Notice of Availability of the Draft Resource Management Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement for the Lakeview Field Office, Lakeview District, Oregon, 48682-48684 [2024-12463]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
48682
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 2024 / Notices
project development except within
specific siting corridors. Siting corridors
in Alternative D would span 48,597
acres. Project activity would disturb
4,838 acres. Similar to Alternative C,
Alternative D would focus on
minimizing fragmentation of wildlife
habitat and potential impacts to Wilson
Butte Cave and Minidoka NHS.
Alternative D would avoid development
in areas that have higher sagebrush
cover and protect functional Greater
sage-grouse habitat. The reduced
footprint would also avoid or minimize
impacts to other resources and areas of
concern.
Alternative E (Reduced Southern
Corridors) would avoid and minimize
potential impacts to Minidoka NHS.
Alternative E builds from Alternative C
but would further avoid and minimize
potential impacts to Minidoka NHS by
removing additional siting corridors
from development. Siting corridors in
Alternative E would span 50,680 acres.
Project activity would disturb 5,136
acres.
The BLM has identified a Preferred
Alternative based on a combination of
elements of Alternatives B through E.
The Preferred Alternative responds to
resource impact concerns raised by
Tribes, cooperating agencies, and the
public through the public comments
received on the draft EIS. The Preferred
Alternative would reduce visual
impacts to Minidoka NHS, reduce
disturbance to big game migration
routes and winter concentration areas,
reduce impacts to Jerome County
Airport and agricultural aviation uses,
and reduce impacts to adjacent private
landowners. The combination of
Alternatives B–E for development of the
Preferred Alternative included adjusting
the siting corridor and infrastructure to
avoid or minimize impacts while
balancing development of the wind
resource. The BLM considered results of
the analysis of potential impacts
prepared for the draft EIS; feedback
from Tribes, agencies, and various
interested parties; input from the BLM
Idaho Resource Advisory Council’s Lava
Ridge Wind Project Subcommittee; new
wildlife datasets provided by the Idaho
Department of Fish and Game; and
publicly available wind-speed
information for the project area to
develop the Preferred Alternative. Siting
corridors in the Preferred Alternative
would span 44,768 acres. Project
activity would disturb 4,492 acres.
Compliance With NEPA, as Amended
by the Fiscal Responsibility Act
In response to the amendments to
NEPA under the Fiscal Responsibility
Act of 2023 (FRA), Pub. L. 118–5,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:23 Jun 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
section 321(e)(1)(B), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(e),
the BLM revised the organization of the
final EIS so that it is under the FRA’s
300-page limit for a proposed agency
action of ‘‘extraordinary complexity.’’
The BLM moved the evaluation of
certain environmental impacts that it
determined not to be significant to an
appendix.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10)
Public Input
The BLM continues to engage in
government-to-government consultation
with the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes and
the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes on the
project. These Native American Tribes
have expressed concerns focused on
potential impacts to Wilson Butte Cave,
wildlife, and the Shoshone-Bannock
Tribes’ Treaty rights. The BLM
published a Notice of Availability for
the draft EIS for the project in the
Federal Register on January 20, 2023
(88 FR 3759). The notice began a 60-day
public comment period, which was
extended to 90 days ending on April 20,
2023. The BLM held public meetings on
the draft EIS in February and March
2023. Meetings were held virtually and
in person in Shoshone and Twin Falls,
Idaho; Portland, Oregon; and Mercer
Island, Washington. The BLM received
a total of 11,179 submissions via mail,
fax, email, ePlanning online comment
form, and handwritten and verbal
comments given to a transcriptionist at
public meetings. The BLM considered
comments within each submission and
determined if comments were
substantive or non-substantive. The
BLM identified and categorized 3,303
individual substantive comments from
the various submissions. Comments on
the draft EIS received from the public
and internal BLM review were
considered and incorporated, as
appropriate, into the final EIS. The final
EIS includes all substantive comments
with a BLM response.
The BLM conducted additional
meetings in April and May 2024, with
the Idaho Governor’s Office; numerous
Idaho state agencies; Friends of
Minidoka; Minidoka Pilgrimage
Planning Committee; ShoshoneBannock Tribes; county commissioners
from Jerome, Lincoln, and Minidoka
counties; grazing permittees; other
Federal agencies; and others, consistent
with Section 441, Division E, of Public
Law 118–42, the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2024.
Public comments informed clarifying
text, developing the Preferred
Alternative, developing new issue
statements, identifying project-specific
interim Visual Resource Management
classes, and refining a mitigation
framework.
Bureau of Land Management
PO 00000
Frm 00133
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Michael Courtney,
BLM Twin Falls District Manager.
[FR Doc. 2024–12460 Filed 6–6–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331–21–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
[BLM_OR_FRN_MO4500179562]
Notice of Availability of the Draft
Resource Management Plan
Amendment and Environmental Impact
Statement for the Lakeview Field
Office, Lakeview District, Oregon
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
In compliance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended (NEPA), and the
Federal Land Policy and Management
Act of 1976, as amended (FLPMA), the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has
prepared a Draft Resource Management
Plan (RMP) Amendment and Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for the Lakeview RMP and by this notice
is providing information announcing
the opening of the comment period on
the Draft RMP Amendment and Draft
EIS.
SUMMARY:
This notice announces the
opening of a 90-day comment period for
the Draft RMP Amendment and Draft
EIS beginning with the date following
the Environmental Protection Agency’s
(EPA) publication of its Notice of
Availability (NOA) in the Federal
Register.
To afford the BLM the opportunity to
consider comments in the forthcoming
Proposed RMP Amendment and Final
EIS, please ensure the BLM receives
your comments prior to the close of the
90-day comment period or 15 days after
the last public meeting, whichever is
later.
DATES:
The Draft RMP Amendment
and Draft EIS is available for review on
the BLM ePlanning project website at
https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/
project/114300/510.
Written comments related to the
Lakeview Draft RMP Amendment and
Draft EIS may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
• website: https://eplanning.blm.gov/
eplanning-ui/project/114300/510.
• Email: blm_or_lv_rmp_team@
blm.gov.
• Mail: Lakeview District, BLM, 1301
South G Street, Lakeview, OR 97630.
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM
07JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 2024 / Notices
Documents pertinent to this proposal
may be examined online at https://
eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/
project/114300/510 and at the Lakeview
District Office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Collins, Planning and
Environmental Coordinator, 541–947–
2177; 1301 South G Street, Lakeview,
OR 97630; blm_or_lv_rmp_team@
blm.gov. Individuals in the United
States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of
hearing, or have a speech disability may
dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to
access telecommunications relay
services for contacting Mr. Collins.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
document provides notice that the BLM
Oregon/Washington State Director has
prepared a Draft RMP Amendment and
Draft EIS. The Draft RMP Amendment
and Draft EIS analyzes alternatives that
would change the existing 2003
Lakeview RMP and Record of Decision
(ROD), as amended by the 2015 Oregon
Greater Sage-Grouse Approved RMP
Amendment and ROD.
The planning area is located in Lake
and Harney counties, Oregon, and
encompasses approximately 3.2 million
acres of public land.
Purpose and Need
The purpose and need for this Draft
RMP Amendment and Draft EIS is to
comply with the provisions of a 2010
settlement agreement, which required
the BLM to prepare an RMP
Amendment that addresses a range of
alternatives for managing lands with
wilderness characteristics, off highway
vehicle (OHV) use, and livestock grazing
use within the Lakeview planning area.
The BLM has determined that 106
inventory units contain wilderness
characteristics (approximately 1,654,103
acres).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Alternatives Including the Preferred
Alternative
The BLM has analyzed six
alternatives in detail, including the No
Action Alternative. The No Action
Alternative represents the continuation
of existing management direction under
the 2003 Lakeview RMP/ROD (as
amended), including the existing goals
and management direction for OHV and
livestock grazing use. In addition, the
interim management provisions
outlined in the 2010 Settlement
Agreement would continue to prevent
management actions in an inventory
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:23 Jun 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
unit determined by the BLM to possess
wilderness characteristics that would be
deemed by the BLM to diminish the size
or cause the entire BLM inventory unit
to no longer meet the criteria for
wilderness characteristics.
Alternative A would continue the
BLM’s management direction under the
2003 Lakeview RMP/ROD (as amended),
including the existing goals and
management direction for OHV and
livestock grazing use. Management
would emphasize resources and
multiple uses other than wilderness
characteristics. None of the 106 units
that the BLM found to possess
wilderness characteristics would receive
additional protections.
Alternative B would emphasize the
protection of wilderness characteristics
within all 106 units. Under Alternative
B, 34 units and portions of 2 units
(approximately 273,680 acres) would be
designated as Wilderness Study Areas
(WSAs) under section 202 of FLPMA.
These proposed WSAs would be
managed as visual resource management
class I, land tenure zone 1 (retention in
the public domain), exclusion zones for
all rights-of-way, and would include
restrictions on minerals. The remaining
77 units and portions of 2 units
(approximately 1,381,610 acres) would
be managed as visual resource
management class II, land tenure zone 1
(retention in the public domain),
exclusion zones for major rights-of-way,
and include some restrictions on
minerals. OHV use would be closed in
all 106 units that the BLM has found to
possess wilderness characteristics
(approximately 1,654,103 acres) and in
all WSAs. Cross-country motorized
travel and motorized travel on existing
internal primitive routes in these areas
would be prohibited.
Under Alternative B, grazing
allocations would not be changed.
However, where existing livestock
grazing is found to be a significant
causal factor for non-attainment of
rangeland health standards, the BLM
would remove grazing, either at the
allotment or pasture scale, for the
duration of the plan amendment.
Should the BLM receive a voluntary
permit relinquishment for any lands
with wilderness characteristics, WSAs,
Areas of Critical Environmental
Concern, Research Natural Areas, or
designated critical habitat for Federally
listed species, the BLM would remove
or reduce grazing in the area for the life
of the plan amendment.
Alternatives C, D, and E would
establish new management goals and
additional protective management for
wilderness characteristics. The units
emphasized for protection of wilderness
PO 00000
Frm 00134
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48683
characteristics would be managed as
visual resource management class II,
land tenure zone 1 (retention in the
public domain), exclusion zones for
major rights-of-way, and include
restrictions on minerals. The specific
units emphasized for protection of
wilderness characteristics would vary
across these alternatives. In addition, a
100 to 300-foot setback would be
applied along boundary roads of these
units under Alternatives C, D, and E, to
provide the BLM with additional
management flexibility to address other
resources needs, threats, and multiple
uses adjacent to these areas.
Alternative C would emphasize the
protection of wilderness characteristics
in 26 units and portions of 4 units
(approximately 411,033 acres) that the
BLM found to possess wilderness
characteristics. The BLM would balance
the management of wilderness
characteristics with other resources and
multiple uses in 71 units and portions
of 2 units (approximately 1,161,199
acres) and would emphasize the
management of other resources and
multiple uses over wilderness
characteristics in 5 units and portions of
3 units (approximately 74,529 acres).
Under Alternative C, OHV use
throughout the entire planning area
would be limited to existing routes,
unless currently limited to designated
routes or closed to OHV use. Grazing
allocations would not be changed.
However, the BLM would temporarily
remove grazing, at either the allotment
or pasture scale, when existing livestock
grazing is found to be a significant
causal factor for non-attainment of
rangeland health standards, until such
time as monitoring or a subsequent
assessment indicates that the pasture or
allotment is meeting standards or is
making significant progress towards
meeting standards. Should the BLM
receive a voluntary permit
relinquishment for public lands in a
WSA, it would remove or reduce
grazing in the area for the life of the plan
amendment.
Alternative D would emphasize the
protection of wilderness characteristics
within two units (approximately 4,671
acres) that the BLM found to possess
wilderness characteristics. OHV use in
these 2 units would be limited to
existing routes. Management of
wilderness characteristics would be
balanced with other resources and
multiple uses in 41 units and portions
of 18 units (approximately 1,075,323
acres). The BLM would emphasize the
management of other resources and
multiple uses over wilderness
characteristics in 46 units
(approximately 583,332 acres).
E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM
07JNN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
48684
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 2024 / Notices
Under Alternative D, the area open to
cross-country OHV use would be
reduced to about 70,573 acres of
expressly defined areas. Most of the
livestock grazing management would be
the same as the No Action Alternative.
However, if a rangeland health
assessment and evaluation indicates one
or more standards are not met in an
allotment or pasture due to factors that
are subject to BLM control, then the
authorized officer shall consider taking
action to make progress toward
rangeland health standards and land use
plan objectives, even if livestock grazing
is not determined to be a significant
causal factor for non-attainment of
standard(s). Actions available to the
authorized officer could include, but are
not limited to, changes in livestock
grazing management.
Alternative E was developed with
input from individual members of the
Southeastern Oregon Resource Advisory
Council and would emphasize the
protection of wilderness characteristics
within 26 units (approximately 372,218
acres) that the BLM found to possess
wilderness characteristics. Management
of wilderness characteristics would be
balanced with other resources and
multiple uses in 68 units
(approximately 1,109,160 acres).
Management would emphasize other
resources and multiple uses over
wilderness characteristics in 12 units
(approximately 168,512 acres). OHV and
livestock grazing management
throughout the planning area would be
the same as the No Action Alternative.
The BLM further considered seven
additional alternatives but chose not to
analyze them in detail as explained in
the Draft RMP Amendment and Draft
EIS.
The BLM Oregon/Washington State
Director has identified Alternative C as
the preferred alternative. Alternative C
was found to best meet the State
Director’s planning guidance and,
therefore, selected as the preferred
alternative because it emphasizes a high
level of resource protection in portions
of the planning area while providing for
a sustainable level of multiple uses in
other portions of the planning area. This
alternative balances the need to preserve
or protect specific public lands in their
natural condition with the need to
provide food and habitat for fish,
wildlife, and domestic animals, and
provide for outdoor recreation and
human occupancy and use. Alternative
C also recognizes the Nation’s need for
domestic sources of minerals, food,
timber, and fiber from the public lands.
This balance would be accomplished
within the limits of the ecosystem’s
ability to provide these multiple uses on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:23 Jun 06, 2024
Jkt 262001
a sustainable basis and within the
constraints of applicable laws,
regulations, and policies, including
sections 102(7), 102(8), 102(12), 103(c),
and 103(h) of FLPMA.
Schedule for the Decision-Making
Process
The BLM will be holding three public
meetings on the Draft RMP Amendment
and Draft EIS in the following locations:
One in-person meeting in Lakeview,
Oregon, and two virtual meetings. The
specific date(s) and location(s) of these
meetings will be announced at least 15
days in advance through public notices,
media releases, social media, and/or
mailings.
The BLM will continue to consult
with Indian Tribal Nations on a
government-to-government basis in
accordance with Executive Order 13175,
BLM Manual 1780, and other
Departmental policies. Tribal concerns,
including impacts on Indian trust assets
and potential impacts to cultural
resources, will be given due
consideration.
While the BLM has identified
Alternative C as the preferred
alternative, this does not represent the
final agency decision. For this reason,
the BLM encourages reviewers to
provide substantive comments on all
alternatives. Substantive comments are
those that raise issues or concerns that
may need to be addressed, challenge the
accuracy of information presented, or
challenge the adequacy of the analysis,
along with a supporting rationale. You
may submit written comments to the
BLM through any of the methods
identified in the ADDRESSES section
above. All comments must be received
by the end of the comment period or 15
days after the last public meeting,
whichever is later. Whenever possible,
reviewers should include a reference to
either the page or section in the
document to which the comment
applies. Following the comment period,
the BLM will develop and publish the
Proposed RMP Amendment and Final
EIS which may reflect changes or
adjustments based on the substantive
comments received.
Comments submitted must include
the commenter’s name and street
address. Before including your address,
phone number, email address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware 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 your personal identifying
information from public review, we
PO 00000
Frm 00135
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
After the BLM publishes the Proposed
RMP Amendment and Final EIS, it will
provide additional opportunities for
public participation consistent with the
NEPA and land use planning processes,
including a 30-day public protest period
and a 60-day Governor’s consistency
review.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10,
43 CFR 1610.2)
Barry R. Bushue,
State Director, Oregon/Washington.
[FR Doc. 2024–12463 Filed 6–6–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331–24–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[NPS–NCR–WHHO–WHHOA1–37974;
PPNCWHHOA1; PPMPSPD1Z.YM0000]
Committee for the Preservation of the
White House; Notice of Public Meeting
National Park Service, Interior.
Meeting notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
In accordance with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act of
1972, as amended, the National Park
Service (NPS) is hereby giving notice
that the Committee for the Preservation
of the White House (Committee) will
meet as indicated below.
DATES: The meeting will take place on
Wednesday, June 26, 2024. The meeting
will begin at 2:00 p.m. until 4:00 p.m.
(Eastern).
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the White House, 1600 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20500.
The meeting will be open to the public,
but subject to security clearance
requirements.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Comments may be provided to: John
Stanwich, Executive Secretary,
Committee for the Preservation of the
White House, 1849 C Street NW, Room
#1426, Washington, DC 20240, by
telephone (202) 219–0322, or by email
ncr_whho_superintendent@nps.gov.
Individuals in the United States who are
deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have
a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY,
TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Committee was established in
E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM
07JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 111 (Friday, June 7, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48682-48684]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-12463]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[BLM_OR_FRN_MO4500179562]
Notice of Availability of the Draft Resource Management Plan
Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement for the Lakeview Field
Office, Lakeview District, Oregon
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended (NEPA), and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act
of 1976, as amended (FLPMA), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has
prepared a Draft Resource Management Plan (RMP) Amendment and Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Lakeview RMP and by this
notice is providing information announcing the opening of the comment
period on the Draft RMP Amendment and Draft EIS.
DATES: This notice announces the opening of a 90-day comment period for
the Draft RMP Amendment and Draft EIS beginning with the date following
the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) publication of its Notice
of Availability (NOA) in the Federal Register.
To afford the BLM the opportunity to consider comments in the
forthcoming Proposed RMP Amendment and Final EIS, please ensure the BLM
receives your comments prior to the close of the 90-day comment period
or 15 days after the last public meeting, whichever is later.
ADDRESSES: The Draft RMP Amendment and Draft EIS is available for
review on the BLM ePlanning project website at https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/114300/510.
Written comments related to the Lakeview Draft RMP Amendment and
Draft EIS may be submitted by any of the following methods:
website: https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/114300/510.
Email: [email protected].
Mail: Lakeview District, BLM, 1301 South G Street,
Lakeview, OR 97630.
[[Page 48683]]
Documents pertinent to this proposal may be examined online at
https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/114300/510 and at the
Lakeview District Office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Collins, Planning and
Environmental Coordinator, 541-947-2177; 1301 South G Street, Lakeview,
OR 97630; [email protected]. Individuals in the United States
who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability
may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications
relay services for contacting Mr. Collins. Individuals outside the
United States should use the relay services offered within their
country to make international calls to the point-of-contact in the
United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document provides notice that the BLM
Oregon/Washington State Director has prepared a Draft RMP Amendment and
Draft EIS. The Draft RMP Amendment and Draft EIS analyzes alternatives
that would change the existing 2003 Lakeview RMP and Record of Decision
(ROD), as amended by the 2015 Oregon Greater Sage-Grouse Approved RMP
Amendment and ROD.
The planning area is located in Lake and Harney counties, Oregon,
and encompasses approximately 3.2 million acres of public land.
Purpose and Need
The purpose and need for this Draft RMP Amendment and Draft EIS is
to comply with the provisions of a 2010 settlement agreement, which
required the BLM to prepare an RMP Amendment that addresses a range of
alternatives for managing lands with wilderness characteristics, off
highway vehicle (OHV) use, and livestock grazing use within the
Lakeview planning area. The BLM has determined that 106 inventory units
contain wilderness characteristics (approximately 1,654,103 acres).
Alternatives Including the Preferred Alternative
The BLM has analyzed six alternatives in detail, including the No
Action Alternative. The No Action Alternative represents the
continuation of existing management direction under the 2003 Lakeview
RMP/ROD (as amended), including the existing goals and management
direction for OHV and livestock grazing use. In addition, the interim
management provisions outlined in the 2010 Settlement Agreement would
continue to prevent management actions in an inventory unit determined
by the BLM to possess wilderness characteristics that would be deemed
by the BLM to diminish the size or cause the entire BLM inventory unit
to no longer meet the criteria for wilderness characteristics.
Alternative A would continue the BLM's management direction under
the 2003 Lakeview RMP/ROD (as amended), including the existing goals
and management direction for OHV and livestock grazing use. Management
would emphasize resources and multiple uses other than wilderness
characteristics. None of the 106 units that the BLM found to possess
wilderness characteristics would receive additional protections.
Alternative B would emphasize the protection of wilderness
characteristics within all 106 units. Under Alternative B, 34 units and
portions of 2 units (approximately 273,680 acres) would be designated
as Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) under section 202 of FLPMA. These
proposed WSAs would be managed as visual resource management class I,
land tenure zone 1 (retention in the public domain), exclusion zones
for all rights-of-way, and would include restrictions on minerals. The
remaining 77 units and portions of 2 units (approximately 1,381,610
acres) would be managed as visual resource management class II, land
tenure zone 1 (retention in the public domain), exclusion zones for
major rights-of-way, and include some restrictions on minerals. OHV use
would be closed in all 106 units that the BLM has found to possess
wilderness characteristics (approximately 1,654,103 acres) and in all
WSAs. Cross-country motorized travel and motorized travel on existing
internal primitive routes in these areas would be prohibited.
Under Alternative B, grazing allocations would not be changed.
However, where existing livestock grazing is found to be a significant
causal factor for non-attainment of rangeland health standards, the BLM
would remove grazing, either at the allotment or pasture scale, for the
duration of the plan amendment. Should the BLM receive a voluntary
permit relinquishment for any lands with wilderness characteristics,
WSAs, Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, Research Natural Areas,
or designated critical habitat for Federally listed species, the BLM
would remove or reduce grazing in the area for the life of the plan
amendment.
Alternatives C, D, and E would establish new management goals and
additional protective management for wilderness characteristics. The
units emphasized for protection of wilderness characteristics would be
managed as visual resource management class II, land tenure zone 1
(retention in the public domain), exclusion zones for major rights-of-
way, and include restrictions on minerals. The specific units
emphasized for protection of wilderness characteristics would vary
across these alternatives. In addition, a 100 to 300-foot setback would
be applied along boundary roads of these units under Alternatives C, D,
and E, to provide the BLM with additional management flexibility to
address other resources needs, threats, and multiple uses adjacent to
these areas.
Alternative C would emphasize the protection of wilderness
characteristics in 26 units and portions of 4 units (approximately
411,033 acres) that the BLM found to possess wilderness
characteristics. The BLM would balance the management of wilderness
characteristics with other resources and multiple uses in 71 units and
portions of 2 units (approximately 1,161,199 acres) and would emphasize
the management of other resources and multiple uses over wilderness
characteristics in 5 units and portions of 3 units (approximately
74,529 acres).
Under Alternative C, OHV use throughout the entire planning area
would be limited to existing routes, unless currently limited to
designated routes or closed to OHV use. Grazing allocations would not
be changed. However, the BLM would temporarily remove grazing, at
either the allotment or pasture scale, when existing livestock grazing
is found to be a significant causal factor for non-attainment of
rangeland health standards, until such time as monitoring or a
subsequent assessment indicates that the pasture or allotment is
meeting standards or is making significant progress towards meeting
standards. Should the BLM receive a voluntary permit relinquishment for
public lands in a WSA, it would remove or reduce grazing in the area
for the life of the plan amendment.
Alternative D would emphasize the protection of wilderness
characteristics within two units (approximately 4,671 acres) that the
BLM found to possess wilderness characteristics. OHV use in these 2
units would be limited to existing routes. Management of wilderness
characteristics would be balanced with other resources and multiple
uses in 41 units and portions of 18 units (approximately 1,075,323
acres). The BLM would emphasize the management of other resources and
multiple uses over wilderness characteristics in 46 units
(approximately 583,332 acres).
[[Page 48684]]
Under Alternative D, the area open to cross-country OHV use would
be reduced to about 70,573 acres of expressly defined areas. Most of
the livestock grazing management would be the same as the No Action
Alternative. However, if a rangeland health assessment and evaluation
indicates one or more standards are not met in an allotment or pasture
due to factors that are subject to BLM control, then the authorized
officer shall consider taking action to make progress toward rangeland
health standards and land use plan objectives, even if livestock
grazing is not determined to be a significant causal factor for non-
attainment of standard(s). Actions available to the authorized officer
could include, but are not limited to, changes in livestock grazing
management.
Alternative E was developed with input from individual members of
the Southeastern Oregon Resource Advisory Council and would emphasize
the protection of wilderness characteristics within 26 units
(approximately 372,218 acres) that the BLM found to possess wilderness
characteristics. Management of wilderness characteristics would be
balanced with other resources and multiple uses in 68 units
(approximately 1,109,160 acres). Management would emphasize other
resources and multiple uses over wilderness characteristics in 12 units
(approximately 168,512 acres). OHV and livestock grazing management
throughout the planning area would be the same as the No Action
Alternative.
The BLM further considered seven additional alternatives but chose
not to analyze them in detail as explained in the Draft RMP Amendment
and Draft EIS.
The BLM Oregon/Washington State Director has identified Alternative
C as the preferred alternative. Alternative C was found to best meet
the State Director's planning guidance and, therefore, selected as the
preferred alternative because it emphasizes a high level of resource
protection in portions of the planning area while providing for a
sustainable level of multiple uses in other portions of the planning
area. This alternative balances the need to preserve or protect
specific public lands in their natural condition with the need to
provide food and habitat for fish, wildlife, and domestic animals, and
provide for outdoor recreation and human occupancy and use. Alternative
C also recognizes the Nation's need for domestic sources of minerals,
food, timber, and fiber from the public lands. This balance would be
accomplished within the limits of the ecosystem's ability to provide
these multiple uses on a sustainable basis and within the constraints
of applicable laws, regulations, and policies, including sections
102(7), 102(8), 102(12), 103(c), and 103(h) of FLPMA.
Schedule for the Decision-Making Process
The BLM will be holding three public meetings on the Draft RMP
Amendment and Draft EIS in the following locations: One in-person
meeting in Lakeview, Oregon, and two virtual meetings. The specific
date(s) and location(s) of these meetings will be announced at least 15
days in advance through public notices, media releases, social media,
and/or mailings.
The BLM will continue to consult with Indian Tribal Nations on a
government-to-government basis in accordance with Executive Order
13175, BLM Manual 1780, and other Departmental policies. Tribal
concerns, including impacts on Indian trust assets and potential
impacts to cultural resources, will be given due consideration.
While the BLM has identified Alternative C as the preferred
alternative, this does not represent the final agency decision. For
this reason, the BLM encourages reviewers to provide substantive
comments on all alternatives. Substantive comments are those that raise
issues or concerns that may need to be addressed, challenge the
accuracy of information presented, or challenge the adequacy of the
analysis, along with a supporting rationale. You may submit written
comments to the BLM through any of the methods identified in the
ADDRESSES section above. All comments must be received by the end of
the comment period or 15 days after the last public meeting, whichever
is later. Whenever possible, reviewers should include a reference to
either the page or section in the document to which the comment
applies. Following the comment period, the BLM will develop and publish
the Proposed RMP Amendment and Final EIS which may reflect changes or
adjustments based on the substantive comments received.
Comments submitted must include the commenter's name and street
address. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware 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 your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
After the BLM publishes the Proposed RMP Amendment and Final EIS,
it will provide additional opportunities for public participation
consistent with the NEPA and land use planning processes, including a
30-day public protest period and a 60-day Governor's consistency
review.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10, 43 CFR 1610.2)
Barry R. Bushue,
State Director, Oregon/Washington.
[FR Doc. 2024-12463 Filed 6-6-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331-24-P
