Advanced
Resource Solutions, Inc.
Specializing in Land Use, Travel Management and Recreation Planning, Mediation and Environmental Compliance
|
|
|
Route Evaluation Tree Process©1To assist land management agencies with their travel management planning needs, Advanced Resource Solutions, Inc. (ARS) has developed a unique and innovative tool: the Route Evaluation Tree Process©.
Click here to view a .pdf of the Route Evaluation Tree Process©. The Route Evaluation Tree Process© is designed to assist with route evaluation and designation as a basis for creating a successful travel management plan. It is a tool to assist land management agencies with preparing for and performing route evaluation/designation and compiling data that may be utilized by the agency staff during NEPA analysis in current and future planning processes, including development of their travel management plan or motorized travel plans. The Route Evaluation Tree Process© is displayed as 25 discrete steps, however it could be as few as 3 phases or it could be multiples of the 25 steps depending upon the individual tasks detailed because a significant number of activities occur during each step. It all comes down to: “Are you a lumper or are you a splitter?” Regardless of your preference, the process and the outcome would be the same because the various actions still need to be carried out. Trying to cut corners may have short-term cost benefits but usually result in long-term planning deficiencies. While the flowchart is presented in a linear format, the process is not strictly linear in nature. Throughout the Route Evaluation Tree Process©, steps may be revisited as often as necessary to adequately address the needs of the project. While certain activities must be completed prior to designating routes (e.g. delineation of management goals, travel management units must be identified), other activities may continue throughout the entire process (e.g. public involvement). Additionally, steps previously performed may be revisited at any time (e.g. re-evaluating routes if new data sets are developed or obtained). ARS works with agency staff throughout the Route Evaluation Tree Process© to identify the basic “who”, “what”, “where”, “when” and “how” for each step: • “Who” will be performing the actions needed? • “What” are the goals to be accomplished? • “Where” will the task be performed? • “When” must each step be completed? • “How” will the task be performed? The entire Route Evaluation Tree Process© can be broken down into three basic stages: 1) Steps preceding route evaluation 2) Route evaluation 3) Steps following route evaluation It is important to bear in mind that the information provided here, including the Route Evaluation Tree Process© flowchart and the Route Evaluation Tree©, do not provide the full picture of all the tasks involved in the entire process. ARS provides on-site training to agency staff to discuss the process in greater detail and the process is flexible to address any unique circumstances or issues that may exist in the planning area or that may arise during the planning effort. As with any planning process, there are many details that must be individually discussed. The Route Evaluation Tree Process© is not difficult to understand, but it does require a thorough comprehension of the tasks to be accomplished, the goals that are to be attained, the method to accomplish those tasks and goals, and the desire to create a successful travel management plan that meets statutory and regulatory requirements. Steps Preceding Route
Evaluation Route evaluation cannot be performed without very importantly first “doing your homework”. ARS staff works closely with agency staff to assist them in preparation for route evaluation. The “homework” encompasses the first 16 steps of the Route Evaluation Tree Process©: Information
Gathering Phase - Identifying Issues and Sub-Regions 1. Coarsely identify issues for the Planning Area 2. Identify primary Resource concerns, Access concerns, and Political concerns 3. Coarsely identify “Desired Future Condition” and Management Objectives for the Planning Area 4a. Break down planning region into sub-regions with similar issues 4b. Identify “Hot Spots of Concern” or primary issues within the Planning Area based upon weighting the primary concerns 5. Identify/refine primary issues for each sub-region 6. Coarsely identify sub-region management objectives based upon weighting primary concerns 7. Identify priority sub-region(s) and boundaries 8. Coarsely develop different route network option criteria principally based upon NEPA-based alternatives developed by the agency Data Refinement 9. Identify primary data sets and possible deficiencies related to primary issues 10. Identify how primary data deficiencies can be addressed 11. Identify Agency Staff, Volunteers, Contractors to rectify data deficiencies 12. Rectify Data Deficiencies Prepare for Route
Evaluation 13. Divide each sub-region into sub-subregions to be able to create maps at a scale that can clearly portray the coverage information necessary for route evaluation, e.g. 1:24,000 scale or larger 14. Create maps for each sub-subregion to be utilized during route evaluation 15. Review NEPA alternatives and fine tune the travel management and route network objectives for each alternative The Route Evaluation Tree Process© forces agency staff to gather information about the individual routes as well as the larger planning area, sub-units, special management areas or other polygons of data (e.g. soil concerns, air quality concerns, riparian areas, specific wildlife and plants including T, E and S species, habitat types, etc.) and to consider the actual and potential issues identified during their travel management planning and route evaluation/designation. While this data-gathering stage may seem straight-forward and logical, route evaluation and designation is a significant undertaking requiring extensive data management, quality control, collaboration, innovative solutions and public outreach. Many offices and agency staff have never worked on a travel management plan. However ARS staff has worked on travel management or motorized travel plans in five states in collaboration with various federal, state and local agencies and we bring a wealth of experience and knowledge to support agency staff with their planning process. As part of the Route Evaluation Tree Process©, ARS developed the Route Evaluation Tree© software to assist with route evaluation/designation and data management.
Click here to view a .pdf of the Route Evaluation Tree©. The actual evaluation of the routes is just one step within the entire Route Evaluation Tree Process©: 17. Record data on each route utilizing the Route Evaluation Tree©; concurrently enumerate each route and, as needed, each route segment Prior to and throughout route evaluation, the issues and concerns, as well as the various management goals identified in the previous stage, are considered to assist with evaluating the routes and developing route networks based upon a landscape perspective. Not only are the individual routes evaluated, but their impact within the sub-regions and the larger planning area are also evaluated collectively with other routes and their impacts, both locally and regionally. The Route Evaluation Tree© requires the evaluation team to focus at various scales from the large view of the entire planning area down to the localized view of individual routes and to continually adjust that focus throughout the evaluation process by “zooming” in on specific route and area issues and “zooming” out to consider the route and area in connection with the larger landscape perspective. A basic tenet of route evaluation is that routes cannot be evaluated in a vacuum. They must be evaluated in terms of their individual impacts, contributions, characteristics and location combined with their relationship to surrounding routes and areas and the cumulative impacts and contributions with those routes and areas. While step 17 (recording route data) can be done as an entirely separate task, it is often combined with step 18 (evaluating and recommending a designation) as a single task. These two steps, whether done singly or in combination, are conducted until all routes have been evaluated and designated, both individually and as part of a larger landscape level route network, taking into consideration both the localized impacts and the impacts of the combined route system. The questions within the Evaluation Tree© are systematically asked of each route as a means of collecting standardized data. This provides documentation for the specific evaluation process leading to evaluation and the recommended designation. As the evaluation team progresses through the Route Evaluation Tree©, the responses to each question are recorded as neutral data, without assigning weighting to the question responses. A route, or part of it, is either in an ACEC or it is not. A route, or part of it, either serves as a right-of-way or it does not. A route, or part of it, is either in desert tortoise class I habitat or it is not. The weighting of the data collected is applied by the agency staff during the evaluation and designation stage for each alternative, not during the data collection stage. Each alternative in accordance to agency staff management goals may choose to weight certain concerns more than others and designate the route according to that weighting. It is very important to realize that the Route Evaluation Tree© is only a tool that creates a systematic framework for the collection of data utilized for the evaluation of each route and identification of a recommended range of designations. It is only one step among many in the entire Route Evaluation Tree Process©. The confidence that one places in the outcome is only at its highest when the evaluation team devoted adequate time to carry out all of steps of the Route Evaluation Tree Process© identified above (steps 1 through 16) before applying the Route Evaluation Tree©. An effective and complete evaluation of the network of routes in a planning area cannot be done without performing the steps that precede and follow the actual route evaluation step. Unfortunately, some critics of the Route Evaluation Tree Process© overlook the substantial work that is performed during the steps preceding and following route evaluation and incorrectly judge the whole process on just this one step. + Tell me
more about the route evaluation stage.
Steps Following Route Data
Collection The data collected during the previous stage is utilized in the next stage of the Route Evaluation Tree Process© and after evaluation results in the creation of a network of routes for each alternative (under a range of alternatives) that addresses both the identified issues and constraints, as well as the management goals for that alternative. The development of a range of route network alternatives when combined with the other criteria and prescriptions for each alternative enables agency staff to advance to the next stages of planning, including NEPA analysis and document preparation. Evaluation and
Development of Route Network Options 18. Based upon evaluation of route data and the management goals of each alternative, recommend and record designation code for each route under each route network option/alternative as well as special notes regarding potential impacts, proposed mitigation, etc. 19. Integrate data from the Route Evaluation Tree© software and GIS to create maps for each route network option showing recommended route designations 20. Solicit input on range of route network options (e.g., input regarding evaluation data and preferences from staff, management, cooperating agencies, and/or public) 21. Development of preferred route network option as part of range of route network options/alternatives NEPA Documentation 22. Develop and incorporate route evaluation recommendations into the appropriate NEPA document 23. Public Comment and Review of Draft Plan (e.g., Environmental Impact Statement, Environmental Assessment) 24. Final Plan (e.g., Environmental Impact Statement, Environmental Assessment) 25. Record of Decision (ROD) / Decision Record (DR) After collecting data on a route, the evaluation team is typically presented with a “rosette” of potential designations based upon the evaluation responses: Open, Close, Limit, Mitigate Open or Mitigate Limit. Each of these possible designations are numerically coded (i.e., “Close 08” or “Open 07”) such that the exact sequence of responses to the Route Evaluation Tree© questions can be easily ascertained at any time. |
|
|
|
|
When the evaluation team is presented with the potential designations, each alternative as represented by agency staff weights each answer according to the objectives/desired future conditions developed through past or current planning projects. The objectives may be based upon any number of issues (e.g., natural or cultural resources, environmental concerns, route type, route condition, public uses, and/or previous planning process findings). Additionally, the collective effects of the route’s impacts, contributions and potential designations must be considered as part of a greater landscape perspective. Within that framework, each alternative identifies the designation that best aligns with its previously established objectives. Mitigation measures may be suggested during this stage to assist with implementation of the planning documents, but the detail regarding potential mitigation actions is discussed by the agency in the subsequent planning documentation. The Route Evaluation Tree Process© is a tool to assist with systematic data collection, route evaluation and route designation and does not take the place of any required NEPA analysis. |
An Aside about “Mitigate Limit” and “Mitigate Open”… In addition to
“Close”, “Limit” and “Open” designations, the Route Evaluation Tree©
provides designations of “Mitigate Limit” and “Mitigate Open”, which can
include a standardized statement regarding adaptive management and monitoring
and/or specific needs for a route or area.
The “Mitigate Limit” and “Mitigate Open” designations are provided as
a means to assist agency staff with identifying routes that may require
additional measures to address potential or actual impacts. During the NEPA
process, the agency staff would identify and/or develop the specific measures
which to address potential or actual impacts identified during the evaluation
and designation process. Monitoring
plans, mitigation measures, and adaptive management take time to develop, are
specific to the resources being impacted (or potentially being impacted), and
require input from agency specialists that may be outside the collective
knowledge or the scope of work of the route evaluation team. As previously stated,
the Route Evaluation Tree Process© is not a replacement for
NEPA. The full discussion of any
monitoring, mitigation or adaptive management that would be necessary for a
route, an area, or a route network would be clearly addressed within in the
NEPA document. |
|
|
|
The purpose of identifying the need for mitigation during the route evaluation and designation is to draw the attention of the agency staff to the need for mitigation that will be addressed in the planning process. While agency staff may be very specific in the suggested mitigations identified during route designation, the purpose of the Route Evaluation Tree Process© software is not to develop a full mitigation and monitoring plan, but to identify those routes where mitigation is or may be necessary. The actual monitoring and/or mitigation measures would be established by the resource specialists within the accompanying planning document. With the Route Evaluation Tree© software, data is collected into a database consisting of neutral route information and information collected as part of the route evaluation/designation phase. The data collected and the recommended designations are available immediately for joining with GIS. This allows for the immediate production of maps that integrate recommended designations with the route inventory. Additionally, Route Evaluation Reports© are created that show all the data collected for each route. The maps and reports can be utilized for soliciting feedback from the staff, management, cooperating agencies and/or the public. While Step 20 (soliciting input) is an explicit feedback loop within the process, feedback loops may be introduced at any time during the process to verify that the information gathered and developed is accurate. Once feedback has been received, agency staff can review the feedback, update the routes within the database as may be necessary based upon the information received, modify designations if appropriate, and create new Route Evaluation Reports© and maps. Once the additional input has been reviewed and the route designations for each route network option are complete, the Preferred/Proposed Route Network is developed. This is accomplished by utilizing data collected via the Route Evaluation Tree Process© and is based upon a number of factors (e.g. statutory compliance, public concerns, the weighting of certain issues manifested as management goals and desired future conditions). As useful as the Route Evaluation Tree© may be as a tool to systematically evaluate and make recommendations for route designations, there may be unusual circumstances which compel a manager to over-ride the recommended designation rosette of the Route Evaluation Tree©. This circumstance was anticipated and would be addressed within the Route Evaluation Tree© software and NEPA document by providing a “statement of overriding considerations.” Integrating the Route Evaluation Tree Process© as a tool with the agency’s NEPA requirements and the specific guidelines delineated in agency planning handbooks is an integral component of this process. Travel management planning and route evaluation/designation create outcomes that are viewed by many professional land management planners as central to the understanding and effective analysis of impacts in any major land use plan. Simply put, most impacts over which management has control within a management area are related to visitor use trend and patterns (i.e. where they go, how many, how they go, when they go, etc.) Because of this very important and inseparable interrelationship, travel management planning (including route designation) should, to the extent possible, be fully integrated and addressed early in the land use planning process. Due to this relationship, the data collected and the designations made through the Route Evaluation Tree© provide a strong base of information for required NEPA analysis in a planning document, but it does not provide the necessary NEPA analysis on its own. As the proposed route networks are developed, maintenance, law enforcement (e.g. compliance), monitoring, management, staff, and budget considerations need to be carefully evaluated for their feasibility and practicality. Detail about these fiscal and personnel concerns are discussed in the NEPA document. However, the Route Evaluation Tree© software contains a component for calculating the fiscal impacts based upon data collected during the evaluation and values assigned by the agency to each factor to make this data more readily available to the agency staff for use during their NEPA analysis. Public Input and Comment At various points during the Route Evaluation Tree Process©, the public has the opportunity to provide input or comment on the route evaluations, depending upon the individual agency and the purpose for which they are utilizing the Route Evaluation Tree Process©. ARS encourages the agencies to involve the public as early and as frequently as possible given legal and fiscal constraints. This public involvement may be accomplished in many ways depending upon the needs/opportunities of the given planning effort: • assistance with inventory of the routes to be evaluated and designated; • submitting to agency staff information regarding the use and/or resources for routes, route networks or areas; • submitting to agency staff information regarding specific resources to be considered for avoidance, mitigation, or protection while evaluating the routes; • formal public meetings discussing the process; • informal meetings with agency staff; • posting of maps and Route Evaluation Reports© for public review at agency offices and/or other locations; and/or • submitting written comments as part of a formal NEPA comment period. Through NEPA scoping and circulation of the planning document, the public will typically have the opportunity to review and comment on the type of data to be collected (scoping), actual data collected, proposed route evaluations and designations. In order to facilitate the ease with which the public can review the information utilized to evaluate the routes, individual route reports can be made available electronically at low cost via CD and/or posted on a website. In addition, maps of the proposed route networks for each alternative can also be made available electronically. Written comments are submitted to the agency for their review, classification, and incorporation into the final NEPA document, as needed, and appropriate changes to the route designations may be made. Incorporation of Additional Information / Addressing New
Conditions During the life of a plan it can be expected that new information or changing conditions will result in the need to reassess both individual routes and possibly the entire route system. Examples of such changes that might result in such a re-evaluation might include: • discovery of previously unknown cultural sites • newly listed/delisted species • proposals for new routes or route closures • changing recreational trends • shifts in commercial activities The Route Evaluation Tree Process© has been designed to address the need for updating which allows for the easy incorporation and analysis of new information. This new information can then be integrated with GIS to reflect the new designation of routes as necessary (i.e. in accordance with NEPA and other pertinent statutes). Once route designations have been appropriately modified, those route designation changes can be quickly shared with appropriate parties (including the public) via the production of route reports that display the information that was considered as part of each route evaluation, as well as visually via the production of detailed GIS maps.
or, jump to:
|
|
|
|
|
1
The process has previously been referred to as the “Route
Evaluation/Designation Decision Tree Process” or “Decision Tree”. A “decision tree” is a technique or tool
for assisting in the decision making process by leading one through a series
of yes/no questions based upon input received (flowchart). A “decision” in the context of NEPA has a
more legalistic meaning specifically relating to the NEPA process. The name “Decision Tree” was used to
indicate it was created in a flowchart style, however to avoid the potential
for misunderstanding of the meaning of the word “decision”, it has been
removed from the title of the process.
Similarly, the word “designation” has been removed from the title of
the process to eliminate potential misunderstanding of the function of the
process. |
|
©Advanced Resource Solutions, Inc.,
2002-2005. Patent Pending.