NATIONAL
ROS INVENTORY MAPPING
PROTOCOL
****** 7/01/2003 ******
2/17/168:30 PM
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
ROS – DEFINITION…………………………………………………………3
NEED AND BENEFITS OF USING ROS……………………......…………3
GENERAL GUIDELINES………………………………………...…………5
ROS INVENTORY MAPPING STEPS…………………………..………..10
APPENDICES………………………………………………………………..19
A:
ROS SETTING CHARACTERISTICS
…..20
B:
“PRIMITIVE ROAD” DETERMINATION
ROS LINK WITH ROADS (OMLs and INFRA DATA BASE)
…..24
MAPPING EXAMPLE
.....26
C:
2
2/17/168:30 PM
RECREATION OPPORTUNITY SPECTRUM (ROS)
MAPPING PROTOCOL
7/01/2003
ROS - What is it?……………………………………………….
Since the early 1980’s, the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) has been used as a
framework for identifying, classifying, planning, and managing a range of recreation
settings. Six distinct settings: urban, rural, roaded natural, semi-primitive motorized,
semi-primitive non-motorized, and primitive are defined using specific physical,
managerial, and social criteria. For detailed information on ROS categories and criteria
refer to the ROS User Guide, 1982 USDA Handbook, and the ROS Primer and Field
Guide, 1990 USDA, R6-REC-021-90. For additional information on applications, refer to
FSM 2311 and FSM 2330.
NEED AND BENIFITS…………………………………….
National Forests across the country are in various stages of Plan revision. While some
have completed their revisions, others are in the process, and the remaining Forests will
be starting within the next five years. It is timely to develop National guidance for ROS
inventory and mapping.
Although the basic framework and definitions have been in place for over 20 years, the
system has not been integrated with recent technological advances in mapping and
analysis procedures. Forests and Regions have developed processes independently,
leading to inconsistencies within and across Regional boundaries. Specifically:





The number and type of ROS categories vary among Forests and Regions.
ROS polygons within Wilderness are defined and mapped differently.
The process and layers used in deriving a ROS layer vary.
Naming conventions vary.
Seasonal distinctions for ROS layers are not consistently defined.
It is important to utilize consistent definitions and methodologies for mapping a
nationally recognized classification system. Not only will the agency be more effective
in communicating recreation settings and programs to the public, we will be able to look
beyond one FS unit’s boundaries to make comparisons and analyze implications of
proposed management decisions at a variety of scales.
Used as a zoning tool, ROS within a GIS framework is one of the tools available in which
social considerations and the biophysical components of a landscape are integrated to
achieve multiple social and natural resource objectives. Used in conjunction with Sense
of Place (SOP), the Scenery Management System (SMS), and Benefits Based
3
2/17/168:30 PM
Management (BBM), ROS will enable the agency to display human values, meaning and
attachment to the landscape, as well as ecological impressions and serve as an important
consideration in defining existing and desired conditions. A detailed discussion on
linkages (inventory – analysis – desired conditions) to SOP, BBM, and SMS can be
found in the 2003 National RHWR Technical Guide for Integrating Recreation with Plan
Revision.
ROS has applications throughout the planning process. Regardless of what “Needs for
Change” are identified; ROS is a valuable tool in integrating recreation with other
resources values. Planning steps in which ROS can be utilized include:








Defining Existing Conditions
Assessments of current management direction
Defining Desired Conditions
Developing Alternatives
Analyzing Effects of Alternatives
Defining the Preferred Alternative
Determining actions necessary to move from existing to desired (Implementation)
Measuring effects of actions / implementation (Monitoring)
ROS is also valuable in addressing key issues. Motorized versus non-motorized
recreation uses continue to be an important issue in most Regions. ROS can be used as a
zoning tool, establishing programmatic access direction from which subsequent sitespecific, travel management decisions can tier to. ROS maps will assist the public in
understanding and identifying with:




the type of settings (landscapes) provided,
the types of transportation permitted,
the social setting to expect;
and the level of management and infrastructure.
4
2/17/168:30 PM
GENERAL MAPPING GUIDELINES…………………………...
It is understood that ROS mapping is not an exact science and some flexibility is
necessary at the ground level to deal with site-specific conditions and anomalies that are
not exact matches with specific ROS class criteria and definitions. Site-specific
situations that may require field expertise and judgment are too numerous to list and
impossible to address within the context of a National protocol. Listed below are
process-related sideboards and guidelines to follow when conditions on the ground don’t
quite reflect definitions outlined in the ROS User Guide.
Refining criteria within primary ROS classes to better distinguish differences between
the six primary classes (Primitive, Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized, Semi-Primitive
Motorized, Roaded Natural, Rural, and Urban) is encouraged, as long as the result is not
a shift in the national ROS “characterizations” as described in Chapter 10 of the ROS
Users Guide. The ability to refine criteria will depend on the level of information
available at local units. The information can range from natural resource information, to
use and user data. Documentation of any local refinements is critical and should be
included in the attribute table for the specific ROS polygon, as well as in the planning
record.
Creating subclasses within any of the six primary ROS classes is allowed as long as
aggregations can be made back to the six primary classes. Subclasses can be utilized to
better reflect physical, social and/or managerial settings, where distinct differences exist
and are repeated in the unit’s landscape. Conferring with neighboring forests and the
Regional office is important to coordinate the distinctions being made and the criteria
used in categorizing them.
Examples of subclasses with the primary ROS class of Roaded Natural have
been developed in several Regions. Below are some examples of RN subclasses.
These subclasses are not mandatory, but simply reflect examples developed and
utilized by various Regions and Forests.

Roaded Modified has been used as a subclass of RN by several Forests
and Regions for many years. Roaded Modified has typically been defined
as areas exhibiting evidence of Forest management activities that are
dominant on the landscape. Examples include heavily logged areas,
evidence of mining, oil/gas or other minerals extraction activities, etc.
No size criteria apply. To assist in identifying these areas, mapping
completed to display existing conditions of the scenic resources can be
used. Roaded Modified areas would likely coincide with EVC (Existing
Visual Condition) polygons rated as EVC 3 or greater or with ESI
(Existing Scenic Integrity) polygons rated as “Low” or below.)
5
2/17/168:30 PM

There may also be a need to classify settings that are less developed areas
within RN – settings that meet all but the size criteria (2,500 acres) for
SPM designation. Some Regions have used a smaller (1,500 acre)
minimum for designating these areas and mapping them as subclasses
within the RN primary class.

There may also be a need to classify settings that are predominately nonmotorized, exhibiting all of the SPNM characteristics except for 2,500
acreage size criteria. This subclass would essentially show areas that are
non-motorized (but not big enough to be mapped as SPNM) within the
primary ROS class of RN.
Creating Seasonal ROS maps is allowed. This is consistent with direction in the ROS
User Guide, 21.6, page 29. Forests may find it helpful to distinguish between summer
and winter (or possibly spring or fall) recreation settings due to drastic changes in the
physical, social and/or managerial components of the landscape. Considerations for
determining the need for a seasonal ROS layer should include:





Infrastructure (i.e. roads, trails, structures and other facilities) may not be useable,
accessible, or even visible during the winter months due to snow depths. Other
seasonal changes (i.e. water levels, etc.) may also change the settings
infrastructure.
Size and remoteness changes due to changes in the presence/extent of roads.
Managerial changes such as shifts in motorized and non-motorized travel
opportunities and restrictions
Changes in the levels of use – social setting changes
Etc!
The above list is not inclusive. Forests will need to evaluate the need for developing a
seasonal ROS map based on the extent and duration of setting changes, as well as specific
issue(s) that seasonal ROS maps may assist in addressing. Where specific issues require a
more detailed look at existing ROS settings for a particular season of use, a seasonspecific ROS map may be warranted. If seasonal ROS maps are developed, the
methodology used and the classification criteria will be critical to document.
Although all six ROS classes may not be presented on seasonal maps, it is suggested that
at a minimum, differentiations between motorized and non-motorized settings be
delineated.
ROS mapping within designated Wilderness has varied across the nation. There are
several issues that have caused confusion and resulting inconsistencies.
One of the issues has been that “primitive”, as defined in the ROS User Guide, is
not synonymous with the “primitive” typically used within a Wilderness context.
6
2/17/168:30 PM
This has not only caused confusion internally, but has also created confusion
when communicating with the public.
In addition, “Primitive”, as defined within the ROS context, is an extremely broad
category and when applied within Wilderness, does not adequately differentiate
the characteristics and attributes of the settings (i.e. those that are more remote
and pristine). This has lead to the development of various Forest and Regional
classification systems that either link to ROS or are completely separate from the
ROS classification system.
The term “Roaded Natural” is also confusing within the context of designated
Wilderness. Since Wilderness areas are managed for non-motorized and
mechanized use, the term “roaded” seems automatically inappropriate. There are,
however, isolated cases where RN actually does describe the existing setting
within Wilderness. These areas are typically at/along a Wilderness boundary,
often part of a larger RN polygon that originates from roads in adjacent, nonWilderness landscapes. Motorized settings may also exist due to language
contained within enabling legislation, permitting motorized use in specific areas
of a Wilderness (i.e. on waterways and airstrips, or limited motorized overland
travel to access to private in- holdings).
This protocol establishes ROS inventory mapping procedures for all Forest System
Lands, including those within designated Wilderness. The primary objectives of
maintaining a consistent inventory system, interior and exterior to Wilderness boundaries,
are to:
 Accurately display existing conditions within Wilderness that are consistent with
inventory procedures and definitions on other Forest System lands – one system
for all Forest System lands.
 Accurately display existing conditions that are inconsistent with Wilderness
management objectives.
 Accurately display existing conditions that are consistent with Wilderness
management objectives.
 Enable a comparison of differences among various Wilderness Areas.
 Enable comparisons between landscapes within designated Wilderness and those
outside designated Wilderness.
Once units move beyond inventory and describe/display desired conditions, the ROS
classifications that are not Primitive or Semi-Primitive, can (and should) be delineated to
reflect Congressional intent, Wilderness values and management objectives.
ROS inventory mapping protocols pertaining to designated Wilderness are consistent
with direction contained in the ROS User Guide, Section 21.1, page 15 and outlined
below:
1) Map existing ROS classes within Wilderness by following the ROS
Inventory Mapping Steps 1-6 outlined of this document (pages 10-15).
7
2/17/168:30 PM
2) Review all polygons initially mapped as motorized (SPM and RN) ROS
settings (this is also discussed under ROS Inventory Mapping Steps 7-9,
pages 15-18 of this protocol). Carefully scrutinize polygons initially mapped
as RN and SPM (often due to their proximity – within ½ mile – of roads) to
ensure all ROS class criteria are considered. Since Wilderness areas
typically prohibit motorized and mechanized use, do not contain facilities or
recreation developments, and are managed for a primitive recreation
experience, other physical, social and managerial ROS criteria become critical
in refining initial ROS designations. RN and SPM settings within
Wilderness should only occur in isolated situations, under very limited
circumstances:



where an adjacent road or development has a profound effect on the
wilderness recreation experience,
where language within the enabling legislation permits motorized
transportation and,
where the motorized use is frequent enough to influence the typical
wilderness recreation experience
Motorized ROS designations are typically limited to narrow corridors (i.e.
along cherry stem roads and water ways) and small, isolated areas (i.e. air
strips). Levels and frequency of motorized use should be considered prior to
automatically mapping an area SPM or RN.
In cases where motorized use is infrequent and not a significant impact to the
otherwise SPNM or P recreation experience, the area is mapped as P or
SPNM. Site-specific departures or inconsistencies (i.e. an airstrip that is used
for emergencies or occasional administrative use) to the overall ROS class
designation are simply documented in the attribute table of that ROS polygon.
More guidance in resolving inconsistencies is described in step 9 of the ROS
Inventory Mapping Steps (page 16-18 of this protocol).
3) Wilderness-specific subclasses are being developed by a National team and,
although a separate effort, shall be designed to reside within the primary ROS
classes and be consistent with the direction contained in this protocol. The
subclasses will better reflect Wilderness attributes, as well as, address
management needs. Once established, they shall be incorporated with this
National ROS Inventory Mapping Protocol as an addition.
***
It should be noted that when mapping management prescriptions and
desired future conditions, the only ROS classes appropriate within
Wilderness are Primitive or Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized (and in isolated
instances, Semi-Primitive Motorized). ***
8
2/17/168:30 PM
ROS mapping along river corridors, including designated Wild and Scenic Rivers,
also presents unique challenges. Due to the nature of rivers, the patterns of use, and the
unique physical characteristics, additional guidelines for ROS classification (for both
inventory and desired conditions) are being developed nationally. The rivers-specific
guidance will not change direction contained in this protocol. It will simply give
additional guidance for ROS mapping within river corridors, and show linkages to such
tools as Levels of Acceptable Change (LAC), the Scenery Management System (SMS),
etc. It will also show the correlation between various wild and scenic designations and
ROS classifications. Once finalized, the guidelines shall be incorporated into this
protocol as an addition.
9
2/17/168:30 PM
ROS INVENTORY MAPPING STEPS …………………………
The following section outlines the steps to map existing ROS classes. The steps were
developed using definitions and processes outlined in Chapter 21 - ROS Delineation of
the ROS User Guide. Since GIS and many of the corporate data layers that are currently
available did not exist at the time the User Guide was developed, the objective of the
following outline is to link the User Guide with GIS data and applications.
The first 4 steps describe the process and data layers necessary in producing initial ROS
maps using GIS. Because every forest has different information and available layers, it
will be necessary to do a “cross-walk” to ensure the information needed for this process
is available. GIS Data Dictionary standards or other information found in the National
Applications were examined for use during this process. The process is still possible
even if a forest layer does not meet the GIS Data Dictionary standards.
Remaining steps (steps 5-9) are the adjustment of initial GIS maps using local expertise
about the landscapes and use patterns. Although resource specialists and District
personnel should be used throughout the mapping process, their involvement is
particularly critical in these last steps to determine where inconsistencies occur, resolve
those inconsistencies, and refine computer generated maps that best represent conditions
on the ground.
Five mapping criteria are used in defining the physical, social and managerial setting of
each landscape:
Physical setting
1. Remoteness
2. Size
3. Evidence of humans
Social setting
4. User Density
Managerial Setting
5. Managerial regimentation
These criteria, when combined, result in an ROS class designation. Each criterion is
discussed in the ROS User Guide, Section 21, pages 14-27, and summarized in tables 3-7.
Appendix A displays typical examples of the physical, social and managerial attributes
contained in each of the ROS classes.
1.) Develop map showing initial division between motorized and nonmotorized ROS settings
Motorized ROS settings are areas within ½ mile of motorized travel routes. Motorized
travel routes include: roads, motorized trails, railroads, and possibly lakes and streams
where motorized use is allowed.
Start with GIS maps containing all system roads and trails. In addition to Forest-specific
information confined to within the Forest boundary, utilize information available on nonForest roads, both within and adjacent to, the Forest boundary. It is advisable to include
10
2/17/168:30 PM
all motorized routes within 3 miles of the Forest boundary. This will ensure
consideration of off-Forest influences when mapping on-Forest settings.
Distinguish which routes are motorized and which are non-motorized.
A further refinement of motorized areas will require a roads designation of “better than
primitive” or “primitive”. A ROS User Guide definition for “primitive roads” is: are not
constructed or maintained, and are used by vehicles not primarily intended for highway
use. Refer to Appendix B for information on the designation of “primitive roads” based
on information that may be available through INFRA Travel Routes database.
It is recommended that “primitive” and “better than primitive” roads are identified during
this initial step and buffered separately. Further refinement of motorized areas occurs in
Steps 3 and 6.
If Operational Maintenance Levels (OMLs) are identified on the roads layer, separate
layers for buffering based on the following delineations:
Buffer Primitive Roads:
For “primitive roads” select OML = 1. In addition OML 2 roads should be
examined. Using the information in Appendix B, select OML 2 roads that meet
the “primitive road” criteria.
Motorized Trails can be left separate for buffering purposes but are included in
the definition of “primitive roads”. Motorized trails can be identified in the Trails
view of the Infra database. If “motorized prohibited” is blank, the trail is
inventoried as a motorized trail.
The Travel Routes Data Dictionary includes an optional field entry for Template Slope
Code (housing various cross section characteristics of the travel way). One of the code
options is “P”, indicating “primitive”. The description for that code is “no constructed
cross section – wheel track”. This is consistent with the ROS User Guide definition for a
“primitive road”.
Buffer Better than Primitive Roads:
For “Better than Primitive Roads”, select OML = 3, 4, and 5 and apply the buffer.
Further division of roaded polygons shall be completed in steps 6 and 7.
Buffer all motorized routes by ½ and 3 miles and overlay all resulting motorized
corridors (i.e. waterways-river corridors and lakes, airstrips, etc). Add the forest boundary
to the buffer overlay. Select areas which fall in ½ mile of motorized travel and identify
them as “motorized”. All areas outside will be identified as “non-motorized”.
Overlay current management information (i.e. local travel plans) to verify that current
management is consistent with the OML of the road and to also compare area
management with initially mapped polygons. Make necessary adjustments. For
11
2/17/168:30 PM
example, areas initially mapped as “motorized” because of the presence of roads but are
closed according to the travel management plans, may be identified as Semi-Primitive
non-motorized (SPNM) due to the closure. Other changes may be made based on the
resource specialist knowledge of the area and other management criteria. Steps 5-9
discuss the types of information and considerations for further map refinement.
At this point, the draft map will display a rough division between motorized and
non-motorized ROS settings.
2.) Classify non-motorized lands as either Primitive or semi-primitive
non-motorized
Areas 3 miles or greater away from motorized routes are initially mapped as Primitive.
Areas less than 3 miles and more than ½ mile from all roads, railroads, motorized trails
and water-ways are initially mapped as semi-primitive non-motorized.
At this point, the draft map will display a rough division between primitive and
semi-primitive non-motorized ROS settings.
3.) Map initial Semi-Primitive Motorized and Roaded Natural ROS
settings.
Using the resulting coverage from previous steps, further delineate motorized ROS
settings as either Semi-primitive Motorized or Roaded Natural.
Select and code the polygons within the ½ mile buffers of routes designated as primitive
roads and motorized trails to semi-primitive motorized (SPM). Areas within ½ mile
buffers for “Better than Primitive” roads and other motorized travel corridors become
roaded natural.
SPM areas and preliminary RN areas are now delineated.
4.) Apply size criteria to Primitive and Semi-Primitive polygons.
This step identifies areas meeting the various size criteria as well as identifying
(flagging and coding) areas that don’t meet the size criteria. The flagged areas shall
be analyzed in subsequent steps to ensure other criteria are fully considered before
eliminating the area due strictly to remoteness and size.
12
2/17/168:30 PM
Select areas identified as primitive with a size greater than or equal to 5,000 acres. These
areas meet all criteria for Primitive. Those that don’t meet the 5,000 are flagged as
“smallP”.
Select areas identified as SPNM with a size greater than or equal to 2,500 acres. These
areas meet all criteria for SPNM and shall be labeled as such. Areas not meeting the size
criteria should be flagged and coded as “smallSPNM” to allow for further analysis.
Select the “SPM” polygons greater than or equal to 2,500 acres. These polygons meet
the definition of “SPM”. Remaining “SPM” polygons smaller than the 2,500 acres will
be flagged and coded as “smallSPM”. These areas will be further analyzed in steps 8
and 9. If analysis does not support a SPM setting, they shall be coded RN.
5.) Conduct adjacency assessment to refine P and SPNM settings:
For those areas initially mapped as Primitive but are smaller than 5,000 acres, look at
adjacent ROS settings. There may be areas contiguous to semi-primitive non-motorized
areas, yet still provide a primitive experience, they should be flagged for further
assessment by local specialists. The decision requires local knowledge of the area and its
features (i.e. topography, etc.).
For SPNM areas that do not meet the 2,500 acre size criteria, consider adjacent ROS
designations. If adjacent lands are P, the polygon may still provide a SPNM experience
and be mapped as such. In addition, if the area is isolated due to topography or other
permanent landscape features, the area, even though not 2,500 acres, may be mapped as
SPNM. Local expertise and judgment will be necessary in considering individual area
designations. If none of these conditions occur, the area would be mapped as RN. This
is consistent with direction in the ROS User Guide, 21.22, page 20.
There may also be instances where a small SPNM setting is engulfed by a SPM setting.
In this case, the SPNM setting would become part of the SPM polygon. Although
motorized use is not allowed in this portion of the setting, it contributes to the semiprimitive character.
Another source of information potentially useful in verifying these settings is the Forest’s
Wild and Scenic River mapping. For example, as a general rule (based on the 6/02/2003
Draft ROS for River Management), most Wild Rivers will correlate with Primitive
settings, Wild-Scenic Rivers are typically in SPNM settings, and Scenic Rivers are
typically in SPM settings.
The map now depicts Primitive, Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized and Semi-Primitive
Motorized areas.
13
2/17/168:30 PM
6.) Distinguish between Roaded Natural, Rural, and Urban ROS classes.
No size criteria apply to roaded natural, rural, or urban ROS classes. Remaining buffered
areas within ½ mile of “better than primitive roads” should be identified as “RN”. This
includes those classified operational maintenance levels 3-5, and those that are
maintenance level 2 but not included in the primitive roads for SPM mapping.
No real distinction between roaded natural, rural and urban classes can be derived from
operational maintenance levels 3, 4, and 5. All three ROS classes are feasible. Refer to
table 2 in Appendix B for linkages between operational maintenance levels and ROS
class distinctions.
The primary indicator or criteria useful in differentiating between these three ROS classes
is the level of development. Potential information to assist in determining the level of
development may be available from existing GIS layers or other maps. Information that
may be useful includes:
 administrative site boundaries (i.e. office complexes, visitor center sites, work
compounds, maintenance yards, housing areas, etc, may exhibit rural or even
urban ROS class characteristics)
 developed recreation sites (highly developed sites such as ski areas, marinas, etc.
may exhibit rural or even urban ROS class characteristics). ROS classes are
identified in Infra within the Develop Recreation Sites module.
 Wild and Scenic Rivers - the type of River designation can be helpful in
differentiating between RN, Rural and Urban. For example, as a general rule
(based on the 6/02/2003 Draft ROS for River Management), most ScenicRecreational Rivers will correlate with Roaded Natural settings, and Recreational
Rivers will likely be either Rural or Urban settings).
 permit boundaries (lodges, dude ranches, ski areas, marinas, and highly developed
recreation complexes, may constitute a rural or urban ROS classification)
 EVC (Existing Visual Condition) maps. – Those areas designated as EVC 4 or 5
may contain features that would qualify as either Rural or Urban.
 ESI (Existing Scenic Integrity) maps – Those areas mapped as “low” or “very
low” there may be features on the landscape that would qualify as either Rural or
Urban.
 Management Prescription maps (displaying existing conditions) may coincide
with development levels.
 DOQs (digital ortho-photo quadrangles) can be viewed to verify levels of
development.
 Etc.
Where official boundaries of the above information (surveys, an polygon coverage in
GIS, etc.), they should be used. In cases where boundaries are not be mapped or
surveyed, field judgment will be necessary in delineating the polygon.
14
2/17/168:30 PM
If available, information regarding the social and managerial setting should also be
referenced and utilized in refining ROS classifications. Refer to Table 6 (Social setting
Criteria) and Table 7 (Managerial Setting Criteria) of the ROS User Guide for attributes
appropriate under each ROS class.
Social setting information may not be available, or where available, not displayed
geographically. One source of social setting information resides in the INFRA database
for GFAs (General Forest Areas). CUAs (concentrated use areas) are identified and can
used in identifying those areas that are undeveloped but receive high levels of use.
Although CUAs and social setting criteria in general, do not drive the designation of one
ROS class over another, they can be helpful in later phases of planning where they are an
inconsistency within the overall ROS setting being managed.
Management setting information is also not likely mapped. Perhaps the best source of
managerial information is District and Forest Travel Management Plans, combined with
local knowledge of the area. On-site regimentation can either be visible (barriers, signs,
etc.) or invisible (such as permits, etc.). Appendix A displays physical, managerial and
social attributes typically found in each of the ROS classes.
7.) Apply Wilderness Criteria
Overlay designated Wilderness boundaries (where applicable).
Review all polygons initially mapped as motorized (SPM and RN) ROS settings.
Carefully scrutinize polygons initially mapped as RN and SPM (often due to their
proximity – within ½ mile – of roads) to ensure all ROS class criteria are considered.
Since Wilderness areas typically prohibit motorized and mechanized use, do not contain
facilities or recreation developments, and are managed for a primitive recreation
experience, other physical, social and managerial ROS criteria become critical in refining
initial ROS designations. RN and SPM settings within Wilderness should only occur in
isolated situations, under very limited circumstances:



where an adjacent road or development has a profound effect on the
wilderness recreation experience,
where language within the enabling legislation permits motorized
transportation and,
where the motorized use is frequent enough to influence the typical
wilderness recreation experience
Motorized ROS designations are typically limited to narrow corridors (i.e.
along cherry stem roads and water ways) and small, isolated areas (i.e. air
strips). Levels and frequency of motorized use should be considered prior to
automatically mapping an area SPM or RN.
15
2/17/168:30 PM
In cases where motorized use is infrequent and not a significant impact to the
otherwise SPNM or P recreation experience, the area is mapped as P or
SPNM. Site-specific departures or inconsistencies (i.e. an airstrip that is used
for emergencies or occasional administrative use) to the overall ROS class
designation are simply documented in the attribute table of that ROS polygon.
Wilderness-specific subclasses are being developed by a National team and, although a
separate effort, shall be designed to reside within the primary ROS classes and be
consistent with the direction contained in this protocol. The subclasses will better reflect
Wilderness attributes, as well as, address management needs. Once established, they
shall be incorporated with this National ROS Inventory Mapping Protocol as an addition.
The map now depicts motorized versus non-motorized ROS setting plus a
refinement of areas where specific management actions and wilderness designations
affect the ROS designation.
8.) Apply other criteria and local knowledge:
Other available information (topography, vegetation, etc.) may be used to further refine
polygons. Where roads are contained within steep canyons or surrounded by dense
vegetation, the “influence” zone of those routes may be less than ½ mile. Where routes
are on flat terrain with sparse vegetation, the sights and sounds of humans may carry
beyond the ½ buffer. These types of adjustments will require local knowledge and
judgment to determine. This step is critical in finalizing the designation of all polygons,
including those initially mapped as “smallP”, “smallSPNM” and “smallSPM”.
9.) Resolve inconsistencies:
When the physical, social and/or managerial settings are inconsistent with one another, an
ROS category must be selected that best represents current conditions. Resolution of
any apparent conflicts and search for compatibilities should begin with the following
guidelines for analyzing inconsistencies. For additional guidance in resolving sitespecific inconsistencies, refer to the ROS User Guide, page 29.
1) Determine the significance of inconsistencies on the recreation setting. This
analysis requires judgments about possible short or long-term consequences and
cumulative effects. Important questions to address when evaluating the
significance of ROS setting inconsistencies include:

How did the inconsistency occur? Was it intentional in the forest plan
direction or unanticipated?
16
2/17/168:30 PM

What are the implications of the inconsistency? For example, will the
inconsistency be significant enough to create a change in ROS setting? Will
the changes be rapid or slow?

What is the intensity (severity) and spatial extent of the inconsistency? What
is the degree of setting alteration or effects of inconsistent activity or mode of
travel? Is the inconsistency activity or mode of travel concentrated in only a
small portion of the ROS class or use season, or are they widespread? Will it
be a short or long-term change in the ROS setting?

What should be done about the inconsistency?
2) Determine the course of action necessary in resolving inconsistency. There
are three possible actions:
a. Retain the ROS classification and document the inconsistency that
occurs.
b. Eliminate inconsistency through plan direction
c. Acknowledge inconsistency and change ROS class.
By considering the intensity and spatial extent of impacts, the actual or potential effects
on setting indicators can be evaluated. The following matrix provides a method for
evaluating the intensity and spatial extent of effects.
DEGREE OF INCONSISTENCIES AND POTENTIAL ACTIONS TO ADDRESS
INTENSITY
LOW
HIGH
Unacceptable
HIGH
SPATIAL
EXTENT


Eliminate
Change ROS
Unacceptable
MODERATE


Eliminate
Change ROS
17
MODERATE
Unacceptable


Eliminate
Change ROS
Inconsistent



Retain &
document
Eliminate
Change ROS
Inconsistent

Retain &
document
 Eliminate
 Change ROS
Inconsistent


Retain &
document
Eliminate
2/17/168:30 PM
Inconsistent
LOW



Inconsistent
Retain &
document
Eliminate
Change ROS


Retain &
document
Eliminate
Inconsistent

Retain &
document
Evaluating a potential inconsistency requires a systematic analysis and the exercise of
judgment. An inconsistency in one indicator does not automatically require a change in
the ROS designation. Both the intensity of the inconsistency—the severity of the effect
on setting, access or use—and its spatial extent must be considered and weighed.
As expressed in the table, an inconsistency rated high for intensity and spatial extent or
moderate on one scale and high on the other would likely require elimination or a change
in ROS class. Since the physical setting is often the most influential factor in defining a
setting, this criteria is often weighed heavier when deciding on the ROS class. The
potential to make no change increases with combinations of moderate and/or low ratings,
assuming the inconsistency has little or no effect on the area’s character.
Units may determine that the physical, managerial and social settings are best mapped as
separate layers. This protocol allows for that flexibility. As a minimum standard,
however, each unit must produce a compiled ROS map. This is necessary for National
consistency in data layers, and will allow for comparisons and analysis at a variety of
scales.
An example of how the maps progress through the above steps is included in Appendix
C.
18
2/17/168:30 PM
APPENDICES
A. ROS SETTING CHARACTERISTICS
B. PRIMITIVE ROAD DETERMINATION AND
LINK TO INFRA
C. MAPPING EXAMPLE
19
2/17/168:30 PM
Appendix A:
SUMMARY OF ROS SETTING CHARACTERISTICS
Primitive
DESCRIPTION
Setting
Setting
Physical
Managerial
Semi-Primitive NonMotorized
Social***
Physical
Managerial
Social***
Theme: Remote (3 miles from motorized use),
predominately unmodified, naturally evolving
Size*: 5,000 + acres
Infrastructure**:
Access - Non-motorized trails are present.
Fishing sites –rivers and lakes;
Camp/Picnic sites – not developed or defined, leave no trace;
Sanitation – no facilities, leave no trace;
Water supply – undeveloped natural;
Signing – minimal, constructed of rustic, natural materials;
Interpretation - through self discovery and at trailheads;
Water crossing – minimal, some bridges made of natural
materials (wood) may exist but are rare.
Vegetation: Natural, no treatments except for fire use.
Few signs, few encounters with rangers, Travel on foot and horse,
no motorized travel allowed.
Very high probability of solitude; closeness to nature; self-reliance,
high challenge and risk; little evidence of people.
Theme: Predominately natural/natural appearing; rustic
improvements to protect resources.
Size*: 2,500 + acres (No size criteria apply within designated
Wilderness boundaries).
Infrastructure**:
Access - Non-motorized trails are present.
Closed and temporary Roads may be present but not
dominant on the landscape.
Fishing sites – rivers, lakes and reservoirs;
Camp/Picnic sites – not developed, leave no trace
Sanitation – no facilities, leave no trace
Water supply – undeveloped natural
Signing – rustic constructed of natural materials.
Interpretation - through self discovery, at trailheads
Water crossing – rustic structures or bridges made of natural
materials.
Vegetation: Predominately natural, treatment areas exist to enhance
forest health but are few and widely dispersed;
Minimum or subtle signing and regulations, some encounters with
rangers. Motorized travel prohibited.
High probability of solitude, closeness to nature, self-reliance high
to moderate challenge and risk; some evidence of others.
20
Semi-Primitive Motorized
2/17/168:30 PM
Physical
Managerial
Social***
Theme: Predominately Natural, Natural Appearing
Size: 2,500 + acres (no minimum size within designated
Wilderness)
Infrastructure**:
Access - Motorized trails exist
Fishing sites – rivers, lakes, and reservoirs w/ some trails &
primitive roads (motorized trails);
Camp/Picnic sites – not developed, leave no trace, some
identified dispersed areas
Sanitation – limited facilities, rustic, may have rustic
outhouses available.
Water supply - undeveloped natural, rustic
developments;
Signing – rustic, made of natural materials;
Interpretation – self discovery, some located on site or
at trailheads;
Water crossing - rustic structures or bridges made of natural
material, some designed for motorized use.
Vegetation: treatment areas are very small in number,
widely disbursed, and consistent with natural
vegetation patterns.
Minimum or subtle on-site controls with some restrictions;
Motorized off-highway vehicles allowed.
Moderate probability of solitude, closeness to nature, high degree of
challenge and risk using motorized equipment; motorized use
visible and audible.
Theme: Natural Appearing with nodes and corridors of
Development such as campgrounds, trailheads, boat
launches, and rustic, small-scale resorts.
Roaded Natural
Size: n/a
Physical
Managerial
Social***
Infrastructure**:
Access – Classified Road System for highway vehicle use
Fishing sites – rivers, lakes, reservoirs with some facilities;
Camp/picnic sites – identified dispersed and developed sites;
Sanitation – developed outhouses that blend with setting
Water supply – often developed
Signing – rustic with natural materials to more refined using a
variety of materials such as fiberglass, metal, etc.;
Interpretation – simple roadside signs, some interpretive displays
Water crossing – bridges constructed of natural materials.
Vegetation: Changes (treatments) to the natural vegetation
patterns are evident but in harmony with natural setting.
Opportunity to be with other users in developed sites; some obvious
signs (information and regulation) and low to moderate likelihood
of meeting Forest Service rangers.
Moderate evidence of human sights and sounds; moderate
concentration of users at campsites; little challenge or risk.
21
Rural
2/17/168:30 PM
Physical
Managerial
Urban
Social***
Physical
Managerial
Theme: Altered Landscapes with natural appearing backdrop.
Ranches, administrative sites, and moderately developed resorts are
sometimes in this ROS class.
Size: n/a
Infrastructure**:
Access - Travel routes highly developed, classified roads
Trails are constructed for ease of movement. Majority of
routes are concrete, paved or graveled.
Camp/Picnic sites – developed and designed for user comfort,
variety of construction materials used that blend with setting.
May have hookup amenities such as hot water, electricity, and
sewage disposal.
Sanitation – developed and designed for user comfort
Water supply – developed and designed for user comfort
Signing – natural and synthetic materials appropriate
Interpretation –roadside exhibits, interp. Programs, etc;
Water crossing bridges constructed of a variety of materials,
In harmony with landscape
Vegetation: dominate treatments that blend with landscape.
Obvious signing (regulation and information), education and law
enforcement staff available. Motorized and mechanized travel
common and often separated.
High interaction among users is common. Little challenge or risk
associated with being outdoors.
Theme: Heavy site modifications and facilities. Backdrop is
often natural appearing. Highly developed Ski areas and
resorts are examples of urban nodes within NF System lands.
Size: n/a but typically small nodes
Infrastructure**:
Access - Travel routes highly developed (typically maintenance
levels 4 and 5) for motorized use often with mass transit
available. Majority of routes are concrete, paved or
graveled.
Camp/Picnic sites – developed and designed for user comfort,
variety of construction materials used, campsites in close
proximity to each other, nearby café’s and restaurants.
Sanitation – developed and designed for user comfort, most
have running water.
Water supply – developed and designed for user comfort,
many have hot water available.
Signing – natural and synthetic materials appropriate
Interpretation –exhibits in staffed visitor centers, highly
developed and formalized exhibits, etc;
Water crossing bridges constructed of a variety of materials,
designed for user convenience and safety.
Vegetation: often planted, manicured and maintained
Intensive on-site management, obvious signs, and staffing,
education and law enforcement available. Motorized and
mechanized travel restricted to designated routes. No motorized or
mechanized travel allowed off designated travel routes.
22
2/17/168:30 PM
Social***
Opportunity to be with others - high degree of interaction with
people. Challenge and risk are unimportant except for competitive
sports.
*
Size of Primitive areas may be smaller if contiguous to a SPNM area(s)
Size of SPNM areas may be smaller if contiguous to Primitive area(s)
**
Levels of development for infrastructure should be consistent with definitions for development scales
(Appendix A, Meaningful Measures User Guide 2000). New and/or reconstructed facilities should follow
BEIG (Built Environment Image Guide) principles and concepts.
***
Use figures, where available, should be included as part of defining existing conditions of the Social
setting. Sources of information include: INFRA, NVUM, Infra/CUAs, traffic counts, local surveys and
use monitoring, etc.
23
2/17/168:30 PM
Appendix B:
Determining Primitive Roads using the INFRA Travel Routes:
The Travel Routes Data Dictionary includes an optional field entry for Template Slope
Code (housing various cross section characteristics of the travel way). One of the code
options is “P”, indicating “primitive”. The description for that code is “no constructed
cross section – wheel track”. This is consistent with the ROS User Guide definition for a
“primitive road”.
Use Infra Travel Routes database to identify all motorized trails and Operational
Maintenance Level 2 travel routes.
Verify which maintenance level 2 routes are consistent with the ROS User Guide
definition for “primitive roads”: are not constructed or maintained, and are used by
vehicles not primarily intended for highway use.”
In some cases, roads (i.e logging roads built to accommodate large logging trucks: wide,
graveled, gentle grades, and meet standards for highway vehicles) may be classified as
maintenance level 2 roads but not be consistent with a “primitive” road definition. These
would likely be more indicative of a RN, as opposed to SPM setting. Use other available
information contained in the Infra Travel Routes module to further refine which
maintenance level 2 routes meet the “primitive road” definition. The following table
show applicable fields and values that are consistent with “primitive road” definitions in
the ROS Guide.
Table 1:
“Primitive Road” (roads within SPM settings) Characteristics:
Infra data fields within the
Travel Routes Module
Service life
Traffic Type
Vehicle Type
Traffic Volume
Typical surface
Travel speed
User comfort and convenience
Functional Classification
Traffic Service
Traffic Management Strategy
Route characteristics meeting ROS User Guide definition for “Primitive”
route and consistent within the context of a SPM setting:
Constant Service or Intermittent Service-Open Status
Administrative, permitted, dispersed recreation, specialized
High clearance, ATV, etc.
Low Traffic volume
None, Native
Low Travel speed
Not a consideration
Local Collector
D
Discourage or Prohibit cars. Accept high clearance vehicles.
24
2/17/168:30 PM
Appendix B (continued):
Table 2:
ROS Spectrum
Link to Transportation Maintenance Levels
Criteria
Service life
Traffic Type
Maintenance Levels
1
Intermittent
Service-Closed
Status
Open for nonmotorized uses.
Closed to
motorized uses.
Closed-N/A
Vehicle Type
Traffic Volume
Typical surface
Closed-N/A
All types
Travel speed
User comfort
and convenience
Functional
Classification
Closed-N/A
Closed-N/A
Traffic Service
All types
Traffic
Management
Strategy
Prohibit or
Eliminate
All types
SPNM
2
3
4
Constant Service or Intermittent Service-Open Status
(Some uses may be restricted under 36 CFR 261.50)
5
Administrative use
All National Forest Traffic – General Use,
permitted,
Commercial Haul
dispersed
recreation,
specialized
commercial haul
High clearance,
All types – passenger cars to large commercial
pick-up, 4X4, log
vehicles
trucks, ATV, etc.
Traffic volume increases with maintenance level
None, Native, or Aggregate-may be
Aggregate – usually dust
dust abated
abated; paved
Travel speed increases with maintenance level
Not a consideration Low priority
Moderate
High Priority
priority
Local
Local Collector Local
Local Collector
Collector
Arterial
Collector
Arterial
Arterial
D
A,B,C – Traffic service level increases with
maintenance level
Discourage or
Prohibit cars.
Encourage,
Encourage
Accept/Discourage
accept
high clearance
vehicles.
SPM - RN
RN
ROS CLASS
25
RN, R or U
2/17/168:30 PM
26