Gunnison BLM Domestic Sheep EIS

[COEngineer]

Sorry I missed this. I have not been checking this forum often enough. Next time something like this comes up, feel free to PM me and I can get some attention on it from other hunt forums, etc.

Thanks for taking point on this.

Keep hammering.

 

[Irrelevant]

I tried to find a link to the "study" cited in the letter that claims all these other wildlife are carriers of M.Ovi. Does anyone have a link to it?

 

[Oak]

So, what's the story? Was it invite only? Did sportsmen not know about the meeting? Are these issues not of concern to people?

Shame on me for not becoming involved earlier... what can I do now to help pass along a message for the cause?? How do I find public input meetings and who needs to get an email from me?

They were public meetings, but not well announced. justdada, you are on the right email list, I just need to be better about using it.

1. We have a family man, everyday employee (Oak) fighting the fight for BHS regardless of his future employment opportunities. And this is a absolute concern.

If I were going to be fired for my transgression it would have already happened. And is it really a transgression if it's the right thing to do?

I was told by the BLM that if they are not able to renew these permits or if it gets challenged in court, that we can expect that no BLM office here will undertake another NEPA analysis on domestic sheep grazing allotments. And they will never have to do so with the FLPMA 402(c)2 exception. I expect that's true, as there are BLM analyses that were scoped in 2014, draft EAs were never completed, and the projects have been removed from ePlanning. This after we protested another decision from the same office and the IBLA judge remanded it back to the BLM. They subsequently completed a new EA for the cattle allotments from the original analysis, but have punted on the sheep allotments. That project has also now been removed from ePlanning. Edit: Found these "missing" projects on ePlanning, but no progress has been made on them.

I tried to find a link to the "study" cited in the letter that claims all these other wildlife are carriers of M.Ovi. Does anyone have a link to it?

I don't think it has been published yet. It only exists as a research letter at this point.

 

[Oak]

Hey @BigHornRam, here's some more science at work. This proposed Record of Decision just crossed my desk a few minutes ago. The BLM is selecting Alternative C, which their own analysis determined:

The BLM sensitive species determination for Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep is that Alternative C may impact individuals or habitat and may contribute locally towards need for federal listing. The primary reasons for this determination are close proximity of allotments or pastures to CHHR, potential for Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep forays intersecting allotments or pastures, mountainous terrain that makes monitoring for effective separation extremely difficult, and the risk associated with straying sheep. This alternative would reduce risk of contact between domestic and wild sheep by eliminating direct overlap of permitted pastures with bighorn sheep CHHR, but it would not eliminate the risk associated with potential bighorn sheep foray movements as described above.

 

[Bambistew]

My reading comprehension sucks, but am I understanding that they selected Alternate C which they believe will lead to federal listing?

Its a win, but still scratching my head?

 

[Oak]

My reading comprehension sucks, but am I understanding that they selected Alternate C which they believe will lead to federal listing?

Its a win, but still scratching my head?

They believe that it could contribute to the need for federal listing. Said another way, if everyone did it this way it may lead to federal listing. They originally scoped for an EA in 2012, but quickly realized they wouldn't be able to sign a FONSI for renewal of the permits. So they kicked the can down the road a few years and disclosed the impacts to bighorn sheep in an EIS under a favorable administration. There are also potential impacts to the federally endangered Gunnison Sage-Grouse, which CPW addressed in their comments (attached).

 

[Oak]

Hey @BigHornRam, here's some more science at work. This proposed Record of Decision just crossed my desk a few minutes ago. The BLM is selecting Alternative C, which their own analysis determined:

The FEIS was posted yesterday and although the proposed action has not changed from the DEIS, they have watered down the effects determination with no justification.

 

[T Bone]

Oak,

Do current domestic BLM lease holders have rollover rights?

If not, could an organization obtain the lease, and not put domestics on it, and thereby protect the wild sheep?

 

[Oak]

Oak,

Do current domestic BLM lease holders have rollover rights?

If not, could an organization obtain the lease, and not put domestics on it, and thereby protect the wild sheep?

The short answer is that term permit holders have priority for renewal if they have complied with the terms and conditions of the permit. Term permits are only issued to permit holders that own livestock to be grazed and the required base property. There are some exceptions, but not really useful ones.

 

[Oak]

Well, just 20 short months after releasing the Final EIS, the BLM has issued proposed decisions on these allotments, subject to a 15-day protest period. The proposed decision is to reauthorize grazing on all allotments.

Boring Documents

 

[Bluffgruff]

What are the chances a protest by an interested party would change the course?

 

[Oak]

What are the chances a protest by an interested party would change the course?

"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take." - Oak

"Based on the analysis in the EIS, it is my decision that domestic sheep grazing will be allowed to continue as described in Alternative C. Alternative C avoids overlap of pastures authorized for domestic sheep with core Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep herd home summer range, which ensures temporal and spatial separation while still allowing grazing. My decision also includes new permit terms and conditions to further reduce the risk of contact. This gives me a high degree of confidence that there will be low to no risk of contact with wild sheep that would result in disease transmission within these allotments." - Elizabeth A. Dawson, Acting District Manager (emphasis mine)

On the high elevation allotments being considered for renewal, the BLM has essentially made the decision to not allow domestic sheep to graze on the portions of the allotments that are mapped by CPW as bighorn sheep summer range, with no buffer. So draw a line in the dirt and bighorns can be on one side and domestics on the other side.

CPW defines summer range as: "That part of the overall range where 90% of the individuals are located between spring green-up and the first heavy snowfall. Summer range is not necessarily exclusive of winter range; in some areas winter range and summer range may overlap."

You can see what this looks like on paper on the map I threw together. The allotments being renewed in this area are American Flats, American Lake, and Henson Creek (typo in the shapefile).



One question that comes to mind when I look at that map is, where are the other 10% of bighorn sheep during the summer grazing season? Another question that comes to mind is, do the bighorns know where these lines in the dirt are located?

Completely coincidentally, I was sitting on the boundary of American Flats and American Lake last Friday when the proposed decisions came out. This photo is looking east into the American Lake allotment from the A. Flats boundary.



It was only about a 2.5 mile hike to this point after after an hour drive from the pavement. It's pretty remote and there is no cell service. If we go back to ADM Dawson's statement above, she notes additional T&C to reduce the risk of contact. Those include:

• "The permittee/lessee will immediately notify the local BLM authorized officer...of any observed or reported contact, or close proximity, between wild sheep and the permittee's/lessee's domestic sheep or goats."
• "The permittee/lessee will immediately report (as soon as feasible) to the authorized office (i.e., Field Manager) any wild sheep sightings in proximity to authorized domestic sheep or goat allotments or trailing routes."

So the BLM is relying on this guy...



...to immediately notify the BLM if a bighorn wanders into his band of sheep below. How?



This is just a couple of many layers of bull$hit in this decision.

Oh, by the way, the CPW summer range polygon has changed since they did their analysis 3 years ago. The polygon on the map above is larger than back then. Why? Because CPW updates them regularly....

 

[COEngineer]

Really disappointing. Are the allotments worth that much to the BLM? Or are they afraid of the S&G lobby or what? I guess another alternative is that they just don't care about Bighorns, but I'd like to think that's not the case.

 

[Oak]

Really disappointing. Are the allotments worth that much to the BLM? Or are they afraid of the S&G lobby or what? I guess another alternative is that they just don't care about Bighorns, but I'd like to think that's not the case.

The sheep industry is small but politically connected, and they are more vocal than BHS advocates. The BLM is charged with threading the needle between not reducing any grazing and not getting litigated over a ridiculous decision. The fact that CO is in the 10th Circuit makes their job easier.

Value of the allotments to the BLM? The cover of the EIS to renew the 9 allotments in this analysis says "Estimated total costs associated with developing and producing this EIS: $385,000." The decision authorizes a total of 3,270 AUM annually, which will bring in $4,414.50 of revenue annually, or $44,145 over the life of the term permits.

 

[Jwill]

The sheep industry is small but politically connected, and they are more vocal than BHS advocates. The BLM is charged with threading the needle between not reducing any grazing and not getting litigated over a ridiculous decision. The fact that CO is in the 10th Circuit makes their job easier.

Value of the allotments to the BLM? The cover of the EIS to renew the 9 allotments in this analysis says "Estimated total costs associated with developing and producing this EIS: $385,000." The decision authorizes a total of 3,270 AUM annually, which will bring in $4,414.50 of revenue annually, or $44,145 over the life of the term permits.

87 years just to pay for the EIS.

 

[Bluffgruff]

Is there money to litigate this on behalf of the bighorns?

 

[Bluffgruff]

Or money to buy out the allotment and retire it?

 

[Oak]

Is there money to litigate this on behalf of the bighorns?

Or money to buy out the allotment and retire it?

There are still protest and appeal processes to work through. The last time I appealed a BLM grazing decision (2016) I actually won and it was remanded back to the BLM for a do-over, on which nothing has been done since!

Allotment "buyouts" are between 3rd parties and permittees, and require a willing seller and a federal agency willing to vacate the allotment. Closing an allotment generally takes a NEPA process unless the land management plan has addressed closing allotments for resource protection, etc.

 

[Irrelevant]

Pardon my ignorance, but I don't understand why this:

Isn't funding an appeal or protest?

 

[Oak]

The protest and appeal cost no money. After those administrative remedies are exhausted, litigation is the only recourse. Historically, conservation organizations with memberships primarily of hunters have left the dirty work of litigation to the "environmentalists."

And there is always the chance that if the decision is appealed, the BLM will voluntarily take the L and then never fully process the permits, because they are not required to do so. That's what happened in the appeal that I "won." The BLM attorney recommended to the IBLA judge that he remand the decision back to the BLM, which the judge did. The BLM office then fully processed the cattle permits through a new EA process and did nothing with the domestic sheep permits.

Side note...the drawing being conducted from that bin of purple tickets was sponsored by RMBS.