Mojave National Preserve Management Plan for Developed

Mojave National Preserve—Management Plan for Developed Water Resources

(Table 4). Figure 3 and Figure 4 outline the sequence and transition process, and Table 5 describes the implementation actions under each alternative. Proposed sites for relocated guzzlers would be determined based on accessibility for maintenance and proximity to known bighorn populations and habitat. Probable relocation sites are shown in Figure 4, which illustrates the implementation scenario for Alternative 3. The existing conditions include all the guzzlers currently located in wilderness (No Action). The transition includes all existing, new, and relocated guzzlers that would be monitored for impacts and use. The final condition illustrates a successful implementation of Alternative 3, with a total of 7 guzzlers (2 retained, 2 relocated, and 3 new).

Table 4. Priorities for Big Game Guzzler Actions under Each Action Alternative

Alternative 3 Alternative 2 Alternative 4 (Preferred Alternative) 1. Kelso – retain and maintain 1. Old Dad – rebuild and repair as 1. Old Dad – rebuild and repair as 2. New Kerr and New Vermin – build needed needed and monitor discovery and use; 2. Kelso – retain and maintain 2. Kelso and Piute – retain and collar Piute ewes 3. New Kerr and New Vermin – build maintain 3. Clark – continue to monitor for an and monitor discovery and use; 3. New Kerr and New Vermin – build additional year before disabling collar Piute ewes new guzzlers and monitor and removal 4. Piute North – build and monitor discovery and use; collar Piute 4. Vontrigger – build and monitor discovery and use ewes discovery and use in coordination 5. Clark – continue to monitor for an 4. Clark – continue to monitor for an with monitoring, disabling, and additional year before disabling additional year before disabling removal of Piute and removal and removal 5. Ginn Spring – install new water 6. Vontrigger – build and monitor 5. Vontrigger – build and monitor source discovery and use in coordination discovery and use 6. Kerr and Vermin – monitor for with monitoring, disabling, and 6. Ginn Spring – build and monitor transition to relocated guzzlers, removal of Piute discovery and use disable, and remove 7. Ginn Spring – build and monitor 7. Kerr and Vermin – monitor for 7. Old Dad – monitor use and discovery and use transition to relocated guzzlers, transition to New Kerr and New 8. Kerr and Vermin – monitor for disable, and remove Vermin; disable, monitor, and transition to relocated guzzlers, remove disable, and remove 8. Piute – monitor transition to 9. Piute –monitor transition to Piute Vontrigger, disable, and remove North and Vontrigger, disable, and remove For guzzler removals and relocations, the primary approach would be to install a new/relocated water source and to keep both guzzlers in place while bighorn discover and transition to using the new water source. Monitoring would occur for as long as is needed to document the discovery and transition of sheep to the new site. As monitoring indicates and after bighorn have discovered and use the new/relocated source, the existing guzzler would be disabled for an extended period while monitoring of bighorn use continues. Once monitoring has demonstrated that bighorn have successfully adapted to the new site, the old guzzler infrastructure would be removed and the site rehabilitated. If monitoring indicates that unanticipated or unacceptable impacts on bighorn sheep populations are occurring, the NPS may reinitiate use of the old disabled guzzler. (Once they have been physically removed from wilderness, reestablishing guzzlers at old sites would require new analysis and approvals under NEPA and the Wilderness Act. Such an action is not anticipated in this plan and would be pursued as a last resort to mitigate unforeseen circumstances.)

Mojave National Preserve 33

to Las Vegas

King ston W E H a E S s G h T I N G G N Big Game Guzzlers and A M H R A L Y A N R I A N Bighorn Movement

H Clark Mountain RRR D

G G R U " U A 95 Y Corridors O Yates Well

S O N

M L G

U 1 IVANPAH L E K Mojave National Preserve L 15 LAKE U (dry) C Water Resources Management Plan and Environmental Assessment

M M M M sh M 164 L a HIL W Searchlight WK on MOH A at Nipton W he Mojave National Preserve boundary W P I Salton 164 U

E E E E E T Bighorn sheep habitat patches (Creech et al. 2014) Sea I G N E N E h R Y s A A a R L W E s L 5 H S Big game guzzler g AAA V in CCC IL r ES L p M N A S 127 ll L u I B L New water source A E

Y V S T Springs used by bighorn A N L M U Halloran Springs GinnL Spring S

N Bighorn migration corridor (Creech et al. 2014) E H O I h A W Y s MMM A i a P ll h CASTLE Restorable bighorn migration corridor o as T w W W

N Willow N MOUNTAINS e (Creech et al. 2014) t SILVER A U u Spring NATIONAL i LAKE V P O MONUMENT National Park Service wilderness (dry) I M 15 E Cal Nev Ari Kessler L Paved road Spring K T CIMCICIMMAMA RRR S O Y A Unpaved 2-wheel drive road Deer DDOMDOOMMEMEEE CCC 7 h W Piute North s Spring E a N P W Baker I NEVADA nk CALIFORNIA Unpaved 4-wheel drive road a U T ck Keystone la T B Spring E Mojave Road 4-wheel drive road Cima

R Desert wash

PIPPININTOTOTO Piute A CINCIC NDNDDEDERERR CCOONONENE Palm N Gardens 163 LAVLALLAVAAAVAVAA BBE EDEDSDS S " LSL G SODA LLLLLS L A N F A I R LAKE IL E HILHHILL V A L L E Y Marl h (dry) s GROGROOTTOTTT O 2 a 95 MARMAMARRRLL Spring HILHILLS Vermin W o Rock Zzyzx s MOUMOMOOUUNNTATAAAINININSNS l sh e Wa Spring Spring K Cedar ROUO NDD Zzyzx " VALV LEYY Piute Old Dad Spring " " M Habitat Patches Kelso AC O R GGEGG P M TRTRIT I O Hackberry NTRI U LS U N GOLGOLD O VONV HILLSHILLS Clark Mountain Spring T 1 TTT OD N S Vontrigger E " S M D O Spring U KerrE N Old Dad/Kelso V T 2 A W Vontrigger Spring I 6 I a L N t F S s E S o N V Kelso Depot n N A Granite Mountains

W 3 Information Center E P a R L B s L l h L ac V k E AAA 4 A C L Y a Y 4 Providence Mountains n L G y E Co o Y t n R to n Cornﬁeld w W K O o Mescal/Ivanpah Range elso Spring a 5 Wash o s U h

N W

a D s Woods/Hackberry Mountains h 6

D S E Goffs e E Foshay

N Y vi U ls D NC Spring Piute/Castle Mountains Pla SO E 7 ygr EL ENCENE oun K L d S DED W L IDIDENCE L ash L I

VIDVIV A H

R OVO V

B RO N 40 L

N PPRPROVID I N

Quail E

F F F F D

3 Spring H

H L

E GRAGRG RAR AANNITNINITEITTTEE o

m P Fenner e P r

MOUMOM OUOOUNUUNNTANNTTAT AIA ININSNNSS I W L S a s O C N h LLL I D D A A D T M N O S U N N I U T A Budweiser TAINTA I 40 N O N S Spring MOUN M ER M PPER Essex E CLCLIPCLIC LIP T U Ludlow I 40 P 40 MIDM DDDLE HIHILLILLSLSS N

01234 Miles

to Barstow

Non-wilderness Wilderness Existing Condition • Guzzler in wilderness

Non-wilderness Wilderness Transition - Step 1 • New guzzler outside of wilderness • Two guzzlers during monitoring period • Monitor bighorn use for several years

Non-wilderness Wilderness Transition - Step 2 • Bighorn documented to use new guzzler • Shut off old guzzler • Monitor bighorn transition

Non-wilderness Wilderness Transition - Step 3 • Bighorn only use new guzzler • Remove old guzzler • Continue monitoring

If monitoring indicates that the guzzler transition is not successful, or if severe impacts on bighorn are evident, each step can be reversed to ensure that impacts on bighorn populations are minimal. Guzzler Transition Sequence Clark Mountain

Existing big game guzzler Existing big game guzzler on during transition Big game guzzler removed Piute New water source location Vermin Big game guzzler relocation site Old Dad Kelso Kerr

Existing

Clark Mountain

Ginn Spring

Piute North

Piute New Vermin Vermin Kelso Old Dad Vontrigger Spring Kerr

Transition

Ginn Spring

Piute North

New Vermin Kelso Old Dad New Kerr Vontrigger Spring

Implementation sequence Final Condition for Alternative 3 shown Mojave National Preserve—Management Plan for Developed Water Resources

Table 5. Implementation Actions for Big Game Guzzlers Alternative 3 No Action Alternative 2 Alternative 4 (Preferred Alternative)

Manage water developments to Minimize water developments in support native species conservation Manage water resource to augment Continue current, ad hoc management wilderness while strategically using Objective and population stability while reducing native wildlife habitat and restore and maintenance activities water developments to conserve the number of water developments in connectivity native wildlife populations wilderness

Existing Guzzlers Filled every year or so depending on Common to All Action Alternatives: precipitation by driving about two Retain Kelso miles into wilderness on an existing • Repair as needed two-track road Can be filled only by helicopter; repair Remove Retain Retain of valves, tanks, pipes, drinker, and • Shut off water and initiate Repair as needed Same as Alternative 2 Old Dad other parts done by dropping off monitoring equipment from helicopter; volunteers • If monitoring shows bighorn use hike to site New Kerr and New Vermin, remove Common to All Action Alternatives: Filled every year or so depending on Relocate precipitation by driving about one mile Kerr • Identify suitable non-wilderness site into wilderness on an existing two- • Initiate relocation process track road • Once new guzzler is established, remove Common to All Action Alternatives: Filled every year or so depending on Relocate precipitation by driving on a cherry- Vermin • Identify suitable non-wilderness site stemmed road and then using a long • Initiate relocation process hose • Once new guzzler is established, remove Common to All Action Alternatives: Clark Requires very little to no repair Remove • Dismantle and move parts to location outside of wilderness where it could provide more benefits to bighorn Remove Remove Retain • Shut off water and initiate • Shut off water and initiate • Repair as needed to support monitoring monitoring regional connectivity Piute Infrequent filling and repair • Remove if supported by monitoring • Install new water sources in nearby locations • Remove if supported by monitoring

Mojave National Preserve 39 Mojave National Preserve—Management Plan for Developed Water Resources

Alternative 3 No Action Alternative 2 Alternative 4 (Preferred Alternative) New Water Sources • Two new guzzlers located within • Three new guzzlers located within • Two new guzzlers located within the Alternative No new guzzlers would be permitted the Preserve on non-wilderness the Preserve on non-wilderness land Preserve on non-wilderness land Approach in the Preserve land • None Common to All Action Alternatives: New Water Source • NPS recommended a translocation • Improving regional habitat connectivity Objectives to N. Soda (BLM) for Soda • Restoring I-40/I-15 movement corridors Mountain Solar mitigation • Establishing a new population in the Mescal/Ivanpah Range • Vontrigger Spring –connector • Vontrigger Spring –connector Same as Alternative 2 between Hackberry and Piute between Hackberry and Piute Spring Spring • Ginn Spring –connector from New Proposed Locations • Ginn Spring –connector from New York/Castle north to Clark of New Water None York/Castle north to Clark Mountains, in the Ivanpah Range Sources Mountains, in the Ivanpah Range • Piute North Guzzler – located in northern Piute Range; connector between Piute Spring and Castle Mountains • Total Guzzlers: 6 • Total guzzlers: 5 • Total guzzlers: 7 • Total guzzlers: 7 Summary of • Wilderness: 6 • Wilderness: 1 • Wilderness: 2 • Wilderness: 3 Guzzler Actions • Non-wilderness: 0 • Non-wilderness: 4 • Non-wilderness: 5 • Non-wilderness: 4 • New: 0 • New: 2 • New: 3 • New: 2 Guzzler Management and Maintenance Guzzler maintenance and refilling Common to All Action Alternatives: Summary of occurs on an ad hoc basis under • Guzzlers are repaired or refilled by volunteers under NPS guidance Management CDFW guidance and with volunteer • Ongoing repair continues until implementation actions are initiated Approach labor

Mojave National Preserve 40 Mojave National Preserve—Management Plan for Developed Water Resources

The general sequence for the implementation of guzzler actions includes the following: 1. Install new or relocated guzzler outside of wilderness, in order of Preserve priorities. 2. Monitor both new/relocated and existing guzzlers for as long as needed to document transition. 3. When bighorn have been documented to use the new guzzler, manipulation/disabling of the existing guzzler can begin. 4. Continue monitoring to document use, transition, and impacts. 5. Remove existing guzzler if monitoring indicates that bighorn have transitioned to using new/relocated guzzler–or– 6. Reinstate existing guzzler if monitoring indicates conditions that are unacceptable or if bighorn are not transitioning to use new/relocated guzzler. Big Game Guzzlers: Alternative 2

Objective Under Alternative 2, the NPS would seek to retain a similar number of big game guzzlers (compared to the No Action Alternative) in the Preserve, but to minimize the number of within wilderness wherever possible. The overall management objective would be strategic use of big game guzzlers, to minimize intrusion into wilderness while using big game guzzles as a tool to conserve sustainable native wildlife populations, particularly bighorn sheep.

Approach Implementation of Alternative 2 for big game guzzlers would consist of installing new/relocated water sources; monitoring discovery, use, and transition of bighorn to new/relocated sources; disabling guzzlers; and eventually removing guzzler infrastructure. During implementation, all guzzlers would continue to be retained and repaired in their current state until they are part of a relocation evaluation process or are physically relocated. The end state of Alternative 2 would be the long-term use of five guzzlers within the Preserve. Three guzzlers (Clark, Piute, and Old Dad) would be removed, two (Kerr and Vermin) would be relocated out of wilderness, and one (Kelso) would remain in wilderness. Two new water sources (Vontrigger Spring and Ginn Spring) would be permitted within the Preserve on non- wilderness land (Figure 5). Final locations would be determined as part of the implementation process.

New Water Sources The NPS would pursue the establishment of two new guzzlers or water sources in non- wilderness locations to support the potential restoration of migration corridors and demographic connectivity across I-40 and I-15, including the establishment of a population in the Mescal/Ivanpah Range (see “New Guzzler Development” above, and Figure 2). The NPS would work with CDFW and BLM to place temporary or permanent water developments to encourage the use of existing underpasses. Potential sites for new water sources are: • Vontrigger Spring –would function as a habitat connector between Piute Spring and the Hackberry Range. • Ginn Spring –would function as a habitat connector between the New York and Castle Mountains to the south and the Clark Mountains to the north.

Mojave National Preserve 41 Alternative 2 Clark Mountain 95 Big Game Guzzlers Yates Well 15 164 Mojave National Preserve Nipton Water Resources Management Plan and 164 Environmental Assessment

Ginn Castle Mountains Spring National Monument 95 15 Cal Nev Ari Piute

Baker NEVADA CALIFORNIA Cima Piute

Zzyzx Vermin Kelso Old Dad Vontrigger Spring Vontrigger Spring Kerr Enlargement shown Enlargement shown above right below right

Vermin Goffs

40 Kelso

Fenner Old Dad

Guzzler Alternative 2 Clark Remove Piute Remove Essex Ludlow Old Dad 40 Remove Kerr Kelso Retain 0 510 [ Miles Kerr Relocate Vermin Relocate Alternative Actions New Water Yes – Two sites Retain guzzler Guzzler relocation site Mojave National Preserve boundary Sources outside wilderness Total Guzzlers 5 Remove guzzler New water source location Wilderness* Within wilderness 1 Relocate guzzler *Vermin relocation site is within a non-wilderness Outside wilderness 4 area associated with an existing road Mojave National Preserve—Management Plan for Developed Water Resources

Implementation Sequence Before each implementation step, the Preserve would identify and secure funding and logistical support that is necessary to implement the actions and associated monitoring. Site-specific compliance under NEPA would be completed for each guzzler action. Detailed plans would be developed for guzzler relocations including material, equipment, and personnel costs; logistics; and monitoring. Priorities for guzzler actions include: 1. Kelso – Retain and maintain as needed in its present location because of its importance for rams and the lack of a nearby relocation site. 2. New Kerr and New Vermin – Build new guzzlers for relocation of Kerr and Vermin, and monitor for discovery and use. 3. Clark – Continue monitoring for an additional year, followed by disabling and removal if monitoring data supports action. Infrastructure may be reused at a suitable non- wilderness site. 4. Vontrigger Spring –Implement new water sources in conjunction with the monitoring and subsequent removal of Piute. 5. Ginn Spring – Implemented new water source and monitor for discovery and use. 6. Kerr and Vermin – Monitor as bighorn discover and use New Kerr and New Vermin. Once the relocated sites have been discovered and used by bighorn populations, and transition has been successful, disable and eventually remove the old sites if monitoring supports actions. 7. Old Dad – Monitor for use and to determine if a transition to New Kerr and New Vermin is possible. If so, continue monitoring use and transition, deactivate, and monitor for transition. Remove after transition is successful, due to its inaccessibility and the absence of a suitable relocation site. Infrastructure would be removed over the long term as resources allow. 8. Piute – Monitor use, including collaring ewes, to determine if a transition to the new Vontrigger water source is possible. If so, disable guzzler and continue to monitor transition. If transition is successful, remove guzzler if monitoring data supports action. Proposed relocation sites for Vermin and Kerr guzzlers have been identified in potentially suitable non-wilderness locations near existing guzzlers. Factors considered in identifying relocation sites would include bighorn habitat quality, local terrain and hydrology, accessibility for maintenance, and contributions to regional movement corridors. Final locations would be determined as part of the implementation process. A detailed site-specific monitoring approach would be developed during implementation (see “Monitoring” above). Big Game Guzzlers: Alternative 3 (Preferred Alternative)

Objective Under Alternative 3, the NPS would seek to reduce the number of big game guzzlers in wilderness in a manner that results in no net loss of functioning dry season habitat for bighorn. It would emphasize reducing of the number of big game guzzlers in wilderness while improving the overall habitat value for bighorn sheep. The overall management objective would be strategic intervention to ensure that bighorn sheep populations are stable as the overall number of big game guzzlers within wilderness is reduced and regional habitat connectivity is improved.

Mojave National Preserve 43 Mojave National Preserve—Management Plan for Developed Water Resources

Approach Implementation of Alternative 3 for big game guzzlers would consist of installing new/relocated water sources; monitoring discovery, use, and transition of bighorn to new/relocated sources; disabling guzzlers; and eventually removing guzzler infrastructure. All guzzlers would continue to be retained and repaired in their current state until they are part of a relocation evaluation process or are relocated. If all actions are implemented under this alternative, seven big game guzzlers or alternative water sources would exist in the Preserve. Two guzzlers (Clark and Piute) would be removed, two (Vermin and Kerr) would be relocated out of wilderness, and two would remain in wilderness (Old Dad and Kelso). Three new water sources (Vontrigger Spring, Ginn Spring, and Piute North) would be permitted within the Preserve on non-wilderness land (Figure 6).

New Water Sources The NPS would pursue the establishment of three new guzzlers or water sources in non- wilderness locations to support the potential restoration of migration corridors and demographic connectivity across I-40 and I-15, including the establishment of a population in the Mescal/Ivanpah Range (see “New Guzzler Development” above, and Figure 2). The NPS would work with CDFW and BLM to place temporary or permanent water developments to encourage the use of existing underpasses. Potential sites for new water sources are: • Piute North Guzzler –would function as a habitat connector between Piute Spring and the Castle Mountains. • Vontrigger Spring –would function as a habitat connector between Piute Spring and the Hackberry Range. • Ginn Spring –would function as a habitat connector between the New York and Castle Mountains to the south and the Clark Mountains to the north.

Mojave National Preserve 44 Alternative 3 Clark Mountain 95 Big Game Guzzlers Yates Well 15 164 Mojave National Preserve Nipton Water Resources Management Plan and 164 Environmental Assessment

Ginn Castle Mountains Piute North Spring National Monument 95 15 Cal Nev Ari Piute

Baker NEVADA CALIFORNIA Cima Piute North Piute Vermin Zzyzx Kelso Old Dad Vontrigger Spring Vontrigger Spring Kerr Enlargement shown Enlargement shown above right below right

Vermin Goffs

40 Kelso

Fenner Old Dad

Guzzler Alternative 3 Clark Remove Piute Remove Essex Ludlow Old Dad 40 Retain Kerr Kelso Retain 0 510 [ Miles Kerr Relocate Vermin Relocate Alternative Actions New Water Yes – Three sites Sources outside wilderness Retain guzzler Guzzler relocation site Mojave National Preserve boundary Total Guzzlers 7 Remove guzzler New water source location Wilderness* Within wilderness 2 Relocate guzzler *Vermin relocation site is within a non-wilderness Outside wilderness 5 area associated with an existing road Mojave National Preserve—Management Plan for Developed Water Resources

7. Ginn Spring – Implement new water sources and monitor for discovery and use. 8. Kerr and Vermin – Monitor as bighorn discover and use New Kerr and New Vermin. Once the relocated sites have been discovered and used by bighorn populations, and transition has been successful, disable and eventually remove the old sites if monitoring supports actions. 9. Piute – Monitor use, including collared ewes, to determine if a transition to Piute Spring/Creek and the new Vontrigger and Piute North water sources is possible. If so, disable guzzler and continue to monitor transition. If transition is successful, remove guzzler if monitoring data supports action. Final locations would be determined as part of the implementation process. Proposed relocation sites for Vermin and Kerr guzzlers have been identified in potentially suitable non-wilderness locations near existing guzzlers. Factors considered in identifying relocation sites would include bighorn habitat quality, local terrain and hydrology, accessibility for maintenance, and contributions to regional movement corridors. Final locations would be determined as part of the implementation process. A detailed site-specific monitoring approach would be developed during implementation (see “Monitoring” above). Big Game Guzzlers: Alternative 4

Objective Under Alternative 4, the NPS would seek to maximize the ecological benefits of big game guzzlers and place them in additional locations throughout the Preserve. Emphasis would be on augmenting bighorn sheep habitat value through the use of big game guzzlers in the Preserve while minimizing the number of water developments within wilderness, where possible. Alternative 4 aims to increase bighorn sheep metapopulation resilience by retaining water availability for existing populations, increasing the functional dry season habitat for bighorn sheep, and increasing connectivity between populations. Alternative 4 seeks to retain and improve existing habitat and connectivity within and adjacent to the Preserve. Recent and past development is restricting bighorn connectivity in the Greater Mojave Desert (Epps et al. 2007; Creech et al. 2014). The current and future impact of climate change, which will result in warmer and drier conditions in the southwestern United States (see “Climate Trends and History” in Chapter 3: Affected Environment), is also likely to have a negative effect on bighorn in the region, because herds located in lower-elevation drier mountain ranges have been found to be more likely to be extirpated (Epps et al. 2004). NPS guidance has clearly emphasized the need for parks to cooperate with other agencies to conserve resources both inside and outside of parks and to manage for ecosystem integrity in the face of climate change and other anthropogenic disturbance. The integrity of the larger desert bighorn metapopulation can primarily be maintained through enhancing connectivity and increasing the genetic diversity and population persistence of existing and restorable bighorn herds (Epps et al. 2006; Creech et al. 2014). This alternative seeks to maintain bighorn integrity by expanding the use of guzzlers, as water is considered one of the most limiting factors for many bighorn herds in the Mojave Desert.

Approach Implementation of Alternative 4 for big game guzzlers would consist of installing new/relocated water sources; monitoring discovery, use, and transition of bighorn to new/relocated sources; disabling guzzlers; and eventually removing guzzler infrastructure (Figure 7). During implementation, all guzzlers would continue to be retained and repaired in their current state until they are part of a relocation evaluation process or are physically relocated.

Mojave National Preserve 46 Mojave National Preserve—Management Plan for Developed Water Resources

Implementation Sequence Before each implementation step, the Preserve would identify and secure funding and logistical support that is necessary to implement the actions and associated monitoring. Site-specific compliance under NEPA would be completed for each guzzler action. Detailed plans would be developed for guzzler relocations including material, equipment, and personnel costs; logistics; and other information needed. Priorities for guzzler actions are: 1. Old Dad – Rebuild guzzler and repair as needed. 2. Kelso – Retain and maintain as needed in its present location because of its importance for rams and the lack of a nearby relocation site. 3. Piute – Retain and maintain as needed in its present location. 4. New Kerr and New Vermin – Build new guzzlers for relocation of Kerr and Vermin, and monitor for discovery and use. 5. Clark – Continue monitoring for an additional year, followed by disabling and removal if monitoring data supports action. Infrastructure may be reused at a suitable non- wilderness site. 6. Vontrigger Spring –New water sources would be implemented and monitored for discovery and use. 7. Ginn Spring –Implement new water sources and monitor for discovery and use. 8. Kerr and Vermin – Monitor as bighorn discover and use New Kerr and New Vermin. Once the relocated sites have been discovered and used by bighorn populations, and transition has been successful, disable and eventually remove the old sites if monitoring supports actions. If all actions are implemented under this alternative, three big game guzzlers would be retained in wilderness and four guzzlers would exist in non-wilderness locations within the Preserve. Final locations would be determined as part of the implementation process. A detailed site- specific monitoring approach would be developed during implementation (see “Monitoring” above)

Mojave National Preserve 47