Over the past several weeks we’ve shared the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) new federal plan. Since that original announcement, we’ve had the opportunity to begin the process of digging into what the agency has to say about their proposed plans. The 90-day comment period for the Draft Resource Management Plan Amendment and the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will end on June 13, 2024. More information on how to comment on this draft connect with this link. In addition, BLM is concurrently offering a 60-day comment period for consideration of the designation of Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC). The ACECs would be incorporated into two of the six alternatives being considered and basically would prohibit all types of use and activities.
The BLM will hold two virtual public meetings and 11 public meetings to answer questions and take further comments on the draft alternatives and analysis. The first meeting will be a virtual meeting on Tuesday, April 9th. It starts at 1 p.m. Mountain Daylight Savings Time (Noon our time here in Nevada). Pre-register here.
On Tuesday, April 16th a public meeting will be held in person at the Sparks, NV Nugget and Casino. This meeting is scheduled to take place from 6-8 p.m. in the Cascade Room of the Sparks, Nugget and Casino.
As the series of meetings wind up around the western region, another virtual meeting will be held virtually, Thursday, April 25, starting at 6 p.m. Mountain Daylight Savings Time. Pre-register here.
As we have reported, the six alternatives include:
Alternative 1: BLM would re-adopt the applicable Greater Sage Grouse habitat management area boundaries, goals, objectives and actions that they offered in their 2015 Records of Decision. This proposal got shut down by a court injunction and brought about the adoption of the 2019 version. In particular this option would allow the agency to return to their management of Sagebrush Focal Areas with the recommendation of using this designation to withdraw mineral location and entry under the Mining Law of 1872. It would also allow for prioritization of other activities to vegetative treatments like livestock grazing and wild horses & burros.
Alternative 2: This is suggested to be the agency’s “No-Action” Alternative, operating under the applicable decisions from the 2019 Record of Decision (except for areas in the Montana/Dakotas). It is being considered as the “No-Action” Alternative because it reflects management currently in BLM’s Resource Management Areas. This option also most closely follows the Sage Grouse plans that were developed by the states.
Alternative 3: In their own words, this alternative “includes the most restrictive measures to protect and preserve Greater Sage Grouse and its habitat.” Armed with the ACEC’s (covering over 11 million acres) that the agency would like to include, this proposal would make all habitat management to the level of priority habitat management and exclude all uses, including livestock grazing. It even suggests that BLM would pull all Wild Horses and Burros from the designated areas.
Alternative 4: This proposal updates the habitat management areas and associated management based on new information and science that has become available since the 2015 and 2019 versions of BLM’s top-down requirements. In Wyoming it dings new oil and gas leases and puts into place the potential of compensatory mitigation to be used in specific conditions. It would allow for more opportunities for consideration of local habitat characteristics when applying mitigation exceptions but still requires functional habitat prior to granting the exception. Lastly, this alternative would treat the previously identified Sage Grouse Focal Areas to be managed as Priority Habitat Management Areas with removal of the withdrawal from mineral entry recommendations and prioritization strategies.
Alternative 5: This proposal has been identified as BLM’s “preferred alternative.” State Sage Grouse management areas have been updated in this version of possible management. It is also considered to be the option with fewer restrictions and more flexibility, using higher degrees of compensatory mitigation to offset impacts on Sage Grouse and their habitat. For wind, solar and major rights-of-ways projects (top priority BLM objectives) have less direct avoidance and provides more opportunities for considering compensatory mitigation to offset the impacts on the birds as well as their habitat.
Alternative 6: This alternative is proposed to be similar to Alternative 5 with the exception that it includes the addition of ACECs to follow the restrictions found in Alternative 3. Supposedly the ACEC scheme in Alternative 6 is going to seek less restrictions in comparison with the plans for Alternative 3.
|