Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.. <br /> <br />DECISION <br /> <br />N <br />t.Cl <br />Q) <br />W <br /> <br />It is my decision to adopt the attached standards for pubiic land health and guideiines for iivestock <br />grazing management (standards and guidelines), dated November 1996. They are similar. to those <br />describad in the Standards and Guideiines Environmental Assessment (EA), dated June 28, 1996, <br />but with some minor changes resulting from pubiic comments. <br /> <br />This decision amends the Colorado Resource Management Plans (RMPs)." These standards and. <br />guideiines supplament (i.e. add to) the existing decisions in each RMP. Some of the decisions in <br />certain RMPs. will be modified or replaced as shown In the individual RMP attachments to this. <br />Decislon"Record. The RMPs amended are: <br /> <br />Glenwood Springs <br />Grand Junction <br />Gunnison <br />Kremmiing <br />Little Snake <br />Northeast <br />Royal Gorge <br />San Juan/San Miguel <br />San Luis <br />Uncompahgre 8asin <br />White River (Proposed) <br /> <br />This decision will be effective on February 12, 1997 following resoiution of any protests, <br />completion of the Governor's consistency review, and approval by the Secretary of the Interior. <br /> <br />. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED <br /> <br />In addition to the proposed action, adoption of the fallback standards and guideiines as described in <br />43 CFR 4180.2 was considered. By regulation,this alternative will be in effect after February 12. <br />1997 if the proposed action is not approved prior to that date. If this occurs, the Fallback <br />standards and guidelines will continue in effect until the Colorado standards.and guldeiines are <br />.approved. 'this alternative was not selected because there was strong support from virtually all. <br />pubiic land users to develop standards and guideiines for Colorado. <br /> <br /> <br />The alternative of continuing present management was considered. This alternative, although not <br />legally implementable, served as a baseline .for describing and comparing implementation processes" <br />and impacts with other altarnatives. <br /> <br />,i <br /> <br />, <br />~ <br /> <br />RATIONALE <br /> <br />4 <br />, <br />"j <br />1 <br />c; <br />":j <br />, <br />'.~I <br />4 <br /> <br />These standards and guideiines were developed in partnership with the three Colorado Resource <br />Advisory Councils, utilizing input received during numerous pubiic workshops and meetings, <br />consultations with academicians, and from public comments on the EA.. Correctly appiied, they <br />will assure public. land health. I am hopeful that the open, collaborative implementation process will <br />help in building mutual trust and respect with "and between pubiic land users. Similarly, the <br />common terminology used in assessing rangeland health, should reduce misunderstandings. The <br />focus on sustaining natural systems using a landscape perspective furthar encourages a <br />collaborative approach using the best information and methods available. <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />,) <br />i <br />, <br />'i <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />~_";"_~;.;o,-_;i:",- k-.' <br />