WSP10967 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ntl"l/Q!; u :J U .~ ,) u Record of Decision Little Snake Resource Management Plan This document records the decisions reached by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for managing 1.3 million surface acres of public land and 2.4 million subsurface acres (including those beneath the 1.3 million surface acres) in the Little Snake Resource Area. DECISION The decision is hereby made to approve the resource management plan (RMP) for the Little Snake Resource Area. This plan was prepared under the regulations for implementing the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976 (43 CFR 16(0). An environmental impact statement (EIS) was prepared for this plan in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. This plan is identical to the one set forth in tbe Revised Proposed Little Snake Resource Management Plan published in October 1988 and the associated final environmental impact statement published in September 1986. Language has been added to the management action section for recreation and to management units lOA and II A to show that in a later amendment to the plan, BLM will study the Yampa River for suitability for designation under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. That language also states BLM will take no actions nor approve any actions during the interim which would detract from the values which qualify the river for consideration under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The RMP describes management prescriptions for seventeen management units within the Little Snake Resource Area. The management unit descriptions also contain the geographical location, the acreage, and the management objective of the unit. Major decisions made in the RMP are: . Approximately 636,800 acres (containing an estimated 5.8 billion tons of coal) are available for further consideration for coal leasing. . The resource area is open to oil and gas leasing with various stipulations attached except for 36,240 acres proposed as wilderness which would be closed to leasing if the area is designated as wilderness J:>y Congress. . Public land is open to locatable mineral entry and development, except for 50,321 acres proposed as wilderness which would be closed to locatable mineral entry if these areas are designated as wilderness by Congress. . Full livestock preference is authorized until completion of monitoring studies. . Wildlife habitat is provided for mule deer, elk, pronghorn, and bighorn sheep with no requests for adjustments in numbers until completion of monitoring studies. . Four areas of critical environmental concern, totaling 22,530 acres, are designated to protect sensitive plants, scenic qualities, archaeological history, and threatened and endangered species. The four areas are Cross Mountain Canyon ACEC (3,000 acres), Irish Canyon ACEC (11,680 acres), Limestone Ridge ACEC/RNA (1,350 acres), and Lookout Mountain ACEC (6,500 acres). . Soil and water resources are protected by special stipulations applied to surface-<listurbing activities. . Diamond Breaks (36,240 acres) and Cross Mountain (14,081 acres) WSAs are recommended to the Secretary of the Interior as suitable for designation as wilderness. . Little Yampa/Juniper Canyon (19,840 acres) is administered as a special recreation management area. Wild Mountain (21,000 acres), Cedar Mountain (880 acres), and two areas on Cold Spring Mountain (27,000 acres) are managed for recreation values. ALTERNATIVES Initially, five alternatives were analyzed: Current Management (No Action) Alternative, Energy and Minerals Alternative, Commodity Production Alternative, Renewable Resource Alternative, and Natural Environment Alternative. A minimum management alternative was considered. This alternative was eliminated from detailed study because it was not a realistic, implernentable alternative, nor did it meet the requirements of FLPMA. The potential impacts to the environment and nearby communities were assessed for each alternative and the results were presented to BLM management. Then, based on this analysis, BLM policy and goals, and the responsiveness of each alternative to the issues identified at the beginning of the process, a preferred iii