FRR Draft PEIS Alternatives

The FRRR Draft PEIS considers the No Action alternative and three action alternatives. The No Action Alternative for this programmatic means existing management practices for fuels reduction and rangeland restoration efforts would continue as they have been, and would vary from office to office depending on existing project plans and NEPA analyses. The types of actions considered in the three action alternatives are the same or similar to projects that the BLM is taking or has taken in the past within the project area. The difference between the action alternatives and the No Action Alternative is that the action alternatives would provide analysis of the impacts of typical vegetation treatments within the majority of sagebrush community related vegetation states within the project area. The alternatives include:

• Alternative A (No Action Alternative): No treatments would be implemented under this analysis. Individual projects could be implemented when NEPA compliance is completed at the site-specific level.

• Alternative B (Preferred Alternative): All treatments and methods could be used in all vegetation states within the 38.5-million-acre potential treatment area. The 26.3-million-acre emphasis area for Alternative B consists of the areas that are most likely to receive treatment based on past planning efforts like the Fire and Invasives Assessment Tool (FIAT) and sage-grouse priority habitat. While projects may occur anywhere within the potential treatment area most projects are expected to occur within the emphasis area. Primarily native plant species would be used in restoration treatments, however, nonnative plant material may be used in areas where full restoration is unlikely. Intact communities of all resistance and resilience levels are a high priority for protection while degraded areas in moderate resistance resilience areas would be a high priority for restoration actions.

• Alternative C: The BLM would use only mechanical and manual treatments within the 26.8-million-acre potential treatment area. The 18.7-million-acre emphasis area for Alternative B consists of the areas that are most likely to receive treatment based on past planning efforts like the FIAT and sage-grouse priority habitat. No chemical treatments, prescribed fire, targeted grazing, or nonnative plant material would be used. No sagebrush would be removed and no treatments would occur in phase III pinyon-juniper or in areas of high resistance and resilience.

• Alternative D: Alternative D proposes the same treatment methods and flexibility described in Alternative B, but in a more limited geographic area. The potential treatment area is the 5.6 million acres within the FIAT Planned Treatment Areas. The FIAT did not plan treatments in Phase III Pinyon-Juniper so it is unlikely that they would occur under this alternative. The emphasis area is the same as the potential treatment area in this alternative.

Analysis Exclusion Areas

Under all alternatives, treatments are not being proposed for the following areas (see Section 2.2.1 of the FRRR DPEIS for more information):

• Riparian exclusion areas

• Areas in mapped Canada lynx distribution and wolverine primary habitat

• Wilderness

• Wilderness Study Areas

• Lands with wilderness characteristics that are managed to maintain or enhance those characteristics, including natural areas managed to maintain their natural character

• National Conservation Areas and National Monuments

• Areas designated through the John D. Dingell Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act (2019)

• Visual Resource Management Class 1 areas

• Areas within a quarter-mile of a Wild and Scenic River, including rivers found eligible or suitable or both

• Within National Scenic and Historic Trails and trail ROWs/corridors as identified in the Trailwide Comprehensive Plan and applicable land use plan

Alternatives Comparison

An alternatives comparison table is provided below. Alternative B, the Preferred Alternative, provides the most treatment options on the most acres. Alternative C, provides more limited treatments in a slightly smaller treatment area. Alternative D allows for the same treatment options as Alternative B, but in a much smaller treatment area. Essentially all treatment options would be available under Alternatives B and D, but Alternative C would be limited to manual and mechanical treatments. Under Alternative C no herbicides, targeted grazing, or prescribed fire would be used and no sagebrush would be removed. Additionally no nonnative plant materials would be used. The potential treatment area for Alternative D is based on the 2015 FIAT planning effort that identified the high priority areas for restoration in the Great Basin. For more information please review Chapter 2 of the FRRR Draft PEIS.

Proposed Treatments in the Action Alternatives

Treatment Options by Alternative

Design Features

The BLM developed design features that would be required to minimize or eliminate adverse impacts of Alternatives B, C and D on identified resources. There is a full list of design features provided in Appendix D of the FRRR Draft PEIS. BLM district or field office resource specialists would determine the locations for avoidance and where to apply design features to protect resources during site-specific analyses. Additional design features may be relevant to a given project on a site-specific basis, such as design features included in land use plans. Design features will be implemented in accordance with any land use plans. Examples of design features include:

• Prioritize the placement of equipment (e.g., vehicles and mechanical treatment equipment) in previously disturbed areas.

• Ensure atmospheric conditions are within prescriptions when a prescribed burn is ignited, and monitor smoke throughout the ignition.

• Noxious weeds and invasive plants would be monitored to track changes in populations over time, and corrective action would be prescribed where needed, in accordance with local weed programs. Thresholds and responses for noxious weeds and invasive plants (particularly invasive annual grasses) will be included in monitoring plans.

• Avoid or minimize potential ground-disturbing activities when soils are saturated.

• Implement restrictions and conservation strategies for special status species, including federally listed, proposed, candidate, and BLM sensitive species, as contained in approved recovery and conservation plans, cooperative agreements, and other instruments in whose development the BLM has participated. If none are available, coordinate with the USFWS and/or state wildlife agencies to develop appropriate restrictions.

Next Station: What are the Next Steps? 

For more information on the FRRR Draft PEIS please contact Ammon Wilhelm, 208-373-4000.

If you have questions about the FRRR Draft PEIS or wish to be added or removed from the mailing list, please contact BLM at BLM_PEIS_Questions@blm.gov.