Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />W <br />Q <br />No <br />~ <br /> <br />Specific proposals for grazing management are being developed through the <br />planning process. The proposals include adjustments in numbers of animals <br />(livesto,ck, wild horses,and wildlife), seasons or periods of use, and <br />implementation of grazing management systems and rangeland improvement <br />projects. The land use plan proposals and alternatives to the proposals <br />are analyzed in grazing environmental impact statements (EIS's) which are <br />subject to widespread public review prior to final decisions. The EIS's <br />compare the environmental impacts of implementing improved grazing manage- <br />ment programs to such alternatives as complete livestock removal and <br />no action (continuation of the present grazing management program). This <br />comparison allows decisionmakers to evaluate the effects of different <br />levels and types of management on salinity, watershed conditions, soils, <br />vegetation, wildlife habitat, other natural resources, and economic and <br />social values within the area. <br /> <br />Land use plans and grazing EIS's have been completed in the past two years <br />on several areas in the Upper Colorado River Basin, including Grand Junction <br />and Uncompahgre in Western Colorado, Sandy and Seven Lakes in Southwestern <br />Wyoming, and Three Corners and Parker Mountain in Utah. Individual decisions <br />have been or are being issued to grazing permittees in these areas and <br />specific management programs will be implemented over the next several years. <br />Grazing EIS's and decisions on associated management programs will be com- <br />pleted on all Bureau lands by 1988. <br /> <br />The land use plan decisions also deal with ORV use, energy related activities <br />(e.g., oil and gas exploration and development, coal and uranium mining, <br />power line rights-of-ways, etc.) and other actions which increase salinity <br />in the Colorado River Watershed. Decisions may prohibit or restrict such <br />activities in areas where there are significant land use conflicts or where <br />serious resource damage would occur (e.g., habitat of threatened or en- <br />dangered species, highly saline soils). <br /> <br />In addition to decisions on implementation of specific on-the-ground management <br />programs designed to improve the public land resources (and reduce salinity), --~~~ <br />BLM is actively working to strengthen its policy and guidance to field offices <br />on ways to control salinity. Examples include publication of the 1977 <br />Salinity Report and 1978-79 Status Report for use by BLM scientists and field <br />mana~ers and specific emphasis on salinity control in the new BLM grazing <br />administration Hanual S"ctions (currently being reviewed in final draft form <br />in the Washington Office). <br /> <br />Ac ti')os <br />--- <br /> <br />ImplementatiOn of decisions result in a variety of land use management <br />actIons. !-tany of the actions that are taken have positive effects on <br />salinity reduction even though their primary purpose may not have been tnat <br />per se. Others have been specifically targeted at reducing salinity from <br />point sourceS or from surface runoff. Those for example include: <br /> <br />- Several small retention dams have been constructed near saline <br />springs tc dC: as evaporation ponds near Craig, Colorado. <br /> <br />..' <br /> <br />- Several artesian wells have been plugged to stop the discharge of <br />saline wat~t's. <br /> <br />