|
<br />nr,~l':'~6
<br />~~ -J l!- J ~J
<br />
<br />PROPOSED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
<br />
<br />This section describes the proposed resource management
<br />plan for the Little Snake Resource Area, in terms of (I)
<br />proposed management actions by resource and (2) definitions
<br />of proposed management priority areas, which are
<br />geographic areas that are unique, significant, or unusually
<br />suited for developmen~ management. protection, or use of
<br />a particular resource, Management priority areas are
<br />delineated on the map of the proposed plan included witb
<br />this document. The map visually summarizes the multiple-
<br />use decisions in the proposed plan and should be used in
<br />conjunction with the following narrative.
<br />
<br />The management priority areas depicted on the proposed
<br />plan map may include areas of split-estate (private surface
<br />over federal minerals), private, state, or other nonfederal
<br />lands, However, the management priority areas apply only
<br />to public lands, i.e" BLM-managed surface and federal
<br />mineral estate, On split-estate lands, management priority
<br />area designations indicate how BLM would manage the
<br />federal mineral estate; they would not dictate other surface
<br />uses unrelated to federal mineral development. None of the
<br />management priority areas apply to private. state or other
<br />lands or minerals not managed by BLM,
<br />
<br />In developing the proposed plan, BLM considered a
<br />balance of land uses and resource values within the resource
<br />area, the principles of multiple use and sustained yield. the
<br />issues and concerns raised by the public during development
<br />of the Draft RMP lEIS. the long-term public interest and
<br />benefits of implementing each of the alternatives analyzed
<br />in the Draft RMP lEIS, the environmental consequences
<br />of those altematives, and public comments received on the
<br />Draft RMP lEIS. The proposed plan has been developed
<br />in accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management
<br />Act of 1976; the National Environmentai Policy Act of
<br />1969; and other applicable laws, regulations, and standards.
<br />
<br />The proposed plan recognizes tbe existence of valid
<br />existing rights. Nothing in the management actions or
<br />management priority area definitions is intended to challenge
<br />those rights,
<br />
<br />Activities or uses not specifically addressed in the plan,
<br />such as small-scale projects (right-{)f-way applications for
<br />rural telephone lines, access roads, free-use permits, etc,),
<br />would be authorized if they met legal requirements and
<br />were compatible witb the management emphasis of a given
<br />area.
<br />
<br />Implementation of the recommended actions for the
<br />resource area would be guided by a series of activity plans,
<br />An activity plan is a more detailed and specific plan for
<br />management of a single resource program or plan element
<br />undertaken as necessary to implement the more general RMP
<br />decisions, Detailed management actions, including projects,
<br />
<br />treatments, and other on.the-ground activities, and schedules,
<br />are described in the activity plan. Activity plans prepared
<br />following the RMP would include an oil and gas activity
<br />plan, habitat management plans (HMPs) for wildlife,
<br />allotment management plans (AMPs) for livestock grazing,
<br />landownership adjustment activity plans, watershed plans,
<br />and cultural resource management plans (CRMPs), Site-
<br />specific management plans would also be required for areas
<br />of critical environmental concern (ACECs), research natural
<br />areas (RNAs), special recreation management areas
<br />(SRMAs), and areas designated by Congress as wilderness,
<br />
<br />In addition, an overall resource monitoring plan would
<br />be prepared for the Little Snake Resource Area. The plan
<br />would identify appropriate locations and methods for
<br />monitoring resources (either in combination or individually),
<br />coordination procedures for developing and initiating specific
<br />monitoring studies, and methods for recording and evaluating
<br />monitoring data,
<br />
<br />MANAGEMENT ACTIONS
<br />
<br />Coal (Issue I-I)
<br />
<br />I. Approximately 638,800 acres (containing an estimated
<br />5.8 billion tons of coal) would be identified as
<br />acceptable for further consideration for federal coal
<br />leasing, Of this total, approximately 457,089 acres (an
<br />estimated 4,2 billion tons of coal) would be acceptable
<br />for further consideration for leasing for surface or
<br />underground development and approximately 181,669
<br />acres (an estimated I.3 billion tons of coal) would
<br />be acceptable for further consideration for leasing for
<br />underground development only (see Tables I and 2).
<br />Approximately 266 million tons of coal throughout
<br />the region would not be available for surface mining,
<br />
<br />2, Site-specific activity planoing, including additional
<br />environmental analysis, would be needed before a
<br />decision to lease specific tracts could be made.
<br />
<br />3. Exploratory drilling would be allowed in order to obtain
<br />sufficient data for resource management decisions and
<br />fair-market-value determinations.
<br />
<br />4. Other data gathering efforts would be scheduled that
<br />would ensure data adequacy standards would be met
<br />for activity planning within the coal planning area,
<br />
<br />I-I
<br />
|