DOCSLIB.ORG

Grazing Permit Renewals for the Wilson Creek Allotment DOI-BLM

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Grazing Permit Renewals for the Wilson Creek Allotment DOI-BLM BLM U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Preliminary Environmental Assessment Grazing Permit Renewals for the Wilson Creek Allotment DOI-BLM-NV-L020-2016-0001-EA July 2018 PREPARING OFFICE Bristlecone Field Office U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Ely District Office, Nevada Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 Identifying Information .............................................................................................................. 2 Title, Environment Assessment Number and type of Project ........................................... 2 Location of Proposed Action ............................................................................................ 2 Name and Location of Preparing Office ........................................................................... 2 Background Information ............................................................................................................ 4 Grazing Permit History .................................................................................................... 4 BLM Interdisciplinary Review and Assessment of Rangeland Health ............................. 5 Standards for Rangeland Health Achievement ............................................................... 5 Guideline Conformance for the Wilson Creek Allotment .............................................. 5 Purpose and Need for Action ..................................................................................................... 5 Decision to be Made ......................................................................................................... 6 BLM Land Use Plan(s) ..................................................................................................... 6 Relationship to Statues, Regulations or Other Plans ......................................................... 7 Public Involvement, and Issues .................................................................................................. 8 Proposed Action and Alternatives ..................................................................................... 9 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 9 Actions Common to All Action Alternatives ............................................................................. 9 Grazing Permit Renewals .................................................................................................. 9 Atlanta and Muleshoe Use Areas ...................................................................................... 9 Fairview Use Area and Pony Seeding Pasture ................................................................ 10 Thorley Use Area ............................................................................................................ 10 Cultural Design Features ................................................................................................. 10 Minimum Required Decision Guide (MRDG) ............................................................... 10 Range Improvements ...................................................................................................... 10 Vegetation Treatments .................................................................................................... 11 Wildlife Required Design Features ................................................................................. 11 Coordinated Resource Management Plan (CRMP) ........................................................ 11 Alternative A –Agency Alternative .......................................................................................... 11 Dry Lake Valley Use Area .............................................................................................. 12 Thorley Use Area ............................................................................................................ 18 Deadman Use Area (White River) .................................................................................. 19 South Lake Valley Use Area (includes area referred to as Pioche Bench) ..................... 20 Patterson Wash Seedings Use Area ................................................................................ 23 Brown Spring Use Area .................................................................................................. 27 Summer Native Use Area................................................................................................ 28 Meadow Valley Seedings Use Area ................................................................................ 30 Hamblin Valley Use Area ............................................................................................... 34 Miller Use Area (including the Delmue Burn)................................................................ 35 U-4 Use Area .................................................................................................................. 36 Alternative B –Cattle Operator’s Alternative ........................................................................... 39 Dry Lake Valley Use Area .............................................................................................. 40 Thorley Use Area ............................................................................................................ 42 Summer Native Use Area................................................................................................ 44 Hamblin Valley Use Area ............................................................................................... 45 Alternative C –Sheep Operator’s Alternative ........................................................................... 46 Dry Lake Valley Use Area .............................................................................................. 47 Deadman Use Area (White River) .................................................................................. 48 South Lake Valley Use Area (Pastures 1 and 2) ............................................................. 49 Alternative D –No Action Alternative...................................................................................... 50 Alternatives Considered but Not Analyzed in Detail ............................................................... 58 No Grazing Alternative ................................................................................................... 58 Blue Diamond Oil Corporation’s Alternative ................................................................. 58 No Range Improvements Alternative .............................................................................. 58 50/50 Split for Dry Lake Valley Use Area ...................................................................... 59 Affected Environment and Environmental Effects ........................................................ 60 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 60 Resources Considered .............................................................................................................. 61 General Setting ......................................................................................................................... 65 Resources .................................................................................................................................. 65 Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................... 65 Socioeconomic Values .................................................................................................... 66 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics (LWC) ............................................................... 69 Soil Resources ................................................................................................................. 73 Vegetation Resources/ Rangeland Health ....................................................................... 74 Non-Native Invasive and Noxious Species ..................................................................... 89 Wetlands/Riparian Zones ................................................................................................ 90 Livestock Grazing ........................................................................................................... 91 Fish and Wildlife, Special Status Species ..................................................................... 104 Wild Horses................................................................................................................... 113 Visual Resources ........................................................................................................... 116 Fire/Fuels ...................................................................................................................... 119 Cumulative Effects .......................................................................................................... 121 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 121 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Crd Title P1.Ai
    ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS This chapter describes the potential environmental impacts of constructing and operating a railroad along the Caliente rail alignment or the Mina rail alignment. An impact would be any change, positive or negative, from the existing (baseline) conditions described in Chapter 3 for each environmental resource area. The No-Action Alternative represents a continuation of baseline conditions. Glossary terms are shown in bold italics. DOE/EIS-0369D 4-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 4.1 Introduction This chapter begins with a description of impacts associated with the No-Action Alternative (Section 4.1.1). As Proposed Action: To determine a described in Section 2.3, under the No-Action Alternative, rail alignment within a rail corridor in which to construct and operate a the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) railroad to transport spent nuclear would not select a rail alignment or build a railroad within fuel, high-level radioactive waste, the Caliente rail corridor or the Mina rail corridor and and other materials from an existing would relinquish public lands withdrawn or segregated from railroad in Nevada to a repository at surface and mineral entry. The description of impacts Yucca Mountain, Nye County, associated with the No-Action Alternative applies to both Nevada. The Proposed Action rail corridors and all rail line alternative segments and includes the construction of railroad common segments. Section 4.1.2 introduces descriptions of construction and operations support impacts associated with the Proposed Action. facilities. This Rail Alignment EIS analyzes two Sections 4.2 and 4.3 describe potential impacts associated alternatives that would implement the with construction and operation of the proposed railroad Proposed Action: the Caliente rail along the Caliente rail alignment and the Mina rail alignment alignment and the Mina rail under the Proposed Action, including a Shared-Use Option.
    [Show full text]
  • Dry Lake Valley North SEZ Analysis
    1 11.4 DRY LAKE VALLEY NORTH 2 3 4 11.4.1 Background and Summary of Impacts 5 6 7 11.4.1.1 General Information 8 9 The proposed Dry Lake Valley North SEZ is located in Lincoln County in southeastern 10 Nevada (Figure 11.4.1.1-1). The SEZ has a total area of 76,874 acres (311 km2). In 2008, the 11 county population was 4,643, while adjacent Clark County to the south had a population 12 of 1,879,093. The closest population centers to the SEZ are Pioche, located about 15 mi (24 km) 13 to the east, and Caliente, located about 15 mi (24 km) to the southeast; both communities have 14 populations of about 1,000. The smaller communities of Caselton and Prince are located about 15 13 mi (21 km) to the east of the SEZ. Las Vegas is located about 110 mi (180 km) to the south. 16 17 The nearest major road to the Dry Lake Valley North SEZ is State Route 318, which is 18 about 7 mi (11 km) to the west of the SEZ, while U.S. 93 is about 8 mi (13 km) to the south. 19 Access to the interior of the SEZ is by dirt roads. The nearest railroad access is approximately 20 25 mi (40 km) away, while nearby airports include Lincoln County Airport in Panaca and Alamo 21 Landing Field in Alamo, which are located about 13 mi (21 km) south–southeast of and 35 mi 22 (56 km) southwest of the SEZ, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Stratigraphy and Structure of the Seaman Range and Fox Mountain, Lincoln and Nye Counties, Nevada
    Stratigraphy and Structure of the Seaman Range and Fox Mountain, Lincoln and Nye Counties, Nevada U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1988-B I 1 r^Hr-~"r-^S »:-«>'°-;>-.'; '£ '. -"* °-"^^io-'oO;ol!i-..e>L ^? :^~ty-":- o\: s--b>^.'d- .? " ? o..bTvo-r» ?:.-!:.»:-. "o'.-o'-o .- *^-o?.°:.--o : : ° o£\*>: ^-°:* '.« - "o-o- .-o - ^-.o.*'. ^» ' - 1 .". '. O- ' "" "- "* -" no: ^--'*^-o.yvo:»-c)^ - *>- : p.-by :o.;--p-/.-'o."-',c>-( 0 = ?.o'VO -V "±« -* «?'.<?o-oi ^ .. «- .*».-:»: -* ^^»-^ Chapter B Stratigraphy and Structure of the Seaman Range and Fox Mountain, Lincoln and Nye Counties, Nevada By DONLON O. HURTUBISE and EDWARD A. DU BRAY A multidisciplinary approach to research studies of sedimentary rocks and their constituents and the evolution of sedimentary basins, both ancient and modern U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1988 EVOLUTION OF SEDIMENTARY BASINS EASTERN GREAT BASIN HARRY E. COOK AND CHRISTOPHER J. POTTER, Project Coordinators U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1992 For sale by Book and Open-File Report Sales U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center, Box 25286 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Hurtubise, D.O. Stratigraphy and structure of the Seaman Range and Fox Mountain, Lincoln and Nye Counties, Nevada / by Donlon O. Hurtubise and Edward A. du Bray, p. cm. (Evolution of sedimentary basins Eastern Great Basin ; ch. B) (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1988-B) Includes bibliographical references.
    [Show full text]
  • Figure 3-72. Groundwater Usage in Nevada in 2000. (Source: DIRS 175964-Lopes and Evetts 2004, P
    AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT – CALIENTE RAIL ALIGNMENT Figure 3-72. Groundwater usage in Nevada in 2000. (Source: DIRS 175964-Lopes and Evetts 2004, p. 7.) There are a number of published estimates of perennial yield for many of the hydrographic areas in Nevada, and those estimates often differ by large amounts. The perennial-yield values listed in Table 3-35 predominantly come from a single source, the Nevada Division of Water Planning (DIRS 103406-Nevada Division of Water Planning 1992, for Hydrographic Regions 10, 13, and 14); therefore, the table does not show a range of values for each hydrographic area. In the Yucca Mountain area, the Nevada Division of Water Planning identifies a combined perennial yield for hydrographic areas 225 through 230. DOE obtained perennial yields from Data Assessment & Water Rights/Resource Analysis of: Hydrographic Region #14 Death Valley Basin (DIRS 147766-Thiel 1999, pp. 6 to 12) to provide estimates for hydrographic areas the Caliente rail alignment would cross: 227A, 228, and 229. That 1999 document presents perennial-yield estimates from several sources. Table 3-35 lists the lowest (that is, the most conservative) values cited in that document, which is consistent with the approach DOE used in the Yucca Mountain FEIS (DIRS 155970-DOE 2002, p. 3-136). DOE/EIS-0369 3-173 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT – CALIENTE RAIL ALIGNMENT Table 3-35 also summarizes existing annual committed groundwater resources for each hydrographic area along the Caliente rail alignment. However, all committed groundwater resources within a hydrographic area might not be in use at the same time. Table 3-35 also includes information on pending annual duties within each of these hydrographic areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Structure and Devonian Stratigraphy of the Timpahute Range, Nevada
    STRUCTURE AND DEVONIAN STRATIGRAPHY OF THE TIMPAHUTE RANGE, NEVADA Volume I by Alan K. Chamberlain © Copyright, 1999 A thesis submitted to the Faculty and Board of Trustees of the Colorado School of Mines in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Geology). Golden, Colorado Date____________ Signed:__________________________ Alan K. Chamberlain Approved:__________________________ Dr. John E. Warme Professor and Thesis Advisor Golden, Colorado Date____________ ____________________________________ Dr. Roger Slatt, Professor and Head, Department of Geology and Geological Engineering ii ABSTRACT Sequences of Devonian rocks are advantageously exposed along a unique 40- mile-long east-west traverse in the greater Timpahute Range, southeastern Nevada. Study of these rocks casts light upon Devonian paleogeography, the Devonian Antler orogeny, an Upper Devonian cosmolite impact basin, this part of the Cretaceous Sevier fold-and- thrust belt, and the effects of Cenozoic extension. The greater Timpahute Range lies within the Timpahute Range 30' X 60' quadrangle and includes the region from Tempiute Mountain on the west to the Pahroc Range on the east. Concealed major north-south trending normal faults caused by Cenozoic extension have been proposed to disrupt the Paleozoic rocks of the region. However, a structural interpretation using a new geologic map of the quadrangle requires no major north-south striking normal faults. Furthermore, the greater Timpahute Range is interpreted as a salient of stacked thrust sheets within the Sevier fold-and-thrust belt. The range is bounded on the north and south by thrust tear faults that may be related to basement fractures caused by the cosmolite impact. Evidence for the Late Devonian cosmolite impact includes shocked quartz, iridium anomalies, ejecta spherules, and disturbed shallowing-upward sequences exhibiting intrasequence folding, brecciation, carbonate liquefaction, and graded bedding.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Nevada Reno Delineation of \ Subsurface Flow in The
    University of Nevada Reno Delineation of Subsurface Flow in the Upper Meadow Valley Wash Area \ Southeastern Nevada A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Hydrology and Hydrogeology by David H. Emme <'' December 1986 UNIVERSITY Of NEVADA LIBRARY i MINES LIBRARY Ttizsi's A I 5 The thesis of David. H. Emme is approved: f University of Nevada Reno December 1986 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Mike Dettinger and Jim Thomas of the U-S-_ Geological Survey for suggesting this project and providing critical comments through its course. Committee members Mike Campana, Roger Jacobson and Ed Wagner deserve thanks for serving on my graduate committee. Particular gratitude is extended to Mike ^ Campana for serving as committee chairman and providing continuous support and encouragement through a frustrating experience. Excellent critical review by Roger Jacobson is also appreciated, although receiving this review prior to my thesis defense would have been appreciated even more. Finally, thanks go out to friends who remained friends and to my parents for providing support for too many years. ABSTRACT The study area is located within the Great Basin carbonate rock province, which contains regionally extensive aquifer systems. Panaca Spring discharges approximately 8000 acre-feet/year from carbonate rocks in the study area. Results of simple mixing calculations, using chloride concentration and S D to weight recharge estimates, suggest that sources of regional flow lie to the north in Lake Valley and Patterson Wash. Three scenarios were proposed to describe groundwater flow conditions in Lake Valley and Patterson Wash: 1) a well mixed, single layer system; 2) a two layer, local and regional system with upward vertical leakage; and 3) a two layer system with downward vertical leakage.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1464 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1132
    § 1132 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 1464 Department and agency having jurisdiction of, and reports submitted to Congress regard- thereover immediately before its inclusion in ing pending additions, eliminations, or modi- the National Wilderness Preservation System fications. Maps, legal descriptions, and regula- unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress. tions pertaining to wilderness areas within No appropriation shall be available for the pay- their respective jurisdictions also shall be ment of expenses or salaries for the administra- available to the public in the offices of re- tion of the National Wilderness Preservation gional foresters, national forest supervisors, System as a separate unit nor shall any appro- priations be available for additional personnel and forest rangers. stated as being required solely for the purpose of managing or administering areas solely because (b) Review by Secretary of Agriculture of classi- they are included within the National Wilder- fications as primitive areas; Presidential rec- ness Preservation System. ommendations to Congress; approval of Con- (c) ‘‘Wilderness’’ defined gress; size of primitive areas; Gore Range-Ea- A wilderness, in contrast with those areas gles Nest Primitive Area, Colorado where man and his own works dominate the The Secretary of Agriculture shall, within ten landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where years after September 3, 1964, review, as to its the earth and its community of life are un- suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as trammeled by man, where man himself is a visi- wilderness, each area in the national forests tor who does not remain. An area of wilderness classified on September 3, 1964 by the Secretary is further defined to mean in this chapter an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its of Agriculture or the Chief of the Forest Service primeval character and influence, without per- as ‘‘primitive’’ and report his findings to the manent improvements or human habitation, President.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Ely District
    Ely Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement Ely Field Office / Nevada Ely Field Office Appendices November 2007 COOPERATING AGENCIES: Great Basin National Park Lincoln County Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest Nye County Nellis Air Force Base White Pine County Nevada Department of Wildlife Duckwater Shoshone Tribe Nevada Division of Minerals Ely Shoshone Tribe Nevada Division of Transportation 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 of present and future generations. BLM/EL/PL-07/09+1793 DOI No. FES 07-40 Cover Photo: Cottonwood Canyon – Fortification Range Wilderness, Lincoln County, Nevada. Ely BLM photo. May, 2002. LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A - PHASES OF THE WATERSHED ANALYSIS PROCESS AND THE GRAZING ALLOTMENT EVALUATION PROCESS APPENDIX B - RESOURCE ADVISORY COUNCIL STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES APPENDIX C - STATE AND TRANSITION MODELS, LANDFIRE AND FIRE REGIME CONDITION CLASS APPENDIX D - AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN APPENDIX E - SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES APPENDIX F - CONSOLIDATED BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Section 1 – Resource Program Best Management Practices Section 2 – Fluid Minerals Lease Notices and Stipulations Section 3 – BLM Wind Energy Development Program Policies and Best Management Practices APPENDIX G - TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES AND PROGRAMMATIC EMERGENCY STABILIZATION AND REHABILITATION PLAN APPENDIX H - LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS FOR POTENTIAL LAND DISPOSAL APPENDIX I - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES ON THE DRAFT RMP/EIS APPENDIX A PHASES OF THE WATERSHED ANALYSIS PROCESS AND THE GRAZING ALLOTMENT EVALUATION PROCESS APPENDIX A APPENDIX A PHASES OF THE WATERSHED ANALYSIS PROCESSES AND THE GRAZING ALLOTMENT EVALUATION PROCESS The watershed analysis process described in the BLM Handbook, H-4180-1 Rangeland Health Standards is being used to analyze 61 watersheds and associated grazing allotments in the planning area.
    [Show full text]
  • Mineral Resources of the Clover Mountains Wilderness Study Area, Lincoln County, Nevada
    Mineral Resources of the Clover Mountains Wilderness Study Area, Lincoln County, Nevada U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1729-D t **. i &. i-wj'-sA" ..,. r .»\ '* ~ "'" ^^-J5?#^ Chapter D Mineral Resources of the Clover Mountains Wilderness Study Area, Lincoln County, Nevada By BARRY MORING, H. RICHARD BLANK, Jr., and JAMES D. HOFFMAN U.S. Geological Survey EDWARD L McHUGH U.S. Bureau of Mines U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1729 MINERAL RESOURCES OF WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS: SOUTHEASTERN NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL MODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Any use of trade names and trademarks in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1988 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center, Box 25425 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Mineral resources of the Clover Mountains Wilderness Study Area, Lincoln County, Nevada. (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1729-D) Bibliography: p. 1. Mines and mineral resources Nevada Clover Mountains Wilderness. 2. Clover Mountains Wilderness (Nev.) I. Moring, Barry, C. II. Series. QE75.B9 no. 1729-D 557.3 s 88-600195 [TN24.N3] [553'.09793'14] STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Study Area The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Public Law 94-579, October 21, 1976) requires the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Mines to conduct mineral surveys on certain areas to determine the mineral values, if any, that may be present.
    [Show full text]
  • A Conceptual Model of Groundwater Flow in Spring Valley, NV, and Snake Valley, NV-UT
    Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 2008-02-07 A Conceptual Model OF Groundwater Flow in Spring Valley, NV, AND Snake Valley, NV-UT Jeremy Micheal Gillespie Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Geology Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Gillespie, Jeremy Micheal, "A Conceptual Model OF Groundwater Flow in Spring Valley, NV, AND Snake Valley, NV-UT" (2008). Theses and Dissertations. 1328. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/1328 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF GROUNDWATER FLOW IN SPRING VALLEY, NV, AND SNAKE VALLEY, NV-UT by Jeremy M. Gillespie A thesis submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Department of Geological Sciences Brigham Young University April 2008 Copyright © 2008 Jeremy M. Gillespie All Right Reserved BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY GRADUATE COMMITTEE APPROVAL of a thesis submitted by Jeremy M. Gillespie This thesis has been read by each member of the following graduate committee and by majority vote has been found to be satisfactory. Date Stephen T. Nelson, Chair Date Alan L. Mayo Date Barry R. Bickmore BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY As chair of the candidate’s graduate committee, I have read the thesis of Jeremy M. Gillespie in its final form and have found that (1) its format, citations, and bibliographical style are consistent and acceptable and fulfill university and department style requirements; (2) its illustrative materials including figures, tables, and charts are in place; and (3) the final manuscript is satisfactory to the graduate committee and is ready for submission to the university library.
    [Show full text]
  • Ely District Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan
    Ely District Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan August 2008 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 of present and future generations. BLM/NV/EL/PL-GI08/25+1793 Cover Photo: Cottonwood Canyon – Fortification Range Wilderness, Lincoln County, Nevada. Ely BLM photo. May, 2002. ELY DISTRICT RECORD OF DECISION AUGUST 2008 Ely District RMP Record of Decision CONTENTS INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................1 DECISION ............................................................................................................................3 Appeal Procedures for Implementation Decisions ........................................................3 PROPOSED PLAN AND ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................4 Alternatives Analyzed in Detail......................................................................................4 Environmentally Preferable Alternative .........................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Lincoln County Public Lands Policy Plan
    The Lincoln County Public Lands Policy Plan 2010 Amended 2015 2010 Lincoln County Public Lands Policy Plan; as amended 2015 Table of Contents Page I. PLAN BACKGROUND…………………………………………………………...... 4 Location………………………………………………………………………… 4 II. PLAN PURPOSE………………………………………………………………….. 8 III. PROCESS………………………………………………………………………… 10 IV. ENVIRONMENT………………………………………………………………… 11 Climate……….……………………………………………………………....... 11 Geologic and Geographic Features…..……………………………........ 11 Hydrology and Groundwater Resources……………………………… 12 Vegetation…………………………………………………………………..... 14 Land Uses........................................................................................ 17 Transportation System.................................................................... 17 Agricultural and Natural Resources................................................. 17 Wildlife………………………………………………………………………..... 18 V. CULTURE AND HISTORY……………………………………………………..... 19 Prehistoric Settlement..................................................................... 19 Historic Settlement.......................................................................... 19 Contemporary Settlement............................................................... 20 Recreation…………………………………………………………………..... 21 Fiscal and Economic Conditions…………………..……………………... 24 VI. POLICIES………………………………………………………………………..... 25 1. Plan Implementation, Agency Coordination and Local Voice… 25 2. Management of Public Lands………………..……………………….. 28 3. Federal Land Transactions...………………………………………….. 29 4. Agriculture and Livestock
    [Show full text]