with the management of visual resources. In order to resolve potential con- 

 flicts, it has become necessary to develop a system than can identify visual 

 resources and provide measurable management standards that are practical to 

 imp I ement . 



Numerous systems for identifying visual resource values and evaluating 

 visual impact have been developed. The systems vary considerably both in 

 procedures followed and criteria applied. On Federal lands there are two 

 principal visual resource management (VRM) systems in use today. One was 

 developed by the U.S. Forest Service and the other by the U.S. Bureau of 

 Land Management (BLM). Both systems have the capability to: 



• Identify areas of significant visual resource value; 



• Establish land units with each unit having measurable, homogeneous 

 qua I i t i es; and 



• Prioritize the land units through establishment of units of low visual 

 quality, hence requiring minimal management protection, and units 

 having high visual quality requiring maximum management protection. 



The major components of each system involve a systematic field inventory 

 including (I) scenic quality or visual variety, (2) visual sensitivity, and 

 (3) degree of visibility. Generally, the field inventories are conducted 

 from an on-t he-ground perspective. Visibility from the air is generally not 

 considered except under specialized circumstances. 



Definitions of the three key VRM inventory components of scenic quality, 

 visual sensitivity, and degree of visibility follow. Inventoried systemat- 

 ically using the BLM system, these components yield a land unit rating system 

 divided into five classes. Each class provides various degrees of resource 

 management control over prospective resource development proposals, including 

 gravel removal operations from arctic and subarctic floodplains. 



288 



