Alternatives

The Draft RMP/EIS assesses the potential impacts of the five alternatives under consideration: the No Action alternative and four action alternatives. General descriptions of the alternatives are provided below. For details on acreage of management allocations within the decision area by alternative, view Table 2-1, Quantitative Summary of Alternatives from Chapter 2 the Central Yukon Draft RMP/EIS.

Alternative A - No Action

Alternative A would continue the current management direction and practices, based on the Utility Corridor RMP (BLM 1991), Central Yukon RMP (BLM 1986), Southwest Management Framework Plan (BLM 1981), and other management decision documents. These include special rules published in the Federal Register, such as special rules for off-highway vehicle (OHV) and recreation use. Alternative A would continue the existing public land orders (PLOs), including withdrawals under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) of 1971 17(d)(1).

Under Alternative A, there are 18 existing areas of critical environmental concern (ACECs) and 8 research natural areas (RNAs), for a total of approximately 1.8 million acres designated to protect relevant and important values and research opportunities. Approximately 6.7 million acres are open to locatable mineral entry. Of these open lands, 3.5 million acres would be encumbered by State or Native selections. These selections segregate the lands from locatable mineral entry (43 CFR 2627.4.b) and federal priority subsistence (Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act [ANILCA] 102.3 and 804). Under Alternative A, the BLM would maintain all existing withdrawals in the planning area, including PLO 5150.

Alternative B

Alternative B emphasizes resource protection over other uses. Planning for connectivity corridors, adaptability to climate change, and protection of priority species would be considered to a greater degree under this alternative than the other alternatives, with less emphasis on resource development. Thirty-one ACECs and RNAs (approximately 4 million acres) would be designated, with special management to address a wide range of relevant and important values and research opportunities.

Alternative B identifies areas suitable as ecological benchmarks. This allows the BLM to establish quantitative planning objectives, to monitor the effectiveness of management decisions in meeting those objectives, and to use that information to inform adaptive management strategies. The experimental control areas would lie mostly on BLM-managed lands, including approximately 5,518,846 acres of Central Yukon Field Office lands.

Alternative B uses a variety of decisions to focus on priority habitats, including closing 4.2 million acres to fluid minerals and 1.4 million acres to locatable mineral entry. High value watersheds management decisions include right-of-way (ROW) exclusion in the 100-year floodplain. Alternative B also proposes 11 suitable wild and scenic rivers (WSRs) and 363,000 acres of land to be managed for wilderness characteristics as a priority over other resources. Alternative B recommends a partial revocation of PLO 5150—set aside in 1971 for a utility and transportation corridor. This would allow for State of Alaska top-filed lands to become valid selections on 738,000 acres.

Alternative B recommends a revocation of the ANCSA 17(d)(1) withdrawals. If accepted by the Secretary of the Interior, these revocations would make lands available for selection and appropriation. It would include land allotments by Alaska Native Vietnam-era veterans under Section 1119 of the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act.

Alternative B also introduces a backcountry conservation area (BCA) in what is commonly known as the “outer corridor” of the Dalton Corridor, focusing on providing semi-primitive recreational hunting opportunities.

In addition, there are two special recreation management areas (SRMAs) and three extensive recreation management areas (ERMAs) under Alternative B; approximately 10.9 million acres would be open to locatable mineral entry, of which 7.2 million acres would be encumbered by State or Native selections.

Alternative C1

Alternative C1 emphasizes a blend of resource protection and resource development. Connectivity corridors, adaptability to climate change, and priority species would be considered in the context of allowing for more minerals development and other resource uses than under Alternative B. Eight ACECs or RNAs (approximately 418,000 acres) would be designated. Management to protect relevant and important values would be less restrictive for resource uses than under Alternative B. Like Alternative B, Alternative C1 identifies areas suitable as ecological benchmarks. Benchmarks under Alternative C1 would incorporate 2,457,104 acres of BLM-managed lands in the Central Yukon Field Office.

Alternative C1 has fewer ACEC designations than Alternative B but does propose habitat-specific management for both Dall sheep and caribou. Two Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) withdrawals are proposed for locatable minerals under this alternative, relative to caribou and Dall sheep habitats. Management actions for the 100-year floodplain of high value watersheds is emphasized under Alternative C1 as ROW avoidance areas.

Alternative C1 proposes no suitable WSRs and no acres identified as managed for wilderness characteristics as a priority; however, it does apply management restrictions to minimize impacts on wilderness characteristics on 882,000 acres of BLM-managed lands. Similar to Alternative B, Alternative C1 recommends a partial revocation of PLO 5150 for 738,000 acres of land.

Alternative C1 combines the two SRMAs identified in Alternative B into one SRMA with multiple resource management zones (RMZs) and identifies one ERMA. Under this alternative, approximately 12.2 million acres would be open to locatable mineral entry, of which 7.2 million acres would be encumbered by State or Native selections.

Alternative C2 (Preferred Alternative)

Alternative C2 emphasizes a blend of resource protection and resource development, but reduces the acres set aside as ACECs or closed to mineral entry and appropriation, while retaining the Toolik Lake RNA (77,000 acres). Management of habitat for caribou is similar to Alternative C1, except that there are no proposed FLPMA withdrawals. There are no specific management actions for Dall sheep habitat under this alternative.

Alternative C2 includes ROW avoidance areas to core caribou habitat, clustered pingo locations, and a narrow band of BLM-managed lands that extends toward Venetie that is bordered by State of Alaska lands to the north and USFWS lands to the south.

Alternative C2 proposes no suitable WSRs. Lands with wilderness characteristics would be managed to emphasize other multiple uses as a priority over protecting wilderness characteristics.

Alternative C2 recommends a full revocation of PLO 5150, which would allow 2.1 million acres of State of Alaska top-filed lands to become valid selections. The inner Dalton Utility Corridor would be administratively designated as a utility corridor. This would emphasize this continuing function as a utility and transportation corridor to support the current and future projects. Alternative C2 contains one SRMA and one ERMA.

Alternative C2 closes 1 million acres to mineral material sales; approximately 13.1 million acres would be open to locatable mineral entry, of which 7.9 million acres are encumbered by State or Native selections.

Alternative D

Alternative D emphasizes management to facilitate resource development more than the other alternatives. This alternative focuses on maximizing the development potential for BLM-managed lands. Management for habitat and resources relies on using current federal management guidelines without the use of habitat-specific or ACEC-specific management.

Climate change adaptability, and priority species are addressed by considering connecting existing conservation system units (CSUs) in the planning area, such as national wildlife refuges and national parks.

Alterative D does not designate any ACECs or RNAs, nor does it include SRMAs or ERMAs. Lands with wilderness characteristics would be managed to emphasize other multiple uses as a priority over protecting wilderness characteristics. This alternative does not propose any WSRs as suitable.

This alternative does not apply specific management to core caribou or Dall sheep habitat. The only areas not open to ROWs are in the existing Central Arctic Management Area (CAMA) Wilderness Study Area.

Alternative D recommends a full revocation of PLO 5150, which would allow 2.1 million acres of State of Alaska top-filed lands to become valid selections, like Alternative C2. Also, similar to Alternative C2, the inner Dalton Utility Corridor would be administratively designated as a utility corridor to emphasize function as a utility and transportation corridor to support the current and future projects.

Alternative D does not include any recommendations to close lands to mineral entry or appropriation; approximately 13.1 million acres would be open to locatable mineral entry, of which 7.9 million acres are encumbered by State or Native selections.

For more additional information on alternatives, please see Chapter 2, Alternatives of the Central Yukon RMP/EIS.

Next Station: Key Resources

For more information on the Draft RMP/EIS or to submit comments, please visit the BLM’s NEPA Register website: https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/35315/510.

For more information, contact Chel Ethun at (907) 474-2253.