|
<br />:l~~!:'!:'O
<br />U <J u ,j ,> J
<br />
<br />3, BLM would consider leasing geothermal energy
<br />resources or other leasable minerals on a case-by-<:ase
<br />basis, All minerals that are considered leasable on
<br />acquired lands (Bankhead-Jones Land Use Lands)
<br />would be treated the same as other leasable minerals.
<br />In Limestone Ridge ACEC/RNA, Little Vampa/
<br />Juniper Canyon SRMA, and the Cedar Mountain
<br />recreation management priority area, leasing of other
<br />minerals for underground mining would be allowed
<br />with no-surface-occupancy stipulations. Leasing for
<br />surface mining would not be allowed in these three
<br />areas.
<br />
<br />4, New leases and mineral material sales within fragile
<br />soil and water areas would be subject to the
<br />performance objectives d=ribed under Soil and Water
<br />Resources (Issues 2-5 and 2-6).
<br />
<br />5, The recommended Diamond Breaks and Cross
<br />Mountain wilderness areas (including Cross Mountain
<br />Canyon ACEC) would be withdrawn from locatable
<br />mineral entry, leasing and development of other
<br />minerals, and mineral material sales.
<br />
<br />Livestock Grazing (Issue 2-1)
<br />
<br />I. Livestock grazing utilizing federal preference (166,895
<br />AUMs) would be allowed until rangeland monitoring
<br />studies were completed.
<br />
<br />2, BLM would immediately initiate rangeland monitoring
<br />studies on a minimum of 13 conflict allotments
<br />(allotment numbers 4203, 4206, 4207, 4209, 4210,
<br />4219,4225,4302, 443I,4432,4520,452I,and4522)
<br />to yield information needed to make management
<br />decisions on livestock stocking rates. Other rangeland
<br />monitoring studies would be initiated on allotments
<br />exhibiting worst-forage conditions established from the
<br />1981-83 surveys, The level of survey would depend
<br />on funding and staff,
<br />
<br />3, Based on 1981-1983 surveys for 73 percent of the area
<br />and earlier surveys for the rest of the area, anticipated
<br />grazing level of 148,821 AUMs would be used as
<br />baseline inventory data,
<br />
<br />4, Livestock-use adjustments would be implemented in
<br />accordance with 43 CFR 411 OJ-3 after acquisition
<br />of 2 or 3 years of rangeland monitoring data, in
<br />combination with baseline data, if such data indicated
<br />that adjustments were necessary, Decisions implement-
<br />ing changes in livestock use would be issued as soon
<br />as data were available to support that cbange, fn no
<br />case would more than 5 years of rangeland monitoring
<br />data be required for adjustments, Any adjustments
<br />
<br />PROPOSED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
<br />
<br />would result in consultation/coordination with the
<br />livestock operator,
<br />
<br />5, A 5-year implementation period would be used,
<br />Decisions would be issued in the third and fifth years
<br />to modify the adjustments as necessary to reach
<br />estimated grazing capacity, These decisions would be
<br />contained in a rangeland program summary,
<br />
<br />6, Livestock grazing would be temporarily suspended in
<br />areas where key forage plants have been critically
<br />overutilized,
<br />
<br />7, Vegetative land treatments would be implemented on
<br />68 allotments, Proposed treatments would involve
<br />interseeding, burning. burning and reseeding, spraying,
<br />and plowing and reseeding; in conducting these
<br />treatments, BLM would adhere to established
<br />procedures and design specifications to protect all
<br />resource uses and values. A benefit/cost analysis and
<br />environmental analysis would be completed before any
<br />treatments were implemented,
<br />
<br />8, Range improvement projects would be constructed on
<br />69 allotments to control livestock use, improve
<br />distribution. and improve riparian/wetland habitat. A
<br />benefit/cost analysis and environmental analysis would
<br />be completed before any projects were implemented,
<br />
<br />9, Management categorization (M, I, or C) for allotments
<br />would be updated as the result of rangeland condition
<br />change or as data that supported changes became
<br />available tbrough the monitoring program,
<br />
<br />10, Allotment management plans would be developed for
<br />all allotments within the Little Snake Resource Area,
<br />Level of detail of each plan would be determined from
<br />the management category (M, I, or C) for that allotment.
<br />
<br />Wildlife Habitat (Issue 2-2)
<br />
<br />I. Forage would be provided on BLM land to maintain
<br />approximately 66,400 mule deer, 6,500 elk, 6,300
<br />pronghorn, and 70 bighorn sbeep, which would
<br />contribute to total resource area big game populations
<br />of 110,600 mule deer, 21,700 elk, 8,350 pronghorn,
<br />and 70 bighorn sheep, until further monitoring studies
<br />were completed and proper utilization levels were
<br />established,
<br />
<br />2, BLM would immediately initiate monitoring studies on
<br />a minimum of 13 conflict allotments (allotment
<br />numbers 4203, 4206, 4207, 4209, 4210, 4219, 4225,
<br />4302, 4431, 4432, 4520, 4521, and 4522) to yield
<br />information needed to make management decisions on
<br />wildlife numbers. Other monitoring studies would be
<br />initiated on allotments exhibiting worst-forage
<br />
<br />1-5
<br />
|