Coalition of Local Governments 925 Sage Avenue, Suite 302 Kemmerer, Wy 83101

COALITION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS 925 SAGE AVENUE, SUITE 302 KEMMERER, WY 83101

COUNTY COMMISSIONS AND CONSERVATIO NDISTRICTS FOR LINCOLN, SWEETWATER, UINTA, AND SUBLETTE - WYOMING

April 3, 2017

VIA E-MAIL - [email protected] ORIGINAL VIA OVERNIGHT MAIL

Patricia O’Connor Forest Supervisor Bridger-Teton National Forest 340 N. Cache P.O. Box 1888 Jackson, WY 83001

Dear Ms. O’Connor,

Pursuant to 36 C.F.R. Section 218, Subparts A and B, through its undersigned counsel, the Coalition of Local Governments (“CLG”) on behalf of its members including the Lincoln County Board of County Commissioners files this objection to the United States Forest Service’s Final Environmental Impact Statement (“FEIS”) and Draft Record of Decision (“Draft ROD”) for the Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project on the Bridger-Teton National Forest in Wyoming (“Project”). See 36 C.F.R. §218.8(d)(4). The responsible official who will issue a final decision on this project is Dale Deiter, District Ranger of Jackson Ranger District. See id.

This objection is timely filed because legal notice of the FEIS and Draft ROD was published in the Casper Star-Tribune on February 17, 2017, which places the end of 45-day objection period on April 3, 2017. 36 C.F.R. §§218.9, 218.26(a).

I. Objector, 36 C.F.R. §§218.2, 218.8(d)(1)

Coalition of Local Governments 925 Sage Avenue, Suite 302 Kemmerer, WY 83101

Coalition Member Board of Commissioners, Lincoln County, Wyoming Attn: Kent Connelly, Chairman 926 Sage Avenue, Ste. 302 Kemmerer, WY 83101 (307) 877-9056 Patricia O’Connor Objection of Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project April 3, 2017 Page 2

II. Statement of Interest

The Coalition is a voluntary association of local governments organized under the laws of the State of Wyoming to educate, guide, and develop public land policy in the affected counties. Wyo. Stat. §§11-16-103, 11-16-122, 16-1-101, 16-1-104(a).1 Coalition members include Lincoln County, Sweetwater County, Uinta County, Sublette County, Lincoln Conservation District, Sweetwater Conservation District, Uinta County Conservation District, Sublette County Conservation District, Little Snake River Conservation District, and Star Valley Conservation District. The Coalition serves many purposes for its members, including the protection of vested rights of individuals and industries dependent on utilizing and conserving existing resources and public lands, the promotion and support of habitat improvement, the support and funding of scientific studies addressing federal land use plans and projects, and providing comments on behalf of members for the educational benefit of those proposing federal land use plans and land use projects.

Lincoln County has broad authority to protect the public health and welfare of county residents and this includes providing for transportation, fire protection, land use and zoning, and assuring a supply of water for agriculture, municipal, and industrial purposes. Wyo. Stat. §§18-2- 101(a)(vi), 18-3-504, 18-3-509, 18-5-201. Lincoln County has adopted land use plans and policies addressing various public land uses and the impact of public land use decisions, including fire management and minimizing impacts to private landowners, forage, and water sources. Ex. 1, Lincoln County Comprehensive Plan at 7, 8 (2006); Ex. 2, Lincoln County Comprehensive Plan, Appendix 3: Public Lands Policy at 3-4, 3-9 - 3-11, 3-29 - 3-31 (2006). The County supports actions that provide resources for the state’s timber and logging industries and programs that improve watersheds, forests, and forage for the benefit of wildlife species. Ex. 2, Lincoln County, Wyoming, Comprehensive Plan, Appendix 3 Public Lands Policy, at 3-13 (2006). It is Lincoln County’s position that fire, timber harvesting, and treatment programs must be managed so as to prevent waste of forest products, prevent catastrophic events, and reduce fire potential at the urban interface. Id. at 3-31.

Lincoln County funds wildfire suppression and over the years the County has signed memoranda of understanding (“MOU”) with the Forest Service to cooperate on fire suppression and control. Lincoln County has also developed a Community Wildfire Protection Plan. Ex. 3, Lincoln

1 The Coalition has standing to submit objections on behalf of its member Lincoln County, because an organization has standing so long as one of its members does, the interests of the member are germane to the organization, and no monetary damages are sought. Hunt v. Washington Apple Advertising Comm’n, 432 U.S. 333, 343 (1977). The participation of Lincoln County in the NEPA process and its legal interests in wildfire suppression clearly put the Forest Service on notice regarding the issues raised in this statement of objections. Patricia O’Connor Objection of Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project April 3, 2017 Page 3

County Comprehensive Plan, Appendix 7.B: Community Wildlife Protection Plan (2006). On National Forest System lands, the County supports the use of harvests and thinning to maintain diversity in both age class and stand densities to curtail insect and disease outbreaks, and to reduce the potential for large scale stand replacement wildfires. Id. at 6.

Part of the of Project boundary lies within the northeastern corner of Lincoln County, but the proposed fire treatment areas are located to the north and east of the County within Teton County, Wyoming. Fuels management in the area surrounding Lincoln County and near the Snake River drainage will impact the management of the Forest Service lands in Lincoln County, the watershed upon which Lincoln County and its residents’ rely upon, and potential threats to forest and rangeland health in the County due to catastrophic wildfires.

III. Statement of Specific Issues Related to the FEIS and Draft ROD for the Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project that are the Subject of this Objection, 36 C.F.R. §218.8(d)(5)

CLG and Lincoln County2 object to the Forest Service’s FEIS and proposed adoption of a modified Alternative 3 in the Draft ROD for the following reasons:

1. Past management practices, including reduced timber harvesting and an extensive beetle infestation, aggravated by continued fire suppression, has created the perfect storm for large, catastrophic wildfires in the Bridger-Teton National Forest. As a result, the FEIS and Draft ROD emphasis on prescribed burn treatments in the Project area ignores the conditions of the Project area, places private landowners at risk, threatens the forest health, and creates the risk of significant harm to air quality, water quality, and wildlife habitat. The Forest Service must consider and utilize more mechanical treatments, including thinning and timber harvesting, to effectively address the current forest conditions or explain how it will mitigate the potential harm to the environment.

2 By statute, local governments including counties and conservation districts have the authority to cooperate with each other. See Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§16-1-101, 16-1-104(a). A county may delegate to a particular agent the duty and authority to perform certain tasks, including submitting comments or objections, on behalf of the county. See Wyo. Stat. Ann. §18-5-208(b) (A board of county commissioners of a county that has adopted a comprehensive plan may participate in efforts to coordinate the plan with federal agencies as provided in federal statutes.); see also Maverick Motorsports Grp., LLC v. Dep't of Revenue, 253 P.3d 125, 133 (Wyo. 2011) ("‘Agency' is the fiduciary relationship that arises when one person (a ‘principal') manifests assent to another person (an ‘ agent') that the agent shall act on the principal's behalf and subject to the principal's control, and the agent manifests assent or otherwise consents so to act. This contemplates different entities for agent and principal."). Patricia O’Connor Objection of Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project April 3, 2017 Page 4

2. Reducing the fire treatments and failing to consider additional mechanical treatments in the inventoried roadless areas (IRAs) places private landowners at risk and threatens the forest health with catastrophic wildfire. The 2001 Roadless Rule, 66 Fed. Reg. 3244 (codified at 36 C.F.R. Part 294), allows timber harvesting to maintain or restore the ecological conditions of an area and when the IRA has been modified to an extent that the roadless characteristics are no longer present. These conditions exist in the Munger Mountain and Phillips Ridge IRAs and, therefore, mechanical treatments, including thinning and timber harvest, should be considered in the FEIS.

3. Deferring all mechanical treatments in the Palisades Wilderness Study Area (WSA) and removing a number of the prescribed burn units in the southern portion of the WSA allows fuel loads to continue to grow, threatens the forest health and wildlife habitat, and places the health and safety of the public at risk. The FEIS must consider the use of non-commercial thinning in the Palisades WSA as a fire management activity that is consistent with legislative direction and national forest policy to control fire and reduce the risks of wildfire within wilderness areas.

IV. Previous Comments and New Issues Introduced After the Comment Periods, 36 C.F.R. §218.8(d)(6)

Lincoln County3 submitted written comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (“DEIS”) on October 1, 2015. The County supported the proposed Alternative 2 but requested the Forest Service to expand the proposed treatments to enhance efforts to protect the watersheds and address threats, including catastrophic wildfire, to forest and rangeland health. Ex. 4, Lincoln County DEIS Comments (Oct. 1, 2015). The expanded treatments requested were removal of timber and salvage, and the use of existing Forest Service roads. Id. Lincoln County specifically requested additional treatments in the Munger Mountain and Phillips Ridge IRAs to protect public health and safety from the threat of fire and to protect bordering private lands. Id. The County also documented that these two IRAs no longer possessed roadless character because of the timber projects that have occurred and the construction of many roads since the areas RARE II designation in 1977. Further, that the conditions within the Snake River drainage allows for the removal of timber and salvage under Section 294.13 of the Roadless Rule. Id.

Lincoln County expressed the same views on many occasions when meeting with the Forest Service during larger planning and strategy meetings for the Bridger-Teton National Forest. Lincoln County told the Forest Service on a number of occasions that it supported mechanical treatments, thinning, and the removal of timber and salvage as opposed to prescribed burning that destroys the forest resources.

3 See Biodiversity Conservation Alliance v. Jiron, 762 F.3d 1036, 1059 (10th Cir. 2014) (Declarations submitted by individual members of an environmental organization are sufficient to establish the entities standing.); see also supra Footnote 1. Patricia O’Connor Objection of Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project April 3, 2017 Page 5

As a participant in a fire suppression MOU, Lincoln County frequently expresses the views at its meetings that the Forest Service’s fire management policies have created the risk of catastrophic wildlife and without mechanical treatment, the forest conditions will not improve. As one example, Lincoln County along with the Wyoming Governor’s office and the State Forestry worked to secure approval to mechanically treat over 4,000 acres in the Hams Fork IRA. This resulted in critical areas being treated in the watershed and in the production of over 35 million bd feet to the local economy. Lincoln County, working with its consultant and the Governor’s office, was able to work with the Forest Service to assist in getting the waivers needed to enter the roadless area as well as secure resources to execute the projects. There is no reason why the same cannot happen for this Project.

The CLG and Lincoln County are also addressing in this objection a radical change that has occurred since the close of the comment period. 36 C.F.R. §218.8(d)(6). The Draft ROD has modified Alternative 3 by deferring all mechanical treatments within the Palisades WSA until there is a legislative determination as to whether the areas are or are not to be designated as wilderness. Draft ROD at 1-4. Both the DEIS and the FEIS Alternatives 2 and 3 considered mechanical treatments in the Palisades WSA. DEIS at 45; FEIS at 50. The modified Alternative 3 has also eliminated a substantial portion of the prescribed burn units in the Palisades WSA without providing any other treatment options. Id. at 1, 4. This has resulted in a substantial reduction in the fuels treatment acres analyzed under both Alternative 2 and 3 for the Palisades WSA. Draft ROD at 4 (12,867 acres under Alternative 2; 8,301 acres under Alternative 3; and 3,882 acres under the modified Alternative 3); DEIS at 45; FEIS at 50.

V. Statement of Reasons, 36 C.F.R. §218.8(d)(5)

A. Standard of Review for Agency Decision-Making

Agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) is to be set aside if it is “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law.” 5 U.S.C. §706. An agency's decision is arbitrary and capricious if the agency (1) “entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem,” (2) “offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before the agency, or is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of agency expertise,” (3) “failed to base its decision on consideration of the relevant factors,” (4) made “a clear error of judgment,” (Utah Envtl. Cong. v. Troyer, 479 F.3d 1269, 1280 (10th Cir. 2007) (quotations omitted)), or (5) when the decision conflicts with federal law or policy (Radmacher v. Colo. Ass’n of Soil Conservation Dists. Med. Benefits Plan, 11 F.3d 1567, 1569 (10th Cir. 1993); Brock v. Cathedral Bluffs Shale Oil Co., 796 F.2d 533, 536 (D.C. Cir.1986) (“It is axiomatic that an agency must adhere to its own regulations.”)).

Within the FEIS and Draft ROD, the Forest Service has failed to consider the impact of Patricia O’Connor Objection of Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project April 3, 2017 Page 6

implementing predominantly prescribed burning treatments in an area that has high fuel loads and is at risk of catastrophic wildfire. The use of mechanical treatments, thinning, and timber harvests are well within the bounds of the Roadless Rule, will have limited adverse impacts on the wilderness character of the Palisades WSA, and will provide the greatest protection to the healthy and safety of the public, natural resources, and the watershed. Such treatments also conform to the Healthy Forest Restoration Act.

B. Consideration of Fire Treatments Beyond Prescribed Burning

Lincoln County comments on the DEIS requested the Forest Service to expand the proposed treatments to include removal of timber and salvage with the use of existing Forest Service roads to protect the watersheds, address the wildfire threat, and protect the forest and rangeland health. Ex. 4, Lincoln County DEIS Comments (Oct. 1, 2015).

The Draft ROD proposes 2,432 acres of prescribed burning and only 273 acres of mechanical thinning in the Phillips Ridge IRA. Draft ROD at 2. The proposed treatment option for Mungar Mountain IRA only includes 1,658 acres of prescribed burning, with no mechanical thinning treatment areas. Id. at 3. The proposed fuel treatments for the Phillips Ridge IRA were modified very little from the proposed Alternative 2, but 2,256 acres of prescribed burning were removed from the Munger Mountain IRA without adding any mechanical thinning treatment in this same area. Id. at 2-4. The FEIS and Draft ROD would not consider any additional mechanical thinning or timber harvesting in the IRAs because the Forest Service concluded that it was not necessary to reduce the risk of wildfire burning onto adjacent private lands and that the prescribed burns could be successfully implemented. See FEIS Appendix F, Response to Comments, at 56-57.

The Draft ROD also proposes to defer all mechanical treatments within the Palisades WSA, which includes about 436 acres, until a legislative determination is made regarding designating the areas as wilderness and proposes to reduce the amount of acreage for prescribed burning to 3,882 acres. Draft ROD at 2-4. The modified Alternative 3 substantially reduces the treatment areas as proposed in Alternative 2 and Alternative 3. Id. at 4. Only about 1,417 acres will receive any type of mechanical treatments in the entire Project area and about 8,924 acres are recommended for prescribed burning. Id.

Past management practices, including fire suppression and reduced logging, and a strong cycle of mountain pine beetle and spruce beetle infestation have created perfect conditions for larger, catastrophic wildfires in the Bridger-Teton National Forest. See FEIS at 5-6 (Teton to Snake wildland-urban interface area is one of the highest fire risks in the Bridger-Teton National Forest), 212. The FEIS recognizes that the Project area’s capability of producing flame lengths over 4 feet or crown fires is unacceptably high, and that the fuel loads have increased over the years. Id. at 6; see also Bridger-Teton National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (BTNF LRMP) at 40 Patricia O’Connor Objection of Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project April 3, 2017 Page 7

(as amended Apr. 15, 2015). This has resulted in the need to take aggressive fire suppression action any time a fire starts in the Project area to prevent it from spreading onto adjacent lands. FEIS at 6.

This fire risk and heavy fuel loads will also impact the Forest Service’s ability to control any prescribed fires. In 2013, a Forest Service prescribed fire got out of control and burned about 16,000 acres of public and private lands in northwestern South Dakota. In 2016, three prescribed fires on National Forest lands escaped Forest Service control burning about 2,291 acres and destroying 23 homes northwest of Carson City, Nevada on the Whittell Forest, burning about 1,008 acres of public land west of Ely, Minnesota on the Superior National Forest, and burning about 750 acres in northeast Oregon on the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. The conditions in western Wyoming will similarly create a high risk environment for prescribed fires to escape Forest Service control.

First, wildfire suppression management since 1897, in addition to the end to significant logging over the last 30 years, has created unnaturally dense, old growth forests with vegetation at multiple levels of the canopy and unnaturally high amounts of fuel wood on the ground. Fuel at several levels, especially at the ground level and lower shrubs, create much more severe and strong fires. Second, tree killing insects, including the mountain pine beetle and spruce bud beetle, have recently decimated many types of vegetation, which has killed thousands of acres of large lodgepole and whitebark pine trees and spruce trees. This increases fuel loads as dead needles and branches fall off standing trees. Third, frequent droughts and high winds are common in western Wyoming. These conditions and heavy fuel loads leave a very small window for prescribed burning treatments and increase the risk of the Forest Service losing control of the fire. It will also require the use of aggressive suppression techniques to prevent the prescribed fires from escaping Forest Service control, which is exactly what the Project is attempting to decrease. See Draft ROD at 5-6; FEIS at 5-9. The health and safety of the public is severely at risk with the number of prescribed burn units in the Project area.

The FEIS and Draft ROD’s failure to consider more mechanical treatments in addition to or as a replacement for prescribed burning ignores the conditions of the Project area and increases the chances for uncontrollable, catastrophic fires. The resources are so unhealthy and so loaded that mechanical treatments must be utilized first. The catastrophic fires burn at higher temperatures, consume most of the vegetation, and sterilize the soils. Post-fire rehabilitations is also more difficult because these sites suffer higher soil erosion, increased losses of wildlife habitat, and invasion of noxious weeds. It takes years before any vegetation and trees will resurface. The Forest Service, therefore, must consider additional thinning and possible timber harvesting in the Project area. See Ex. 4, Lincoln County DEIS Comments (Oct. 1, 2015) (request to expand proposed action to include timber harvest units).

The use of mechanical treatments will not only restore and enhance the vegetation and wildlife habitat, and help prevent any catastrophic wildfire in the Project area, but it will also benefit Patricia O’Connor Objection of Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project April 3, 2017 Page 8 the local economy. The end to significant logging over the last 30 years has resulted in the timber harvest and logging industry to vacate western Wyoming. Those companies that are available to complete mechanical treatments are now based out of Idaho and Montana. If mechanical treatments are considered and implemented in the Project area, then this would attract some industry back to western Wyoming and bring an economic benefit to the local economy. It is also becoming more and more difficult to find companies and individuals to complete mechanical treatments in western Wyoming, and the continued battle against harvesting will result in no one being available when the treatments become absolutely necessary.

C. The 2001 Roadless Rule Allows Mechanical Treatments and Removal of Timber in Inventoried Roadless Areas

Lincoln County commented on the DEIS that modified conditions in the IRAs and the need to restore the ecological habitat and prevent catastrophic wildfires allowed for the removal of timber and salvage under the 2001 Roadless Rule. Ex. 4, Lincoln County DEIS Comments (Oct. 1, 2015). The Forest Service cites the 2001 Roadless Rule to manage all IRAs as if they were wilderness, including unilateral closure of roads and trails and stringent limits on vegetation projects to reduce the extreme levels of decadent timber and fuel loads. These areas are at risk for catastrophic wildfires that will adversely impact forest resources, wildlife, watersheds and water quality, and private lands.

The Forest Service adopted the Roadless Rule to prevent the altering or fragmenting of roadless landscapes, values, and characteristics caused by road construction and timber harvest. 66 Fed. Reg. 3244. Notwithstanding this objective, the IRAs admittedly had many roads, developments, and residences existing within or just outside of the designated IRAs. 66 Fed. Reg. at 3246. This is true for the Munger Mountain and Phillips Ridge IRAs, which have seen a number of timber projects and the construction of roads since designation as RARE II in 1977. See Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project Resource Report - Special Areas, at 5-7 (Nov. 21, 2011). This occurred because these areas were released from consideration for wilderness and the respective land use plans would have allowed multiple uses, including logging, road construction, and mineral development. 66 Fed. Reg. at 3249-3250; Wyoming Wilderness Act, Pub. L. No. 98-550, §401(b)(3), (5). Ironically, the Forest Service defended the Roadless Rule as independent of the Wilderness Act.

The Roadless Rule does generally prohibit timber harvesting and new road construction, but it also recognizes that “science-based forest management might require some level of vegetative management in [IRA].” 66 Fed. Reg. at 3257. With regards to wildfire danger, the Roadless Rule permits a road to be constructed or reconstructed in IRAs if it “is needed to protect public health and safety in cases of an imminent threat of flood, fire, or other catastrophic event that, without intervention, would cause the loss of life or property.” 36 C.F.R. §294.12(b)(1). Similarly, timber may be harvested “to maintain or restore the characteristics of ecosystem composition and structure, Patricia O’Connor Objection of Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project April 3, 2017 Page 9

such as to reduce the risk of uncharacteristic wildfire effects, within the range of variability that would be expected to occur under natural disturbance regimes of the current climatic period.” 36 C.F.R. §294.13(b)(1)(ii). An area would benefit ecologically from thinning treatments that cut and remove vegetation that has “become overgrown with shrubs and smaller diameter trees creating a fuel profile that acts as a ‘fire ladder’ to the crowns of the dominant overstory trees.” 66 Fed. Reg. at 3257-3258. Hazardous fuel treatments, therefore, are not prohibited in IRAs, especially for the conditions described in the FEIS. Id. at 3258.

Timber may also be harvested if the “[r]oadless characteristics have been substantially altered in a portion of an [IRA] due to the construction of a classified road and subsequent timber harvest . . . occurr[ing] after the area was designated an [IRA].” 36 C.F.R.. 294.13(b)(4). Past road construction and timber harvesting may have altered the roadless characteristics to the extent that the purpose of the IRA cannot be achieved. 66 Fed. Reg. at 3251, 3258. The timber harvest would be limited to that area already substantially altered by past management. Id. at 3258.

The FEIS and Draft ROD do not consider any additional mechanical thinning or timber harvesting in the IRAs because the Forest Service concluded that it was not necessary to reduce the risk of wildfire burning onto adjacent private lands and that the prescribed burns could be successfully implemented. See FEIS Appendix F, Response to Comments, at 56-57. Further, the Forest Service concluded that reconstruction of existing old or temporary roads would be necessary to conduct any timber harvesting in the IRAs and this was contrary to the Roadless Rule. Id. The risk to private land is not a factor in the Roadless Rule and, as show below, there is no excuse for not prescribing more treatments.

As discussed supra, the conditions in the Bridger-Teton National Forest has resulted in an increased risk of catastrophic wildfires in the Project area. See Ex. 4, Lincoln County DEIS Comments at 2 (Oct. 1, 2015). This puts the public health and safety at risk, as well as the vegetation, wildlife habitat, and Snake River watershed. In the Mungar Mountain IRA, specifically, the modified Alternative 3 in the Draft ROD has removed about 2,256 acres of a prescribed burning unit without adding any mechanical treatments in this area. Compare FEIS at 28, Appendix A - Alternative 2 Emphasis Map 11, with Draft ROD at 3, 31. The proposed treatment area borders private land in the Hog Island Subdivision and is also within the Snake River watershed. FEIS at Appendix A, Alternative 2 Emphasis Map 11. The failure to consider mechanical thinning or timber harvesting in this area could have a substantial impact on the surrounding private lands, natural resources, and water quality. Therefore, in order to restore the ecological conditions in the Munger Mountain IRA, thinning and timber harvesting would be appropriate and allowed under the Roadless Rule. 36 C.F.R. §294.13(b)(1)(ii).

In addition, the Munger Mountain and Phillips Ridge IRAs have been substantially modified since their designation as RARE II in 1977. See Ex. 4, Lincoln County DEIS Comments at 2 (Oct. Patricia O’Connor Objection of Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project April 3, 2017 Page 10

1, 2015). Congress released these areas from wilderness consideration in the Wyoming Wilderness Act and there has been a number of timber harvests and roads constructed since 1977. See Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project, Special Areas Report at 5-7. The IRAs also do not retain a remote feel or contain primitive recreation due to easy access to developed trailheads and popular off- highway motorized use that occurred in these areas before restrictions were put in place in 2009. See id. at 6-7. Mechanical thinning and timber harvesting would therefore be appropriate in those areas of the IRAs that have been modified and no longer contain their roadless character. 36 C.F.R.. §294.13(b)(4); 66 Fed. Reg. at 3251, 3258.

The Forest Service has successfully approved mechanical treatments in other IRAs in the past. With the coordination of Lincoln County, the Wyoming Governor’s office, and the State Forestry, the Forest Service was able to get the necessary waivers to enter the Hams Fork IRA and secure the resources necessary to execute mechanical treatments. This project has resulted in the treatment and protection of critical areas in the watershed of the Hams Fork IRA. It has also provided an economic benefit to the local economy by producing more than 35 million bf feet. There is no reason that similar treatments cannot be completed within the Munger Mountain and Phillips Ridge IRAs.

These types of treatments would also be consistent with the land and resource management plan (LRMP) objectives and desired future conditions for the Bridger-Teton National Forest. See BTNF LRMP at 113, 148-149, 225-228, 309-326 (as amended Apr. 15, 2015). “Silvicultural prescriptions in addition to clearcutting should be considered which will help achieve soils, scenic quality, recreation, wildlife, and other resource objectives.” Id. at 113. An objective of the LRMP is to cut or remove timber to meet “recreation, wildlife, visual, or water-production objectives on lands not suited-unscheduled- for timber production.” Id. at 148. The desired future condition areas in which the IRAs are located focus on achieving desired wildlife habitat conditions (id. at 225-228, 309-326), but this does not preclude mechanical treatments or timber harvesting from occurring on this land. See Decision Notice and FONSI on BTNF LRMP Revision of Fire Management Standards and Guidelines at 4 (Apr. 2004).

D. Non-Commercial Thinning Can Occur in the Palisades Wilderness Study Area

Under the Wyoming Wilderness Act, the Palisades WSA is to be managed “so as to maintain [its] presently existing wilderness character and potential for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System” until Congress determines otherwise. Pub. L. No. 98-550, §301(c). The 1964 Wilderness Act, however, allows for necessary measures to control “fire, insects, and diseases” within designated wilderness areas. 16 U.S.C. §1133(d)(1). The Forest Service policy for fire management in wilderness areas is to: “(1) permit lightning caused fires to play, as nearly as possible, their natural ecological role within wilderness; and (2) reduce, to an acceptable level, the risks and consequences of wildfire within wilderness or escaping from wilderness.” FSM 2324.21 Patricia O’Connor Objection of Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project April 3, 2017 Page 11

(Jan. 22, 2007).

The Forest Service may use prescribed burns to reduce unnatural buildup of fuels if necessary to meet one of the objectives set forth in FSM 2324.21, if fuel treatment measures outside of wilderness are not sufficient to achieve fire management objectives in wilderness, if a team of specialists evaluates and recommends the use of prescribed fire, and if the public has been involved in the decision. FSM 2324.22(6). All fire management activities within wilderness must be conducted in a manner compatible with the wilderness management objectives and the disturbed areas must be rehabilitated to a natural state. FSM 2324.23. Preference is given to “methods and equipment that cause the least: 1. Alteration of the wilderness landscape. 2. Disturbance of the land surface. 3. Disturbance to visitor solitude. 4. Reduction of visibility during periods of visitor use. 5. Adverse effect on other air quality related values.” Id. (emphasis added).

There is no legislative direction or national fire policy for fuels management within WSAs. However, the LRMP prohibits timber harvesting in WSAs, but allows fire management that “emphasizes preservation of Wilderness values and allows natural processes of ecological change to operate freely.” BTNF LRMP at 261, 264. Given the significant adverse impacts of fire in wilderness, there is no impediment to allow mechanical treatments.

The Draft ROD has deferred all mechanical treatment units within the Palisades WSA, which includes about 436 acres, until a legislative determination is made regarding designating the areas as wilderness and proposes to reduce the amount of acreage for prescribed burning to 3,882 acres. Draft ROD at 1-4. The modified Alternative 3 has substantially reduced the amount of treatment areas in the Palisades WSA by effectively withdrawing any mechanical treatments and cutting the prescribed burn areas by more than half than those described in Alternatives 2 and 3. Id. at 4; see DEIS at 45, FEIS at 50. The modified Alternative 3 was proposed to address public concern about impacts to the Palisades WSA wilderness character. See id. at 8-9. Congress has not acted in more than 30 years, so this proposed management is really a decision to do nothing regardless of the risk.

The modified Alternative 3 emphasis on prescribed burning in the Palisades WSA will not meet the purpose and need of the Project, and will further place the health and safety of the public at risk. The purpose and need of the Project is to improve firefighter and public safety by reducing expected fire flame length and potential for crown fires, reduce the potential for wildland fire spread from the National Forest System to state and private lands, and decrease the need for aggressive suppression actions when natural fires occur, especially in the Palisades WSA. FEIS at 5-9. The Draft ROD recognizes that under the modified Alternative 3 the fuel conditions will not be improved where private land, WSAs, and National Forest System boundaries coincide. Draft ROD at 8. “If such areas remain indefinitely as a wilderness study area, and or are designated wilderness with no boundary setback, the risk of wildfire affecting private property, safety concerns, potential escalating fire cost, and resource impacts will remain.” Id. at 8; see Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project Patricia O’Connor Objection of Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project April 3, 2017 Page 12

Resource Report - Special Areas, at 13-14 (Nov. 21, 2011) (Natural and untrammeled quality of the Palisades WSA would be adversely impacted by the need to use more aggressive suppression tactics.).

As discussed supra, the heavy fuel loads that have development in the Project area over the years will cause significant problems and risks during any prescribed burning effort. It will be difficult for the Forest Service to find an appropriate window for the burning to occur or for the Forest Service to control any prescribed burn that has started. See supra. The Forest Service must allow the proposed mechanical treatments to occur under the modified Alternative 3 and also consider additional mechanical treatments to replace some of the prescribed burning units.

Mechanical treatments that include non-commercial thinning and hand cutting would be well within the legislative direction and national fire policy for fuels management within wilderness areas. It would reduce the risk of wildfires in the Palisades WSA and risk of wildfires escaping the WSA. 16 U.S.C. §1133(d)(1); FSM 2324.21. The treatments would also only cause minimal disturbance, short-term alteration of the wilderness landscape, minor disturbance to visitor solitude, and minimal to no impact on visibility and air quality. FSM 2324.23; see Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project Resource Report - Special Areas, at 16-17 (Nov. 21, 2011). Allowing mechanical treatments and increasing the amount of units receiving such treatment will also benefit the Palisades WSA in the long term by reducing fuels loads and decreasing the need for suppression actions when natural fires occur. See Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project Resource Report - Special Areas, at 13- 14 (Nov. 21, 2011).

VI. Conclusion and Suggested Remedies, 36 C.F.R. §218.8(d)(5)

For the reasons stated above, the Forest Service should withdraw the Draft ROD and write a new ROD that conforms to the admitted conditions on the ground and the stated policy objectives of reducing the risk of catastrophic wildfire and promoting restoration of the forest.

Dated: April 3, 2017

Submitted by Coalition of Local Governments, on behalf of Lincoln County:

/s/ Kent Connelly Kent Connelly, Chairman Coalition of Local Governments 925 Sage Avenue, Suite 302 Kemmerer, WY 83101

EXHIBIT 1 Comprehensive Plan Lincoln County, Wyoming

Adopted: July 6, 2005 Last Amended Date: November 13, 2006 Lincoln County Comprehensive Plan

INTRODUCTION ...... 2

PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS ...... 2

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES...... 3 I. EDUCATION ...... 3 ll. HOUSING ...... 4 Ill. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ...... 5 IV. LAND USE ...... 6 V. PUBLIC LANDS ...... 7 VI. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES ...... 8 VII. HAZARDS ...... 9 VllI. PUBLIC SERVICES ...... 11 IX. TRANSPORTATION ...... 12 X. RECREATION ...... 13 XI. CULTURAL RESOURCES ...... 14 XII. COMMUNITY DESIGN ...... 15

APPENDICES MAPS

Comprehensive Plan Lincoln County, Wyoming 1 Lincoln County Comprehensive Plan

v. PUBLIC LANDS

GOALS:

The County will actively participate in all public land management decision-making processes and anticipates federal agency participation in county planning efforts and activities.

BACKGROUND:

Lincoln County contains approximately 1.8 million acres of publicly managed lands (See Map 4). The economy of Lincoln County and its respective communities is dependant upon the multiple uses of these lands. Due to these facts it becomes imperative that Lincoln County actively participates in planning for the wise use and management of these lands. Provisions in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), Council on Environmental Quality and other management and planning regulations provide for Lincoln County to engage in and have a strong voice in the planning and decision making process associated with managing its public lands (See Appendix 3).

OBJECTIVES:

1. Develop a working relationship with public land managers and coordinate efforts on wildlife, grazing, access, economic, social and cultural issues. 2. Promote and support public land uses consistent with orderly development and efficient use of renewable and non-renewable resources. 3. Provide a County Public Lands Plan for federal and state land resources issues.

: i Ii 1

Comprehensive Plan Lincoln County, Wyoming 7 Lincoln County Comprehensive Plan

VI. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES

GOAL:

Protect and manage the natural resources of Lincoln County.

BACKGROUND:

Lincoln County has always been dependant upon the resources located within the county for its economic base and sustainability of the communities located within its borders (See Maps 5a e). The wise use and conservation of these resources is essential to the continuance of economies, customs and culture that has existed for several generations.

There are many reasons why people have chosen to live in Lincoln County. One of these reasons is the abundance of unspoiled environmental resources. For the past several years Lincoln County has experienced a large amount of growth which in tum has put pressure on the environmental resources (See Appendix 4). The citizens of Lincoln County feel a strong need to protect these resources and still allow for growth. (See Maps 6a & 6b)

As of the spring of 2004, over 4,800 subdivision lots existed in Lincoln County with approximately 30% of those lots having a structure located on the lot. Each of these lots will have a septic system to deal with the liquid waste, an increased demand for water, roads, and solid waste. All of these impacts create an additional consumption of land and resources.

OBJECTIVES:

1. Prevent on-site erosion and impacts to streams. 2. Promote safe and adequate water quality and quantities. 3. Identify locations. and methods for the disposal of solid, liquid and agricultural waste. 4. Protect the riparian, wetland and 100 year flood plain areas of Lincoln County from encroachment and impacts by development. 5. Guard against air pollution and maintain the air quality ofthe county. 6. Promote the use of Transfer of Development Rights (TDR's) and Purchase of Development Rights (PDR's) for the sustainability of environmental resources. 7. Guard against the production of light pollution in Lincoln County.

15 1*

Comprehensive Plan Lincoln County, Wyoming 8

EXHIBIT 2

LINCOLN COUNTY, WYOMING

PUBLIC LANDS POLICY

3-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction………………………………………………………………….….. 3 Purpose………………………………………………………………………….. 4 Area History………………………………………………………………….…. 5 Kemmerer……………………………………………………………………….. 5 Diamondville………………………………………………………………….….7 Cokeville………………………………………………………………………….7 Star Valley………………………………………………………………...... 8 LaBarge…………………………………………………………………………..9 Objectives………………………………………………………………………...9 Management Actions…………………………………………………………...12 Strategies………………………………………………………………………..14 Public Land Committee……………………………………………………...... 15 Position’s Statements………………………………………………………...... 16 Wilderness Designations/Roadless……………………………………………..16 Other Special Designations…………………………………………………...... 19 ACEC’S…………………………………………………………………………20 Wild and Scenic Rivers………………………………………………………....22 Introduced, Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species, Recovery Plans, Experimental Populations……………………………………………….25 Public Access/Transportation…………………………………………………...26 Land Exchanges, Acquisitions, and Sales………………………………………27 Recreation and Tourism…………………………………………………………28 Water Resources……………………………………………………………..….29 Timber………………………………………………………………………..…31 Energy and Mineral Resource………………………………………………..…32 Wild Horses…………………………………………………………………..…35 Cultural and Heritage Resources………………………………………………..36 Soils…………………………………………………………………………..…37 Air Quality…………………………………………………………………….. 38 Wildlife…………………………………………………………………………38 Forage Allocation/Livestock Grazing…………………………………………. 40 Paleontology/Archeology/Geology……………………………………………. 44 Off Highway Vehicles (OHV)…………………………………………………. 44 Mitigation/Habitat Improvement………………………………………………. 45 Transportation………………………………………………………………….. 46

3-2 Management decisions made on these lands greatly impact the economy, culture,

health, safety, and quality of life of Lincoln County and its residents. Therefore, it is

extremely important that public land agency plans and management are consistent with

Lincoln County Land Use Plan.

PURPOSE

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), the Forest Management

Act and the Council on Environmental Quality, as well as other federal and state

management and planning regulations provide local governments various opportunities to

participate and influence planning and decision making processes associated with

managing public lands.

In the case of federally managed lands, managers are required, to varying degrees, to ensure that management, planning, and decision making are consistent with local

government plans, policies, and ordinances.

The public lands portion of the Lincoln County General Plan reflects the County’s

position on the management and use of public lands, within County or, that impact

County interests. The plan clearly and concisely states the County policies, issues and

objectives that relate to federal and state public land management, planning efforts, and

decision-making processes.

The intent of the plan is to protect the interest of the County, its customs and

culture, the health and safety of its residents, and to communicate county interest and

concerns regarding management of public lands. It is designed to ensure that the spirit

and intent of the laws, regulations and policies that govern management and use of public

3-4 Early residents of Star Valley were self sufficient until the creation of creameries and dairies brought a cash economy. Forest grazing and logging have been continuous activities since the first settlers. Some coal mining was done in the Greys River area.

Big game hunting, fishing and outfitting on public land also play important roles in the local economy.

LABARGE

LaBarge incorporated in 1982. The area was settled during the oil boom of the

1920’s. It was first called Tulsa, but the name was changed because of confusion with the city in Oklahoma.

It was not long after the town was incorporated that Exxon announced it would be building its Shute Creek Plant. That brought a swell of population and economic impact assistance to the infant community.

Not far from the town of LaBarge is Names Hill. The oldest inscriptions date

1822. In 1825, J.J. Shay inscribed his name. Other names include that of John Danks in

1827, and J. Ames, May 4, 1830. The most famous inscription is that of Jim Bridger.

Some question exists as to whether it was personally placed by Bridger in that he normally signed his name with an “X”.

OBJECTIVES

The following objectives and subsequent policies shall be the basis for public land management and implementation plan that will further define this policy.

The County’s objectives are:

• To Support the wise use, conservation and protection of public lands and its

resources including well-planned, outcome based, management prescriptions. It

3-9 acknowledges the need, on occasion, to place strict requirements on the

management of some resources to provide needed protection, when it has been

determined through scientific and supportable analysis that such needs exist, to

protect such resources from irreparable harm.

• To ensure management decisions are accomplished with full participation of the

County and supported by tested and true scientific data. Decisions shall fully

analyze and disclose impacts on the Lincoln Basin economy tax base, culture,

heritage, and life styles and rights of area residents.

• To mitigate and compensate for impacts to the County and its residents. If action

results in a taking, all applicable law must be applied.

• To ensure public and private access and rights-of-way for utilities and

transportation of people and products on and across public lands. Access must be

provided to merit such needs.

• To ensure public lands are managed for multiple use, sustained yield, and

prevention of natural resource waste. Further, these lands should be managed to

prevent loss of resources and private property from catastrophic events and to

protect the safety and health of the public.

• To support national energy needs relative to the nation’s increasing dependency

on foreign oil, all public lands must remain open to the greatest extent possible for

the exploration and production of energy and other energy related products.

• To ensure that special designations do not influence the use of resources on lands

outside those listed in the designation. The county opposes the use of a buffer

3-10 zone management philosophy that dictates land use practices and influences

decisions beyond the scope and boundaries of the designations.

• To support agriculture on private and public lands as part of the local economy,

custom, culture, heritage as well as the provision of a secure national food supply.

• To provide policies, plans, and other documents for governmental agency use to

ensure management and planning consistency with the County. To ensure

resource management and planning that is consistent with that of the County.

• To ensure that restrictions placed on any resource are based on analysis of trends,

need, and imposed only after a complete analysis.

• To ensure that lands designated open for various specified uses are available on a

timely basis and permits for such use are processed promptly. Extended delays or

no action shall not be used as a method to accomplish restrictions or protections.

Waivers modification or exception to restrictions must be provided for when

conditions exist or impacts can be mitigated to prevent irreparable damage to the

subject resource.

• Agriculture and grazing lands should continue to produce the food and fiber

needed by the citizens of the state and the nation, and the rural character and open

landscape of rural Wyoming should be preserved through a healthy and active

agricultural and grazing industry, consistent with private property rights and state

fiduciary duties.

3-11 o provide for the preservation of cultural resources, both historical and

archaeological;

o meet the needs of economic development;

o is conducive to well planned and measured community development; and

o provide for the protection of water rights;

o proper stewardship of the land and natural resources is necessary to ensure

the health of the watersheds, timber, forage, and wildlife resources to

provide for a continuous supply of resources for the people of the county

and local communities who depend on these resources for a sustainable

economy;

• Forests, rangelands, timber, and other vegetative resources;

o provide forage for livestock;

o provide forage and habitat for wildlife;

provide resources for the state’s timber and logging industries;

contribute to the state’s timber and logging industries;

contribute to the state’s economic stability and growth;

are important for a wide variety of recreational pursuits;

o Management programs and initiatives that improve watersheds, forests,

and increase forage for the mutual benefit of wildlife species and vital to

the state’s economy and the quality of life in Wyoming.

3-13 • It endorses Wyoming State water laws as the legal basis for all water use within

the County.

• Beneficial use is the basis for the appropriation of water in the State of

Wyoming.

• It will support all reasonable water conservation efforts. Water conserved

should be allocated to those persons or entities whose efforts created the

savings.

• Many wetlands are created by fugitive water from irrigation systems. When law

requires mitigation of impacts from conservation and other projects, the creation

of artificial wetlands should be considered only after all other mitigation

possibilities have been analyzed. Creation of artificial wetlands is contrary to

the intent of conservation.

• Managers of public lands must protect watersheds with respect to water quality

with the assurance that water yield will not be decreased but improved.

TIMBER

It is the County’s position that:

• All forested lands be managed for sustained yield and multiple use.

• Fire, timber harvesting, and treatment programs must be managed as to prevent

waste of forest products.

• Management programs must provide for fuel load management to prevent

catastrophic events and reduce fire potential at the urban interface.

• Management and harvest programs must be designed to provide opportunities

for local citizens and small business.

3-31

EXHIBIT 3

EXHIBIT 4

Board of Lincoln County Commissioners

Jerry T. Harmon Kent Connelly Robert E. King Chairman Vice-Chair Thayne, Wyoming Afton, Wyoming Kemmerer, Wyoming

925 Sage Avenue, Suite 302, Kemmerer, WY 83101 Phone: 307-877-2004 Email: [email protected]

October1, 2015 VIA E-MAILhttp://tinyurl.com/tetontosnakefuels

Dale Deiter, District Ranger Jackson Ranger District Bridger Teton National Forest P.O. Box 1689 Jackson, WY 83001

Re: Teton to Snake Fuels ManagementProject- Lincoln County Comments

Dear Dale,

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project within the Jackson Ranger District. The Board of Lincoln County Commissioners supportsAlternative 2, the Proposed Action. The proposed activities are supported by the BT Land Resource Management Plan, which had broad input by local and state agencies in its formulation. The Lincoln County Community Wildfire Plan and the Lincoln County Public Lands Policy are also supported by the proposed actions.

It appears that part of the Project Boundary lies within Lincoln County. Wyoming law confers broad authority on the counties to protect the public health and welfare of county residents. The County has consistently requested that the BTNF minimize its impact on private lands for federal projects. This protects the health and safety of its citizens, protects property values and the tax base of the county, and minimizes impacts to the environment and wildlife. Ex. 1, Lincoln County Plan at 3-4 (objectives of the Lincoln County Public Lands Policy). Further, the County works with Federal land partners to preserve private property rights and values for its citizens and minimize impacts by public land use decisions.

Much of the project area lies within inventoried roadless areas, which limits timber cutting, sale and removal, and road construction. However, there are exemptions provided when needed to protect public health and safety in cases of an imminent threat of flood, fire or other catastrophic event. Much of the project area borders private lands, which have been identified for protection. The Roadless Rule retains the ability to use timber harvesting to meet ecological needs, such as to reduce the risk of uncharacteristic wildfire effects. It is with this in mind that we request consideration to expand the proposed action to include commercial harvest units and the use of existing forest service roads.

Teton to Snake Fuels Management Project October 1, 2015 Page 2

The Rule clearly stated that timber harvesting can take place in areas that were substantially modified and no longer have roadless character as defined by the Roadless Rule. There have been numerous timber projects that have occurred within inventoried roadless area (IRA) of the project area since RARE II of 1977. Many system roads have been constructed in the Munger Mountain and Phillips Ridge IRA area since 1977, not including temporary roads. Clearly the two IRAs no longer possess the roadless character described by the Rule, if they ever did to begin with.

We believe that the Roadless Rule allows under section 294.13, the removal of timber/salvage under the conditions that prevail in the Snake River drainage. While it sets the conditions, it does not overly restrict the actions that are needed to restore the area to a vibrant and healthy forest. We strongly encourage the agency to be more aggressive in its decision and to adopt the alternative that will best accomplish the purpose and need for the project.

We requestthe BTNF expand the treatments in the proposedalternative in light of the discussion above and also because the project area fits the definition of past practices that allowed exemptions under the Roadless Rule (36 CFR Part 294.13; Items b(1-4).Lincoln County is committed to insure that public lands are managed for multiple use and sustained yield and to prevent waste of natural resources. Enhancing efforts to protect watersheds and address threats to forest and rangeland health, including catastrophic wildfire, are priorities we all share.

Lincoln County supports the efforts of Bridger/Teton National Forest to reduce the risks of wildfire and we thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Sincerely,

/s/ Jerry T. Harmon, Chairman

Jerry T. Harmon, Chairman Board of Lincoln County Commissioners