DOCSLIB.ORG

Northwest Colorado Greater Sage-Grouse Proposed LUPA/Final EIS 5-I Table of Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Northwest Colorado Greater Sage-Grouse Proposed LUPA/Final EIS 5-I Table of Contents Chapter 5 Cumulative Effects TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page 5. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS .................................................................................................. 5-1 5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Cumulative Analysis Methodology ............................................................................................ 5-1 5.2.1 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions ................................ 5-3 5.3 Fish and Wildlife .......................................................................................................................... 5-12 5.4 Special Status Species – Greater Sage-Grouse .................................................................... 5-12 5.4.1 Methods ......................................................................................................................... 5-14 5.4.2 Assumptions .................................................................................................................. 5-17 5.4.3 Existing Conditions in WAFWA MZ II/VII and the Northwest Colorado Sub-region Planning Area ........................................................................ 5-18 GRSG Habitat and Populations ......................................................................... 5-18 Planning Area Habitat Conditions .................................................................... 5-19 Population Trends in Management Zone II/VII ............................................. 5-19 5.4.4 Regional Efforts to Manage Threats to GRSG ...................................................... 5-20 Other BLM and Forest Service Planning Efforts ........................................... 5-20 Colorado Statewide Efforts ............................................................................... 5-20 Idaho Statewide Efforts ....................................................................................... 5-21 Montana Statewide Efforts ................................................................................. 5-22 Utah Statewide Efforts ........................................................................................ 5-23 Wyoming Statewide Efforts ............................................................................... 5-24 Natural Resource Conservation Service Sage-Grouse Initiative .............. 5-26 Other Regional Efforts ........................................................................................ 5-26 5.4.5 Relevant Cumulative Actions .................................................................................... 5-28 5.4.6 Threats to GRSG in Management Zone II/VII ...................................................... 5-29 Energy Development and Mining ...................................................................... 5-29 Infrastructure ........................................................................................................ 5-42 Grazing/Free-Roaming Equids ........................................................................... 5-49 Spread of Weeds .................................................................................................. 5-54 Conversion to Agriculture/Urbanization ........................................................ 5-56 Fire ........................................................................................................................... 5-58 Recreation .............................................................................................................. 5-60 Conifers .................................................................................................................. 5-63 5.4.7 Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 5-65 Alternative A: Current Management ............................................................... 5-66 Alternative B .......................................................................................................... 5-66 Alternative C ......................................................................................................... 5-67 Alternative D ......................................................................................................... 5-68 Proposed LUPA .................................................................................................... 5-68 Summary ................................................................................................................. 5-69 5.4.8 Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions in MZ II/VII Likely to Impact GRSG Habitat ............................................................................................................... 5-70 5.5 Special Status Species (Other Species of Issue) ................................................................... 5-78 5.6 Lands and Realty ......................................................................................................................... 5-79 5.7 Vegetation (Forest, Rangelands, Riparian and Wetlands, and Noxious Weeds) ......... 5-80 5.8 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management ............................................................................... 5-80 5.9 Minerals – Leasable, Locatable, Salable, and Nonenergy Leasable .................................. 5-82 June 2015 Northwest Colorado Greater Sage-Grouse Proposed LUPA/Final EIS 5-i Table of Contents 5.10 Recreation and Travel Management ....................................................................................... 5-83 5.11 Range Management ..................................................................................................................... 5-85 5.12 Wild Horse Management .......................................................................................................... 5-86 5.13 Special Designations ................................................................................................................... 5-86 5.14 Soil and Water Resources ........................................................................................................ 5-87 5.15 Air Quality .................................................................................................................................... 5-89 5.16 Climate Change ........................................................................................................................... 5-91 5.17 Visual Resources ......................................................................................................................... 5-92 5.18 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics ................................................................................. 5-93 5.19 Soundscapes ................................................................................................................................. 5-94 5.20 Cultural Resources ..................................................................................................................... 5-95 5.21 Paleontological Resources ........................................................................................................ 5-96 5.22 Social and Economic Conditions (Including Environmental Justice) ............................... 5-97 5.23 References ................................................................................................................................. 5-103 5.23.1 Special Status Species – Greater Sage-Grouse .................................................. 5-103 5.23.2 All Other Sections .................................................................................................... 5-109 TABLES Page 5.1 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Projects, Plans, or Actions that Comprise the Cumulative Impact Scenario ........................................................................................... 5-4 5.2 Estimated Number of Wells and Pads in ADH .................................................................................. 5-10 5.3 Management Jurisdiction in MZ II/VII by Acres of Priority and General Habitats ..................... 5-19 5.4 Acres Open* and Closed to Fluid Mineral Leasing in GRSG Habitat in MZ II/VII ..................... 5-32 5.5 Acres with NSO and CSU/TL Stipulations in GRSG Habitat in MZ 1I/VII .................................. 5-33 5.6 Acres Open and Closed to Mineral Material Disposal in GRSG Habitat in MZ II/VII .............. 5-38 5.7 Acres Open and Recommended for Withdrawal from Mineral Entry in GRSG Habitat in MZ II/VII .................................................................................................................................................. 5-40 5.8 Acres Open and Closed to Nonenergy Leasable Mineral Leasing in GRSG Habitat in MZ II/VII ....................................................................................................................................................... 5-41 5.9 Acres of Rights-of-Way/Special Use Authorization Management in GRSG Habitat in MZ II/VII ....................................................................................................................................................... 5-44 5.10 Acres of Wind Energy Management Areas in GRSG Habitat in MZ II/VII ................................... 5-47 5.11 Acres Available and Unavailable to Livestock Grazing in GRSG Habitat in MZ II/VII ............... 5-52 5.12 Acres Identified for Retention and Disposal in GRSG Habitat in MZ II/VII ...............................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Secure Fuels from Domestic Resources ______Profiles of Companies Engaged in Domestic Oil Shale and Tar Sands Resource and Technology Development
    5th Edition Secure Fuels from Domestic Resources ______________________________________________________________________________ Profiles of Companies Engaged in Domestic Oil Shale and Tar Sands Resource and Technology Development Prepared by INTEK, Inc. For the U.S. Department of Energy • Office of Petroleum Reserves Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves Fifth Edition: September 2011 Note to Readers Regarding the Revised Edition (September 2011) This report was originally prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy in June 2007. The report and its contents have since been revised and updated to reflect changes and progress that have occurred in the domestic oil shale and tar sands industries since the first release and to include profiles of additional companies engaged in oil shale and tar sands resource and technology development. Each of the companies profiled in the original report has been extended the opportunity to update its profile to reflect progress, current activities and future plans. Acknowledgements This report was prepared by INTEK, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Petroleum Reserves, Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves (DOE/NPOSR) as a part of the AOC Petroleum Support Services, LLC (AOC- PSS) Contract Number DE-FE0000175 (Task 30). Mr. Khosrow Biglarbigi of INTEK, Inc. served as the Project Manager. AOC-PSS and INTEK, Inc. wish to acknowledge the efforts of representatives of the companies that provided information, drafted revised or reviewed company profiles, or addressed technical issues associated with their companies, technologies, and project efforts. Special recognition is also due to those who directly performed the work on this report. Mr. Peter M. Crawford, Director at INTEK, Inc., served as the principal author of the report.
    [Show full text]
  • Oil Shale Tracing Federal Support for Oil Shale Development in the U.S
    SUBSIDIZING OIL SHALE TRACING FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR OIL SHALE DEVELOPMENT IN THE U.S. www.taxpayer.net OIL SHALE SPECIMEN. Image Courtesy of United States Geological Survey OIL SHALE SPECIMEN. Image Courtesy of United States Geological Survey lthough the oil shale industry is still in reserves were created to ensure a military oil supply. its commercial infancy, it has a long his- In response, the Bureau of Mines program began A tory of government support that continues research into exploiting oil shale technology and in today. The Bureau of Land Management recently the 1960s private industry followed. But significant issued two new research, development and demon- action was limited until the 1970s, when in response stration leases and new federal regulations for com- to the gas shortages Congress intervened in oil shale mercial leases and royalty rates are expected any day. development, in hopes of creating a domestic fuel Before the federal government goes down that road alternative. Their unsuccessful attempt to spur large- it’s important to take a look back and ask whether we scale commercial development of oil shale and other should be throwing good money after bad. unconventional fossil fuels became a notorious waste Oil shale, or kerogen shale, is a sedimentary rock of federal funds. that contains liquid hydrocarbons that are released Since then federal support has continued in vari- when heated. Considered an oil precursor, kerogen ous forms. Although not a key part of the overall is fossil organic matter that has not had exposure energy policy agenda, federal subsidies continue to to high enough temperatures or been in the ground appear in legislation and administrative actions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Oil Shale Market 2012-2022
    The Oil Shale Market 2012-2022 Table 4.26 Brazilian Oil Shale Market Forecast 2012-2022 ($m, AGR %) 20112012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Capex ($m) 35 36 37 38 37 36 36 35 34 32 32 32 AGR(%) 3 3 2 -1 -3 -2 -2 -3 -4 -2 -1 Source: Visiongain 2012 Table 4.27 Brazilian Oil Shale Market Forecast CAGR (%) 2012-2022, 2012-2017, and 2017-2022 2012-2022 2012-2017 2017-2022 CAGR (%) -1.3 -0.2 -2.4 Source: Visiongain 2012 Figure 4.29 Brazilian Oil Shale Market Forecast 2012-2022 ($m) 40 35 30 25 20 Capex ($m) Capex 15 10 5 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Year Source: Visiongain 2012 www.visiongain.com Page 95 The Oil Shale Market 2012-2022 7. Expert Opinion 7.1 Global Oil Shale Group Limited (GOS) Global Oil Shale Group Limited established in 2011, is a global oil shale processing company currently engaged in Estonia, Jordan, Australia and Morocco. The company focuses exclusively on oil shale and has its own oil shale research laboratories in Kohtla Järve, Estonia. GOS is looking develop one of the first commercial oil shale processing facilities in Australia and Jordan after entering into a Heads of Terms with regard to processing Xtract Energy PLC’s oil shale tenements at Julia Creek in Queensland, Australia and in the process of entering into a MoU for an oil shale project with the Natural Resources Authority of Jordan. Anton Eiguine is Operations Director at GOS.
    [Show full text]
  • Oil Shale Tracing Federal Support for Oil Shale Development in the U.S
    SUBSIDIZING OIL SHALE TRACING FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR OIL SHALE DEVELOPMENT IN THE U.S. www.taxpayer.net OIL SHALE SPECIMEN. Image Courtesy of United States Geological Survey OIL SHALE SPECIMEN. Image Courtesy of United States Geological Survey lthough the oil shale industry is still in reserves were created to ensure a military oil supply. its commercial infancy, it has a long his- In response, the Bureau of Mines program began A tory of government support that continues research into exploiting oil shale technology and in today. The Bureau of Land Management recently the 1960s private industry followed. But significant issued two new research, development and demon- action was limited until the 1970s, when in response stration leases and new federal regulations for com- to the gas shortages Congress intervened in oil shale mercial leases and royalty rates are expected any day. development, in hopes of creating a domestic fuel Before the federal government goes down that road alternative. Their unsuccessful attempt to spur large- it’s important to take a look back and ask whether we scale commercial development of oil shale and other should be throwing good money after bad. unconventional fossil fuels became a notorious waste Oil shale, or kerogen shale, is a sedimentary rock of federal funds. that contains liquid hydrocarbons that are released Since then federal support has continued in vari- when heated. Considered an oil precursor, kerogen ous forms. Although not a key part of the overall is fossil organic matter that has not had exposure energy policy agenda, federal subsidies continue to to high enough temperatures or been in the ground appear in legislation and administrative actions.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Utah's Oil Shale Industry
    HISTORY OF UTAH’S OIL SHALE INDUSTRY Gary D. Aho1 INTRODUCTION This paper briefly reviews the 100-year history of oil shale activities in Utah. The author has been an active During the 1800s, western pioneers were introduced participant since 1974 and continues to work on oil to oil shale by Native Americans referring to it as “the shale projects across the United States. rock that burns.” An early Mormon retort in Juab County, Utah, supposedly produced small quantities of shale oil for lubricants around 1850. However, it wasn’t until THE FIRST BOOM PERIOD about 1915 that the vastness of the oil shale resource in the western United States was fully realized and the Lands potential for producing transportation fuels from oil shale was recognized. An oil shale industry existed in Europe as early as 1851, and small plants operated in the eastern United States The efforts to develop an oil shale industry in Colorado, prior to 1859, the year of Drake’s first oil well discovery Utah, and Wyoming have had a history of “boom and near Titusville, Pennsylvania. After 1859, convention- bust,” with activity increasing when the price of crude al crude oil wells and refineries in the eastern United oil increased, then, when the price of crude oil dropped, States flourished for decades and adequately met the activity would go essentially dormant for decades. Over needs of the nation. As the automobile came on the the past 100 years, industry and government agencies scene in the early 1900s, the demand for transportation have repeatedly demonstrated that technology exists to fuels increased dramatically.
    [Show full text]