untrammeled Quality ............................................................................................................ 11
Natural Quality ...................................................................................................................... 15
Undeveloped Quality ............................................................................................................. 22
Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation Quality ...................................................... 34
Measures not used ................................................................................................................... 40
Untrammeled Quality ............................................................................................................ 40
Natural Quality ...................................................................................................................... 43
Undeveloped Quality ............................................................................................................. 46
Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation Quality ...................................................... 47
Conclusions .............................................................................................................................. 51
Appendices .............................................................................................................................. 53
Appendix A - Worksheet: Priority Ranking Of Potential Measures ....................................... 53
Appendix B - Spreadsheets: Effort Required For Wilderness Character Monitoring .............. 60
Appendix C - Table: Detailed Description of Data Sources and How Data Were Gathered ... 63
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 2
SETTING OF THE REFUGE WILDERNESS
Geographic setting
Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge is located in the southwest corner of Arizona and
is approximately 177 kilometers (110 miles) south of Phoenix, Arizona and 201 kilometers (125
miles) west of Tucson, Arizona. It lies along 56 miles of the international border in the heart of
the Sonoran Desert and is bordered by Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument to the east (which
contains wilderness), and the Barry M. Goldwater Range to the west and north. Cabeza Prieta
NWR is the third largest wildlife refuge in the lower 48 states and contains the largest refuge
wilderness outside of Alaska at 803,418 acres. The Cabeza Prieta Wilderness encompasses 93
percent of the refuge.
Geographic setting of Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge (FWS)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 3
Wilderness boundary of Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge (FWS)
Ecological setting
The Fish and Wildlife Service identified and mapped 53 ecosystem units throughout the
United States by grouping watersheds. Ecosystem Teams were established and directed to
develop plans for each unit that describe ecological resources, issues relevant to the resources,
and conservation strategies. The Cabeza Prieta NWR is located within the Gila/Salt/Verde
Ecosystem part of the Lower Colorado River Ecosystem, one of the nine ecosystem units within
the Southwest Region.
Cabeza Prieta means “Black Head” or “Dark Head” in Spanish. The name is inspired by
a lava topped granite peak found on the western side of the refuge. The refuge is remote,
immense, hot, and dry. The geology of the refuge is primarily basalts and granite, with deep
alluvial valleys between mountain ranges. Two types of mountains occur on the refuge: sierras
and mesas. The sierra mountain ranges are characterized by jagged crests that vary little in
height and rise steeply from valley floors. The mesas are gently inclined, or relatively flat,
massive blocks cut by young canyons. Separating the mountain ranges are broad, nearly level
alluvial valleys and basins. Runoff from the mountains drains northward into the Gila River,
westward to the Colorado River, and finally southward to the Gulf of California. Three desert
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 4
playas (“dry lakes”- broad basins that hold water temporarily) are present on the refuge. They
exist because of an absence of an outlet for the draining water and in wet years can be covered
with dense annuals.
Cabeza Prieta Peak, the “Black Head” (FWS)
Cabeza Prieta NWR is located within the Tropical-Subtropical Desertland climatic zone.
The mean annual precipitation on the refuge is less than 10 inches, varying from 9 inches on the
east side of the refuge to 3 inches on the west side. Rainfall increases with elevation. Most of
the precipitation occurs from July to September in the form of intense thundershowers and the
driest months on the refuge are May and June. The highest temperatures occur from mid-May to
mid-September and generally exceed 100 degrees Fahrenheit.
Forty-two species of mammals are known to inhabit Cabeza Prieta. Only a few large
mammals occur in Cabeza Prieta including desert bighorn sheep, Sonoran pronghorn, bobcat,
mountain lion, and coyote. Other mammals include rabbits, burrowing rodents, and bats. Bird
diversity and abundance is low, consisting of arid adapted resident species and Neotropical
migrants moving through the refuge in the spring and fall. Reptiles, on the other hand, are well
represented by unique species. Rocky outcrops, bajadas, and washes all support varied reptiles,
including six species of rattlesnakes, desert tortoise, and numerous lizards including Gila
monster. A few species of amphibians also occur the throughout the refuge inhabiting water
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 5
catchments and natural ephemeral water sources following the summer rains and inhabiting
borrows during non-breeding periods.
Mojave rattlesnake, one of six rattlesnake species found on the Cabeza Prieta National
Wildlife Refuge (Molly McCarter)
The refuge supports 400 plant species. These are distributed over two general vegetation
zones: (1) Arizona Upland-Upper Bajadas and lower elevations support creosote, palo verde,
ironwood, mesquite, ocotillo, saguaro, small shrubs and grasses, and cacti; and (2) Lower
Colorado Valley with bajadas and inner mountain alluvial plains which support mostly open
stands of creosote and bursage. No endangered plant species have been identified on the refuge.
Foothill palo verde and saguaro dominate the landscape.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 6
History of establishing the wilderness
The Cabeza Prieta NWR was originally established as a “Game Range” by Executive
Order 8038 signed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt on January 25, 1939. This Range was
established primarily to assist in the recovery of the desert bighorn sheep, and partially in
response to public demand generated by the Boy Scouts of America, Arizona Game Protective
Association, and the Audubon Society. With the onset of World War II, the bulk of the game
range was included in the Luke Air Force Gunnery Range. The military used the area for pilot
training, live fire exercises at towed targets, ground firing, and practice bombing.
The Public Land Order 5493 of March 21, 1975, amended the original Executive Order
and gave sole jurisdiction to the Fish and Wildlife Service, and changed the name of the Game
Range to Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge. The Cabeza Prieta Wilderness was first
proposed as a Wilderness Study Area in 1968 and was designated by the Arizona Desert
Wilderness Act of 1990 (HR 2570 Title 3). This Act designated about 93 percent of the refuge,
or 325,133 hectares (803,418 acres) as wilderness. Special provisions for border law
enforcement agencies and the military were included in the act.
Saguaros on the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge (FWS)
Refuge purposes
The Cabeza Prieta NWR was established January 25, 1939 as Cabeza Prieta Game Range
by Executive Order 8038 “for the conservation and development of natural wildlife resources,
and for the protection and improvement of public grazing lands and natural forage
resources...(and) that all the forage resources in excess of that required to maintain a balanced
wildlife population within this range or preserve shall be available for livestock…”. This Range
was established primarily to assist in the recovery of the desert bighorn sheep. A strategy
involving water structure development and active management of the rocky, arid sierras and
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 7
intermittent drainage areas was implemented for species recovery throughout their historic range
in Arizona. Enactment of the Arizona Desert Wilderness Act of 1990 designated most of the
refuge wilderness and created the supplemental refuge purpose of wilderness protection, in
accordance with the Wilderness Act of 1964. In addition to the original refuge purposes and the
additional wilderness purpose created by the Arizona Desert Wilderness Act of 1990, several
federal policies, regulations, and laws affect refuge management activities. Preeminent among
these is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, which mandates protection and recovery of
threatened and endangered species. In 1988 Cabeza Prieta NWR was given the lead for recovery
of the Sonoran pronghorn, thus creating an additional refuge purpose.
Sonoran pronghorn (FWS)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 8
DOCUMENTS CONSULTED
♦ Arizona Desert Wilderness Act of 1990 (Public law 101-628).
♦ Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP),
Wilderness Stewardship Plan and Environmental Impact Statement. US Fish and Wildlife
Service. August 2006. Print.
♦ Annual Narratives (several years)
♦ Cultural Resources Overview and Assessment: Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge.
US Fish and Wildlife Service. August 2001. Print.
♦ Ancient Desert Wanderers: An Archaeological Record of Archaic Sites in Turtle Valley.
Arizona Archeological Society, Ajo Chapter. 2005. Print.
♦ Lost City: A Shell Jewelry Manufacturing Village. Arizona Archeological Society, Ajo
Chapter. 2006. Print.
STAFF CONSULTED
♦ James Atkinson, Sonoran Pronghorn Recovery Team Leader
♦ Stephen Barclay, Assistant Refuge Manager
♦ Nick Burnard, Maintenance Mechanic
♦ Brian Krukoski, Supervisory Law Enforcement Officer
♦ Sid Slone, Refuge Manager
♦ Kim Veverka, Wildlife Biologist
♦ Mike West, Law Enforcement Officer
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 9
PROCESS USED FOR IDENTIFYING MEASURES
Reading the Comprehensive Conservation Plan provided the best overview of the status
of the refuge and wilderness, including management actions, border security issues, and species
of concern. This document allowed me to draft a list of potential monitoring measures which
was presented to refuge management (consisting of the refuge manager and the assistant refuge
manager).
The initial meeting with refuge management was very long, and provided me with
excellent information about what the priority concerns were at the Cabeza Prieta Wilderness.
After this meeting, I was able to edit my list of potential measures (redefine, eliminate, and add
measures).
I then immediately began inquiring to the appropriate refuge staff about data availability
and acquirement. Meetings were held with the wildlife biologist, the Sonoran pronghorn
recovery team leader, refuge law enforcement staff, and maintenance staff. These meetings
allowed me to gauge data availability and I subsequently redefined measures to align them with
data that is currently collected by refuge staff.
Several meetings occurred with refuge management to further refine and prioritize
measures. Additionally, meetings were held and inquiries were made to local experts not
employed by the refuge, including nongovernmental organizations, cultural resource assessment
volunteers, a border patrol agent, and neighboring National Park staff. These encounters
provided further insight and additional perspectives on wilderness areas adjacent to international
borders and wilderness areas with federally listed endangered species.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 10
MEASURES USED
This section provides information on the measures selected for the Cabeza Prieta
wilderness character monitoring protocol. This section provides information on the context of
the measure within the Cabeza Prieta Wilderness, data sources, and data quality. Also included
is an assignment of the relevance of the measure within the indicator (high, medium, or low)
which was derived from importance assignments from priority ranking sheets and the weight of
the measures within the database, both of which were determined by refuge management.
Information on data condition (for 2011), data confidence, and trend are represented by colored
circles. The trend for all measures is stable (horizontal arrow) for the 2011 year because this is
the baseline year. The condition is represented by the color of the circle: red (poor), yellow
(caution), or green (good). The confidence in the data accuracy is represented by the line around
the circle: a thick solid line (high confidence), thin solid line (medium confidence), or a dashed
line (low confidence). This section does not provide any physical data; please refer to the
Wilderness Character Monitoring Database for this data.
Mule deer at sunrise on the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge (FWS)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 11
Quality: Untrammeled
Indicator: Actions authorized by the federal land manager that manipulate the biophysical
environment
Measure: Natural fire suppressions in wilderness.
♦ Context: At present, Cabeza Prieta doesn’t have a fire management plan. Refuge
management understands the benefits of natural fires to ecosystems and hopes to develop
a fire management plan in the near future. It takes approximately six hours for fire
personnel to arrive on site, therefore very few fires are suppressed on the Cabeza Prieta
National Wildlife Refuge.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
Low Refuge
Management
Inquiry to
Refuge
Management
50 points High
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
A point system was created to monitor fire suppressions in
wilderness within different size categories. Refuge management
determined that based on these point categorizations, an increase or
decrease of fifty points would be significant enough to indicate a
trend in wilderness character. 2Data Adequacy: There is high confidence in the quality of the data for this year
because it is common refuge knowledge that no wildfires were
suppressed in wilderness within the last year.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 12
Quality: Untrammeled
Indicator: Actions authorized by the federal land manager that manipulate the biophysical
environment
Measure: Number of trips to haul water to wilderness.
♦ Context: Under present management 27 developed wildlife waters are maintained in
wilderness. The presence of these developments can be viewed as contrary to the
undeveloped and untrammeled character of wilderness. Eighteen of these developed
waters, however, were present and maintained on the refuge while the refuge wilderness
proposal was being developed. The refuge periodically hauls water to 20 of the
developed waters in wilderness, although during most years fewer than 20 developed
waters receive hauled supplemental water. Water is hauled to water developments in the
Cabeza Prieta wilderness via motor vehicle and helicopter. While the actual water
brought to the wilderness is a manipulation of the biophysical environment, the trips to
haul this water was determined to be more impactful to the wilderness’s character than
the amount of water brought on these trips.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data1
Significant
Change2
Confidence in
Data Quality3
High Maintenance
mechanic or
other staff that
conduct water
hauls
Inquiry to
maintenance
mechanic
50% High
1Process to Gather Data: Compiled gallons of water delivered to wilderness from
maintenance mechanic into Excel document. Maintenance
mechanic provided number of trips to each development so far for
2011, and a gallons per trip was estimated for all previous years.
This was used to estimate the number of wilderness water hauls for
previous years.
2Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
It was determined by refuge management that an increase or
decrease of 50% in the amount of trips to deliver water to
wilderness water developments would be significant enough to
indicate a trend in wilderness character. 3Data Adequacy: There is high confidence in the quality of this data because
beginning this year (2011), the number of trips to haul water will be
tracked.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 13
Quality: Untrammeled
Indicator: Actions not authorized by the Federal land manager that manipulate the
biophysical environment
Measure: Number of undocumented alien (UDAs) apprehensions in the refuge.
♦ Context: Impacts of UDA presence include ignition of rescue fires, ground disturbance
(including trampling of fragile cryptogammic soils), littering, and pose safety threats to
visitors all of which affect the character of the Cabeza Prieta Wilderness including the
biophysical environment.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
High US Border
Patrol
Inquiry to US
Border Patrol,
compilation of
data from
Yuma and
Tucson sectors
50% High
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
Refuge management determined this significant change.
2Data Adequacy: There is high confidence in the quality of this data because number
of apprehensions within the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge
is kept by the border patrol agency.
Typical items discarded by
cross border violators on
Cabeza Prieta National
Wildlife Refuge (Alex
Wong)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 14
Quality: Untrammeled
Indicator: Actions not authorized by the Federal land manager that manipulate the
biophysical environment
Measure: Acres of wilderness burned due to human-caused wildfires.
♦ Context: Many human ignited fires are signals from undocumented aliens traveling
north from Mexico through the refuge requesting rescue.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
Medium Refuge
Management,
Law
Enforcement
Staff
Inquiry to
Refuge
Management
and Law
Enforcement
Staff
50 points Medium
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
A point system was created to monitor unnaturally caused wildfires
in wilderness within different size categories. Refuge management
determined that based on these point categorizations, an increase or
decrease of fifty points would be significant enough to indicate a
trend in wilderness character. 2Data Adequacy: There is a medium level of confidence in the quality of the data for
this year because fires caused by undocumented aliens (UDAs)
often go unreported.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 15
Quality: Natural
Indicator: Plant and animal species and communities
Measure: Population size of bighorn sheep, a species of concern.
♦ Context: The protection and conservation of desert bighorn sheep were central to
refuge establishment; the original game range was established primarily to assist in the
recovery of the desert bighorn sheep. Throughout the earlier part of the 20th Century
desert bighorn sheep populations continued to dwindle, despite legal protection. In the
early and mid 1930s, staff of the several regional and national agencies conducted
surveys that recommended establishment of a game range or preserve to protect the
natural resources of the Cabeza Prieta area (and other areas in southwestern Arizona) for
protection of the desert bighorn sheep. At present, desert bighorn sheep are recognized as
a wilderness resource, as well as a species basic to the original purpose of the refuge.
Maximizing numbers of bighorn sheep is a refuge management goal.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
Medium CPNWR CCP
and Wildlife
Biologist
Inquiry to
Wildlife
Biologist
Any (based on
CCP target)
High
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
Based on the CPNWR Comprehensive Conservation Plan
population objective of 500 bighorn sheep. Any increase in
population size that approaches the target population size will be an
improving trend in wilderness character for this measure. It should
be noted that even healthy populations fluctuate in size, so
determining whether a change in data indicates an
improving/degrading/stable trend should be left to the wildlife
specialist. 2Data Adequacy: There is high confidence in the quality of the data because these
population estimates are based on aerial flights conducted by
wildlife specialists every three years.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 16
Bighorn sheep on the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge (FWS)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 17
Quality: Natural
Indicator: Plant and animal species and communities
Measure: Population size of Sonoran pronghorn, an endangered species of concern.
♦ Context: The refuge plays a critical role in the recovery and protection of rare and
sensitive species including the federally endangered Sonoran pronghorn. In 1988 Cabeza
Prieta NWR was given the lead for recovery of the Sonoran pronghorn. Pronghorn
recovery is one of the primary management goals of the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife
Refuge. Since the population crash in 2002 when the population dropped to 21
individuals, refuge management practices, particularly the captive breeding program, has
enhanced the population to a current 100 individuals. The relevance of this measure to
this indicator is high because the Sonoran pronghorn is a highly vulnerable species
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
High CPNWR CCP
and Wildlife
Biologist
Inquiry to
Wildlife
Biologist
Any (based on
CCP target)
High
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
Based on the CPNWR Comprehensive Conservation Plan
population objective of 300 Sonoran pronghorn. Any increase in
population size that approaches the target population size will be an
improving trend in wilderness character for this measure. It should
be noted that even healthy populations fluctuate in size, so
determining whether a change in data indicates an
improving/degrading/stable trend should be left to the wildlife
specialist. 2Data Adequacy: There is high confidence in the quality of the data because these
population estimates are based on aerial flights conducted by
wildlife specialists.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 18
Sonoran pronghorn (Alex Wong)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 19
Quality: Natural
Indicator: Plant and animal species and communities
Measure: Frequency of non native plant species encounters based on vegetation plot
surveys.
♦ Context: Three non-native species: fountain grass, buffelgrass and Sahara mustard
occur sporadically on the refuge. These species have the potential to out-compete native
species for resources and reduce the density of native flora on the refuge. Sahara mustard
is of particular concern as it appears to be infesting the Pinta Sands area, which has
supported a native sand dune endemic community considered to be an important food
source for Sonoran pronghorn. Currently monitoring of invasive and non native plant
species is not conducted, but a monitoring protocol is to be established in the next two
years.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change
Confidence in
Data Quality
Medium TBD TBD TBD TBD
*Fields are to be determined when monitoring protocol is established/ implemented.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 20
Quality: Natural
Indicator: Physical resources
Measure: Air Quality Data
♦ Context: This measure and data are to be entered by the I&M Program.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change
Confidence in
Data Quality
High TBD TBD TBD TBD
*Fields are to be determined when data is available.
Blonde tarantula in the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge (FWS)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 21
Quality: Natural
Indicator: Biophysical processes
Measure: Change in frequency of desirable plants (due to changes in climate).
♦ Context: It is expected that desirable plants will be affected by climate change. This is
currently not monitored by refuge staff, but it is a high priority of concern. A monitoring
protocol is to be established in the near future.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change
Confidence in
Data Quality
High TBD TBD TBD TBD
Poppies blooming on the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge (FWS)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 22
Quality: Undeveloped
Indicator: Non-recreational structures, installations, and developments
Measure: Number of man-made, developed wildlife water source structures and enhanced
natural water source areas in wilderness.
♦ Context: These water developments exist for the benefit of bighorn sheep and Sonoran
pronghorn. They are considered necessary for stabilization of these populations.
Types of water developments found on the refuge include: buried reservoirs with
collection points and drinking troughs, runoff tanks (modified tinajas), charcos, and
storage tanks with drinking troughs. Some of these waters are also used by cross border
travelers as rescue waters. While these developments are degrading to the “undeveloped”
quality of wilderness, it improves the “natural” quality of wilderness. Additional water
developments in wilderness are being considered.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
Medium CPNWR CCP,
Refuge
Management,
Wildlife
Biologist
Read CCP data Any High
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
I suggested this significant change, and refuge management
confirmed it. 2Data Adequacy: There is high confidence in the quality of the data because this is
common refuge knowledge. All water developments in wilderness
are known and monitored.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 23
*Source: Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan (2006)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 24
*Source: Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan (2006)
Papago Drinker, a wildlife water development in the Cabeza Prieta Wilderness
(Molly McCarter)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 25
Quality: Undeveloped
Indicator: Non-recreational structures, installations, and developments
Measure: Number of sites with communications and security infrastructure(s).
♦ Context: Monitors the number of separate sites with structures in wilderness. The sites
affect the viewshed around them. A separate “site” is defined as anything at least 300
feet beyond a current site. Currently three such sites exist in the Cabeza Prieta
Wilderness: Growler Mountain, Granite Mountain, and Buck Peak. Seven additional
sites are currently proposed. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has proposed an
upgrade to the existing radio repeater site on Buck Peak, a new radio repeater adjacent to
the existing Air Force repeater on Granite Mountain, and a new repeater in the Tule Well
area. Another four to seven Innovative Fixed Towers are proposed either along the El
Camino and Christmas Pass roads (which are outside wilderness) or in the wilderness, or
a combination of both locations.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
High Refuge
Management,
Wildlife
Biologist
Inquiry to
Wildlife
Biologist
Any High
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
Any additional site 300 feet beyond a current site defines an
additional site and is significant enough to constitute a change in
trend for wilderness character. 2Data Adequacy: There is high confidence in the quality of the data because this is
common refuge knowledge. All water developments in wilderness
are known and monitored.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 26
Quality: Undeveloped
Indicator: Non-recreational structures, installations, and developments
Measure: Total square footage of radio/communications sites (footprint).
♦ Context: This measure monitors the total footprint of sites with structures, and
therefore captures the on-the-ground impact including ground disturbance, habitat loss,
etc.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality
High TBD TBD 25% TBD
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
This significant change was determined by the refuge manager.
*Fields are to be determined when data is available.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 27
Quality: Undeveloped
Indicator: Non-recreational structures, installations, and developments
Measure: Number of tow darts in wilderness (abandoned military structures).
♦ Context: Past military use has left a scattering of debris throughout the refuge. These
materials range from numerous .50 caliber machine gun shell casings to larger items such
tow darts. The darts are wood and aluminum winged structures approximately 4 meters
(13 feet) in length that were towed behind aircraft and used as targets in air-to-air
gunnery targets. Analysis of aerial photographs conducted by the Air Force in 1998
yielded an estimate of more than 1,600 darts within the refuge.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
Medium CPNWR CCP,
Refuge
Management
Read CCP data 10% Medium
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
This significant change was determined by the refuge manager.
2Data Adequacy: There is medium level of confidence in this data for the baseline
year because it is based on an estimate as documented in Cabeza
Prieta National Wildlife Refuge’s Comprehensive Conservation
Plan.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 28
Quality: Undeveloped
Indicator: Non-recreational structures, installations, and developments
Measure: Number of abandoned vehicles in wilderness.
♦ Context: Past illegal vehicle use for drug smuggling has resulted in an accumulation of
abandoned vehicles that break down or become stuck while crossing the refuge
wilderness. Refuge staff report that between 26 and 30 vehicles remain in refuge
wilderness.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
Medium CPNWR CCP,
Refuge
Management
Inquiry to the
Refuge
Manager, Read
CCP data
50% High
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
This significant change was determined by the refuge manager.
2Data Adequacy: There is high confidence in this data for the baseline year because
the known 26 abandoned vehicles have been identified with GPS
coordinates.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 29
Quality: Undeveloped
Indicator: Inholdings
Measure: Acres of inholdings in wilderness.
♦ Context: Three potential inholdings are located in the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife
Refuge. One exists in the Cabeza Prieta Refuge, but it is not adjacent to or near the
wilderness boundary. The other two are within the wilderness boundary, but are believed
by refuge management to no longer have any private use rights. One appears to be an old
mining claim (“Papago Mine”) between 20-40 acres. This private land near Papago Well
is identified on the Bureau of Land Management’s (1:100,000 scale) land status maps.
Little else is known about this land. Another potential inholding is a portion of land
identified on the Bureau of Land Management’s (1:100,000 scale) land status map as
state land and is the northern boundary of the refuge adjacent to Christmas Pass Road (in
wilderness). Because both of these parcels are believed to be inactive, neither of these
potential inholdings was included in the wilderness character monitoring database. A
follow up needs to be conducted to confirm the status of these lands; if the parcels are
private the refuge will work towards their acquisition.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
High Refuge
Management,
Refuge Maps
Inquiry to the
Refuge
Manager,
Referenced
Refuge Maps
Any Medium
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
I suggested this significant change, and refuge management
confirmed it. 2Data Adequacy: There is a medium level of confidence in the quality of this data
because of the potential of inholdings to exist within the wilderness
boundary. A follow up needs to be conducted to confirm the status
of these lands.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 30
Quality: Undeveloped
Indicator: Use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment, or mechanical transport
Measure: Off road vehicle tracks according to east-west transect surveys.
♦ Context: This data will capture off road vehicle (ORV) tracks made by (1) border
security activities, (2) illegal border traffic, and (3) illegal use of ORVs by visitors.
Refuge management is optimistic that border patrol will better comply with only
necessary off road use and incursion report filing when off road use does occur. A
monitoring protocol is to be established in the next two years. With the installation of
new infrastructure, the refuge believes that within the next four to five years illegal
border activity will be drastically reduces and thus border patrol will have less need to
drive off road. However, illegal border activity is expected to increase on the refuge over
the next four years as border patrol achieve success in the east (this will drive traffic to
the west, to Cabeza Prieta NWR).
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality
High TBD TBD 25% TBD
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
This significant change was determined by the refuge manager.
*Fields are to be determined when monitoring protocol is established/ implemented.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 31
Quality: Undeveloped
Indicator: Use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment, or mechanical transport
Measure: Number of vehicle days of authorized internal motorized/mechanized use in
wilderness (vehicles X days).
♦ Context: This measure would capture authorized use of vehicle in wilderness on
administrative trails. It will include a sum of: (1) Law enforcement vehicle use, (2)
Water hauls, (3) Other uses of administrative trails by refuge staff. Management use of
vehicles in wilderness may be done for purposes including but not limited to: surveys,
sign installation, abandoned vehicle removal, military debris removal.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
Medium TBD TBD TBD TBD
*Fields are to be determined when monitoring protocol is established/ implemented.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 32
Quality: Undeveloped
Indicator: Loss of statutorily protected cultural resources
Measure: Percent of cultural resource sites that have been surveyed in wilderness.
♦ Context: To date, no assessment of the extent of disturbance to cultural resource sites
in wilderness has been conducted. Therefore, a measure was selected that monitors the
extent of surveying of cultural resource sites in wilderness. When damage assessments
are conducted in the future, this measure should be changed. Severity of disturbances to
cultural resources should be documented with photos/status reports.
El Camino del Diablo trail district, an ancient trail that passed through the southern part
of the refuge, was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1978 and is listed by the
State Historic Preservation Office as an Arizona historic trail. This original trail system, more a
braided corridor of multiple paths than a single trail, is distinct from the modern refuge access
road that shares its name and general location. The National Historic District is a 1.6-kilometer
(1-mile) wide corridor centered on the original trail used by travelers in the region since the pre-
European contact era. The name El Camino del Diablo - “the Devil’s Highway” - first appears in
historical records from the 1850s, and was likely coined by prospectors on their way to the
California gold fields and other travelers from Caborca, Mexico to Yuma, Arizona. Thousands of
prospectors braved this arid route. It has earned its name as the most deadly immigrant trail
where over 400 travelers perished over the years.
Several other archeological sites have been identified as eligible for listing. Within the refuge, 45 prehistoric and historic sites have been recorded by a statewide survey. In
addition, there are numerous site “leads” and site locations that are known but have not been
formally recorded. Disturbances to cultural resources in the Cabeza Prieta Wilderness
include damage from vehicles and erosion. Other damage can include vandalism
(carving letters beside petroglyphs), trampling, etc.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
High CPNWR
Cultural
Resource
Volunteers
Inquiry to
CPNWR
Cultural
Resource
Volunteers
Any Medium
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
I suggested this significant change, and refuge management
confirmed it. 2Data Adequacy: There is a medium level of confidence in the quality of this data
because it was estimated by the CPNWR cultural resource
volunteers.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 33
Petroglyphs pictured at a possible cultural resource site on the Cabeza Prieta National
Wildlife Refuge (FWS)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 34
Quality: Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation
Indicator: Remoteness from sights and sounds of people inside the wilderness
Measure: Miles of roads open to border patrol use in wilderness.
♦ Context: A special provision to the Arizona Desert Wilderness Act of 1990 allows use
of trails in wilderness for border security purposes. This measure is a sum of
Administrative Trails and Border Patrol Operational Trails. Administrative trails are
used for hauling water to water developments when necessary and for other refuge or
wilderness management purposes (per a Minimum Requirements Analysis).
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
High Refuge Maps
in GIS with
appropriate
layers
Calculated
road length
using GIS and
appropriate
road layers
20% High
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
The refuge manager determined this significant change.
2Data Adequacy: There is high confidence in the quality of this data because it was
calculated using official refuge maps in a GIS program.
Administrative
trail open for
use by border
patrol agents
(Molly
McCarter)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 35
Quality: Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation
Indicator: Remoteness from sights and sounds of people inside the wilderness
Measure: Miles of unauthorized routes in wilderness.
♦ Context: The Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge shares 56 miles of border with
Mexico. Over the past decade, the refuge has experienced significant impacts associated
with illegal border crossings and subsequent interdiction efforts by law enforcement.
These illegal crossings include the smuggling of undocumented aliens (UDAs) of various
nationalities and drugs. These activities concern refuge management because of their
impacts to wilderness character and other trust resources such as the federally endangered
Sonoran pronghorn. CPNWR conducted an inventory of off-road vehicular travel within
the refuge. Using high resolution aerial photography from 2008, 12,455 km (7,739) miles
of vehicular trails were found in the Cabeza Prieta Wilderness. Refuge management is
unsure about the ability to get data of this high quality in the future, but certainly hopes
to.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
High Vehicle Trails
Associated
with Illegal
Border
Activities on
CPNWR
Report
Read roads
report for data
10% High
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
The refuge manager determined this significant change.
2Data Adequacy: There is high confidence in the quality of this data because it was
calculated using high resolution aerial photography.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 36
Digitized off road tracks showing distribution and classification from 2008 CPNWR Roads
Report (FWS)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 37
Quality: Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation
Indicator: Remoteness from sights and sounds of people outside the wilderness
Measure: Miles of wilderness border adjacent to development.
♦ Context: Currently there is no development directly adjacent to the Cabeza Prieta
Wilderness border. But, since the border is along Mexico, this is a highly vulnerable
measure because development along this border is far outside refuge management’s
control.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
High Refuge
Management
Inquiry to
Refuge
Manager
Any High
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
I suggested this significant change, and refuge management
confirmed it. 2Data Adequacy: There is high confidence in the quality of this data because it is
common refuge knowledge.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 38
Quality: Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation
Indicator: Facilities that decrease self-reliant recreation
Measure: Number of agency-provided recreation facilities.
♦ Context: There are three campsites for visitors to use in the Cabeza Prieta National
Wildlife Refuge: (1) Papago Well, (2) Tule Well, and (3) Christmas Pass. While these
campsites are partially within wilderness, most of these parcels are within the 100ft non-
wilderness corridor around public roads. They are not intended for the wilderness
backpacker, they exist for the vehicle camper. They are adjacent to public access roads
and only extend partially into wilderness, and therefore, according to refuge management,
have no effect on wilderness character.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
High Refuge
Management,
Wildlife
Biologist
Inquiry to
Wildlife
Biologist,
Visits to
campsites
Any High
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
I suggested this significant change, and refuge management
confirmed it. 2Data Adequacy: There is high confidence in the quality of this data because it is
common refuge knowledge.
Tule Well Campsite including fire ring, picnic table, and grill (Molly McCarter)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 39
Quality: Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation
Indicator: Management restrictions on visitor behavior
Measure: Number of months in a calendar year that visitors are restricted from wilderness
access.
♦ Context: There is a seasonal restriction for visitor entry into roughly two thirds of the
Cabeza Prieta Wilderness from March 15 to July 15. This is part of the Sonoran
pronghorn recovery efforts; this time of year is when pronghorn are fawning.
Relevance to Indicator
(High/Medium/Low)
Data
Source(s)
Process to
Gather Data
Significant
Change1
Confidence in
Data Quality2
High Refuge
Management,
Wildlife
Biologist
Inquiry to
Wildlife
Biologist
Any High
1Significant Change:
(how it was determined)
I suggested this significant change, and refuge management
confirmed it. 2Data Adequacy: There is high confidence in the quality of this data because it is
common refuge knowledge.
Construction of sign describing visitor restrictions for the seasonal closing of the Cabeza
Prieta National Wildlife Refuge (FWS)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 40
MEASURES NOT USED
► [Untrammeled – Auth Actions] Actions to trammel species in wilderness.
Many management actions to trammel species in wilderness were suggested for monitoring.
Ultimately refuge management decided to not include the following trammeling in
wilderness. Should these actions be regarded as impactful to wilderness character in the
future, they should be reconsidered for inclusion in the monitoring protocol.
(1) Pronghorn captures from wilderness.
♦ Context/Why not used: This has been practice has only occurred a few times in
wilderness in the past, the most recent being in 2008. Refuge management determined
this was not an action that should be monitored due to its infrequency and very low
number captured. If management perceives this as an issue needing monitoring in the
future, and/or if the effects of this action on wilderness character are great, it is
recommended that this measure be reconsidered for inclusion into the wilderness
character monitoring protocol since data for this measure should be easily obtained.
♦ Priority: Medium
(2) Predator control in wilderness.
♦ Context/Why not used: While this action is not currently practiced in designated
wilderness, the refuge has proposed a very limited predator control program as part of the
Sonoran pronghorn recovery efforts. A predator control program will probably involve
the trapping of coyotes within five miles of the pronghorn breeding recovery pen. As the
pen is outside wilderness, only a portion of the five mile trapping radius will overlap
wilderness. The proposal has not yet gone out for public comment so the outcome of a
final decision is not yet known. If implemented, less than 0.03% of designated
wilderness will be directly affected by this action, therefore a predator control program as
anticipated will have little effect on wild fauna populations except for the benefit of
pronghorn fawn recruitment. If management perceives this as an issue needing
monitoring in the future, and/or if the effects of this action on wilderness character are
great, it is recommended that this measure be reconsidered for inclusion into the
wilderness character monitoring protocol since data for this measure should be easily
obtained.
♦ Priority: Medium
(3) Bighorn sheep capture/transplanting.
♦ Context/Why not used: This action is not occurring in wilderness at this time and is not
anticipated to occur anytime in the future on the refuge. Therefore this measure was
eliminated from monitoring. If management perceives this as an issue needing
monitoring in the future, and/or if the effects of this action on wilderness character are
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 41
great, it is recommended that this measure be reconsidered for inclusion into the
wilderness character monitoring protocol since data for this measure should be easily
obtained.
♦ Priority: Low
(4) Pesticide use to control undesirable plant species.
♦ Context/Why not used: With the changing climate, current and new invasives may be
able to expand their range, and therefore actions to squelch these species may be
practiced in the future. Refuge management determined this was not an action that
should be monitored at this time as there is no pesticide use program on the refuge. If
management perceives this as an issue needing monitoring in the future, and/or if the
effects of this action on wilderness character are great, it is recommended that this
measure be reconsidered for inclusion into the wilderness character monitoring protocol
since data for this measure should be easily obtained.
♦ Priority: Low
(5) Mist netting actions (bats).
♦ Context/Why not used: This has been practiced in the past, but refuge management
believed this was not a “true” trammeling of the biophysical environment and therefore
was eliminated from monitoring. Refuge management determined this was not an action
that should be monitored.
♦ Priority: Low
(6) Number of actions to supplement food to animals in wilderness.
♦ Context: This action is part of the recovery of the endangered Sonoran pronghorn.
This has been practiced on refuge (the latest being in 2009), but never in the wilderness.
It is expected that this will be practiced in the wilderness in the future, possibly as soon as
May 2012 (an EA for food supplementation in wilderness is currently in progress). If
fawns are detected in the vicinity of a water source, this is where food will be supplied.
Research shows that there is a higher fawn success rate when food supplementation is
practiced. Currently there is very low wild pronghorn recruitment, therefore
supplemental feed is considered the minimum tool necessary to enhance wild
recruitment. Concerns with food supplementation include the spread of an exotic species
(alfalfa) and spread of weeds from alfalfa. Protein blocks are also being considered.
♦ Priority: Medium
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 42
Alfalfa being
supplemented to
pronghorn on Barry
M. Goldwater
Marine Corps
Range which
neighbors the
Cabeza Prieta
Wilderness (Alex
Wong)
► [Untrammeled – Auth Actions] Number of new man-made devices (collars, radios, or
other transmitting equipment) put on animals.
♦ Context/Why not used: Sonoran pronghorn collaring takes places annually. The
purpose of these collars is for pronghorn movement tracking and to evaluate possible
impacts of human use (including border patrol activity) on pronghorn recovery. This data
is considered essential to pronghorn recovery. Wilderness character impacts of collars
include the visual impact of these collars to refuge visitors and the possibility of these
collars to drop off the animal and be left in wilderness. By monitoring the number of
new collars put on animals each year, both of these impacts are monitored: both the
potential visual impact to visitors and the potential of collars to be left in wilderness (both
possibilities increase/decrease with an increase/decrease in the number of new collars put
on animals each year). Refuge management determined this was not an action that
should be monitored. If management perceives this as an issue needing monitoring in the
future, and/or if the effects of this action on wilderness character are great, it is
recommended that this measure be reconsidered for inclusion into the wilderness
character monitoring protocol since data for this measure should be easily obtained.
♦ Priority: Medium
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 43
Two Sonoran pronghorn with visible ear tags (FWS)
► [Untrammeled – Auth Actions] Gallons of water brought to wilderness
♦ Context/Why not used: Data is kept on the gallons of water hauled on each trip to
every water development (see “Wilderness Water Deliveries” Excel spreadsheet). This
measure was not used because refuge management believed that the trips to haul water
caused a more significant impact than the amount of water delivered. Therefore this
measure was replaced with “Number of trips to haul water to wilderness” [Untrammeled
– Auth Actions].
♦ Priority: Low
► [Natural – Plant and animal communities] Non native animal detections within the last
five years.
♦ Context/Why not used: This measure was not used because it is of low concern to
refuge management. The main species of concern for this measure would be the burro,
which occasionally entered the refuge in the past year. Refuge management determined
this was not an action that should be monitored because the refuge intends to trap and
remove these burros this winter. Trapping operations will occur outside wilderness and
will occur on adjacent BLM lands as necessary to keep them off the refuge. There are
no other known exotic fauna species on the refuge, therefore there is no need to monitor
this. If management perceives non native species as an issue needing monitoring in the
future, and/or if the effects of this action on wilderness character are great, it is
recommended that this measure be reconsidered for inclusion into the wilderness
character monitoring protocol since data for this measure should be easily obtained.
♦ Priority: Low
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 44
Burros on BLM land neighboring the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge. Burros in this
group escaped from the neighboring Tohono O'odham reservation and have been sighted on
refuge lands. (Rachel Wilson)
► [Natural – Plant and animal communities] Trespass livestock.
♦ Context/Why not used: Trespass livestock include cattle and horses abandoned by
cross border violators. This measure was eliminated from monitoring because it is of low
concern for refuge management. According to management, almost no trespass livestock
make it to the Cabeza Prieta Wilderness, and when they do they do not survive long in
the harsh desert environment. Abandoned horses are taken into custody by border patrol
when feasible and turned over to the state for disposition. If management perceives this
as an issue needing monitoring in the future, and/or if the effects of this action on
wilderness character are great, it is recommended that this measure be reconsidered for
inclusion into the wilderness character monitoring protocol.
♦ Priority: Low
► [Natural – Biophysical processes] Number of known wildlife diseases.
♦ Context/Why not used: Known wildlife diseases present on the Cabeza Prieta
Wilderness include: (1) bot fly larvae parasite which parasitize desert bighorn sheep; (2)
epizootic hemorrhagic disease (EHD) whose likely avenue of transmission to pronghorn
is by biting midges (Culicoides spp.); and (3) bluetongue disease (BTD) which affects
Sonoran pronghorn. Refuge management determined this was not an action that should
be monitored because it is not of high concern. If management perceives this as an issue
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 45
needing monitoring in the future, and/or if the effects of this action on wilderness
character are great (for example, if a disease decimates wildlife populations, such as the
Sonoran pronghorn), it is recommended that this measure be reconsidered for inclusion
into the wilderness character monitoring protocol.
♦ Priority: Medium
► [Natural – Biophysical processes] Alteration to hydrology due to roads and off road
tracks.
♦ Context/Why not used: While this is a great concern to the Cabeza Prieta refuge staff,
monitoring the alteration to hydrology from off road tracks is too difficult to accomplish.
A monitoring protocol could not be imagined, and if one were to be created it is likely
that it would require too much additional refuge effort to be implemented. If such a
monitoring is conducted in the future, this measure should be included into the wilderness
character monitoring protocol.
♦ Priority: High
Example of hydrology alteration in the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge. The road
here has become a wash that diverts water flow in the vicinity. (Molly McCarter)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 46
► [Natural – Biophysical processes] Fragmentation of wilderness due to roads.
♦ Context/Why not used: While this is a concern to the Cabeza Prieta refuge staff,
monitoring the effect of this fragmentation is too difficult to accomplish. A monitoring
protocol could not be imagined, and if one were to be created it is likely that it would
require too much additional refuge effort. If such a monitoring is conducted in the future,
this measure should be included into the wilderness character monitoring protocol.
♦ Priority: Medium
► [Natural – Biophysical processes] Damage to cryptogammic soils.
♦ Context/Why not used: While this is a great concern to the Cabeza Prieta refuge staff,
monitoring the impact on the fragile cryptogammic soils in the wilderness is too difficult
to accomplish. A monitoring protocol could not be imagined, and if one were to be
created it is likely that it would require too much additional refuge effort. If such a
monitoring is conducted in the future, this measure should be included into the wilderness
character monitoring protocol.
♦ Priority: Medium
► [Undeveloped – Motor/Mech use] Number of authorized motorized/mechanized uses in
wilderness for survey purposes.
♦ Context/Why not used: Aerial surveys do not occur “in” wilderness (only over
wilderness) and are conducted for the benefit of the “natural” quality of wilderness
character, therefore this was perceived as a low priority for monitoring by refuge
management. Telemetry flights for pronghorn locating are conducted every week;
general pronghorn aerial surveys are conducted biannually; bighorn sheep aerial survey
are conducted every three years.
♦ Priority: Low
Typical helicopter used for aerial wildlife surveys (FWS)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 47
► [Solitude – remote inside] Radius of surveillance around border patrol security
infrastructures.
♦ Context/Why not used: Monitoring by border security agencies occurs throughout the
Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge. Innovative fixed towers (IFTs) are planned for
construction on the refuge in the near future, but none exist presently in the Cabeza Prieta
Wilderness. These towers include radar and a camera, with the purpose of monitoring
illegal cross-border activity. On Organ Pipe National Monument, where these towers
currently do exist, legal wilderness visitors are also monitored by these towers.
Therefore a visitor’s sense of privacy and of being alone is absent. It was the refuge
manager’s opinion that while a visitor’s privacy is indeed interrupted, these structures
exist for the benefit of the wilderness visitor and national security. Visitors to the
wilderness are also monitored by cross border violators, so if border patrol monitoring
stations are removed a false sense of improvement would occur.
♦ Priority: Medium
► [Solitude – remote outside] Difference in customary military above ground level (AGL-
in feet) and AGL feet allowed over wilderness.
♦ Context/Why not used: Military aircrafts are permitted to fly much lower over parts of
the Cabeza Prieta Wilderness than the customary above ground level limit by a special
provision to the Cabeza Prieta wilderness designation legislation. Refuge management
was unable to conclude whether or not lower level flights were more or less impactful to
the wildlife below them than higher level flights. The point was made that while lower
level flights are louder than higher level flights, they intrude on the natural soundscape of
the area below them for a shorter time. Therefore, this measure was considered to be of
too little priority for monitoring by refuge staff.
♦ Priority: Low
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 48
► [Solitude – remote outside] Developments visible from wilderness.
♦ Context/Why not used: While structures outside of wilderness that are visible within
wilderness certainly do affect the solitude quality of wilderness, refuge management
eliminated this measure from monitoring because is de-incentivizes putting structures
outside of wilderness.
♦ Priority: Medium
Fence of the Sonoran pronghorn
captive breeding pen, one of fourteen
identified developments outside of
wilderness that are visible from
wilderness. Mountain range in
background is in the Cabeza Prieta
Wilderness. (Molly McCarter)
► [Solitude – remote outside] Noise from vehicles on non-wilderness public refuge roads
♦ Context/Why not used: This was a concern to some refuge staff, but monitoring of the
vehicle noise intrusion into wilderness from vehicles on public non-wilderness roads
would require significant additional refuge effort. There was consideration of monitoring
this in the future. If such monitoring does occur in the future, it is suggested that this
measure be reintroduced and the data be used as a way to monitor wilderness character
impacts.
♦ Priority: Medium
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 49
► [Solitude – remote outside] Number of known violations to above-ground-level
restriction for military flyovers.
♦ Context/Why not used: These incidents are not documented, although some refuge
staff expressed interest in knowing such data. If these incidents are documented in the
future, it is suggested that this measure be reintroduced. It is likely that monitoring of
this data would require too much addition refuge effort. Cabeza Prieta’s wilderness
designating legislation also allows these military flyovers; the Act states that the Cabeza
Prieta National Wildlife Refuge and Cabeza Prieta Wilderness shall manage these lands
“to support current and future military aviation training needs consistent with
[memorandums of understanding, or MOUs].”
♦ Priority: Medium
► [Solitude – remote outside] Miles of international border fence along the wilderness.
♦ Context/Why not used: This data was not included as a stand-alone measure because
this mileage will likely never change as it is a matter of border security. It was proposed
that this structure be documented in the measure “Number of developments visible from
wilderness,” but this measure was also eliminated from monitoring per refuge
management’s request. The border fence is located within a 60 feet area adjacent to the
international boundary. This area is part of a 60-foot federal easement adjacent to the
international boundary called the “Roosevelt easement,” which was established for
purposes related to border security, including the erection of barriers. Customs and
Border Patrol has control of this 60-foot easement.
♦ Priority: Low
International border
fence along Cabeza
Prieta Wilderness
(Molly McCarter)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 50
► [Solitude – mgmt restrictions] Camping restriction around wildlife waters.
♦ Context/Why not used: According to title 17 “Game and Fish” Ch. 3 Art. 1. 17-308, “It
is unlawful for a person to camp within one-fourth mile of a natural water hole containing
water or a man-made watering facility.” Since this is a state law, it was not considered a
“management” restriction on visitor behavior.
♦ Priority: Low
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 51
CONCLUSIONS
The Cabeza Prieta Wilderness is in an optimal location for wilderness designation. The
Sonoran Desert is a truly unique ecosystem that deserves maximum protection. But, as is
evident from the measures selected and not selected for monitoring, the character Cabeza Prieta
Wilderness is under threat. It will be difficult for a visitor to the Cabeza Prieta Wilderness to
gain an experience of true solitude, void of the influences of modern man, while the international
border remains in need of security. The biological integrity of the Cabeza Prieta Wilderness is
also threatened by these issues. The presence of border patrol to even a short-term visitor is
obvious. Vehicle tracks dominate the landscape and visitors are often tracked and encountered
by border patrol inquiring about their citizenship. It is impossible to predict what the future
holds for the character of the Cabeza Prieta Wilderness as it is highly affected by this security
and political issue.
A special provision in the Arizona Desert Wilderness Act of 1990 states that Department
of Homeland Security bureaus (U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP] and CBP Office of
Border Patrol [CBP-BP]), may drive in the wilderness to accomplish their missions, in
accordance with any interagency agreements.
According to the Vehicle Trails Associated with Illegal Border Activities on Cabeza
Prieta National Wildlife Refuge report (FWS 2011),
“Over the last 10 years, the illegal movement of people and
narcotics into the United States has significantly affected the
CPNWR Wilderness Area. The very qualities that made the refuge
worthy of designation as a unit of the National Wilderness
Preservation System have made this an ideal location for the
smuggling of people and contraband into the United States.
CPNWR is located in one of the most remote sections of the
Sonoran Desert. Due to the great distance from paved roads,
rugged conditions, and lack of development, the refuge wilderness
area has been used as a travel corridor for illegal border crossing
and drug smuggling activities. These events, and the resulting
interdiction efforts by the USBP [border patrol], have resulted in
significant impacts associated with a proliferation of trails driven
by both smugglers and U.S. law enforcement agency personnel.”
As the international border is secured and border impacts are resolved, it is
expected that the character of the Cabeza Prieta will greatly improve.
The measures described here for monitoring of the Cabeza Prieta Wilderness
capture some of the most impactful acts occurring in the wilderness. I believe that many
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 52
measures that were excluded from monitoring (see “Measures Not Used” section) would
improve the thoroughness of this monitoring protocol. I suggest that they be reevaluated
for inclusion in the future.
Sunset at the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge (FWS)
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 53
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Worksheet: Priority ranking of potential measures
Instructions
A. Level of importance (the measure is highly relevant to the quality and indicator of wilderness
character, and is highly useful for managing the wilderness):
High = 3 points, Medium = 2 points, Low = 1 point
B. Level of vulnerability (measures an attribute of wilderness character that currently is at risk,
or might likely be at risk over 10-15 years):
High = 3 points, Medium = 2 points, Low = 1 point
C. Degree of reliability (the measure can be monitored accurately with a high degree of
confidence, and would yield the same result if measured by different people at different times):
High = 3 points, Medium = 2 points, Low = 1 point
D. Degree of reasonableness (the measure is related to an existing effort or could be monitored
without significant additional effort):
High = 1 point, Low = 0 point
Untrammeled Quality
Criteria for Prioritizing Potential Measures
Potential Measure
A. Importance B. Vulnerability C. Reliability D.
Reasonableness
OVERALL
SCORE
Indicator: Actions
authorized by the
federal land
manager that
manipulate the
biophysical
environment
Measure: Number
of new man-made
devices (collars,
radios, or other
transmitting
equipment) put on
animals (in each
1
2
3
1
7
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 54
Criteria for Prioritizing Potential Measures
Potential Measure
A. Importance B. Vulnerability C. Reliability D.
Reasonableness
OVERALL
SCORE
year) (within the
last 5 years).
Indicator: Actions
authorized by the
federal land
manager that
manipulate the
biophysical
environment
Measure: Natural
fire suppressions in
wilderness
2
2
2
1
7
Indicator: Actions
authorized by the
federal land
manager that
manipulate the
biophysical
environment
Measure: Gallons of
water brought to
wilderness
3
3
3
1
10
Indicator: Actions
authorized by the
federal land
manager that
manipulate the
biophysical
environment
Measure: Number
of actions to
supplement food to
animals in
wilderness.
1
2
3
1
7
Indicator: Actions
not authorized by
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 55
Criteria for Prioritizing Potential Measures
Potential Measure
A. Importance B. Vulnerability C. Reliability D.
Reasonableness
OVERALL
SCORE
the Federal land
manager that
manipulate the
biophysical
environment
Measure: Acres of
wilderness burned
due to human-
caused wildfires
2
2
2
1
7
Natural Quality
Criteria for Prioritizing Potential Measures
Potential Measure
A. Importance B. Vulnerability C. Reliability D.
Reasonableness
OVERALL
SCORE
Indicator: Plant and
animal species and
communities
Measure:
Population size of
bighorn sheep, a
species of concern.
3
3
3
1
10
Indicator: Plant and
animal species and
communities
Measure:
Population size of
Sonoran pronghorn,
an endangered
species of concern.
3
3
3
1
10
Indicator: Plant and
animal species and
communities
STOP!
If A + B ≤
STOP!
If A + B ≤
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 56
Criteria for Prioritizing Potential Measures
Potential Measure
A. Importance B. Vulnerability C. Reliability D.
Reasonableness
OVERALL
SCORE
Measure: Frequency
of non native
species encounters
based on vegetation
plot surveys.
3 3 2 0 8
Indicator: Physical
resources
Measure: Air
Quality Data
3
3
3
1
10
Indicator:
Biophysical
processes
Measure: Number
of known wildlife
diseases
1
2
3
1
7
Undeveloped Quality
Criteria for Prioritizing Potential Measures
Potential Measure
A. Importance B. Vulnerability C. Reliability D.
Reasonableness
OVERALL
SCORE
Indicator: Non-
recreational
structures,
installations, and
developments
Measure: Number
of man-made,
developed wildlife
water source
structures and
enhanced natural
water source areas
3
3
3
1
10
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 57
Criteria for Prioritizing Potential Measures
Potential Measure
A. Importance B. Vulnerability C. Reliability D.
Reasonableness
OVERALL
SCORE
in wilderness.
Indicator: Non-
recreational
structures,
installations, and
developments
Measure:
Developments in
wilderness
1
2
3
1
7
Indicator: Inholdings
Measure: Acres of
inholdings in
wilderness
3
1
3
1
8
Indicator: Use of
motor vehicles,
motorized
equipment, or
mechanical
transport
Measure: Off road
vehicle tracks
according to east-
west transect
surveys
3
3
2
0
8
Indicator: Use of
motor vehicles,
motorized
equipment, or
mechanical
transport
Measure: Number
of days of
authorized internal
motorized/mechani
zed use in
3
3
2
1
9
STOP!
If A + B ≤
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 58
Criteria for Prioritizing Potential Measures
Potential Measure
A. Importance B. Vulnerability C. Reliability D.
Reasonableness
OVERALL
SCORE
wilderness.
Indicator: Loss of
statutorily protected
cultural resources
Measure:
Disturbance/damag
e assessment of
cultural resources
3
2
2
1
8
Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Recreation Quality
Criteria for Prioritizing Potential Measures
Potential Measure
A. Importance B. Vulnerability C. Reliability D.
Reasonableness
OVERALL
SCORE
Indicator:
Remoteness from
sights and sounds of
people inside the
wilderness
Measure: Miles of
roads open to
border patrol use in
wilderness.
3
3
3
1
10
Indicator:
Remoteness from
sights and sounds of
people inside the
wilderness
Measure: Miles of
unauthorized routes
3
3
3
1
10
Indicator:
Remoteness from
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 59
Criteria for Prioritizing Potential Measures
Potential Measure
A. Importance B. Vulnerability C. Reliability D.
Reasonableness
OVERALL
SCORE
occupied and
modified areas
outside the
wilderness
Measure:
Developments
visible from
wilderness
3
3
2
1
9
Indicator: Facilities
that decrease self-
reliant recreation
Measure: Number
of agency-provided
recreation facilities
3
2
3
1
9
Indicator:
Management
restrictions on
visitor behavior
Measure: Number
of months in a
calendar year that
visitors are
restricted from
wilderness access
3
2
3
1
9
Names of team members filling out these worksheets:
► Molly McCarter, Wilderness Fellow
► Sid Slone, CPNWR Refuge Manager
► Stephen Barclay, CPNWR Assistant Refuge Manager
STOP!
If A + B ≤
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 60
Appendix B - Spreadsheets: Effort Required For Wilderness Character
Monitoring Refuge: Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge Date: October 2011
Prepared by: Molly McCarter
Effort per Measure
Quality Indicator Measure
Were data
gathered from
office paper files,
computer files,
or field work
(professional
judgment is an
option)?
Time you
spent
gathering
data for
each
measure (in
whole
hours) Comments
Untrammeled Actions authorized
Natural fire suppressions in
wilderness.
Professional
Judgment (LE and
Refuge Mgmt) <1
Untrammeled Actions authorized Number of trips to haul water.
Maintenance files (see also
"Wilderness
Water Deliveries"
Excel
spreadsheet) 2
Untrammeled Actions authorized
Number of actions to
supplement food to animals in
wilderness
Pronghorn
Recovery Team
Leader <1
Untrammeled
Actions not
authorized
Number of undocumented
aliens (UDAs) travelling
through the refuge.
US Border Patrol
Agent 2
Inquiry to US Border Patrol,
compilation of data from
Yuma and Tucson sectors.
Initial meeting and follow up
emails.
Untrammeled
Actions not
authorized
Acres of wilderness burned
due to human-ignited
wildfires.
Professional
Judgment (LE and
Refuge Mgmt) 1
Natural
Plant and animal
species and
communities
Population size of bighorn
sheep, a species of concern.
Wildlife Biologist,
CCP <1
Data is collected via aerial
surveys which take time, but
physically gathering this data
takes little time.
Natural
Plant and animal
species and
communities
Population size of Sonoran
pronghorn, an endangered
species of concern.
Pronghorn
Recovery Team
Leader & Wildlife
Biologist, CCP <1
Data is collected via aerial
surveys which take time, but
physically gathering this data
takes little time.
Natural
Plant and animal species and
communities
Frequency of non native plant species encounters based on
vegetation plot surveys. TBD TBD
Natural Physical Resources Air Quality Data TBD TBD
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 61
Natural
Biophysical
Processes
Change in frequency of desirable plants (due to
changes in climate). TBD TBD
Undeveloped
Non-recreational
developments
Number of man-made,
developed wildlife water
source structures and
enhanced natural water source
areas in wilderness.
Wildlife Biologist,
Refuge
Management,
CCP <1
This number was compiled in
the CCP. Reading the CCP
took much time, but
extracting this particular data
took little time.
Undeveloped
Non-recreational
developments
Number of sites with
communications and security
infrastructure(s).
Refuge
Management <1 Common refuge knowledge
Undeveloped
Non-recreational
developments
Total square footage of radio/communications sites
(footprint). TBD TBD
Undeveloped
Non-recreational
developments
Number of tow darts in
wilderness (abandoned
military structures). CCP (estimate) <1
This number was compiled in
the CCP. Reading the CCP took much time, but
extracting this particular data
took little time.
Undeveloped
Non-recreational
developments
Number of abandoned
vehicles in wilderness.
CCP (estimate) &
Refuge
Management <1
This number was compiled in
the CCP. Reading the CCP
took much time, but
extracting this particular data
took little time.
Undeveloped Inholdings
Acres of inholdings within
wilderness.
Refuge
Management <1 Common refuge knowledge
Undeveloped
Use of motorized or
mechanical
Off road vehicle tracks
according to east-west transect
surveys. TBD TBD
Undeveloped
Use of motorized or
mechanical
Number of vehicle days of
authorized internal
motorized/mechanized use in
wilderness (vehicles*days). TBD TBD
Undeveloped
Loss of cultural
resources
Percent of cultural resource
sites that have been surveyed
in wilderness.
Professional
Judgment
(CPNWR Cultural
Resource
Volunteers) 2 Emails
Solitude + Remoteness inside
Miles of roads open to border
patrol use in wilderness
Refuge Maps, GIS
Layers 2
Finding the appropriate GIS
layers took quite some time,
but GIS calculations took
relatively little time.
Solitude + Remoteness inside Miles of unauthorized routes
Roads Reports,
Refuge
Management <1
These roads reports take quite some time to compile.
Data collection is also very
time consuming. But
physically gathering this data
from the report takes little
time.
Solitude + Remoteness outside
Miles of wilderness border
adjacent to development.
Refuge
Management <1 Common refuge knowledge
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 62
Solitude +
Facilities that
decrease self-reliant
recreation
Number of agency-provided
recreation facilities.
Refuge Maps,
Refuge
Management <1 Common refuge knowledge
Solitude +
Management
restrictions on
visitor behavior
Number of months in a
calendar year that visitors are
restricted from wilderness
access
Refuge
Management,
CCP <1
This number was compiled in
the CCP. Reading the CCP
took much time, but
extracting this particular data
took little time.
*For all of the measures, it took much time to define the measure properly, coordinate meetings,
etc. Once this was completed, actual data collection often took little time.
Refuge Staff Effort
Title of staff involved in identifying,
prioritizing, and selecting measures
Staff time to identify,
prioritize, and select
measures (in whole hrs) Comments
Refuge Manager 20 Measure selection/defining, data collection.
Assistant Refuge Manager 15 Measure selection/defining, data collection.
Wildlife Biologist 10 Measure selection/defining, data collection.
Sonoran Pronghorn Recovery Team
Leader 5 Measure selection/defining, data collection.
Law Enforcement Team 2 Data collection, emails.
Chief of Maintenance 2 Data collection, emails.
Local Border Patrol Agent 1 Data collection.
Cultural Resource Experts (CPNWR
Volunteers) 2 Measure defining, emails.
Wilderness Fellow Effort
Time you spent
to identify,
prioritize, and
select all the
measures (in
whole hours)
Time you spent to
learn how to enter
data into the WCM
database
application (in
whole hours)
Time you spent to
enter all data into
the WCM database
application (in
whole hours)
Time you spent on other
tasks directly related to
WCM (e.g., reading CCP,
giving presentations,
talking with staff) (in
whole hours)
Time you
spent doing
other
Refuge tasks
not directly
related to
WCM (in
whole
hours)
140 0 (n/a) 40 140 40
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 63
Appendix C - Table: Detailed Description of Data Sources and How the Data
Were Gathered
FWS National Wildlife Refuge System Wilderness Fellows
Keeping Track of Wilderness Character Monitoring Measures
Refuge: Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge Date: October 2011
Prepared by: Molly McCarter
Measure
Priority
(H, M,
L)
Detailed Description of the Data Source(s)
and How the Data Were Gathered
Untrammeled Quality 1. Natural fire
suppressions in
wilderness.
L Inquiry to Refuge Management. Calculation of fire
suppression points based on assigned points per
suppression size.
2. Number of trips to haul water.
H Inquiry to maintenance mechanic. Compiled gallons of
water delivered to wilderness from maintenance mechanic
into Excel document. Maintenance mechanic provided
number of trips to each development so far for 2011, and a
trips per gallon was estimated. This was used to estimate
the number of wilderness water hauls for previous years. 3. Number of undocumented aliens
(UDAs) travelling
through the refuge.
H
Inquiry to local border patrol officer, Robert Gumtow.
Compilation of data from Yuma and Tucson sectors.
4. Acres of wilderness burned due to human-
ignited wildfires.
M Inquiry to Refuge Management and Law Enforcement
Staff. Calculation of fire points based on assigned points
per unnatural fire size.
Natural Quality 5. Population size of
bighorn sheep, a species
of concern.
M Inquiry to Wildlife Biologist. Population estimates are
based on aerial flights conducted by wildlife specialists.
6. Population size of Sonoran pronghorn, an
endangered species of
concern.
H Inquiry to Wildlife Biologist. Population estimates are
based on aerial flights conducted by wildlife specialists.
7. Frequency of non native plant species
encounters based on
vegetation plot surveys.
M TBD when monitoring protocol is established/
implemented.
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 64
8. Air Quality Data H TBD when data is available. 9. Change in frequency of desirable plants (due to
changes in climate).
H TBD when monitoring protocol is established/
implemented.
Undeveloped Quality 10. Number of man-
made, developed wildlife
water source structures and enhanced natural
water source areas in
wilderness.
M Read CCP data.
11. Number of sites with
communications and
security infrastructure(s).
H Inquiry to Wildlife Biologist
12. Total square footage of radio/communications
sites (footprint).
H TBD when data is available.
13. Number of tow darts in wilderness (abandoned
military structures).
M Read CCP data estimate.
14. Number of abandoned
vehicles in wilderness.
M Inquiry to the Refuge Manager, read CCP data estimate
15. Acres of inholdings
within wilderness.
H Inquiry to the Refuge Manager, Referenced Refuge Maps
16. Off road vehicle
tracks according to east-
west transect surveys.
H TBD when monitoring protocol is established/
implemented.
17. Number of vehicle days of authorized
internal
motorized/mechanized use in wilderness
(vehicles*days).
M TBD when monitoring protocol is established/
implemented.
18. Percent of cultural
resource sites that have
been surveyed in
wilderness
H Inquiry to CPNWR Cultural Resource Volunteers
Solitude or Primitive and Unconfined Quality 19. Miles of roads open to
border patrol use in
wilderness.
M Calculated road length using GIS and appropriate road
layers
20. Miles of unauthorized
routes.
H Read roads report for data
21. Miles of wilderness
border adjacent to
H Inquiry to Refuge Manager
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 65
development.
22. Number of agency-
provided recreation facilities.
H Inquiry to Wildlife Biologist, Visits to campsites
23. Number of months in
a calendar year that visitors are restricted
from wilderness access
H Inquiry to Wildlife Biologist
US Fish and Wildlife Service Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge | 66