PERMFILE134363 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-~ quality."13 Essentially, NEPA "ensures that the agency, in reaching its decision, will have available and will carefully consider detailed information concerning significant environmental ' impacts."14 The Data Quality Act and the corresponding guidelines issued by the Office of Management and Budget, DOI and BLM expand on this obligation, requiring that decision- making input be based on "best available science and supporting studies conducted in , accordance with sound.and objective scientific practices."Is Baseline information for most of these species and their habitat was not collected prior to this ' project. The baseline information that the agency should collect and use in order to make a good decision and meet NEPA's requisite "hard look" includes: monitoring data of Special Status Species and their habitat over a set period; species occurrence, distribution, abundance, and ' condition; population trend, dynamics, size, and density; denning areas; condition and trend of habitat; monitoring of other ongoing activities within the planning area to determine the impact on the species and population; monitoring of ongoing land use activities and management ' practices, strategies, and plans to determine whether these practices aze adequately conserving species; and the current use of each species habitat throughout the field office. To satisfy NEPA's "hazd look" requirement, corresponding case law, and associated regulations, the ' agency's obligation under BLM Manual §6840, and the agency's requirement to comply with the Data Quality Act and corresponding Data Quality Guidelines, the BLM must collect the baseline information noted above. ' e. All alternatives considered by BLM must provide sufficient protection for Special Status Species , The BLM is required to ensure that activities on BLM lands do not contribute to the need for any species to become listed as Threatened or Endangered. 16 U.S.C. § 1536(a)(2). On account of the ' size and scope of the project, the project's foreseeable impacts, and due to the sensitivity of these species to such impacts, the BLM may violate this requirement. Without sufficient protection for Special Status Species, the BLM cannot ensure that the proposed project will not contribute to , heightened legal protection for species in the project area. Therefore, the agency should be proactive in conserving Sensitive species by developing effective conservation strategies to be included in each alternative and by developing alternatives that minimize damage. , The main goal of the conservation strategies should be to ensure the conservation and recovery of Special Status Species and related habitat within the Grand Junction Pield Office, and more ' specifically, within the proposed project area. The BLM must ensure that this proposed project will not harm or contribute to the decline of any Special Status Species. The BLM should proactively use its management authority to conserve native biodiversity within the project area. ' Should the BLM fail to comply with these obligations by not providing or ensuring protection for Sensitive and other Special Status Species, the agency will neglect its NEPA duties to take a 14 Robertson v. Methow YDpey Citizens Council, 490 U.S. 332, 349 (1989). 's Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Yeaz 2001, Pub.L.No. 106-554, § 515. See also, Office of , Management and Budget "Information Quality Guidelines," available at htto://www.whitehouse.~ov/omb/inforeeliae oct200?pdf and individual "Agency information Quality Guidelines," available at http://vnvw.whitehouse eov/omb/inforez/aeencv info Duality links.html. ' Center for Native Ecosystems Page 8 of 24 Scoping Comments for the Proposed Red Cliff Coal Mine 1