Category: Uncategorized

BLM issued draft environmental impact statements on May 2 to amend its 2015 greater sage grouse plans. The drafts are issued for each of these states including Colorado, opening a 90-day public comment period on May 4 (the date they will be published in the Federal Register), We hope that the (2015) plan remains intact but there likely will be some tweeking. The 2015 plan was developed through collaboration among federal, state and local governments, conservation organizations, agriculture and industry.

The plan “clarifies” mitigation requirements. It states, “The BLM will require and ensure mitigation activities consistent with the recommendation of Colorado Parks and Wildlife in the programs. This will be achieved by avoiding, minimizing, and compensating for impacts by applying beneficial mitigation actions. If the BLM and Colorado Parks and Wildlife determine that there are unacceptable residual impacts on the Greater Sage-Grouse or Greater Sage-Grouse habitat, the BLM will require mitigation that provides a conservation uplift and achieves the outcome consistent with the principles outlined in Appendix H (Guidelines for Implementation and Adaptive Management), consistent with the State of Colorado’s Habitat Exchange and mitigation strategy.”

The net conservation gain standard was not changed, but BLM is requesting comment on compensatory mitigation approach in light of changes to mitigation policies and reconsideration of whether BLM has the authority to impose compensatory mitigation.

Here is the link to the mass of BLM’s Colorado 2018 Northwest Colorado Greater Sage-Grouse Draft Resource Management Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement:

BLM issued draft environmental impact statements on May 2 to amend its 2015 greater sage grouse plans. The drafts are issued for each of these states including Colorado, opening a 90-day public comment period on May 4 (the date they will be published in the Federal Register), We hope that the (2015) plan remains intact but there likely will be some tweeking. The 2015 plan was developed through collaboration among federal, state and local governments, conservation organizations, agriculture and industry.

The plan “clarifies” mitigation requirements. It states, “The BLM will require and ensure mitigation activities consistent with the recommendation of Colorado Parks and Wildlife in the programs. This will be achieved by avoiding, minimizing, and compensating for impacts by applying beneficial mitigation actions. If the BLM and Colorado Parks and Wildlife determine that there are unacceptable residual impacts on the Greater Sage-Grouse or Greater Sage-Grouse habitat, the BLM will require mitigation that provides a conservation uplift and achieves the outcome consistent with the principles outlined in Appendix H (Guidelines for Implementation and Adaptive Management), consistent with the State of Colorado’s Habitat Exchange and mitigation strategy.”

The net conservation gain standard was not changed, but BLM is requesting comment on compensatory mitigation approach in light of changes to mitigation policies and reconsideration of whether BLM has the authority to impose compensatory mitigation.

Here is the link to the mass of BLM’s Colorado 2018 Northwest Colorado Greater Sage-Grouse Draft Resource Management Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement: eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/eplanning/planAndProjectSite.do

The White House budget for FY 2018 shortchanges natural resources values.

Here is the statement from NWF:

WASHINGTON D.C. (May 23, 2017) – Today, the White House released its full budget for

the 2018 fiscal year. Some of the largest cuts are proposed for programs that
restore America’s natural resources, protect public health, and revitalize rural
America. The proposed budget includes deep cuts to the Environmental Protection
Agency, Department of Interior, Department of Agriculture, and National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, and the reduction or elimination of key collaborative
conservation programs.

Collin
O’Mara,
president and chief executive officer of the National Wildlife Federation, released
the following statement:
“If you want to see someone’s values, look at their budget – and this budget shows
that America’s air and waters, wildlife, rural communities, and the outdoor economy
are simply not priorities for the administration.
“All Americans deserve clean water that is drinkable, swimmable, and fishable –
regardless of their zip code. The drastic cuts or eliminations of programs
supporting the restoration of the Gulf of Mexico, Great Lakes, Everglades,
Chesapeake, Puget Sound, Colorado, and Sacramento, if adopted, would make it
impossible for the president to fulfill his campaign pledge of ‘crystal clear
water.’ These budget cuts put the health of all Americans who depend upon clean
water at risk.
“The proposed cuts to the Department of Interior and the Department of Agriculture
undermine the President’s campaign commitments to America’s hunters and anglers and
would harm America’s $887 billion outdoor economy. The cuts would reduce access and
allow further degradation of America’s public lands and leave behind rural
communities across our nation. Most troubling are the deep cuts to collaborative,
bipartisan programs that help recover wildlife populations through non-regulatory
approaches, including USDA conservation programs, the Land and Water Conservation
Fund, and other collaborative recovery programs.
“The most draconian cuts are targeted at the EPA – the agency that protects public
health and air and water quality. It’s one thing to disagree with various regulatory
approaches, it’s a dereliction of duty to remove the funding that is necessary to
protect Americans from toxic air and water pollution, hazardous waste, and unsafe
chemicals. America’s public health will suffer if the EPA is not able to do its job.
“Now that the administration has released its proposed budget, we call upon
bipartisan champions from both parties to reject this budget and speak up for
America’s natural resources, our public health, rural communities, and the growing
outdoor economy. Communities across our nation need Congress to invest in America’s
natural resources and support the hundreds of millions of Americans and the growing
outdoor economy that depend upon them.”

The White House budget for FY 2018 shortchanges natural resources values.

Here is the statement from NWF:

WASHINGTON D.C. (May 23, 2017) – Today, the White House released its full budget for

the 2018 fiscal year. Some of the largest cuts are proposed for programs that
restore America’s natural resources, protect public health, and revitalize rural
America. The proposed budget includes deep cuts to the Environmental Protection
Agency, Department of Interior, Department of Agriculture, and National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, and the reduction or elimination of key collaborative
conservation programs.

Collin
O’Mara,
president and chief executive officer of the National Wildlife Federation, released
the following statement:
“If you want to see someone’s values, look at their budget – and this budget shows
that America’s air and waters, wildlife, rural communities, and the outdoor economy
are simply not priorities for the administration.
“All Americans deserve clean water that is drinkable, swimmable, and fishable –
regardless of their zip code. The drastic cuts or eliminations of programs
supporting the restoration of the Gulf of Mexico, Great Lakes, Everglades,
Chesapeake, Puget Sound, Colorado, and Sacramento, if adopted, would make it
impossible for the president to fulfill his campaign pledge of ‘crystal clear
water.’ These budget cuts put the health of all Americans who depend upon clean
water at risk.
“The proposed cuts to the Department of Interior and the Department of Agriculture
undermine the President’s campaign commitments to America’s hunters and anglers and
would harm America’s $887 billion outdoor economy. The cuts would reduce access and
allow further degradation of America’s public lands and leave behind rural
communities across our nation. Most troubling are the deep cuts to collaborative,
bipartisan programs that help recover wildlife populations through non-regulatory
approaches, including USDA conservation programs, the Land and Water Conservation
Fund, and other collaborative recovery programs.
“The most draconian cuts are targeted at the EPA – the agency that protects public
health and air and water quality. It’s one thing to disagree with various regulatory
approaches, it’s a dereliction of duty to remove the funding that is necessary to
protect Americans from toxic air and water pollution, hazardous waste, and unsafe
chemicals. America’s public health will suffer if the EPA is not able to do its job.
“Now that the administration has released its proposed budget, we call upon
bipartisan champions from both parties to reject this budget and speak up for
America’s natural resources, our public health, rural communities, and the growing
outdoor economy. Communities across our nation need Congress to invest in America’s
natural resources and support the hundreds of millions of Americans and the growing
outdoor economy that depend upon them.”

BLM’s Royal Gorge Field Office issued an Environmental Assessment (EA) on August 17, 2012 that includes 6 parcels in South Park. Presumably, inclusion of these parcels also was approved by BLM State Director Helen Hankins. 5 of these parcels are in the vicinity of Spinney Mountain Reservoir. Back in November, CWF and NWF, joined by more than 400 residents (Nov. and Jan.) and the County, had asked the BLM to undertake a master planning process that enables BLM to consider where leasing is appropriate and where it is inappropriate — before offering any more oil and gas leases in South Park under its outdated 1996 resource management plan. The County also issued its own letter to the BLM on July 5, requesting planning before issuing more leases. The BLM did not respond to the County’s request. Instead, BLM proposed to lease 6 parcels.

The public comment period began on August 17 and concludes on September 17. CWF will submit comments and encourages you to do so, too. We will post our comments in advance of the due date.

BLM’s rationale for issuing leases as soon as possible in the Royal Gorge Field Office area counties is that if it does not do so it “would set up situations in which reservoirs could not be adequately developed and public minerals would be drained by nearby private or state wells, resulting in a loss of revenue due to drainage situations that could be resolved by timely leasing.” This is not a persuasive rationale for South Park where there is no activity now. BLM’s aim for the parcels close to Spinney’s gold medal fishing waters is to “partially retain existing character of the landscape… the level of change should be moderate….” As to its discussion of cumulative impacts, BLM asserts that such analysis should not occur now but rather when an operator who leases the parcel submits an application for permit to drill (APD). This means an individual site by individual site consideration that certainly does not address cumulative impacts. BLM would apply this apporach to assess “specific geologic formations,” “potential impacts to the site speciifc water quality associated with any exploration and development,” wildlife (beyond lease stipulations), etc. BLM notes that there would begin to be cumulative changes that could detract from the peaceful and serene stated management objectives of the state park by introducing a variety of human intrusions such as roads, equipment, facilities, and workers.”

In addition, Park County has begun a water quality assessment and is testing groundwater with its own funds and some grants. The BLM’s EA states, “…activities at the exploration and development stage could have impacts to water quality. The magnitude and location of direct and indirect effects cannot be predicted until the site-specific APD stage of development.” CWF member, retired Colorado state fisheries manager and South Park landowner Eddie Kochman’s reaction was, ” This is Denver’s watershed. There’s not enough baseline water-quality data available to really judge the risk from oil and gas exploration and production. Before BLM takes any of these actions, there should be good water quality data available, and there’s not.” He added, “To me, a half-mile from Spinney Reservoir (a gold medal waters fishery) is not an adequate distance. “

BLM’s Royal Gorge Field Office issued an Environmental Assessment (EA) on August 17, 2012 that includes 6 parcels in South Park. Presumably, inclusion of these parcels also was approved by BLM State Director Helen Hankins. 5 of these parcels are in the vicinity of Spinney Mountain Reservoir. Back in November, CWF and NWF, joined by more than 400 residents (Nov. and Jan.) and the County, had asked the BLM to undertake a master planning process that enables BLM to consider where leasing is appropriate and where it is inappropriate — before offering any more oil and gas leases in South Park under its outdated 1996 resource management plan. The County also issued its own letter to the BLM on July 5, requesting planning before issuing more leases. The BLM did not respond to the County’s request. Instead, BLM proposed to lease 6 parcels.

The public comment period began on August 17 and concludes on September 17. CWF will submit comments and encourages you to do so, too. We will post our comments in advance of the due date.

BLM’s rationale for issuing leases as soon as possible in the Royal Gorge Field Office area counties is that if it does not do so it “would set up situations in which reservoirs could not be adequately developed and public minerals would be drained by nearby private or state wells, resulting in a loss of revenue due to drainage situations that could be resolved by timely leasing.” This is not a persuasive rationale for South Park where there is no activity now. BLM’s aim for the parcels close to Spinney’s gold medal fishing waters is to “partially retain existing character of the landscape… the level of change should be moderate….” As to its discussion of cumulative impacts, BLM asserts that such analysis should not occur now but rather when an operator who leases the parcel submits an application for permit to drill (APD). This means an individual site by individual site consideration that certainly does not address cumulative impacts. BLM would apply this apporach to assess “specific geologic formations,” “potential impacts to the site speciifc water quality associated with any exploration and development,” wildlife (beyond lease stipulations), etc. BLM notes that there would begin to be cumulative changes that could detract from the peaceful and serene stated management objectives of the state park by introducing a variety of human intrusions such as roads, equipment, facilities, and workers.”

In addition, Park County has begun a water quality assessment and is testing groundwater with its own funds and some grants. The BLM’s EA states, “…activities at the exploration and development stage could have impacts to water quality. The magnitude and location of direct and indirect effects cannot be predicted until the site-specific APD stage of development.” CWF member, retired Colorado state fisheries manager and South Park landowner Eddie Kochman’s reaction was, ” This is Denver’s watershed. There’s not enough baseline water-quality data available to really judge the risk from oil and gas exploration and production. Before BLM takes any of these actions, there should be good water quality data available, and there’s not.” He added, “To me, a half-mile from Spinney Reservoir (a gold medal waters fishery) is not an adequate distance. “

The US Department of Agriculture has issued the proposed Colorado roadless rule, draft environmental impact statement (DEIS), the DEIS summary, dates for public meetings in Colorado and other information related to this rulemaking. It is available at the national roadless website www.roadless.fs.fed.us

CWF is reviewing the proposed rule and studying impacts to wildlife from changes that the proposed rule would make to the Colorado petition. THe public comment period ends on October 23.

The US Department of Agriculture has issued the proposed Colorado roadless rule, draft environmental impact statement (DEIS), the DEIS summary, dates for public meetings in Colorado and other information related to this rulemaking. It is available at the national roadless website www.roadless.fs.fed.us

CWF is reviewing the proposed rule and studying impacts to wildlife from changes that the proposed rule would make to the Colorado petition. THe public comment period ends on October 23.