Table Of Content

BLM LIBRARY 88066853 Ely Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement Ely Field Volume (Chapters and November 2007 Office 1, 2, 3) I / Nevada COOPERATING AGENCIES: Great Basin National Park Lincoln County Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest Nye County Nellis Air Force Base White Pine County Nevada Department of Transportation Duckwater Shoshone Tribe Nevada Division of Minerals Ely Shoshone Tribe Nevada Department of Wildlife Moapa Band of Paiutes Nevada State Historic Preservation Office Yomba Shoshone Tribe BLM Mission Statement It is the mission of the Bureau of Land Management to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment ofpresent and future generations. BLM/EL/PL-07/09+1 793 DOI No. FES 07-40 Cover Photo: Cottonwood Canyon - Fortification Range Wilderness, Lincoln County, Nevada. Ely BLM photo. May, 2002. ZS01M53 lb f^ib 2 United States Department of the Interior .Ni BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Nevada State Office P.O. Box 12000 (1340 Financial Blvd.) TAamkeerPriicdea* Reno, Nevada 89520-0006 http://www.nv.blm.gov In Reply Refer To: 1610/1790 (NV910/040) Dear Reader: Enclosed for your review are the Proposed Resource Management Plan (PRMP) and Final Environmental PRMP Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Ely Field Office. The was prepared by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in collaboration with cooperating agencies and stakeholders, taking into account public comment received during this planning effort. This PRMP provides the framework for the future management of BLM-administered public lands located in White Pine, Lincoln, and a portion of Nye counties, Nevada. The document contains both land use planning and implementation level decisions for management of public lands by the Ely Field Office. The PRMP is available for a 30-day protest period beginning the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the Notice of Availability of the FEIS in the Federal Register. PRMP This and FEIS has been developed in accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management PRMP Act of 1976 and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). The is largely based on Alternative E, the preferred alternative in the Draft Resource Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (DRMP/DEIS), which was released on July 29, 2005. This document contains the proposed plan, summary of changes made between the Draft RMP/EIS and PRMP, analysis of impacts of the proposed plan, summary of the written and verbal comments received during the public review period of the Draft RMP/EIS, and responses to the comments received. Any person who participated in the planning process for this PRMP, and has an interest which is or may be adversely affected, may protest approval of this PRMP and land use planning decisions contained within it (see 43 Code of Federal Regulations 1610.5-2) during this 30-day period. Only those persons or organizations who participated in the planning process leading to the PRMP may protest. The protesting party may raise only those issues submitted for the record during the planning process leading up to the publication of this PRMP. These issues may have been raised by the protesting party or others. New issues may not be brought into the record at the protest stage. Instructions for filing protests are provided in the following attachment. Upon resolution of any protests, an Approved Plan and Record of Decision (ROD) will be issued. The Approved Plan will be mailed to all who participated in the planning process and will be available to on BLM RMP ROD the national website http://www.blm.gov or by mail upon request. The Approved and ( ), will include the instructions for the appeals process for implementation decisions that may be appealed to the Office of Hearing and Appeals following publication of the Approved Plan and Record of Decision. Sincerely, Amy Lueders Acting State Director, Nevada Enclosure RMP Proposed Ely and Final EIS Instructions for Filing Protests BLM Protests must be filed with the Director in writing. Regular mail protests should be sent to: Director (210), Attention - Brenda Williams, PO Box 66538, Washington DC 20035. Overnight mail should be sent to: Director (210), Attention - Brenda Williams, 1620 L Street, NW, Suite 1075, Washington DC 20036. E-mail and fax protests will not be accepted as valid protests unless the protesting party also provides the original letter by either regular or overnight mail postmarked by the BLM close ofthe protest period. Under these conditions, will consider the E-mail or fax protest as an BLM advance copy and it will receive full consideration. Ifyou wish to provide with such advance notification, please direct E-mails to Brenda [email protected] and faxes to (202) 452-51 12 BLM (Attn: Protest Coordinator). All protests must be postmarked on or before 30 days after the notice is printed in the Federal Register. IMPORTANT: In accordance with 43 CFR 1610.5-2 the protest must contain the information described in the following critical elements checklist: I The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the person filing the protest. The “interest” of the person filing the protest (how will you be adversely affected by the approval or amendment of the resource management plan?) A statement of the part(s) of the PRMP, and the issue(s) being protested. (To the extent possible, this should reference specific pages, paragraphs, sections, tables, maps, etc., which are believed to be incorrect or incomplete.) A copy of all documents addressing the issue(s) that the protesting party submitted during the OR planning process a statement of the date they were discussed for the record. A concise statement explaining why the protestor believes the BLM State Director’s proposed decision is incorrect. All of these elements are critical parts ofyour protest. Take care to document all relevant facts. As much as possible, reference or cite the planning documents, or available planning records (e.g., meeting minutes or summaries, correspondence, etc.) To aid in ensuring the completeness of your protest, a printable protest checklist is available online at http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/fo/elv field office.html . BLM The Director will make every attempt to promptly render a decision on the protest. The decision will be in writing and will be sent to the protesting party by certified mail, return receipt requested. The BLM decision ofthe Director shall be the final decision ofthe Department ofthe Interior. Before including your phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your protest, you should be aware that your entire protest - including your personal identifying information - may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your protest to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Resource Management Plan Protest Critical Item Checklist The following items must be included to constitute a valid protest whether using this optional format, or a narrative letter. CFR (43 1610.5-2) BLM’s practice is to make comments, including names and home addresses ofrespondents, available for public review. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, be advised that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold from public review your personal identifying information, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from organizations and businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations and businesses, will be available for public inspection in their entirety. Resource Management Plan (RMP) or Amendment (RMPA) being protested: Name: Address: Phone Number: ( ) Your interest in filing this protest (how will you be adversely affected by the approval or amendment of this plan?): Issue or issues being protested: Statement of the part or parts of the plan being protested: Chapter: Section: Page: Map: (or) Attach copies of all documents addressing the issue(s) that were submitted during the OR planning process by the protesting party, an indication of the date the issue(s) were discussed for the record . Date(s): A concise statement explaining why the State Director’s decision(s) are believed to be wrong: PROPOSED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Lead Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Ely Field Office Cooperating Agencies: Great Basin National Park Lincoln County Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest Nye County Nellis Air Force Base White Pine County Nevada Department of Transportation Duckwater Shoshone Tribe Nevada Division of Minerals Ely Shoshone Tribe Nevada Department of Wildlife Moapa Band of Paiutes Nevada State Historic Preservation Office Yomba Shoshone Tribe Project Location: Lincoln and White Pine counties and a portion of Nye County in east-central Nevada Questions on this Proposed RMP Jeff Weeks, Project Manager Should be Directed to: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Ely Field Office HC33 Box 33500 Ely, Nevada 89301 Date Final EIS Filed with USEPA: Same as the date of publication in the Federal Register Date by Which Protests Must be Received by the BLM: 30 days after publication in the Federal Register ABSTRACT This Proposed Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement (Proposed RMP/Final EIS) provides direction and guidance for the management of approximately 11.5 million acres of public land and minerals located in Lincoln, White Pine, and a portion of Nye counties in eastern Nevada that are administered by the BLM Ely Field Office. The Ely RMP will consolidate the Schell and Caliente Management Framework Plans approved in 1983 and 1981, respectively, the Egan Resource Management Plan approved in 1987, the Egan Resource Management Plan Oil and Gas Leasing Amendment and Record of Decision, May 1994, and the Approved Caliente Management Framework Plan Amendment and Record of Decision for the Management of Desert Tortoise Habitat, September 2000. The Proposed RMP/Final EIS focuses on the principles of multiple use and sustained yield as prescribed by Section 202 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. The Proposed RMP/Final EIS considers and analyzes five (5) alternatives, including the Proposed RMP, a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), and three additional action alternatives (B through D). These alternatives were developed based on public input including scoping (February through July 2003); numerous meetings with local, state, tribal, and federal agencies (Cooperating Agencies); and informal meetings with interested organizations upon their request. The issues addressed in the formulation of alternatives include maintenance and restoration of resiliency to disturbed ecological systems within the portion of the Great Basin administered by the Ely Field Office, protection and management of habitats for special status species, upland and riparian habitat management, noxious weeds, commercial uses (including livestock grazing, mineral development, oil and gas leasing, rights-of-way and communication use areas), Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, travel management, land disposal, and wild horses. The alternatives provide for an array of alternative land use allocations and variable levels of commodity production and resource protection and restoration. The Proposed RMP primarily is based on Alternative E presented in the Draft RMP/EIS (July 2005), and changes in response to public and internal comments received. The management actions that are RMP presented in the Proposed were developed through consideration of the planning criteria, public scoping comments, BLM policy especially as presented in the Land Use Planning Handbook, the professional judgment of the staff in the Ely Field Office, and comments from a wide array of users of the planning area. The Proposed RMP is a compilation of those individual management actions from the other four alternatives, plus unique management actions, that the Ely Field Office believes will best meet its obligations for multiple use management of the resources found within the planning area. The Proposed RMP is not a final agency decision. The management direction may change based on protests that are received on the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. Following resolution of any protests, the final BLM decision will be documented in the Approved RMP and Record of Decision. Responsible Official for EIS: Ron Wenker State Director, Nevada Bureau of Land Management, Nevada State Office 1340 Financial Blvd. Reno, NV 89502 READER’S GUIDE READER’S GUIDE Preparation of this document was guided by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) planning regulations issued under the authority of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 and federal environmental policy under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. The Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement (Proposed RMP/Final EIS) primarily focuses on planning issues and the decisions needed to resolve them. The issues of greatest concern are listed below in alphabetical order. • Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) (see Table 2.9-1, Section 2.4.22, Section 3.22, and Section 4.22) • Land Disposal (see Table 2.9-1, Section 2.4.12, Section 3.12, and Section 4.12) • Livestock Grazing (see Table 2.9-1, Section 2.4.16, Section 3.16, and Section 4.16) • Mineral Extraction (see Table 2.9-1, Section 2.4.18, Section 3.18, and Section 4.18) • Noxious and Invasive Weed Management (see Table 2.9-1, Section 2.4.21, Section 3.21, and Section 4.21) • Recreation (see Table 2.9-1, Section 2.4.15, Section 3.15, and Section 4.15) • Special Status Species (see Table 2.9-1, Section 2.4.7, Section 3.7, and Section 4.7) • Travel Management and Off-highway Vehicle Use (see Table 2.9-1, Section 2.4.14, Section 3.14, and Section 4.14) • Vegetation Treatment (see Table 2.9-1 Section 2.4.5, Section 3.5, and Section 4.5) , • Watershed Management (see Table 2.9-1, Section 2.4.19, Section 3.19, and Section 4.19) • Wild Horses (see Table 2.9-1, Section 2.4.8, Section 3.8, and Section 4.8) • Wildlife (see Table 2.9-1, Section 2.4.6, Section 3.6, and Section 4.6) Other management concerns are addressed in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS, but did not drive the formulation of the alternatives. To assist agency decision-makers and the general public in choosing appropriate solutions to the planning issues, five alternatives or combinations of management options are presented and their impacts evaluated. The alternatives were limited to those that span a reasonable range of implementable means for managing public lands, while offering a broad range of options. 1 . READER’S GUIDE Document Format The format of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS is based on BLM guidance issued in 2005. The guidance document was meant to provide a common look and feel to all RMP planning documents being prepared by BLM across the west. The Proposed RMP/Final EIS is organized around 26 topical headings that cover the range of resources, resource uses, and program areas managed by the Ely Field Office. Each topic retains the same last digit section number throughout the document from Chapter 2.0 through Chapter 4.0. For example, Air Quality has the final digit of 2, while Health and Safety has the final digit of 27. Introductions have the final digit of 1 Three terms are used throughout the document that the reader should understand clearly before proceeding with review: Ely RMP planning area refers to the geographic area in White Pine, Lincoln, and a portion of Nye counties that contains BLM-administered lands (see Map 1.2-1). The planning area totals approximately 13.9 million acres. Ely RMP decision area - the planning area for the Ely RMP/EIS consists of the entire geographic area within which the BLM would make decisions during this planning effort. The planning area includes all lands regardless of jurisdiction; however, the BLM would only make decisions on lands that fall under BLM's jurisdiction. Map 1.2-2 shows the land status within the “planning area.” The "decision area" consists of public lands administered by the Ely Field Office in White Pine, Lincoln, and a portion of Nye County in east- central Nevada. The decision area totals approximately 11.5 million acres. The decision area also includes those private lands on which there is "split estate", and the BLM continues to manage subsurface mineral commodities. Ely Field Office refers to the BLM’s administrative unit that manages the public lands in the Ely RMP decision area. BLM staff members are part of the Ely Field Office. Summary The Summary provides an overview of discussions detailed in the full document and serves as a synopsis of the planning process and the alternative proposals and potential environmental consequences resulting for that process. Chapter 1.0 (Introduction) This chapter contains background information on the planning process and prepares the reader for the information that is presented in the rest of the document. The nine main sections in Chapter 1 include the Purpose of and Need for Action, Planning Area and Map, Ely RMP/EIS Overview, BLM Planning Process, Planning Criteria, Scoping Issues, Management Framework and Implementation, Relationships that are Key to the Ely RMP/EIS, and Consistency with Other Programs, Plans, and Policies. 2