I S3.2:V 82
_
Visual
Resource
Management
Program
( oogle
BLM
O.VISion
o.e .
'
Reclesllon
Contultant
E<11tor
Socle1y; ~$19"9
~m'lf,
Natlonal
Contents
Perspectlve
System
Concep1
IIDnl
16.
Proe111
lnventory/Evaluatlon
Manaaement Classes
Contrast Ratlng
32
lnt!51ration
Land Use Plannlng
Appltcatlon
VRM and Enarg~ Devel~ment
LJ~::.'.:..ilf'ttF 1.1n!~~\
L'.~ P.
.r,:-s
[,
(
- i-S
D191t z
by Googlc
by (~ooglc
.
/
o g t zed oy Googlc
-.
,,
I ..
1
"
..
,.
. '
~l
.'
'
.....'"'
ln
'
Jt
..,
--.
...
\~
.....
--~
--
- -
.....--
---
Perspective
The quality of the visual environment has become
increasingly importan! to the American publlc. The
Bureau of Land Management is committed to
managing visual resources on an equal bass wlth ali
other resources as it continuas to put public land to
productive use.
Visual Resource Management (VRM) has dual
program purposes: to manage the quality of the
visual envlronment, and to reduce the vi sual lmpact
of development activities, while maintainlng
effectiveness in all Bureau resource programs_VRM
also identfies scenic areas that warrant protection
through special management attenlion. lt is a specfic
process that can be mapped and lncorporated lnto
design planning for projects ranging from sitlng
transmission lines to harvesting timber.
This publicatlon fs an lntroeluctlon to the VRM
program. lts intended use is to tamiliarize decislon
makers. land use planners, and designers both inside
and outside ol the Bureau wth VRM and its benefits.
New Dlrectlons
Managing the visual aspects of changes to lhe
natural landscape is particularly importan! for the
Bureau of Land Managernent because rnost activities
taking place on Bureau lands lnvolve sorne degree of
alteration. The Bureau's responslbllitles for visual
management are spelled out In key passages of
recen! Federal legislation.
The Federal Land Pollcy and Management Act ol
1976 (FLPMA), often referred to as the "organlc'' act
for the Bureau, requlres lhat:
publlc lands be rnanaged in a rnanner that wlll
protect the quality of scient fic, scenlc,
hlstorlcal, ecological, environmental, air and
atmospherlc, water resource, and
archaeological vaJues; thal, where approprlate,
will preserve and protect certaln publlc lands
in their natural condition; that will provide food
and habitat for fish and wildlife and domestic
anlmals; ano that wlll provide for outdoor
recreatlon and human occupancy and use . ..
lnvantory/Evaluatlon
Private
sector
BLM
Managament Classes
Govemment
Agencias
Proposed Actlvttles
Contrast Ratlng
lmplementetJon
Concepts
The VRM system Is an analytical prooess that
identifies, sets, and meets objectives for malntalnlng
scenlc values and vlsual quallty.
The system is based on research lhat has produced
ways of assessing aesthetic quallties of the
landscape In objeclive terms. What had been
oonsidered extremely subjective (aesthetic judgment,
particularly concernlng the landscape) was found to
have ldentlflable, consisten! qualltles that can be
described and measured. Whatever the terraln (and
whoever the observar), perception of visual quality in
a landscape seems to be based on several common
principies:
Landscape character is primari ly determlned by
the four basic visual elements of torm, //ne, color,
texture. Although all four elements are present in
every landscape, they exen varylng degrees of
influence.
The stronger the influence exerted by these
etements, the more lnteresling the landscape.
The more visual variety in a landscape, the more
aesthetically pleasing the landscape. Variety with
out harmony, however, is unattractive, particularly
In terms of alteratlons (cultural modiflcations) that
are made wlthout care.
The Bureau incorporales these and other principies in
lts broad program for managlng visual resources.
The VRM system functions In two ways.
First, for management purposes, the Bureau conducts
an lnventory that evaluates visual resouroes on all
Form
Telduro
Une
13
Slmulated Actlvity
(.,oogle
. ..
.~
'
.. ..
..
...
...
~-
....
.
'
'
'
'
<
'.,,
Terms
To understand how the Bureau of Land Management
manages visual resources, it is important to understand how sorne key terms are used In the VAM
system.
Many of the terms illustrated and brlefly defined here
are drawn directly from the visual arts. Others have
been modlfied somewhat, given special meanings by
their VRM context. All are basic-the "program
language" of VRM.
Form
The mass or shape of an object, which appears unified: often defined by edge, outline, and
surroundlng space.
Une
The palh that the eye follows when percelvlng abrupt dllferences in form, color, or textura.
In the landscape, ridges, skylines, structures, changas in vegetatlon. or Individual trees and
branches may be perceived as line.
Color
The property of reflecting light of a particular wavelength that enables the eye to differen
tlate otherwise lndistlngulshable obJects.
Texture
The visual manifestation of the interplay of light and shadow created by variations in the
surface of an object.
Harmony
The combination of parts into a pleasing or orderly whole; congruity; a state of agreement
or proponlonate arrangement of form, llne, color, and texture.
Varlety
Contrasl
The effect of a stking ditterence in form, line, color, or texture of a landscape's features.
Cultural
Any manmade change in land, waterform or v~etation (roads, bridges. buildings, fences);
the addition of a structure which creates a visual contrast to the natural character of a
landscape. A negatlve cultural modlflcatlon Is disharmonlous with the exlstlng scenery. A
posltive cultural modification can actually complement and lmprove a particular scene by
adding variety and harmony.
Modlflc.tlon
Back
Ughting
The light source comes from behind the object viewed. The visible tace of the object is
generally in shadow and its edge highlighted.
10
Front
Llghtlng
The light source comes from behind the observer and falls directly on the object viewed.
There is little shadow effect.
Slde
Llghtlng
The light source comes from one side of the object vlewed. Thls is the light considerad
most effective for evaluating visual contrast.
11
15
..
.. .
-~-~. -~
'... .r ..
..
.:
..... .
.,. ..
.... ;.
... ,&.
- . .....
.. t
.... -~.
. '
. ..
~-
..... ,.,.
. -...;.::. .
Contraat Rallng
. "' . . ... t :.
..
.. r-_
_..,,.>-~
... \.Ylt~
.. ....
-)'
..
-._ .
. ..
.. .
I ..
.,..
~ .~,f\ 1 .
"
. .... . .
~ ~ .: )f""
. ...... . . , . .. '
""-\ "'_~
..,. .
, . ._
"~
,, .
;/A
. . .. , . '
.. .
.....
!'
:""'1" ...
...
... . .
-."*-= :
~t
..
... . . ..
..
...
..
"\,
...
'
w'
.._4:
.
. . . .,.
.
.. ',t . ._. ,
:
...-; ...
...
.~
. ,....._.....ttJ..
,. . _, ,
. ...,. .. .
.. ;
: . .. . . . '" . .
.......
' ...
~
....,. ~~
"'1"
...
t1'>1'1
;;
-.
\~
~
\ ...... l'"
lf. ..,
' ._
. .
.. ~
:.
.! ."., .. . :..
\
. -
'
....
.,
f
Scenlc Quality
Scenlc Ouallty is perhaps best described as the
overall lmpresslon retained after driving through,
walklng through, or flying over an area of land. In the
VRM process, rating Scenic Quality requlres a b<lef
descrlptlon of the existing scenic values in a land
scape. Thls step identifies (1) areas that must be
protected, (2) opportunitles for enhancement and
rehabllitatlon, and (3) opportunities for lmprovement
by reducing the contrast of cultural modificatlons.
When lnventorled, an area is llrst dlvided lnto subunlts that appear homogeneous, generally in terms of
landform and vegetation. Each area is then rated by
seven Key Factors: landform, vegetatlon, water, color,
influence ot ad/acent scenery, scarclty, and cultural
modiflcatlon. A standardlzed polnt system asslgns
great, some, or little importance to each factor. The
values for each category are calculated and.
accordlng to total polnts, three Scen1c Quallty
Classes are determlned and mapped:
Class A Areas that combine the most outstandlng
characterlstlcs of each ratlng factor (19-33 polnts).
Class B Areas in which there is a combinatlon of
sorne outstandlng features and sorne that are fairly
common to the physiographlc reglon (1218 polnts).
Class C Areas In whlch the features are fairly
common to the physiographic reglon (0-11 points).
18
landform
Water
Color
Adjacent
Scenery
Scarcity
no
Cultural
Modlflcations
'
One el 11 kino,
unusually memor- Frw lrom 8$11'1 11cable,
or very rare ally und s.r3ble or
seenery
excepton al l\'tldlle
$Clll)O
OI w tldllower VIC1W
1ng
fimrably to vls.ual
varaety
2
Steep
canyona
cu.do< CXll10S lltnd drumltns, 0r lnte<est<ng
eros..on pauems or
vanety m s1ze aoo Some v11rloty o l FlO'Ning or stll. bul
&hape oC 1aoof0tms. W!(leta11on bul only not dominMI "' tnc
or deta11 feawres one or lwo lypes.
land5ca;.e.
ll'OMln t and lntet
tstlng thOui;h not
dotnln, ni or
mosa:s. bulles.
Some 1n1ens 1y or
llilnoty 1n color& and AdJiltent scene1v
en
conl iut ol tho :ool, mod erat ely
roct< ano vegetatlon, Nnce'5 ove.sil YISUSf
but noc a aom1nan1 OU3hty.
3
scenlc efeme<ll
3
,..cep
honat
ltwl .-rea
Sce<1IC quallty IS
i;omel\ hal de!><ectilled by lnharmonOl$t1nct1ve though lous 1ntrvsions. but
some..illlt Stmhlr 10 no1 so Ctonsivaty
otf'H!rs w1th1n lhe lhlll 1ney are enurely
reg1on
2 negate<I. OI modllf.
cattonr. ad<J ltttle 01
no 'AllUal varlety 10
'
-4
Sc:et\lc Quallty
A Scenery
Sce'*\'
B
e Scenery
19
( oogle
Sensltlvity Levels
Although landscapes do have common elements that
can be measured, there is obvlously still a subjectlve
dlmenslon to landscape aesthetlcs. Each vlewer
brlngs perceptlons formed by Individua! lnfluences:
culture, visual tralning, famillarity with local
geography, personal values.
To measure regional and Individual altitudes In the
evaluatlon of a landscape, visual sensitivty is
determlned In two ways:
Use Volume Frequency of travel through an area (by
road, trall, rlver) and use of that area (for recreatlon,
camping, events) are tabulated. The area Is then
asslgned a high, medium. or low ratlng according to
predeterminad classlllcations.
20
( oogl
Sensilivlly
Hlgh
Low
User
Attilude
Use
Vol ume
H M
M M
H M H L H M L M L
Usllf Altltude
Hlgh
Medlum
Low
Use Volume
Hlgh
Medlum
Low
FlnI Sensltlvlly
HUh
M8Cflum
Low
21
(.,oogle
Distance Zones
The visual quallty ol a landscape (and user reactlon)
may be magnllied or dlmlnlshed by the vlslblllty ol
the landscape from major viewlng routes and key
observation points. In the VRM system, thus, dlstance
plays a key part In visual quallty management.
A landscape scene can be divided into three baslc
Dlstance Zones: foreground/mlddleground,
background, and seldom-seen. Because areas that
are closer have a greater elfect on the observer, such
areas requlre more attention than do areas that are
farther away. Distance Zones allow this conslderatlon
ol the proxlmlty of the observer to the landscape.
Selection of t he key viewing points and accurate
assessment of Dlstance Zones requlre sorne
Judgment. Where several routes exlst, what Is
foreground from one route may be background from
another. (The more restrictive designation is used.)
Atmosphcric cond1tions may also modify the
perception of distance.
For small projects, infield photographic assessment
of Distance Zones is usually sufficient. For large
projects. however, or projects that requlre evaluatlon
from many key vlewpolnts, an alternatlve method for
generatlng data is to use a computer graphlc
modellng technlque such as the VIEWIT system.
The process culmlnates in the preparatlon of a final
Distance Zone map.
22
Googl
80
FGIMG
Dlstance Zonh
FGIMG
BG
SS
23
Management Classes
Management Classes describe the dlfferent degrees
of modlflcation allowed to lhe baslc elements of the
landscape. Class designations are derived from an
over1ay technlQue that combines the maps of Scenlc
Ouallty, Sensitlvlty Levels and Distance Zones. The
overlays are used to ldentify areas wlth similar
oombinations of factors. These areas are assigned to
one of flve Management Classes according to
predetermined cri teria. The resulting map of
oontlguous areas sharing the same VRM class Is an
importan! document for all Bureau land use plannlng
decisions, and it is also used to assess lhe visual
lmpact of proposed development.
Visual Sensltivity
Speclal Areas
Scenlc Quality
Mlnegtmtnl CIHMI
a111 1 !.___ ___,
CIH112
Dlstance Zones
C11u 3
FG BG SS FG BG SS SS
MG
MG
Note Ous 5 reas 1re thOM 1N1t h1ve been ldentllled 1n the YAM Dfnnlno
1~1ern .inldl requife rel\il>lltilt.on 0< enllilflC!lmen1 llflO ttierelo<e if9 not
lncluded W1 l hls Chal1.
24
( oogle
Class 1
Nb.nl ecok>gk:al dulnges nd very llmlted
1tmllr sttuatlons.
o (~ooglc
Class 2
..
,,
'\
. -.
:- ,,.~"
:'-
; . ".#
...
..
...
k
., '
....
. ~". . .
.. -.A.
-~....,,,,.....
'
....., '
-- --------
.'
--
'
QQU3 !$;tl*n..,.. .. . ,, , ~
.
,
'
.
.... . ,., . .._,.
~
..
/
-- -.-.... ;")~~
... . ,,,,,.
..
t . ."
"'""... .
... .... ..
'
.
. ./.
.
..
tti
-.
,.,,,..
#.
:.'"
Class 3
Class 4
Any contr11t 1ttracts ettentlon and Is a domlnant
fNtu,. of the lendscape in terma of scale, but it
should repeat the form, Une. color, and texture of the
eharactemtlc landscape.
"''- - ,:.
- .,..
..
....
<! :
.:"I
..
.t~,,,,
Class 5
The classlflcatlon Is applled to areas where the
natural character of the landscape has been
dislurbed lo a poinl where rehabililation is needed lo
brtng lt up to one ol the tour other classlflc~tlons .
The classlficatlon also applles to areas where there is
potentlal to increase lhe landscape's visual quallty. lt
would, for example, be applled to areas where
unacceptable cultural modiflcatlon has towered
scenic quality; lt Is oflen used as an interlm
classlflcatlon untll objectlves of another class can be
reached.
Contrast Rating
To evaluate speclflc proposed profec ts, a Contrast
Rating System Is used to measure the degree of
contras! between the proposed actlvlty and the
exlstlng landscape. Thls score Is compared with
allowable levels of contras! for the appropriate
Management Class. The comparlson wlll determine if
mlligallon Is required to reduce visual impacts.
The prooess first segregates a landscape lnto lts
major features (land/water surface, vegetation,
structures) and each feature, In turn, into lts baslc
elements (form, fine, color, texture). Each element Is
asslgned a weighted value based on lts slgnlflcance
4, most important. to
in the landscape (lorrn
texlure
1, least lmportant).
Form
Strong
Une
Modera te
Color
Week
Textura
None
30
(,oogk
Proposed Slte
-..~. ..
',
.....,~
Simutated Actitly
31
1. rt-~~'."f'.:t~
l ! .o.'"'..t;:.t::'
..
lnventory/Evaluatlon
...
...... -
f"-
-- -
~-.
..
- F
.... .
11
Management Classes
............
'~
....
..
..._
""-
......
BLM
Resource
Agencies
'-- '
Proposed Actlvltles
'
11
Contrast Rating
Envlronmental Assenment
"
Govemment
Management
Plan
'---
Private
Sector
Resource
lnventory/
Evaluatlon
i~ft1!fp 1L'TI
"' '
"'"
"'
"
~
lmplementatlon
"
D19 t zed by Google
Envlronmental Assessment
Analysis of potential visual mpact Is required in all
environmental assessments of projects proposed for
Bureau lands. Although the depth of analysis may
vary, lt usually involves several steps dlrectly related
toVRM:
33
01 t zed by
~ 7
) . ,;...
- '
, .:;
VRM at Work
The Utah Power and Light Company used VRM
concepts In the locatlon and deslgn of a major
transmlsslon llne. The result was not only mltlgatlon
of visual impact but also a demonstration of how
proper planning can promote cooperation between a
government agency and private industry-and how it
can even save money.
Visual lmpacts
The visual impacts of the Hunlington to Camp
Williams transmlsslon llne, llke those ol most
transmlssion lines, are caused essenllally by the
highly visible contrast between the man-made
facilities and the natural elements of the surroundlng
landscape.
In the interests of safety, transmission lines carrying
extremely hlgh voltage must be strung well above the
ground. The lines run between high towers built at
lntervals of 750 to 1000 feet. Although the shape ol
the towers can vary somewhat. they must be more
than 100 leet hlgh and made of strong, durable
materials llke aluminum or steel. The painted or
galvanizad surface of these metals contrasts strongly
wlth the natural landscape, as do the towers
themselves and the long transmission lines.
38
Cooglc
37
( ooglc
Mitigation Measures
Negotiation and consuttauon among representa11ves
from Utah Power and Light, the Bureau of Land
Management, and the Forest Servico produced somo
specific mitlgation measures acceptable to 1he
agencies as well as the general publlc.
The 1owers atong the Huntlngton/Camp Wllliams line
were painted in varying colors ol mattefmish
pigments specially developed to blend with the dark
natural landscape. The transmisslon llne conductor
was dulled al 1he factory or was pa1n1ed on slle 10
decrease lls reflect lvlty and to lessen lts vislbility.
38
( oogle
Results
The cooperatlve efforts of Utah Power and Light, the
Bureau ol Land Management, and the Unlted States
Succcssl ul Mo1MicahOI\
39
w1ls.oov
UNJVERSrTY OF MINNESOTA
1532:V B2
As tne N"8tlona pnncl pal c:onservallon agency, ttoe U.S. Oepanment ol
the l nt\ffior has responslblllty tor most of our natlonalty owned publlc
lands and ll#tutal r.sourees. This lncludes rosterlng lile wl sest use ol
our land and water resources. protectlng our llsh and wlldlife,
preseMno the envtronmentaJ and Co.Jllural values o f our natlonat parks
and hlstorlcal places, and provldi ng for the enjoyment ol lile through
outdoof teeroatloo. The Dec>artmcnt assesses our energy and mi neral
resoutOeS ~ wOtks to assure that thelr deYelopment 111 In the best
lnterests ol ali our people. Tl'le Department also has a ma;or
r8$)()<\Slbltity lor Amtriean lndin tes.et"tlon eommunltles and ror
people who llve i n lslend territories ooder U.S.. adml nlstration.
( ooglc