Coal Diver Everything you wanted to know about coal, but were afraid to ask.

This is a text-only version of the document "Big Dry Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement - Appendices, DOI, Feb 1995". To see the original version of the document click here.
APPENDIX ACEC

AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN APPENDIX
INTRODUCTION
This appendix provides an assessment of the areas nominated by the BLM and the public as areas of critical environmental concern and the evaluation of those nominations. A total of 18 nominations were evaluated (see table 49). These areas were evaluated according to BLM Manual 1613 to determine if they met the relevance and importance criteria described below. 4. Qualities which warrant highlighting to satisfy public or management concerns about safety and public welfare. 5. Poses a significant threat to human life and safety or to property. Areas To Be Considered: 1. Existing areas of critical environmental concern are subject to reconsideration and must be reviewed. 2. Areas recommended for areas of critical environmental concern consideration. a. External Nominations: Any public (group or person) or other agency may nominate. No formal or special procedures required. b. Internal Nominations: BLM personnel recommend areas which appear to meet the relevance and importance criteria. 3. Areas identified at any time through inventory and monitoring. 4. Adjacent designations or other federal and state agencies must be reviewed. Data On Relevance and Importance: An interdisciplinary team evaluates each area to determine if it meets both the relevance and importance criteria. Evidence of relevance and importance may be gathered from BLM or other sources. If an area does not meet the criteria, or special management attention is not needed, analysis supporting that conclusion is incorporated in the resource management plan and environmental impact statement and the nomination is not considered as a potential area of critical environmental concern. If an area does meet both the relevance and importance criteria and requires special management attention, the nomination is a potential area of critical environmental concern.

EVALUATION PROCESS
Relevance: An area meets the “relevance” criteria if it contains one or more of the following: 1. Significant historic, cultural or scenic values including rare or sensitive archeological resources and religious or cultural resources important to Native Americans. 2. Fish and wildlife resources including habitat for endangered, sensitive or threatened species, or habitat essential for maintaining species diversity. 3. Natural process or systems including endangered, sensitive, or threatened, plant species; rare, endemic, or relic plants or plant communities which are terrestrial, aquatic, or riparian, or rare geological features. 4. Natural hazards including avalanche, dangerous flooding, landslides, unstable soils, seismic activity, or dangerous cliffs. Importance: Value, resource, system, procedures, or hazard described above must have substantial significance and values characterized by one or more of the following. 1. More than locally significant qualities. 2. Qualities or circumstances that make it fragile, sensitive, rare, irreplaceable, exemplary, unique, endangered, threatened, or vulnerable to adverse change. 3. Recognized as warranting protection to satisfy national priority concerns or to carry out the mandates of Federal Land Policy and Management Act.

207

APPENDIX ACEC TABLE 49 AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN NOMINATIONS
Need Special Mgmt. Relevance Importance Attention

Name

Reason

Public Acres

Big Sheep Mountain Hoe Site Jordan Bison Kill Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail Powder River Depot Seline Site Smoky Butte Ash Creek Divide Bug Creek Hell Creek Sand Arroyo Limber Pine Ten Mile Creek Bald Eagle Black-footed Ferret Reintroduction Area Fox Creek Least Tern Piping Plover Site

Cultural Resources Cultural Resources Cultural Resources Cultural Resources Cultural Resources Cultural Resources Geology Paleontological Resources Paleontological Resources Paleontological Resources Paleontological Resources Unique Vegetation Riparian Nests Wildlife Fisheries Nests Piping Plover

360 144 160 330 1,386 80 80 7,931 3,840 19,169 9,056 3,212 1,219 0 11,166 240 0 16

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes No Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No No Yes

NOMINATIONS
BIG SHEEP MOUNTAIN: Nominated for unique cultural values. Relevance Criteria: This site meets relevance criterion 1 as a significant cultural resource property. Significance is defined as being both eligible to the National Register of Historic Places, and through the development of a cultural resource management plan being eligible for allocation to conservation use. This significance is derived from the site’s unique properties and potential to contribute important scientific information on nearly the full range of cultural traditions from the Paleo Indian period to the Late Plains Archaic period. Importance Criteria: This site meets the importance criteria 1, 2, and 3. It possesses information that is regionally significant, and is fragile, sensitive, irreplaceable, unique, and vulnerable to vandalism and adverse change. Natural or man-caused changes could result in the loss of significant scientific data. In addition, the site warrants being allocated to conservation use, carrying out the mandates of cultural resource protection within Federal Land Policy and Management Act and the cultural resource management planning system. 208

Special management attention is needed to preserve the buried deposits for maximum value to the scientific community. Summary: This site (24PE210) qualifies as an area of critical environmental concern under the relevance and importance criteria. The site measures 360 acres in size and is considered eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The site is in T. 15 N., R. 48 E., sec. 28, 29, 32, and 33 and is considered significant for its full range of cultural periods over a period of some 10,000 years. The site contains important information on prehistory and history of the Native American in the plains environment. A cultural resource management plan is proposed for development for this site and will take the place of an area of critical environmental concern activity plan. The cultural resource management plan, when completed, will allocate the site to conservation use. BLM management objectives should involve the long-term conservation of this site for future generations to study and enjoy. Specific research questions could be formulated whereby artifact and records from the site could be studied and used to demonstrate a number of prehistoric activities that were present or conducted at the site.

APPENDIX ACEC HOE SITE: Nominated for unique cultural values. Relevance Criteria: This site meets relevance criterion 1 as a significant cultural resource property. Significance is defined as being both eligible to the National Register of Historic Places, and being eligible for allocation to conservation use through the development of a cultural resource management plan. This significance is derived from the site’s unique properties and potential to contribute important scientific information on possible agricultural traditions from the late prehistoric period relating to the Middle Missouri tradition. Importance Criteria: This site meets importance criteria 1, 2, and 3. It possesses information that is regionally significant, and is fragile, sensitive, irreplaceable, unique, and vulnerable to vandalism and adverse change. Natural or man-caused changes could result in the loss of significant scientific data. In addition, the site warrants being allocated to conservation use, carrying out the mandates of cultural resource protection within Federal Land Policy and Management Act and the cultural resource management planning system. It is important that buried deposits be preserved to be of maximum value to the scientific community. This need for preservation necessitates special management attention. Summary: This site (24PE263) qualifies as an area of critical environmental concern under both the relevance and importance criteria. This site measures some 144 acres in size and has been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The site is in T. 10 N., R. 51 E., sec. 3 and is significant for late prehistoric agricultural subsistence strategies and an associated habitation site. This site represents the most-western findings of possible agricultural practices of the middle Missouri tradition. It contains important information on prehistory of the Native American in the plains environment. A cultural resource plan is proposed for development for this site and will take the place of an area of critical environmental concern activity plan. The cultural resource management plan, when completed, will allocate the site to conservation use. BLM management objectives should involve the long-term conservation of this site for future generations to study and enjoy. Specific research questions could be formulated whereby artifact and records from the site could be studied and used to demonstrate a number of prehistoric activities that were present or conducted at the site. JORDAN BISON KILL SITE: Nominated for unique cultural values. Relevance Criteria: This site meets relevance criterion 1 as a significant cultural resource property. Significance is defined as being both eligible to the National Register of Historic Places, and being eligible for allocation to conservation use through revision of the existing cultural resource management plan. This significance is derived from the site’s unique properties and potential to contribute important scientific information on bison procurement and subsistence strategies from the late prehistoric period. Importance Criteria: This site meets the importance criteria 1, 2, and 3. This site possesses information that is regionally significant, and is fragile, sensitive, irreplaceable, unique, and vulnerable to vandalism and adverse change. Natural or man-caused changes could result in the loss of the site’s significant scientific data. In addition, the site warrants being allocated to conservation use, carrying out the mandates of cultural resource protection within Federal Land Policy and Management Act and the cultural resource management planning system. Special management attention is needed to preserve the site’s buried deposits, for maximum value to the scientific community. Summary: This site (24GF271) qualifies as an area of critical environmental concern under both the relevance and importance criteria. This site is 240 acres and is considered eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The site is in T. 18 N., R. 38 E., sec. 24. The site is significant for late prehistoric period bison kill procurement and subsistence strategies and associated habitation and processing site. The site contains important information on prehistory of the Native American in the plains environment. The site has a cultural resource management plan that would be updated and would take the place of an area of critical environmental concern activity plan. The site will be allocated to conservation use. BLM management objectives should involve the long-term conservation of this site for future generations to study and enjoy. Specific research questions could be formulated whereby artifact and records from the site could be studied and used to demonstrate a number of prehistoric activities that were present or conducted at the site. LEWIS AND CLARK NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL: Nominated for association with unique historic events. Relevance Criteria: The Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail meets the relevance criteria for being a nationally significant historic and cultural resource. Approximately 30 miles of public land is located along the trail. The largest contiguous amount of public land along the trail is 4 miles in Prairie County. The trail route has been altered through time. Both segments of the trail, the lower Missouri River

209

APPENDIX ACEC and the Yellowstone River, are free-flowing through the planning area. Importance Criteria: The Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail meets importance criteria 1, 2, and 3. The historic and cultural values associated with the trail are fragile, sensitive, rare, irreplaceable, unique and vulnerable to being lost through development. The trail has been recognized as a national priority concern through the development of a comprehensive trail plan by the National Park Service for recognition, protection and interpretation. The trail warrants protection for its cultural and recreation values. Summary: Although the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail (see maps 31A,B,C,D) meets relevance and importance criteria, the majority of public landownership along the rivers is not contiguous. The cultural values of the trail on public lands can be protected and enhanced without special management attention. Examples of management actions are: retain BLM-administered public lands along the trail on both sides of the rivers within the planning area and add to the public land base whenever opportunities exist; protect the visual resource and vegetative quality of the river corridors. Sale of wood products, prescribed burns, land treatments or other intrusions on the river banks will not be allowed. The view would be left in a natural state or returned to its natural state whenever possible; where feasible access exists, use as an interpretive site area for the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail with the designated logo. regionally and nationally significant. This site is fragile, sensitive, irreplaceable, unique and vulnerable to adverse change, vandalism and unauthorized metal detecting. Natural or man-caused changes could result in the loss of the significant scientific data. In addition, the site warrants being allocated to conservation use, carrying out the mandates of cultural resource protection within Federal Land Policy and Management Act, and the cultural resource management planning system. Special management attention is needed to study the historic information at the site necessitating preservation of buried deposits, for maximum benefits to the scientific community. Summary: This site qualifies for an area of critical environmental concern under both the relevance and importance criteria. This site (24PE231) is 1,386 acres in size and has been determined eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. The site is included in T. 11 N., R. 50 E., sec. 4; and T. 12 N., R. 50 E., secs. 26, 27, 28, 29, and 33. The area proposed for an area of critical environmental concern includes Sheridan Butte located along the Yellowstone River, where historic graffiti dating to the Indian War period is on the butte’s rock outcrops. The Powder River Depot was the location of General Terry’s supply depot that supplied General Custer’s troops before they headed to Little Big Horn. It was the main supply depot for the armies that pursued the fleeing Sioux and Cheyenne tribes throughout the summer of 1876. The site contains a wealth of archeological information on the makeup of the encampment and the everyday life of the soldiers of that time period. The numerous buried metallic artifacts are now subject to looting and vandalism through unauthorized metal detecting. A cultural resource management plan is proposed for this site and will take the place of an area of critical environmental concern activity plan. The cultural resource management plan will allocate the site to conservation use. BLM management objectives should involve the long-term conservation of this site for future generations to study and enjoy. Specific research questions can be formulated whereby artifact and records from the site could be studied and used to demonstrate the historic activities that were present and conducted at the site. SELINE SITE: Nominated for unique cultural values. Relevance Criteria: This site meets relevance criterion 1 as it is a significant cultural resource property. Significance is defined as being eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places, and for allocation to conservation use. This significance is derived from the site’s unique properties and information potential that can contribute

-

-

The Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail is not recommended as an area of critical environmental concern. POWDER RIVER DEPOT: Nominated for unique cultural values. Relevance Criteria: This site meets relevance criterion 1 as a significant cultural resource property. Significant is defined as being both eligible to the National Register of Historic Places and being allocated to conservation use in a cultural resource management plan. This site has important scientific information on the historic use of the area by the late 19th century military. The archeological findings can be compared with written records. Importance Criteria: This site meets importance criteria 1, 2 and 3. The site possesses information that is both

210

APPENDIX ACEC important scientific information on cultural traditions from the middle prehistoric period. Importance Criteria: This site meets the importance criteria 1, 2, and 3. It possesses information that is regionally significant, and is fragile, sensitive, irreplaceable, unique, and vulnerable to vandalism and adverse change. Natural or man-caused changes could result in the loss of significant scientific data. In addition, the site warrants being allocated to conservation use, carrying out the mandates of cultural resource protection within Federal Land Policy and Management Act, and the cultural resource management planning system. Special management attention is needed to preserve the site’s buried deposits to provide information to the scientific community. Summary: This site (24DW250) qualifies as an area of critical environmental concern under both the relevance and importance criteria. The site measures some 80 acres in size and is considered eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The site is located in T. 16 N., R. 57 E., sec. 22. The site possesses important information on prehistory of the Native American in the plains environment. A cultural resource management plan has been written and when updated will take the place of an area of critical environmental concern activity plan. The plan will allocate the site to conservation use. BLM management objectives should involve the long-term conservation of this site for future generations to study and enjoy. Specific research questions can be formulated whereby artifact and records from the site could be studied and used to demonstrate a number of prehistoric activities that might have been present or were conducted at the site. SMOKY BUTTE: Nominated for unique geological values. Relevance Criteria: Smoky Butte is a 250-foot high prominence located about eight miles west of Jordan in Garfield County, Montana. The Smoky Butte area meets relevance criteria 1 and 3. The area has regionally significant scenic values. It is a landmark feature that can be seen for miles; a striking contrast to the surrounding rolling plains. It was used by early day travelers as a guide when traveling through the area. Pioneers traveling the “Green Trail” west to Lewistown, Montana, could see Smoky Butte for a considerable distance (USDI, BLM 1980a). It is considered to possess significant local and regional scenic and historic values. The rocks that are present at Smoky Butte consist of a rare mineral assemblage. The area is an excellent example of the geologic process of igneous intrusion. 211 Smoky Butte is located in the middle of a 2-mile long line of narrow igneous intrusive dikes and plug-like features. These igneous intrusives form a narrow, linear group of low buttes and knobs which rise out of the otherwise rolling prairie and are oriented in a northeast to southwest direction. The igneous rocks were intruded into the flat-lying sedimentary rocks of the Paleocene Fort Union Formation and Late Cretaceous Hell Creek Sandstones and were emplaced along the axis (obliquely) of the Blood Creek Syncline (Mitchell et al. 1987). The intrusive igneous rocks at Smoky Butte are hard and resist erosion, as do the adjacent sedimentary rocks which were slightly baked and hardened by the hot igneous intrusive. This hardness “holds up” the buttes by providing more resistance to erosion than the surrounding sedimentary rocks. Although Smoky Butte is an interesting example of igneous intrusion and many geologic features associated with such an event are present there, the primary importance of the butte lies in the unique mineral assemblage of the igneous rocks. The igneous rocks at Smoky Butte have been categorized as a lamproite which is a type of volcanic or hypabyssal igneous rock. Matson (1958) noted that one of the most striking features of the intrusive rock complex was that the rocks were high in potassium and titanium and are similar to rocks found at West Kimberly, Australia and the Leucite Hills of Wyoming. Matson (1958) and Velde (1975) observed that the igneous rock is a mixture of minerals. Velde further classified it as an armalcolite-ti-phlogopite-diopside-analcite-bearing lamproite. Velde’s analysis revealed that the Smoky Butte lamproite contains a rare mineral called armalcolite, a mineral found in samples of rock from the moon. Velde reported that the armalcolite at Smoky Butte has the closest composition to the lunar armalcolite of any known terrestrial rocks. In addition, Wagner and Velde (1986) discovered that the mineral davanite, a recently described alkali titanosilicate mineral found in Siberia, is also present in the Smoky Butte lamproite. Smoky Butte contains a rare mineralogic assemblage and is an excellent example of the geologic process of igneous intrusion. Importance Criteria: Smoky Butte meets importance criteria 1 and 2. Smoky Butte has more than locally significant qualities which give it special worth, consequence, and meaning. The special geologic features present have been studied by scientists from the United States, Canada, and France. The Smoky Butte area has been the subject of a Masters of Science thesis study, and a study published by

APPENDIX ACEC the U.S. Geological Survey. It has been reported in scientific trade journals, such as American Mineralogist, Journal of Petrology, and Earth and Planetary Science Letters. Smoky Butte is discussed in Mitchell’s and Bergman’s Petrology of Lamproites, published by Plenum Press, and Alt and Hyndmans’ Roadside Geology of Montana, Mountain Press Publishing Company. The area was also the subject of a special field trip of the 28th International Geological Congress studying the Montana High Potassium Igneous Province in July 1989. Information gleaned from these rocks has been used to draw conclusions and advance theories about the origin of the rocks, and the composition and geotectonics of the mantle of the earth. Scientists believe that the source material for the lamproite at Smoky Butte is mantle derived. This would be deep in the earth’s surface since the crust has been estimated to be about 45 kilometers thick in this area (Velde 1975). The Smoky Butte lamproite is unique because it is the easternmost known intrusive feature in Montana. The nearest intrusive rocks to Smoky Butte occur 55 to 60 miles to the southwest on Porcupine Dome and near Ingomar Dome (Matson 1960). Smoky Butte is also the youngest, dated at 27 million years (Oligocene), and taken together with the Missouri Breaks diatremes, may represent the last phases of igneous activity in the north-central Montana alkalic province (Marvin et al. 1980). Smoky Butte would be vulnerable to damage from exploration and mining activities carried out under a locatable mineral entry (mining claim). Smoky Butte had been quarried many years ago for riprap for facing a nearby dam. The present quarry site is small and actually provides an excellent exposure of the rocks that make up Smoky Butte. However, further mining activity would not improve viewing or enhance research, and would only serve to destroy the surface exposure of this rare geologic feature. Summary: The Smoky Butte area is 680 acres in size and is located in T. 18 N., R. 36 E, sec. 1: SW/14SE1/4; sec. 11: SE1/4NE1/4, E1/2SE1/4; sec. 12: W1/2NE1/4, NW1/4, N1/2SW1/4, SW1/4SW1/4; and sec. 14: NE1/4. The N1/2 SW1/4 of sec. 12 (80 acres) is public surface and minerals. BLM administers the mineral estate on an additional 200 acres underlying private surface in sec. 11: SE1/4NE1/4; sec. 12: SW1/4NE1/4, S1/2NW1/4; and sec. 14: NE1/4 NE1/4. The remaining 400 acres consist of private surface overlying federal coal only mineral estate. The area requires special management attention. Smoky Butte contains public land with a variety of unique values and needs protection. This public land meets the relevance and importance criteria and is recommended as an area of critical environmental concern. ASH CREEK DIVIDE: Nominated for paleontological values (see map 11). Relevance Criteria: This area exhibits characteristics for consideration as an area of critical environmental concern under the relevance criterion “a natural process or system.” The Hell Creek geologic formation and the associated fossils preserve a record of the end of the dinosaur age at the close of the Cretaceous Period. This area preserves a good record of this time period, relatively rare worldwide. The area has produced fossils for display and research, and field studies of depositional patterns and earth history have occurred within the area. The necessary combination of bedrock exposure of the proper age and good preservation of fossils provides research and collecting opportunities rare for this geological time period. Importance Criteria: The Ash Creek Divide area has produced fossils and provided research data that has proven to be significant to the scientific community within the United States as well as worldwide. Comparison of fossils and other data collected here has given scientists insight about the end of the dinosaur age, such as the types of animals and plants present, the environment in which they lived, and the cause of the mass extinction at the close of the Cretaceous Period. This fossil material and information is fragile and needs to be researched in place. In addition, the resource is best served by the public ownership of the land, thereby assuring access by the scientific community. Summary: The Hell Creek Formation is significant for paleontologic resources spanning the time at the end of the Cretaceous Period. The outcrops of these beds are some of the few places in the world that preserve a continuous record just before the mass extinction of the dinosaurs and other forms of life. The Ash Creek Divide area is an example of this record, owing to the good exposures of the bedrock and the preservation of the fossils. Several scientific papers have been written based on research done in this area. The area will continue to provide information as new material weathers out of the rock. This area is recommended for designation as a paleontological area of critical environmental concern. BUG CREEK: Nominated for paleontological values (see map 11). Relevance Criteria: This area exhibits characteristics for consideration as an area of critical environmental concern under the relevance criterion “a natural process or system.” The geologic formations and the associated fossils are a rare example of a continuous record of the end of the dinosaur age (Cretaceous Period) and the beginning of the age of the mammals during the Tertiary Period. This area preserves one of the best records of this time period. The area has

212

APPENDIX ACEC produced fossils for display and research. Field studies of depositional patterns and earth history have occurred within the area. The necessary combination of bedrock exposures of the proper age and good preservation of fossils provides research and collecting opportunities rare for this geological time period. Importance Criteria: The Bug Creek area has produced fossils and provided research data that has proven to be highly significant to the scientific community within the United States as well as worldwide. Comparison of fossils and other data collected here has given scientists insight about the end of the dinosaur age and the start of the mammal age, such as the types of animals and plants present, the environment in which they lived, and the cause and effects of the mass extinction at the close of the Cretaceous Period. This fossil material and information is fragile and needs to be researched in place. Special management attention is needed to afford proper protection. In addition, the resource is best served by the public ownership of the land, thereby assuring access to the scientific community. Summary: The Hell Creek Formation and the overlying Tullock Member of the Fort Union Formation are significant for paleontologic resources spanning the time from the late Cretaceous Period to the early Tertiary Period. The outcrops of these beds are some of the few places in the world that preserve a continuous record before, during, and after the mass extinction of the dinosaurs and other forms of life. The Bug Creek area is one of the best and most studied examples of this record, owing to the extensive exposures of the bedrock and the preservation of the fossils. Many scientific papers have been written based on research from this area. The area will continue to provide information as new material weathers out of the rock. Protection of the area is important to preserve the paleontologic values in this significant area. This area is recommended for designation as a paleontologic area of critical environmental concern. HELL CREEK: Nominated for paleontological values and the Hell Creek National Natural Landmark (see maps 11 and 12A). Relevance Criteria: This area exhibits characteristics for consideration as an area of critical environmental concern under the relevance criterion “a natural process or system.” The geologic formations and the associated fossils are a rare example of a continuous record of the end of the dinosaur age at the close of the Cretaceous Period and the subsequent beginning of the age of the mammals during the start of the Tertiary Period. This area preserves one of the best records of this time period. The area has produced fossils for display and research. Field studies of depositional patterns and earth history have occurred within the area. The necessary combination of bedrock exposure of the proper age and good preservation of fossils provides research and collecting opportunities rare for this geological time period. Importance Criteria: The Hell Creek area has produced fossils and provided research data that has proven to be highly significant to the scientific community within the United States as well as worldwide. Comparison of fossils and other data collected here has given scientists insight about the end of the dinosaur age and the start of the mammal age, such as the types of animals and plants present, the environment in which they lived, and the cause and effects of the mass extinction at the close of the Cretaceous Period. This fossil material and information is fragile and needs to be researched in place. Special management attention is needed to afford proper protection. In addition, the resource is best served by the public ownership of the land, thereby assuring access to the scientific community. Summary: The Hell Creek Formation and the overlying Tullock Member of the Fort Union Formation are significant for their paleontologic resources spanning the time from the late Cretaceous Period to the early Tertiary Period. The outcrops of these beds are some of the few places in the world that preserve a continuous record before, during, and after the mass extinction of the dinosaurs and other forms of life. The Hell Creek area is probably the best and most studied example of this record, owing to the extensive exposures of the bedrock and the preservation of the fossils. The area has provided museums with displays of dinosaurs and scientific papers based on research from this area. Approximately one-half of the Hell Creek National Natural Landmark is included within the boundaries of this area. The area will continue to provide information as new material weathers out of the rock. Protection of the area is important to preserve the paleontologic values in this significant area. This area is recommended for designation as a paleontologic area of critical environmental concern. SAND ARROYO: Nominated for paleontological values (see map 11). Relevance Criteria: This area exhibits characteristics for consideration as an area of critical environmental concern under the relevance criterion as “a natural process or system.” The geologic formations and the associated fossils are a rare example of a continuous record of the end of the dinosaur age at the close of the Cretaceous Period and the subsequent beginning of the age of the mammals during the start of the Tertiary Period. This area preserves a good record of this time period and is relatively rare worldwide. The area has produced fossils for display and research. Field studies of depositional patterns and earth history have occurred within the area. The necessary combination of

213

APPENDIX ACEC bedrock exposure of the proper age and good preservation of fossils provides research and collecting opportunities rare for this geological time period. Importance Criteria: The Sand Arroyo area has produced fossils and provided research data that has proven to be highly significant to the scientific community within the United States as well as worldwide. Comparison of fossils and other data collected here has given scientists insight about the end of the dinosaur age and the start of the mammal age, such as the types of animals and plants present, the environment in which they lived, and the cause and effects of the mass extinction at the close of the Cretaceous Period. This fossil material and information is fragile and needs to be researched in place. Special management attention is needed to afford proper protection. In addition, the resource is best served by the public ownership of the land, thereby assuring access to the scientific community. Summary: The Hell Creek Formation and the overlying Tullock Member of the Fort Union Formation are significant for their paleontologic resources spanning the late Cretaceous Period to the early Tertiary Period. The outcrops of these beds are some of the few places in the world that preserve a continuous record before, during, and after the mass extinction of the dinosaurs and other forms of life. The Sand Arroyo area is a good example of this record, owing to the extensive exposures of the bedrock and the preservation of the fossils. A number of scientific papers have been written based on research done in this area. The area will continue to provide information as new material weathers out of the rock. Protection of the area is important to preserve the paleontologic values in this significant area. This area is recommended as an area of critical environmental concern. LIMBER PINE: Nominated for its unique vegetation (see map 4B). Relevance Criteria: The scattered limber pine stand in the Terry Badlands Wilderness Study Area (3,212 acres) does not meet any of the four criteria for relevance. It is not an endangered, sensitive, or threatened plant species. It is not rare in terms of national or state occurrence. It is not common in the planning area, but does occur in the Missouri River Breaks and outside the planning area near the town of Ekalaka (80 miles south of the Terry Badlands Wilderness Study Area). Importance Criteria: The limber pine stand possesses local significance. Criterion 2 could apply on a local level. Limber pine does occur in other parts of the planning area. Criteria 1, 3, 4, and 5 do not apply. Summary: This area was recommended for special management and protection in the New Prairie Management Framework Plan (USDI, BLM 1981b). On November 30, 1990, data on limber pine was requested and received from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Intermountain Fire Science Laboratory in Missoula, Montana. This information was complied by E. E. Ahleuslager in March 1987, and was entered into the data base for “The Fire Effects Information System” (USDA, Forest Service 1987). Literature verifies that limber pine is found as far east as North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and at lower elevations throughout its distribution range. However, limber pine stands are not common in the planning area. The elevational range for limber pine in Montana is around 4,000 feet, and this particular stand is at 2,800 to 3,000 feet. As the management actions for limber pine will adequately protect and preserve this species in the planning area, this area is not recommended as an area of critical environmental concern. TEN MILE RIPARIAN AREA: Nominated for unique riparian values (see map 22). Relevance Criteria: Located in T. 10 N., R. 51 E., secs. 2 and 3 this nomination meets relevance criteria 1 through 3. The area contains some high-yield freshwater springs and related hardwood draws that are not common for this part of semi-arid eastern Montana. The area is uncommon because of the size of the spring area and the volume of water produced. The vegetative community dependent on the presence of this free water is unusually diverse and large for the planning area. The greatest value of this site is species diversity. The area provides brood-rearing habitat for upland and nongame birds, as well as big game habitat. The fact that the spring area is covered with brush makes it a high-quality watering area and offers escape cover for wildlife. Importance Criteria: This nomination meets importance criteria 1 and 2. The size of the system and the water yield make it significant for vegetation and in terms of wildlife values already discussed under the “Relevance” section. A riparian demonstration area has been managed as a part of Ten Mile Creek since 1988. This management includes additional livestock watering sources, enhancing riparian values and restricting livestock from a 16-acre plot to protect the spring source and associated riparian vegetation. Monitoring has verified this management is effective and enhances the riparian resources. In accordance with BLM policy, riparian areas are managed to restore and maintain riparian/wetland areas so that 75 percent or more are in proper functioning condition by 1997.

214

APPENDIX ACEC Summary: Existing management is protecting and enhancing the riparian values of this area; therefore designating the area as an area of critical environmental concern is not necessary. BALD EAGLE NESTS: Nominated for nests for the bald eagle. Relevance Criteria: The mature cottonwood stands associated with the Yellowstone River (shorelines and islands) are potential nesting habitat for the endangered bald eagle. Importance Criteria: Potential habitat for the bald eagle is significant and valuable. This habitat is important since an endangered species of national significance could inhabit it. Summary: Although this area meets the relevance and importance criteria, this nomination is not being recommended. The reason is that currently no bald eagles are known to nest on public land in this planning area. This is not to say that bald eagles will not occupy public land in the future. BLACK-FOOTED FERRET REINTRODUCTION AREA: Nominated as potential black-footed ferret reintroduction area as well as habitat for associated wildlife species (see map 23). Relevance Criteria: Prairie dog complexes of 1,000 acres or more are potential habitat for the black-footed ferret. This area is considered a potential reintroduction area for the black-footed ferret because it has 1,151 public acres of active prairie dog towns. Also the prairie dog complexes provide habitat for associated species. It meets the relevance criteria stated in BLM Manual 1613.1.11A2. Importance Criteria: Habitat for the black-footed ferret is rare, significant, and valuable, and therefore, satisfies the importance criteria (BLM Manual 1613.2 B1-4). This area is important because of its national significance for potential black-footed ferret reintroduction. This area warrants protection under the Endangered Species Act of 1972 and Federal Land Policy and Management Act 1976 guidelines. In addition, prairie dog towns provide habitat for over 30 associated wildlife species, including the burrowing owl (species of special interest), swift fox (category 2 species), and the mountain plover (category 1 species). Summary: The black-footed ferret is an endangered species dependent on prairie dog colonies. Currently, the only black-footed ferrets known to occur in the wild were those released in the Shirley basin of Wyoming in 1991. No other black-footed ferrets are known to exist outside captivity. In order for the black-footed ferret to recover, it will be necessary to establish ten separate self-sustaining colonies. Since there may not be 10 suitable reintroduction sites in the nation, all reintroduction areas are nationally important. One possible reintroduction site is located in Prairie and Custer counties (Custer Creek site). This area lies west of Terry and is generally comprised of the Hunter and Custer Creek drainages north of the Yellowstone River. This area was chosen because it has 1,151 public acres of prairie dog colonies. This area meets the relevance and importance criteria and is recommended as an area of critical environmental concern. Over 30 wildlife species are associated with prairie dog towns. In addition to the endangered black-footed ferret, burrowing owls, swift fox, and the mountain plover are associated with prairie dog habitat. FOX CREEK: Nominated for unique fisheries values (see map 26). Relevance Criteria: The unique fisheries values associated with Fox Creek are not present. A perennial stream, with any fish present is somewhat unique in eastern Montana. However, the species of fish present in Fox Creek can be found in other perennial streams within the planning area. Importance Criteria: Fox Creek, although unique for the planning area, is only locally important. For this reason, Fox Creek does not meet the importance criteria. Summary: Fox Creek (T. 23 N., R. 54 E.) was originally nominated for an area of critical and environmental concern in the Redwater Management Framework Plan (USDI, BLM 1983a). Monitoring has determined that the creek does not contain a significant or unique fisheries. It is recommended this site not be considered as an area of critical environmental concern. LEAST TERN NESTS: Nominated for nests of least terns. Relevance Criteria: The gravel islands of the Yellowstone River are potential habitat for the federally endangered least tern. Importance Criteria: These graveled islands are nationally significant in terms of being habitat for the least tern. With the unregulated flows characteristic of the Yellowstone River graveled islands suitable for nesting least terns are rare. Summary: Although this area meets the relevance and importance criteria, nomination as an area of critical environmental concern is not recommended. The least tern,

215

APPENDIX ACEC being somewhat nomadic in its nesting, has not established preference for any specific island. Although least terns are known to inhabit public land, to this date no nests are known to occur on public land. PIPING PLOVER SITE: Nominated for a piping plover nest (see map 27). Relevance Criteria: Since this area is habitat for a threatened species it meets the relevance criteria (BLM Manual 1613.1.IIA2). Importance Criteria: Habitat for the piping plover has substantial significance and value, and thus, satisfies the importance criteria (BLM Manual 1613.2 B1-4). This habitat is important because (1) the area is of regional significance since threatened species inhabit it; (2) saline wetlands are somewhat rare since they are fragile, sensitive, unique, and vulnerable to adverse change; and (3) since a threatened species inhabit this area, this warrants protection under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended and Federal Land Policy and Management Act guidelines. Summary: The piping plover is a threatened species associated with saline wetland, typical of northeastern Montana. This species is protected because it is classified as a threatened species by the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. One parcel of BLM-administered land, described as T. 36 N., R. 58 E., sec. 24, lot 12 and located in Sheridan County is known to contain nesting piping plovers. This parcel of BLM-administered land is 15.51 acres in size and borders a saline wetland near the town of Westby. This site meets the relevance and importance criteria and is recommended as an area of critical environmental concern.

216

APPENDIX Engineering

ENGINEERING APPENDIX
INTRODUCTION
Proposed projects will be analyzed using the “9101” process. This process will be conducted according to the BLM Manual 9101 procedures and guidelines. BLM Manuals 9101.1, 9101.11, and 9101.12, “Facility Planning” require a feasibility analysis conducted in the field by an interdisciplinary team of resource specialists. Team specialists include those with backgrounds in engineering, soil science, hydrology, wildlife, paleontology, archeology, and range conservation. Resource specialists that initiate projects are responsible for the 9101 team members participation. pumped from the top of the gravel pack to the ground level to prevent contamination of the producing aquifer. Pipelines and pumping facilities or windmills are placed to deliver the water. Pump facilities for wells may include a gas engine and pumpjack, or an electric submersible pump, or solar-powered pump. Pumping can be controlled by a time switch or pressure tank. Pump houses contain a pressure tank, valves and an electric control box. Wells can deliver water to a single water trough or to several depending on the number of gallons per minute the well yields. Generally windmills deliver water to a single stock tank but can be used to supply water to a storage tank which supplies water to a pipeline.

STRUCTURAL PROJECTS Spring Developments
Spring developments consist of capturing high water table seeps. These areas are generally located in drainage bottoms and are evident by plant species and ponded or draining water. The spring is developed by installing a collection system. The collection system can be a plastic barrier with geotextile fabric, gravel drain, or a corrugated metal pipe. All these collection systems are then attached to a buried polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipeline. The pipeline route leaves the drainage and delivers the water to a stock tank which is located out of the drainage bottom. Sufficient water would be left at the original spring to ensure that riparian vegetation would be protected. Overflow water from the trough would be piped back to the original drainage. The spring would be fenced for the protection of soil and vegetation. Each spring development would disturb about 1/2 acre. When possible the stock tank will be located at least 400 yards out of the drainage bottom.

Reservoirs
Retention reservoirs are placed on drainages. Site selection is dependent on locating an acceptable spillway since this is generally the weak link in reservoir construction. Good spillways are natural, shallow to flat sloped and vegetated. They must be designed to ensure flood routing of a minimum 25 year frequency storm (assuming the reservoir is full). Construction for the embankment consists of moving soils to create a dam across the drainage. Usually soils are removed from the reservoir’s storage area which increases its life and holding capacity. Pit type reservoirs are constructed on shallow drainages, basins, or dry lake beds. Construction consists of digging or blasting a pit to a predetermined size, depending on surface water availability. Small embankments (from soils removed from the pit) are usually placed below the pit to increase its storage capacity. At least 15 to 20 acres of drainage is required to ensure an adequate amount of available water. Ideally, reservoirs should be large enough and deep enough to hold water throughout the year. Surface area varies from 1 acre (which would disturb a total of about 1 1/2 acres) to 5 acres (which would disturb a total of 7 acres). Reclamation to these areas takes from 2 to 4 years depending on the following year’s precipitation. The average reservoir would contain approximately 20 acre-feet of water, with a depth of 18 to 20 feet when full. Topography and other conditions may present the opportunity to create reservoirs capable of supporting a stocked fishery (generally more than 5 surface acres and 15 to 20 feet deep or more). These reservoirs could require fencing, with water either piped to a trough, or a water gap installed in the fence for livestock use. Whenever feasible an island for waterfowl is designed into the reservoir. 217

Water Troughs and Tanks
Troughs and tanks are an integral part of proposed water systems. They vary in size and are usually placed by the operator. Troughs would include a ramp so small birds and mammals could escape. Construction would disturb approximately 0.2 acre per trough.

Wells
Well construction consists of drilling and casing a hole into the aquifer. Wells are cased and developed only when the minimum number of gallons per minute needed are obtained. Casing is then installed and gravel packed to ensure the well’s longevity and quality. A bentonite slurry is

APPENDIX Engineering

Pipelines
Pipelines carry water from wells to areas that lack an adequate water supply. Generally, a 1 1/2 to 2 inch polyvinyl chloride pipe is buried 6 feet deep. Pipelines must be designed to handle various types of pressure. Common items in pipeline construction are: air-vac valves, pressure reducers, flow restrictors, check and curb stop valves, and hydrants. Water troughs are installed along the pipeline where needed. Approximately 1 acre per mile is disturbed during construction. Reclamation of disturbed areas takes about 2 to 3 years.

Burning
Prescribed burning is the carefully planned use of fire for vegetation management. Burning is an inexpensive treatment method and is widely applicable. However, burning requires sufficient fuel and can be used only during ideal conditions; that is, when temperature, humidity, wind, and other factors are right. If fuels are sparse or patchy, burning can leave some areas untreated. With careful planning and application, habitat can be modified or improved.

Plowing
Plowing consists of pulling a heavy-duty multiple-disk plow through the soil, disturbing 90 to 95 percent of the shrub cover and the majority of desirable grasses and forbs. Plowing is expensive, causes ground disturbance, and cannot be used in rough, rocky areas.

Fences
Fencing facilitates implementation of grazing systems and protects riparian habitat. Where big game habitat occurs, fences will be constructed according to BLM specifications (BLM Manual H-1741-1). Approximately 1 acre per mile is disturbed by fence construction.

In-stream Structures
In-stream structures are primarily gabions or check dams of rocks or logs placed in streams and ephemeral water sources to slow water flow and diminish erosion. Structures placed in flowing streams are designed to form splash pools below the dams or gabions to improve fish habitat.

Cattle Guards
Where traffic warrants, cattle guards are located where fences cross roads. Cattle guards are 8 feet wide and 12 to 24 feet long, depending on traffic type and pattern.

LAND TREATMENTS
Vegetation manipulation is accomplished by various methods such as spraying, burning, and plowing. Treatment methods are determined by vegetation composition and age class, soil surface characteristics, terrain, slope, precipitation, conflicts with other resources, cost effectiveness, and legal constraints. Water spreaders (small dikes constructed with the terrain contour to enhance water spreading over the entire area) are utilized to enlarge water placement and plant utilization. Approximately 1 acre per mile is disturbed by spreader dikes. After treatment, a rangeland drill or aircraft is used to seed the area artificially with forage species adapted to local conditions. The area is then rested for two growing seasons.

RECREATION DEVELOPMENTS
Recreation sites are generally small developments. They consist of installing small picnic areas with tables, fire rings and grills, and in some cases toilet facilities. Hiking, riding trails, and boat ramps may be developed in areas having potential for this type of development.

ROADS
Road development is limited to areas where there is a demand for it. Development would include cut and fill, ditch and shoulder work, realignment of existing roads, and in some cases hauling in gravel. To date, no new roads have been constructed for the purpose of access as BLM usually gains easements on existing roads. Some roads have been improved by contract work or by BLM equipment operators. The potential for road development exists for access into large BLM tracts or larger new recreation sites. The BLM Division of Operations maintains the existing transportation system in the Miles City Office. The transportation system or plan (USDI, BLM 1987e) shows all BLM roads whether maintained annually or periodically.

Spraying
Chemical control of noxious weeds consists of spraying the plants with herbicide from an airplane or by ground application. Spraying decreases competition while preserving existing grasses, but it also affects forbs and desirable shrubs.

218

APPENDIX Lands

LANDS APPENDIX
WITHDRAWALS
Revocation for four Bureau of Reclamation withdrawals is recommended in the planning area. Rights-of-way would be issued for existing structures and uses in accordance with the draft Interim Interagency Agreement between the BLM and the Bureau of Reclamation, dated November 1990, and subsequent revisions. Upon revocation, these public lands will be opened to the public land laws and managed similarly to the adjacent public lands. Acreages not included in these tabulations are lands that have either been sold or acquired by the Bureau of Reclamation, and the withdrawals will be revoked upon completion of the withdrawal review.

TABLE 50 EXISTING WITHDRAWALS Additional Acreage to Withdraw 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Continue1 Existing Withdrawal (Acreage) 293.46 24,508.07 160.00 26.32 0 0 0 0 290,222.45 3,756.11 0 0 9,851.56 Revoke1 Existing Withdrawal (Acreage) 0 0 0 0 859.90 913.60 237.53 36.69 0 206,976.45 160.00 113.53 0

Name

Existing Acreage Withdrawn

International Boundary 293.46 Medicine Lake National Wildlife Refuge 24,508.07 Fox Lake Game Management Area 160.00 Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wildlife 26.32 Lower Yellowstone Project 859.90 Fort Buford Project 913.60 Public Water Reserve 107 (McCone) 237.53 Milk River Project 36.69 Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge 290,222.45 Corps of Engineers Fort Peck 210,732.56 Public Water Reserve 107 (Garfield) 160.00 Buffalo Rapids Project Bureau of Reclamation 113.53 Fort Keogh Livestock Experiment Station 9,851.56 Overlap Total
1

(207,176.45) 330,939.22 0 328,817.97 209,297.70

acreages are recommended.

International Boundary Daniels and Sheridan Counties This withdrawal affects 158.04 acres of surface and minerals within Daniels County and 135.42 acres within Sheridan County. The purpose of the withdrawal is to establish a buffer zone between the United States and Canada. The withdrawal segregates the lands from all forms of entry, including mineral entry, they are open to lease under the 1920 Mineral Leasing Act. No action regarding revocation or modification is recommended on this withdrawal. 219

Medicine Lake National Wildlife Refuge Sheridan and Roosevelt Counties This withdrawal affects 22,741.63 acres of subsurface minerals and 994.41 surface acres of public lands within Sheridan County. In Roosevelt County, 1766.44 acres of subsurface minerals and 40 acres of public surface are withdrawn. The withdrawal established the Medicine Lake National Wildlife Refuge for the purpose of waterfowl protection. The lands are segregated from all forms of entry, including mineral entry; however, they are open to leasing

APPENDIX Lands under the 1920 Mineral Leasing Act. No modification of this withdrawal is recommended. Fox Lake Game Management Area Richland County This withdrawal affects 160 acres in T. 22 N., R. 55 E., Principal Montana Meridian, sec. 10: S1/2NW1/4, N1/ 2SW1/4. The lands are primarily utilized as wetlands habitat. The lands are closed to entry, including location under the General Mining Law of 1872. Additionally, these lands are closed to oil and gas leasing pursuant to the classification agreement of February 5, 1965. No modification of this withdrawal is recommended. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Waterfowl Production Area Sheridan County This withdrawal affects 26.32 acres of subsurface minerals and public surface. The land is situated in the extreme northeast corner of Montana, within the Prairie Potholes region. No modification or revocation of this withdrawal is recommended. The withdrawal segregates the lands from all forms of entry, including mineral entry; however, they are open to leasing under the 1920 Mineral Leasing Act. Lower Yellowstone Project Bureau of Reclamation Richland and Dawson Counties This withdrawal affects 858.71 acres of public land. The lands lie along the Yellowstone River, roughly from Glendive to the mouth of the Yellowstone River in western North Dakota. Several withdrawal actions were enacted between 1903 and 1969 for the project. A majority of the lands were second form withdrawals, allowing homestead entry subject to specific conditions. Entry, other than by homesteading, was not allowed under the withdrawal. Exact acreages will be determined during the review process. All lands were subsequently open to mineral leasing following the passage of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. It is recommended that 858.71 acres be revoked. Public Water Reserve 107 McCone County A total of 237.53 acres of public lands are withdrawn as public water reserves within McCone County. Of this, 200 acres lie within the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge boundary. This withdrawal will be revoked, since reservations of local water sources are no longer needed to protect public interests. This will open 37.53 acres to public land laws, while the remaining 200 acres will be subject to the conditions of the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge withdrawal. Milk River Project Bureau of Reclamation McCone County There was a withdrawal of 36.39 acres in McCone County for the Bureau of Reclamation’s Milk River Project. This withdrawal was combined for review with the Milk River Project in the Lewistown District. Withdrawal on two parcels is in effect along the Missouri River in McCone County for the projects. One of the withdrawn parcels has been significantly eroded through reliction from the lands initially withdrawn. The withdrawals segregate the lands from entry, including mineral entry under the General Mining Law, but are open for leasing under the 1920 Mineral Leasing Act. Withdrawal review of these lands is being conducted by the Lewistown District as part of the Milk River Project. The withdrawal is recommended to be revoked. Fort Buford Project Bureau of Reclamation A withdrawal for the Fort Buford Project along the Yellowstone River is in effect in Dawson and Richland counties. The withdrawal segregated the lands from all forms of entry, including mineral entry, but is open to mineral leasing. There are 913.60 acres of public land under withdrawal. Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge McCone and Garfield Counties A total of 290,222.45 acres of public lands are withdrawn in Garfield and McCone counties for refuge purposes. Federal minerals underlying the private surface are subject to the conditions of the withdrawal. The withdrawal segregates the lands from all forms of entry, including mineral entry. Mineral leasing is restricted only to cases involving drainage, and does not permit surface occupancy. Of the public lands withdrawn, 206,976.45 acres are also included in the Corps of Engineers withdrawal for the Fort Peck Dam. Withdrawal review is presently underway to remove the Corps of Engineers withdrawals, except for locations possessing physical improvements, or lands needed for the operation of the dam and hydroelectric facilities.

220

APPENDIX Lands Corps of Engineers - Fort Peck Dam McCone and Garfield Counties A total of 210,732.56 acres of public lands are withdrawn for the Corps of Engineers. Of these, 206,976.45 acres overlap the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge withdrawal. The withdrawal segregates the land from entry, with the exception of restricted mineral entry for metalliferous mining. It is recommended that a majority of the lands be relinquished. Those lands utilized for the operation of the dam and hydroelectric facilities will remain under the effect of the withdrawal. Public Water Reserve 107 Garfield County A 160-acre public water reserve was withdrawn by a Secretarial Order, dated November 7, 1935. Public water reserves are closed to entry, except mineral entry (hard rock), and are open to oil and gas leasing. This withdrawal will be revoked, as reservations of local water sources are no longer needed to protect public interests. Buffalo Rapids Project Bureau of Reclamation Dawson and Prairie Counties A total of 113.53 acres are withdrawn in Prairie and Dawson Counties for the Buffalo Rapids Project. This was a first form withdrawal, closing the land to all forms of entry. Mineral leasing is allowed. This withdrawal has been recommended for revocation, as there are no physical improvements. Relinquishment will open these lands to operation under existing statutes. Fort Keogh Livestock Experiment Station Custer County The Fort Keogh Livestock Experiment Station was established by an Act of Congress in 1924. Prior to dedication of these lands for livestock research, the lands were reserved as a waterfowl refuge, predated by a military reserve. The lands are withdrawn from all forms of entry, including mineral entry. Mineral leasing is allowed under the terms of the withdrawal. Since the withdrawal was invoked by Congress, revocation can only occur by an Act of Congress. No revocation or modification of this withdrawal is proposed. The withdrawal affects 9,851.56 acres of land north of the Yellowstone River within the planning area.

221

APPENDIX Livestock

LIVESTOCK GRAZING MANAGEMENT APPENDIX
INTRODUCTION
Periodically the BLM issues Rangeland Program Summaries and updates to report on progress toward meeting land use plan objectives. The Big Dry Environmental Impact Statement Vegetation Allocation (USDI, BLM 1982b) is environmental documentation addressing livestock grazing. In that document the preferred alternative was for continued development for optimum range utilization. The most recent range and program summary update for the Big Dry Resource Area was issued March, 1984. There have been eight new allotment management plans implemented and five existing allotment management plans revised since the rangeland program summary update in 1984. They are included in table 54 found at the end of this appendix. Range improvement projects completed by or in cooperation with the BLM since 1984 include 26 springs, 33 wells, 59 pits or reservoirs, 47 miles of fence, 56 miles of pipeline, and 3,273 acres of mechanical treatments. These projects were completed at a cost of $739,773. Approximately 1,000 to 1,500 acres of noxious weeds have been treated with herbicides at an average annual cost of $76,300. No major surveys of vegetation condition or production have been conducted to verify changes. Data for allotment management plans in table 54 show a stable or upward trend. Most of the range improvements and activity plans have been developed on allotments where vegetation condition was not adequate to meet authorized levels of livestock use or where livestock use conflicted with wildlife or nonconsumptive uses. No permanent increases in livestock preference have been authorized since 1984. Reductions in authorized livestock use have occurred from 1984 to 1991 on the allotments shown in table 51. Range condition for allotments is found in table 52. All allotments are issued a grazing permit or lease. Livestock use (grazing preference, kind of livestock, and season of use) is authorized under a permit or lease for a period of ten years or less (see table 53).

MONITORING
Monitoring is defined as the orderly collection, analysis, and interpretation of resource data to evaluate progress in meeting management objectives. Resource objectives from land use plans and activity plans establish a framework and criteria for determining the necessary level of monitoring intensity and reliability. Baseline vegetation inventory data is used as a basis for monitoring, where available. Monitoring includes inventories of vegetation and range improvements, vegetation measurements, use supervision, actual use surveys and climatic data. Inventories of range condition will be used to adjust stocking rates or to determine trend. Inventories of range improvements are used to determine the condition of existing range improvements, the need for future range improvements, and their value to proper grazing management. Vegetation measurements will include trend, production and utilization studies. Studies are designed to determine if objectives are being met or further revisions or adjustments are needed in management. Studies are located in key areas and are designed to measure success or failure towards meeting the objectives for the allotment. Key areas will show response to changes in management. One specific method of vegetation sampling will not be standardized since studies must be designed to fit the resources and objectives. Once a method of sampling is established, data

TABLE 51 ALLOTMENTS WITH LIVESTOCK USE REDUCTIONS

Allotment Number 0727 1033 1147

Allotment Name Spring Coulee Degrand Hegge

Original Preference (AUMs) 388 470 843

Current Preference (AUMs) 317 161 532

Initiated By BLM Permittee BLM

Protest None None None

223

APPENDIX Livestock will continue to be gathered using this method as long as it continues to provide adequate information for evaluating the objective. Actual use surveys are requested from the livestock operator to verify livestock numbers and use within an allotment. Use supervision is an important part of the monitoring program since compliance to proper stocking levels and season of use helps maintain and improve range condition. Category C custodial criteria include: 1. 2. 3. 4. Present ecological status is not a factor. Allotments have low resource production potential and are producing near their potential. Limited resource use conflicts or controversy may exist. Opportunities for positive economic return from public investments do not exist, or are constrained by technological or economic factors. Present management is accomplishing the desired results. Percent of public land and number of acres does not provide for effective management influence by the BLM.

5.

ALLOTMENT CATEGORIZATION
6. Allotment categorization was developed to provide for the orderly administration of grazing by domestic livestock (BLM Manual H-1622, appendix 1). Grazing allotments and rangeland areas used for livestock grazing are assigned to an allotment category. Allotments are divided into three categories: “M” maintain, “I” improve, and “C” custodial. The allotment management plans in the planning area are categorized as shown in table 54 at the end of this appendix. The following criteria are applied when placing an allotment into one of the three categories. An allotment does not have to meet all criteria to be placed in a particular category. Category M maintain criteria include: 1. Greater than 70 percent of public land is in late seral potential natural community or is meeting desired plant community. Allotments have moderate to high resource production potential and are producing near their potential. No serious resource use conflicts or controversy exist. Opportunities may exist for positive economic return from public investments. Present management is accomplishing the desired results.

Adjustments
Allotments can be moved from one category to another as new information becomes available, resource conditions change, or management activities are implemented. Such changes must be consistent with the category criteria discussed above. Such changes must also be supported by a documented analysis showing the basis for the change. An allotment in “I” category can be moved to a “M” category prior to reaching >70 percent for public land in good or excellent condition if an allotment management plan or similar activity plan is developed and range condition is in an upward trend. This will allow for BLM resources to shift to allotments with higher priorities and conflicts.

2. 3. 4. 5.

Consultation
To be meaningful, categorization requires public involvement. The District and Area Managers are the authorized officers responsible for determining the appropriate timing and method for achieving the necessary consultation. The public participation requirements of resource management planning are used when timing permits. At a minimum, the authorized officer will ensure consultation with affected rangeland users, resource management agencies, and other affected parties during the selection and application of category criteria, placement of allotments into categories, and subsequent evaluations to determine needed changes in the placement of allotments. Consultation efforts will be directed toward gaining an understanding of the role of categorization in developing priorities, defining management objectives, and developing a monitoring and evaluation program as defined in BLM Manual 1622. When proposing an allotment management plan, the permittee and any other affected party must be consulted.

Category I improve criteria include: 1. Greater than 30 percent of public land is in early or mid-seral status or is not meeting desired plant community objectives. Allotments have moderate to high resource production potential, but are producing at low to moderate levels. Serious resource use conflicts or controversy exist. Opportunities exist for positive economic return from public investments. Opportunities exist to achieve the allotment’s potential through changes in management. Unique values require management emphasis.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

224

APPENDIX Livestock

Relationship to the Rangeland Resource Program
The intent of categorization of allotments is to concentrate funding and on-the-ground management efforts to those allotments where grazing management is needed to improve the resources, or the Area Manager will use the categorization of allotments to assign priorities and select allotments for: (1) implementing management actions (through activity planning), (2) distributing funds, (3) monitoring and evaluation (including intensity), and (4) implementing other aspects of the rangeland resource program. The program and related activities are implemented through administrative and management policies and procedures defined in BLM Manuals 4100, 4400, and 1622.

green ash. Portions of the uplands are dominated by blue grama. Riparian areas and uplands have been overutilized by livestock. Degraded water quality. Objectives: Increase cover of rushes, buffaloberry, willow, and ash. Implement a grazing system with proper stocking levels. Improve ecological status of uplands. 0419 - Category M Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Wilderness study area, elk and deer habitat. Objectives: Continue grazing management to limit conflict with other uses. 0720 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Excessive soil erosion, degraded riparian vegetation along O’Fallon Creek, unsatisfactory vegetation condition, and heavy utilization. Potential habitat improvement for turkey, grouse, beaver, and deer. Objectives: Develop grazing management for improved vegetation condition and cover, improved riparian, and adequate residual cover for ground nesting birds. 1048 and 1182 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Range condition is unsatisfactory, formerly a heavy infestation of leafy spurge which has decreased in density but still extensively scattered, poor livestock distribution, areas with compacted soil layers supporting blue grama and club moss. Checkerboard land pattern. Objectives: Improve and maintain ecological condition to late seral or higher. Improve distribution by developing water and fencing. Apply mechanical treatment with livestock management to improve vegetation productivity. Control noxious weeds, including leafy spurge, with a combination of methods including chemical and biological. 1052 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Vegetation condition is unsatisfactory. Objectives: Improve vegetation condition. 1059 and 1246 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Limited water in uplands. Custer Creek vegetation not at potential. Unsatisfactory vegetation condition. Soil and vegetation loss in prairie dog towns. Leafy spurge. Antelope and deer winter range. Sage grouse, waterfowl, and beaver habitat. Wilderness Study Area. Objectives: Develop water, fences, and grazing management for improving vegetation, riparian and watershed condition. Mechanical treatment of areas for

Allotments With Proposed Allotment Management Plans
Potential allotment management plans are primarily “I” category allotments with high priority or opportunity for allotment management plan development. 0102 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Vegetation condition is unsatisfactory and overutilization of vegetation. Objectives: Develop grazing management for improved vegetation condition and cover. 0139 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Overutilization of vegetation. Unreliable water in west end. Range and watershed condition is unsatisfactory. Objectives: Develop grazing management for improved vegetation and watershed condition. 0351 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Vegetation condition is unsatisfactory and overutilization of vegetation. Objectives: Develop grazing management for improved vegetation condition and cover. 0386 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Unsatisfactory vegetation condition. Objectives: Improve vegetation condition through grazing management. 0389 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Hungry and Cheer creeks have rushes, buffaloberry, willow, and 225

APPENDIX Livestock improved vegetation production. Maintain adequate levels of sagebrush for grouse, antelope and deer. Control prairie dogs if the area is not selected as a black-footed ferret reintroduction site. Control noxious weeds. 1069 and 1330 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Past disproportionate use due to lack of water and a seasonal use pattern resulted in range deterioration on portions of the allotment. Management of the allotment has improved through the years. Mule deer, antelope, sage grouse, and raptors have been observed. Ferruginous hawks are present and are listed as a species of special concern. Objectives: Improve ecological status through grazing management and insure that management actions do not negatively impact ferruginous hawks or their habitat. 1124 - Category M Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Lacks water and management system, as ownership has been unstable and overgrazing has occurred. Objectives: Collect information and make recommendation. 1226 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Contains a high density of green ash draws (41 acres), plus two stands of aspen. Twenty-five percent of the green ash draws have inadequate regeneration and 25 percent of the range in mid seral status. Objectives: Improve regeneration of green ash and improve ecological status. 1247 - Category M Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Allotment with livestock distribution problems. Objectives: Present management is improving vegetation, monitor to ensure improvement continues. 1287 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Extensive green ash draws that are grazed summer long, resulting in a loss in regeneration and woody understory. Objectives: Develop a grazing system for improved woody regeneration and livestock distribution. 1313 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Limited water sources in the uplands resulting in disproportionate use of riparian area along Ten Mile Creek and Powder River and areas adjacent to the riparian area. Leafy spurge. Soil loss and vegetation loss caused by prairie dogs. Improve mule and white-tailed deer habitat. Objective: Improve distribution by developing water in the uplands and provide for improvement of riparian and vegetation condition. Control noxious weeds. 1341 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Unsatisfactory range condition and poor livestock distribution. Objectives: Develop water and fence to provide for improved grazing management and vegetation condition. 1342 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: O’Fallon Creek not at potential but showing improvement. Unsatisfactory vegetation condition. Scattered land pattern. Leafy spurge. Prairie dog town. Objectives: Develop water for improved distribution, flexibility for livestock management, and continue riparian improvement. Control noxious weeds. 1355 - Category I Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Limited water and poor livestock distribution. Hardwood draws. Allotment consists of two pastures separated by six miles. Crested wheatgrass. Objectives: Provide for improved livestock distribution and maintenance of green ash draws. 1494 and 1495 - Category “I” Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Unsatisfactory range condition. Leafy spurge. Overutilization. Objectives: Improve range condition through a grazing system. Control noxious weeds.

“I” Category Allotments With Allotment Management Plans
The following “I” category allotment management plans have been developed, but the resource objectives for the allotments are not being met. 0071 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: No use supervision, sporadic monitoring with no evaluation or recommendations. Objectives: Collect adequate information for evaluation and recommendations. 0093 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Management problem, lack of water, riparian values. Objectives: Improve grazing management and water availability. 226

APPENDIX Livestock 0155 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Overgrazing, management problems. Objectives: Improve grazing management and establish proper stocking. 0283 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Overgrazing, poor livestock distribution. Objectives: Establish proper stocking and improve distribution. 0385 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Range condition, wildlife habitat, allotment management plan revision needed, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service plan coordination, livestock utilization. Objectives: Improve vegetation condition through coordination of grazing management with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 0422 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Nondependable livestock water, lack of use supervision, lack of management, riparian and wildlife concerns, and public access. Objectives: Develop a grazing schedule, improve use supervision, improve public access. 1015 and 1301 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Unsatisfactory range condition, wildlife values. Objectives: Revise AMP for improvement of vegetation condition and wildlife habitat. 1174 and 1304 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Antelope, mule deer, raptors, waterfowl, and long-billed curlews are common. Some areas of fair condition resulted, due to a seasonal use pattern and poor distribution on portions of the allotment. Objectives: An allotment management plan was implemented in 1992 with a goal of improving ecological status in key areas. 1236 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Lack of regeneration in green ash draws. Objectives: Provide for regeneration of green ash and associated species. 1249 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: The original allotment management plan was outdated and portions of the allotment remain in mid-ecological status. An allotment management plan revision was recently com227 pleted. Objectives: Increase chokecherry, rose, and green ash on suitable sites and improve ecological status. 1254 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Range condition, prairie dogs, Cherry Creek Dam project, history of varying ownership, riparian values along Yellowstone River and Cherry Creek. Objectives: Develop grazing system. 1282 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: An area with springs and gravelly drainages. It has potential for willows, cottonwoods, and possibly green ash. Some areas in low ecological status. Antelope and upland game birds. Vegetation condition had improved due to a 1975 allotment management plan and the 1992 revision was developed for improvement of the uplands and riparian areas. Objectives: Improve ecological status and increase woody riparian species and vegetation cover in the drainages. 1303 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: The majority of the allotment is in fair condition. Objectives: Improve livestock distribution and utilization of crested wheatgrass. Increase needleandthread and western wheatgrass while decreasing blue grama and red three-awn grass. 1312 and 1327 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: High value riparian area. Objectives: Improve riparian vegetation.

Remaining “I” Category Allotments
The remaining “I” category allotments are allotments where allotment management plans could be developed or resource conflicts could be resolved with other methods. 0014 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Unsatisfactory range condition. Opportunity for riparian vegetation improvement. Multiple ownership of livestock. Objectives: Improve grazing management. 0025 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Land pattern, percent public land, utilization along Glendive Creek. Objectives: Develop grazing schedule in coordination with Soil Conservation Service ranch plan.

APPENDIX Livestock 0030 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Range condition. Objectives: Collect information and develop recommendation. 0057 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Fair range condition with areas of clubmoss and blue grama. Objectives: Improve vegetation production and condition through mechanical treatment and grazing management. 0216 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Management problem. Objectives: Improve use supervision and grazing management. 0287 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Lack of vegetation cover, multiple ownership, high value riparian area. Objectives: Improve inventory and establish grazing management. 0310 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Unsatisfactory range condition. Objectives: Improve vegetation condition. 0373 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Scattered land pattern, stocking level, no use supervision. Objectives: Develop management coordination, cooperation with soil conservation service and permittee. 0405 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Unsatisfactory range condition. Historical overutilization. Scattered land pattern. Objectives: Establish grazing management and proper stocking. 0653 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: History of heavy utilization. Presently fair condition with upward trend. Riparian values. Objectives: Establish a grazing system. 0655 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Heavy utilization. Vegetation having poor vigor. Fair range condition and excessive soil erosion. Objectives: Improve grazing management and establish proper stocking. 1017 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Vegetation con228 dition and production below potential. Scattered land pattern. Objectives: Review allotment for reconsideration of categorization due to scattered land pattern. 1021 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Lack of vegetation cover. Increase in broom snakeweed. Objectives: Review allotment and make recommendation. 1121 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Leafy spurge, scattered land pattern, small percent public land. Objectives: Biological control of spurge and coordinated management. 1122 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Fair range condition. Scattered land pattern. Objectives: Improve range condition through improved grazing management. 1142 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Vegetation condition is not at potential. Checkerboard land pattern. Objectives: Develop or document grazing management in cooperation with operator. 1154 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Overutilization occurs in spring and fall. Unsatisfactory range condition. Objectives: Establish grazing management and proper stocking. 1168 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Range condition. Objectives: Collect adequate information for recommendation. 1189 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Potential for improved green ash draws. Objectives: Provide vegetative cover for ground nesting birds. Develop grazing system which allows for establishment and maintenance of hardwood and browse species. 1232 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Summer-long grazing has limited woody understory in green ash draws. Objectives: Increase regeneration of woody understory.

APPENDIX Livestock 1237 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Summer-long grazing has limited woody understory in green ash draws. Objectives: Increase regeneration of woody understory. 1256 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Hardwood draws with limited regeneration. Limited water sources resulting in poor livestock distribution. Lack of cover for sharp-tailed grouse. Continuous grazing throughout growing season. Objectives: Schedule grazing to allow for regeneration of hardwoods and provide for sharp-tailed grouse cover and habitat. Develop water where practical for improved distribution. 1279 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Unsatisfactory range condition. Heavy utilization. Objectives: Inventory for carrying capacity. 1298 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Fair range condition, sage grouse, antelope and mule deer habitat. Objectives: Develop water and grazing system for improved vegetation condition. 1302 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Unsatisfactory range condition. Objectives: Collect information and make recommendation. 1306 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Poor to fair range condition adjacent to riparian area. Opportunity for riparian condition improvement. Objectives: Develop water and grazing management for improved distribution and decrease dependency on the riparian area. 1328 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Checkerboard land pattern. Vegetation condition below potential. Objectives: Opportunity for water development and improvement by grazing system. 1349 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Fair range condition. Objectives: Collect adequate information for recommendation. 1361 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Utilization patterns, inadequate range improvements. 229 Objectives: Use supervision for billing authorization, season of use adjustment. 1401 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Scattered land pattern, percent public land limits options, limited water, past historical use. Objectives: Develop grazing schedule in coordination with Soil Conservation Service ranch plan. 1415 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Base operation practices, early season use, common allotment area. Objectives: Use supervision, coordinate grazing schedule with Soil Conservation Service. 1436 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Heavy utilization. Objectives: Establish proper stocking and grazing management. 1438 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: This allotment has a scattered land pattern and is adjacent to Makoshika State Park. It includes unique geologic features. There are opportunities for day hiking, sightseeing, and wildlife viewing. Poor livestock distribution. Objectives: Maintain and improve vegetation conditions while managing livestock grazing in harmony with recreational uses. 1482 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Unsatisfactory range condition. Objectives: Improve vegetation condition. 1513 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Small tract of public land with riparian vegetation well below potential. Objectives: Develop grazing strategy for riparian improvement. 1528 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Combined with allotment 1121. Utilization problem. Objectives: Coordinate management. 1669 Opportunities/Problems/Conflicts: Unsatisfactory condition, allotment management plan outdated, proposed wilderness area which limits grazing management options. Objectives: Develop a grazing system for improvement of vegetation condition.

APPENDIX Minerals

MINERALS APPENDIX
COAL Introduction
This summary is intended to aid in understanding the federal coal management process as it applies to the planning area. The basic requirements of coal management are detailed under the guidance in 43 CFR 3400. The objectives in managing the federal coal resource in this area are (1) to provide for the development of federal coal in an orderly and timely manner, consistent with the federal coal management program and policies, environmental integrity, and national energy needs; and (2) to identify federal coal that is acceptable for further consideration for leasing. This resource management plan and environmental impact statement provides the basis for tract specific analysis of areas considered for new competitive federal coal leasing, lease modification, exchange, and license issuance. screens identified in 43 CFR 3420.1-4. The screens are: identification of areas with coal development potential, the application of unsuitability criteria identified in 43 CFR 3461.1 (which are primarily on-site concerns), multiple land use decisions, and landowner consultation. The off-site impacts of coal development will be addressed as needed when identified in the scoping process for specific lease activity planning. This includes concerns about impacts on the agricultural community, area socioeconomics, air quality, and regional transportation.

IDENTIFICATION OF COAL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
The first step in making coal development potential determinations is the gathering of all available geologic data for the study area. The primary data sources are published and unpublished drill hole reports. This includes drilling by the U.S. Geological Survey, the BLM, the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology, the Bureau of Reclamation, and several coal companies. The government data is available in published reports and publicly accessible files held by the various agencies. The company data is mainly confidential and comes from exploration licenses, mine plan files, and drilling on privately owned coal. The drilling by federal agencies is on federally held coal. There are several publications on the coal geology of eastern Montana. These provide coal outcrop maps, coal elevations and thicknesses, and identify many areas where coal has been burned in-place. Much information is found in the records of old mines and company interest areas. This often includes coal thicknesses, depths, and quality analyses. Once the coal data has been assembled, the coal beds shown in the drilling records and maps are identified and correlated. Then coal thickness (isopach) and overburden thickness maps are prepared for each coal bed of interest. The final step preparatory to identifying coal development potential is the comparison of the overburden maps to the coal isopach maps. This results in a stripping ratio (feet of overburden to feet of coal) map. The stripping ratio is the chief parameter in the identification of the development potential of any parcel of land. The classification of development potential falls into four categories: High - coal at least 5 feet thick, overburden no greater than 150 feet thick, and stripping ratio no more than 10:1.

Coal Planning Process
The planning area is within the Fort Union Coal Region and competitive leasing is subject to oversight by the Regional Coal Team. At this time the region is decertified and not subject to regional coal sales. Individual leases can be sold without a regionwide analysis. However, tract specific analyses are required and the coal team can review the sale and determine that there is enough cumulative regional interest to justify recertifying the coal region. If this decision is made, consideration of the lease sale will become part of a regional analysis. There are four basic types of coal management actions that can be taken in the planning area: lease by application, lease modification, exchange, and license issuance. Since there is no indication of an immediate request for any of these actions, coal activity is not a major issue in this plan. Coal in the Big Dry Resource Area has low potential for underground mining. Therefore, coal planning is based on surface mining only. In each of the procedures there is a point at which an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment is prepared. The decision as to what level of study is appropriate hinges on the sensitivity and perceived impact of the action. The environmental study conducted for coal actions will include passing the tract through the four

285

APPENDIX Minerals Moderate - coal at least 5 feet thick, overburden no greater than 200 feet thick, and stripping ratio no more than 20:1. Low - coal present but does not meet the criteria for high or moderate development potential. None - no coal present. It should be noted that a major factor in development potential categorization is the availability of data. As further data becomes available the ranking of any given area can change, usually upwards. This is especially true of areas ranked as having low potential as they might be better classified as “unknown.” The potential for a section is the highest rank of any portion of that section. If any part of the section has high potential, the entire section is ranked high. This is done because a section is the smallest practical unit for classification and study at a scale suitable for the whole planning area. If specific activity planning is done in an area, more detailed investigation will be done at that time. Fort Union Region coal is ranked as lignite. The lignite heating value ranges from 5,000 to 7,500 British thermal units per pound. Eastern Montana coal typically has high moisture, and low ash and sulfur content (see table 55). The coal resources identified in the planning area shown in coal development potential maps total 19.276 billion tons (of which 47.5 percent or 9.164 billion tons is federal) (see table 56). The coal bearing Fort Union Formation covers the eastern two-thirds of the planning area. There are doubtless many areas of high and moderate potential coal which have not been identified to date. There are also areas which have been identified but are considered insignificant or inadequately understood and were left out of this study. The acquisition of new data will make for refinements in this estimate. The remaining three screening steps are applied to the coal areas identified through this first screen. Criterion 1 - Federal Land System: Lands totaling 22,852 federal coal acres were identified as unsuitable as part of the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail system. Criterion 2 - Federal Lands Within Rights-of-way or Easements, or Surface Leases for Residential, Commercial, Industrial, or Other Public Purposes: No lands were found unsuitable under this criterion. This criterion will be applied if specific coal activity proposals are made. Criterion 3 - Buffer Zones Along Road Rights-of-way and Adjacent to Communities, Public Schools, Occupied Dwellings, Churches, Public Parks, and Cemeteries: No lands were found unsuitable under this criterion. This criterion will be applied if specific coal activity proposals are made. Criterion 4 - Wilderness Study Areas: The Terry Badlands Wilderness Study Area includes 15,630 acres within the Custer Creek coal area. Consequently, 14,166 federal coal acres were found unsuitable for further consideration. Criterion 5 - Scenic Areas: The Terry Badlands Wilderness Study Area is a Class I visual resource management area. Under this criterion, the same acreage as that identified under Criterion 4 (14,166 federal coal acres) was found unsuitable. Criterion 6 - Land Used for Scientific Study: There are no federal lands within the coal areas used for scientific study. Criterion 7 - Historic Lands and Sites: There are no lands within the coal areas that are on the National Register of Historic Places. There are 2,524 federal coal acres overlain by sites considered eligible but not submitted to the register. These coal lands have been declared unsuitable under this criterion. Criterion 8 - Natural Areas: There are no designated natural areas or national natural landmarks within the coal areas. Criterion 9 - Federally Designated Critical Habitat for Threatened and Endangered Species: Under Alternative A, there is no identified area for this criterion. Under Alternatives B and C, 853 acres in the Black-footed Ferret Area of Critical Environmental Concern would overlap the Custer Creek coal area and would be designated unsuitable. Under Alternative D, 3,840 acres in the Black-footed Ferret Area of Critical Environmental Concern would overlap the Custer Creek coal area and would be designated unsuitable under this criterion. The 16 acre piping plover site is also designated unsuitable.

APPLICATION OF COAL UNSUITABILITY CRITERIA
A total of 263,608 federal coal acres were found unacceptable for further consideration for coal leasing through application of the coal unsuitability screen. This screening is preliminary and will be reviewed and completed when a specific coal tract proposal is made. Those applications that can be made for the unsuitability criteria as follows.

286

APPENDIX Minerals TABLE 55 COAL BED DATA IDENTIFIED HIGH AND MODERATE COAL AREAS Average Thickness (feet) Volatile Matter Fixed Carbon Sulfur Percent Percent Percent

Name CREEK: Pust CIRCLE: Pust P Rogers R Haugins S CUSTER CREEK: R U L GIRARD: Prittegurl Breugger Elvirio D KNOWLTON: Upper Dominy Middle Dominy Lower Dominy LAME JONES CREEK: A Lame Jones PENNEL CREEK: A B SCOBEY: E D C WEST GLENDIVE: Kolberg Ranch Peuse Poverty Flats Newton Ranch WIBAUX-BEACH: Harmon Hansen

Moisture Percent

Ash Percent

Btu/lb

23.9 15.0 6.0 10.0 5.0 7.0 12.0 6.8 20.3 7.0 7.5 5.0 14.0 6.7 28.0 8.5 9.0 6.0 7.5 11.5 11.0 3.0 8.0 3.0 8.0 12.0 8.0 9.5 15.0 9.0

38.61 38.61 NA NA NA 33.10 26.50 NA 25.60 NA 39.85 43.20 38.40 34.90 38.80 37.67 36.20 NA 38.40 32.40 NA NA 29.83 NA NA 35.68 NA 30.90 38.71 36.43

8.02 8.02 NA 6.10 NA 5.30 7.50 NA 18.80 NA 7.10 5.80 6.73 7.60 5.72 5.60 7.72 NA 10.46 8.90 NA NA 13.67 NA NA 7.44 NA 13.45 9.13 11.40

26.52 26.52 NA NA NA 26.55 26.50 NA 25.60 NA 25.65 29.00 25.67 27.10 24.64 26.07 25.85 NA 25.98 28.10 NA NA 27.25 NA NA 26.86 NA 24.76 25.30 25.00

26.81 26.81 NA NA NA 35.05 34.90 NA 30.00 NA 27.40 24.00 29.20 30.40 30.78 30.67 30.23 NA 25.60 30.10 NA NA 29.26 NA NA 29.87 NA 30.89 26.86 27.17

0.72 0.72 NA 0.40 NA 0.45 0.27 NA 0.30 NA 0.75 0.30 0.70 0.50 0.39 0.43 0.41 NA 0.61 0.51 NA NA 0.64 NA NA 0.32 NA 0.37 0.88 1.60

6,182 6,182 7,410 NA 7,455 7,223 NA 6,430 NA 6,470 5,999 6,667 6,790 6,663 6,788 6,645 NA 6,235 6,819 NA NA 6,418 NA NA 6,723 NA 6,507 6,079 6,077

KEY:Btu/lb. = British thermal unit per pound NA = not applicable

287

APPENDIX Minerals TABLE 56 HIGH AND MODERATE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL TONS AND ACRES FOR IDENTIFIED COAL AREAS (Federal Ownerships) Total Tons Recoverable (x1,000,000) 5,813 6,238 459 1,534 661 299 474 911 1,903 982 19,276 Federal Tons Recoverable (x1,000,000) 2,595 2,589 342 1,342 280 120 243 526 799 328 9,164

Coal Area Burns Creek Circle Custer Creek Girard Knowlton Lame Jones Creek Pennel Creek Scobey West Glendive Wibaux-Beach TOTAL

Total Acres 267,500 599,500 30,000 235,500 34,000 34,500 52,000 132,000 243,000 46,000 1,674,500

Federal Acres 118,828 253,617 27,191 201,924 14,176 12,685 25,923 74,035 102,477 16,524 847,379

NOTE: Tonnage estimates prepared by BLM.

Criterion 10 - State Listed Threatened and Endangered Species: No areas were listed as unsuitable under this criterion. Criterion 11 - Bald and Golden Eagle Sites: Four eagle nest sites were identified in the coal areas resulting in 2,040 acres declared unsuitable under this criterion. Criterion 12 - Bald and Golden Eagle Roost and Concentration Areas: Eagle roosting and concentration areas were identified along the Missouri and Yellowstone rivers in the Girard and Custer Creek coal areas, resulting in 5,503 federal coal acres declared unsuitable under this criterion. Criterion 13 - Falcon Nesting Sites: Prairie falcon sites were identified in the Burns Creek and Circle coal areas. A total of 4,080 federal coal acres were designated unsuitable under this criterion. Criterion 14 - Migratory Birds of High Federal Interest: No additional migratory birds of high federal interest (besides eagles) were identified in the coal areas. Criterion 15 - Habitat for Species of State Interest: A total of 213,098 federal coal acres are unsuitable under this criterion. The habitat consists of critical winter ranges for white-tailed and mule deer, antelope, and grouse leks. Criterion 16 - 100 Year Floodplains: A total of 6,300 federal coal acres were found within the Burns Creek, 288

Custer Creek, and Girard coal areas and designated unsuitable. Criterion 17 - Municipal Watersheds: No areas were identified as unsuitable under this criterion. There have been no municipal watersheds designated by the surface management agency within the coal areas. Criterion 18 - Natural Resource Waters: No areas were identified as unsuitable under this criterion. There are no natural resource waters designated within the coal areas. Criterion 19 - Alluvial Valley Floors: No areas were identified as unsuitable under this criterion. The state of Montana has the lead in designation of alluvial valley floors. It will make the designation when there is a specific coal action proposal including a mine plan. Criterion 20 - State Proposed Criteria: The state of Montana has proposed no unsuitability criteria.

MULTIPLE LAND-USE DECISIONS
There are no unsuitability conflicts that necessitate multiple use or mitigative measures. Coal mining and oil and gas production can conflict. Present management practice is to allow the companies involved the opportunity to negotiate a private settlement. BLM

APPENDIX Minerals policy is being drafted for the situation when the coal and oil and gas lease are federal. The proposal is to work on a first-come, first-served basis. The second lease issued will include the stipulation that the lessee must be prepared to hold operations in abeyance or cease permanently in favor of the prior lease.

MINE
The generic mine considered is a 5.5 million ton per year surface mine with a 40-year mine life. Mine operation is expected to disturb land at a rate of 340 acres per year or 14,000 acres over 40 years. It would take approximately 10 to 13 years for completion of the full cycle from initial disturbance through mining, reclamation, and bond release for each acre. In full production, the total area out of production in any year would be 3,400 to 4,400 acres. Soils would be continuously replaced on mined-out areas and brought back into production during the life of the mine. The low energy value and high water content of lignite coal constrains transportation of lignite. Therefore, it is assumed that an end-use facility would be near the mine.

SURFACE OWNER CONSULTATION
BLM is required by Section 714 of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act to consult with “qualified” surface owners of split estate lands (privately owned surface over federally held coal) where surface mining of the federal coal is under consideration. “Qualified” surface owners are asked to state their opinion for or against coal mining on their land. In areas of significant surface owner opposition, federal coal is removed from consideration for surface mine leasing. This screen involves only split estate lands remaining after the other three screens have been applied. Surface owner consultation has not been conducted for this resource management plan and environmental impact statement. At present there are no active proposals for new coal leasing in the planning area. Since landownership and owner qualifications will change through time, this screen will be applied when actual lease proposals are contemplated. This is in order to respond to the current landowner feelings at the moment of lease activity planning.

FACILITY
A generic coal-fired electric power generation plant would consist of two 500 megawatt units located near a lignite coal source. The facility has an average operation factor of 0.90 and a load factor of 0.85. It would be capable of delivering a maximum of approximately 900 megawatts to the existing transmission system. The facility would consist of the following units: (l) coal preparation, storage, and handling; (2) power generation; (3) pollution control and waste disposal; and (4) utility and transportation corridors. The total land area dedicated to the facility would be approximately 600 acres.

Coal Development Scenario Generic Mine and End-use Facility Description and Impacts
The purpose of this discussion is to present assumptions and impacts for coal development. The uncertainty of the location and size of the mine and end-use facility will limit this to a general discussion. This is not meant to be a substitute for a detailed site-specific analysis and environmental impact statement that may come later in response to an application for the permit to build and operate a mine and end-use facility. Nor will it preclude any federal, state, local, or private decisions concerning actual end-use, facility siting, or end-use restrictions. The following is based on the detailed analysis presented in the Draft Fort Union Regional Coal Draft Environmental Impact Statement (USDI, BLM 1982c) and related logical mine size tract site-specific analyses and the Draft North Dakota Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (USDI, BLM 1986a).

COAL PREPARATION, STORAGE, AND HANDLING
Lignite coal would be transported from a nearby mine to a 3-day storage pile or a 60-day storage pile. From the 3-day storage pile, the coal would be sent by conveyor to be crushed before being transferred to the plant silos for intermediate storage. Finally, coal would be reconditioned before introduced into the furnace for ignition. A generic plant would burn approximately 800 tons of coal per hour or about 5.5 million tons per year.

POWER GENERATION
The crushed coal is combined with air supplied by forceddraft fans and then ignited and burned in the boiler furnaces. The combustion in the boiler furnace produces heat that creates steam from feed water entering the boiler heatexchange system. After releasing energy through expan-

289

APPENDIX Minerals sion in the high-pressure section of the turbine, steam is returned to the boiler for reheating. After being reheated, steam is returned to the intermediate section and subsequently to the low-pressure section of the turbine. Spent steam passes through the condenser where waste heat is removed, and the condensed liquid is returned to the boiler feed water system. Combustion gases from the furnace are exhausted to the atmosphere through the pollution control devices. Steam energy is converted to mechanical energy by the turbine and subsequently transformed into electrical energy by the generator. Generated power is routed through the main transformer for voltage step-up and then to a switchyard and transmission line system for distribution. The water for the power plant systems would come from a nearby river or impounded water source. Demineralization of the filtered water for boiler makeup will be necessary to provide water of the required quality for the steam generation system. The treated water would then be stored for use. There will be several holding ponds included at the facility to store recoverable water. The cooling system for the electric power facility would be mechanically induced draft wet-type cooling towers. Cooling tower blowdown would be sent to a holding pond to be used for ash sluicing, scrubbers or coal dust suppression. The air emissions would depend primarily on: (l) the conversion process, the emission control technology used at the facility, and the level of control used; (2) the sulfur, ash, and water content of the lignite; and (3) whether or not the facility produces its own electric power. For this discussion, it is assumed that the facility would produce electric power with coal-fired boilers and steam turbines.

UTILITY AND TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS
Water would be pumped from the water source to a surge pond. The water pipelines would require a rights-of-way probably consisting of a 100-foot-wide construction easement and a 50-foot-wide permanent easement. The surge pond would have a water surface area of approximately 42 acres and would contain l,050 acre-feet of water. Transportation corridors would be required for roads and a railspur. The transmission line leaving an electric power facility would be a 500 kilovolt line with a right-of-way 150 feet wide connecting with an existing system.

LOCATABLE MINERALS AND MINERAL MATERIALS Locatable Minerals Disposal Actions
The federal law governing locatable minerals is the Mining Law of 1872, as amended (30 U.S.C. 22-54). This law provides for the exploration, discovery, and mining of metallic and certain nonmetallic minerals on federal lands. The Mining Law of 1872, as amended, has five elements: (1) discovery of a valuable mineral deposit, (2) location of mining claims, (3) recordation of mining claims, (4) maintenance of mining claims, and (5) mineral patenting. BLM manages the last three elements.

POLLUTION CONTROL AND WASTE DISPOSAL
Burning lignite in the boiler produces gaseous emissions, fly ash, and bottom ash. The gas from the boiler passes through a fabric filter baghouse and a sulphur dioxide dry scrubber, and is dispersed by a 600-foot stack. Bottom ash from the main boiler, pyrite rejected from the pulverizer, and ash discharged from the hoppers would be hydraulically conveyed to dewatering bins. The ash would then be loaded into trucks and transported to the adjacent mine for disposal. The plant would include a dry scrubbing system to absorb sulphur dioxide from the flue gas. The scrubber product would be treated prior to disposal with dry fly ash. The flyash and scrubber product would be blended with water for dust control and stabilization. Emission of nitrogen oxides would be controlled by designing the boiler for proper mixing and flame quenching. The quantity of wastes produced by the power facility would be approximately 80 tons per hour of fly-ash and scrubber product and 10 tons per hour of bottom ash.

DISCOVERY
Federal statutes do not describe what constitutes a valuable mineral deposit. Several judicial and administrative decisions over the years have shaped a definition. A principal part of the definition is the “prudent man rule.” This rule holds that the statutory requirements for a discovery have been met if a person of ordinary prudence will be justified in expending labor and costs to develop a mine. Departmental decisions require a discovery on each claim with physical exposure of the valuable mineral within the claim boundaries, and each 10 acres on a placer claim must be

290

APPENDIX Minerals “mineral in character.” Mineral in character is a discovery based on geologic inference, not necessarily on actual exposure. information required. Amendments and transfers of ownership must be filed with the BLM.

MAINTENANCE LOCATION
Any U.S. citizen or corporation organized under state laws can locate a mining claim. A claimant can hold a number of mining claims. A mining claim is located on federal mineral estate with valuable deposits of locatable minerals. There are two types of mining claims (lode and placer); and two types of mineral entries (mill and tunnel sites). Lode claims include classic vein deposits with well defined boundaries. These include deposits such as gold and silver. There is no known potential for lode claims in the planning area. Placer claims are those not subject to lode claims. These include bedded deposits such as bentonite. Where practical placer claims are located by legal land subdivision. The maximum size of a placer claim is 20 acres per claim. A mill site is a parcel of public land of a nonmineral character and is used to support mining claim operations. The mill site must include the erection of a mill or reduction works incident to mining. The maximum size of a mill site is five acres. Tunnel sites are plots of land where a tunnel is run to develop a vein. There is no known need for tunnel sites in the planning area. Claimant rights include: (1) access to the claim across federal surface, (2) use of timber on the claim for the mining operation, (3) construction of fences and gates to protect the area of operations and equipment, and (4) construction of structures for storing equipment and housing employees and testing and processing facilities. Mining claims are real property and interests in them can be bought or inherited. To maintain an interest in a claim, the claimant must pay a rental fee of $100 per claim each year. There is a provision for fee exemptions for claimants who qualify by producing between $1,500 and $800,000 under an active notice plan with less than 10 acres disturbance on 10 claims or fewer nationwide. Exploration and mining activity on BLM-administered lands are subject to the regulations in 43 CFR 3809. These regulations require an operator to prevent unnecessary and undue degradation of the land. Less than 5 acres of disturbance requires the filing of a notice of operations. There is no requirement to notify the BLM of casual use activities (negligible disturbance). This includes activities that involve use of earth moving equipment or blasting. Activities involving more than five acres of disturbance require the preparation of a plan of operations and a reclamation plan. Special category lands defined in 43 CFR 3809.1-4 always require a plan of operations, regardless of the size of the disturbance area. These include areas of critical environmental concern, wilderness areas, and areas designated as closed to off-road vehicle use. Claim operations, whether casual, under a notice, or by a plan of operations, shall be reclaimed (43 CFR 3809.1-1).

MINERAL PATENTS
A patented mining claim is one for which the federal government has passed its title to the claimant, making it private land. A person can mine and remove minerals from a mining claim without a mineral patent. In most cases a mineral patent gives the owner exclusive title to the locatable minerals and title to the surface and other resources. Patenting requires discovery of a valuable deposit that meets the “prudent man rule” and marketability tests. A federal mineral examiner examines the claim to verify its validity. The following are legal descriptions for federal locatable minerals and mineral materials in the areas of critical environmental concern proposed in Alternative D.

RECORDATION
Claims and sites must be recorded with both the county and BLM. Location notices contain: (1) the date of location, (2) the locator’s name, (3) the name of the claim or site, (4) the type of claim or site, (5) the acreage claimed, and (6) a description of the parcel claimed. The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 requires claimants to file a copy of the notice or certificate of location with BLM. Maps and other documents filed under state law must accompany the copy of the official record. Federal regulations (43 CFR 3833) specify the

291

APPENDIX Minerals

Mineral Materials Disposal Actions
The planning area has permitted mineral material disposal areas with free use permits and mineral material sales to local governments. There is no specific data on the material from these locations. A pit is typically on a gravel source located by the permittee. A BLM representative is shown the site during an inspection and a Categorical Exclusion Review is prepared. All permitted sites must meet National Environmental Policy Act standards under the land use plans in effect at the time of permit issuance. A typical permit operation begins with removal of the topsoil and its storage on location. The storage site is selected for the protection and stability needed to maintain the soil over the lifetime of the operation. Backfill will be consolidated to match the original material as much as possible. Natural vegetation will establish some protection from erosion. The pit is excavated by dozers and front-end loaders and the material hauled away with trucks. In operations where large rocks are in the deposit, a portable rock crusher is used to reduce them to usable sizes. An average pit in the planning area is excavated to 10 feet in depth. At the end of operations, BLM stipulations require reduction of vertical exposures to a slope ratio of 3 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) and the topsoil spread on the surface. A conventional seed mixture is prescribed for reclaiming abandoned material extraction sites. In a scoria pit operation, if a dozer is unable to rip a massive deposit, some blasting is necessary. In areas where cliffs serve as raptor nesting sites, mitigation measures are stipulated in the reclamation plan and bonding is set accordingly.

640 to 2,560 acres, depending upon the commodity. Prior to the issuance of the permit, an applicant is required to submit to BLM an exploration plan and a surety or personal bond. A prospecting permit grants to the permittee the exclusive right to prospect on and explore the lands covered by the permit to determine the existence of a valuable deposit of the mineral(s) covered by the permit. As defined in the regulations at 43 CFR Part 3500, entitled “Leasing of Solid Minerals Other than Coal and Oil Shale,” a “valuable deposit” is a mineral occurrence where minerals have been found and the evidence is of such a character that a person of ordinary prudence would be justified in the further expenditure of their labor and means, with a reasonable prospect of success in developing a valuable mine. If the permittee makes a discovery of a valuable deposit of the minerals(s) covered by the permit, they are entitled to a preference right lease. Preference Right Leasing - A prospecting permittee can apply for a preference right lease no later than 60 days after the expiration of the permit. The principle criterion for approval of the application is that there must be a determination by BLM that the permittee has discovered a valuable deposit of the mineral(s) covered by the permit. In preference right lease applications for sodium, potassium, and sulphur, it additionally must be shown that the lands are chiefly valuable for that mineral as opposed to nonmineral disposition of the lands. Prior to issuance of a lease, the applicant is required to furnish a bond. Leases are conditioned upon the payment of a production royalty, which varies in rate depending upon the mineral. Competitive Leasing - Lands classified as known leasing areas may be leased by competitive sale to the bidder who offers the highest acceptable bid. The highest qualified bidder must meet or exceed fair market value and, prior to lease issuance, must furnish a surety or personal bond for a minimum of $5,000. Like preference right leases, competitive leases are issued for an initial 20-year term and are subject to the same conditions for renewal and readjustment.

NONENERGY LEASABLE MINERALS Description of Program
The leasing functions of the nonenergy leasable minerals program revolve around three major program activities, namely, prospecting permitting, preference right (noncompetitive) leasing, and competitive leasing. Prospecting Permitting - Prospecting permits for nonenergy leasable minerals are issued to qualified applicants on public or acquired lands where exploratory work is necessary to determine the existence or workability of deposits of the mineral covered by the permit. The maximum acreage that can be included in a permit varies from

OIL AND GAS Procedures In Oil And Gas Recovery
GEOPHYSICAL EXPLORATION
Oil and gas geophysical exploration activities include data acquisition by use of ground vehicle or aircraft. Data is acquired to determine if a structure exists which might

302

APPENDIX Minerals contain oil or gas. Geophysical exploration does not include core drilling for subsurface geologic information or well drilling for oil and gas. A federal oil and gas lease is not required before conducting geophysical operations. Information from geophysical exploration can lead oil companies or others to request that lands be offered for lease, or assist in the selection of drill sites on existing leases. Existing road systems are used where available. Roads may be cleared of vegetation and loose rocks to improve access for trucks if that action is allowed by the permit. Blading and road construction for seismic operations are not usually allowed so that environmental impacts are minimized. In areas with rugged terrain or without access roads, and certain seasons of the year, seismic work is conducted by helicopter or airplane rather than by ground vehicles. Geophysical operations which do not cause additional surface disturbance include remote sensing, gravity prospecting, and aeromagnetic surveying. and gas bond, with a rider for geophysical exploration, or a $5,000 individual bond filed with the authorized officer. The operator is required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws such as Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Operators may be required to submit an archeological evaluation if dirt work is contemplated, or if there is reason to believe that significant cultural resources may be adversely affected. When geophysical operations have been completed, the operator is required to file a Notice of Completion (form 3150-5) including certification that all terms and conditions of the approved Notice of Intent have been fulfilled. The operator must also submit a map which shows the actual line location, access route, and other survey details. BLM Area Managers (authorized officers) - The authorized officer is required to contact the operator within five working days after receiving the Notice of Intent to explain the terms of the notice, including the “Terms and Conditions for Notice of Intent to Conduct Geophysical Exploration,” current laws, and BLM-administrative requirements. At the time of the prework conference or field inspection, written instructions or orders are given to the operator. The authorized officer is responsible for the examination of resource values to determine appropriate surface protection and reclamation measures. The authorized officer is required to make a final inspection following filing of the Notice of Completion. When reclamation is approved, obligation against the operator’s bond is released. The BLM has 30 days after receipt of the Notice of Completion to notify the operator whether the reclamation is satisfactory or if additional reclamation work is needed. Bonding liability will automatically terminate within 90 days after receipt of the Notice of Completion unless the authorized officer notifies the operator of the need for additional reclamation work. State Standards - Geophysical operators register with the state through the County Clerk and Recorder’s office. State regulations include requirements for shothole locations, drilling techniques, plugging techniques, and reclamation. Mitigation - When a geophysical Notice of Intent is received, restrictions may be placed on the application to protect resource values or to mitigate impacts. Some of these requirements may be the same as oil and gas lease stipulations. Other less restrictive measures may be used when impacts to resource values will be less severe. This is due in part to the temporary nature of geophysical exploration. The decisions concerning the level of protection

Procedures and Regulations
Notification Process - Geophysical operations on public lands are reviewed by the BLM. Exploration on public lands requires review and approval following the procedures in 43 CFR 3150 and 3151 (1990). In the Miles City District the Area Manager is authorized to act for the District Manager to approve geophysical operations. The responsibilities of the geophysical operator and the Area Manager during geophysical operations are described below. Geophysical Operator - The operator is required to file a Notice of Intent to Conduct Oil and Gas Exploration Operations (form 3150-4) for operations on public lands administered by the BLM. Maps (preferably 1:24,000 scale topographic maps) showing the location of the proposed lines and access routes must accompany the Notice of Intent. When the Notice of Intent is filed, the authorized officer may request a prework conference or field inspection. Special requirements or procedures that are identified by the authorized officer are included in the Terms and Conditions for Notice of Intent to Conduct Geophysical Exploration (form 3150-4a and a copy of the state requirements). Any changes in the original Notice of Intent must be submitted in writing to the authorized officer. Written approval must be secured before activities proceed. Bonding of the operator is required. A copy of proof of satisfactory bonding shall accompany the Notice of Intent. Proper bonding may include a nationwide or statewide oil 303

APPENDIX Minerals required are made on a case-by-case basis when an Notice of Intent is received. first qualified applicant. Rental payments for these leases will be $1.50 per acre for the first 5 years and $2 per acre thereafter until production is established. Leases will be issued with a fixed 12.5 percent royalty rate. Future interest leases are also available. An entire mineral estate, or fractional interest therein, of all or certain minerals may revert to federal ownership after being reserved for a specified period of time in the deed. A party who owns all, or substantially all (at least 50 percent), may file an offer with the BLM to lease the mineral rights prior to the date of vesting ownership with the United States. A noncompetitive future interest lease may be issued to the applicant, effective on the date the mineral rights revert to federal ownership.

LEASING PROCESS
Federal oil and gas leasing authority is found in the 1920 Mineral Leasing Act, as amended, for public lands and the 1947 Acquired Lands Leasing Act, as amended, for acquired lands. Leasing of federal oil and gas is affected by other acts such as National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Wilderness Act of 1964, National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, and the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act of 1987. Regulations governing federal oil and gas leasing are contained in 43 CFR 3100 with additional requirements and clarification found in Onshore Operating Orders and Washington office manuals and instruction memorandums. The lease grants the right to explore, extract, remove, and dispose of oil and gas deposits that may be found in the leased lands. The lessee may exercise the rights conveyed by the lease subject to the following lease terms. Lease rights may be subject to lease stipulations and permit approval requirements. Stipulations and permit requirements describe how lease rights are modified. Lease constraints or requirements may also be applied to new use authorizations on existing leases provided the constraints or requirements are within the authority reserved by the terms and conditions of the lease. The stipulations and conditions of approval must be in accordance with laws, regulations, and lease terms. The lease stipulations and permit conditions of approval allow for management of federal oil and gas resources in concert with other resources and land uses. The BLM planning process is the mechanism used to evaluate and determine where and how federal oil and gas resources will be made available for leasing. In areas where oil and gas development will conflict with other land uses or resources, even with mitigation measures, the area is closed to leasing. Areas where oil and gas development could coexist with other land uses or resources will be open to leasing. Leases in these areas will be issued with or without stipulations based upon decisions in the land use document. Stipulations are a part of the lease only when environmental and planning records demonstrate the necessity for the stipulations (modifications of the lease). Currently, leases are issued as either competitive leases or over-the-counter leases with 10-year terms. The competitive leases will be sold to the highest qualified bidder at an oral auction. After the sale, tracts that received no bid during the auction will be issued over-the-counter to the 304

Plan Maintenance
Changes in the data inventory are a result of new information. New use areas and resource locations may be identified or use areas and resource locations which are no longer valid may be identified. These resources usually cover small areas requiring the same protection or mitigation as identified in this plan. Identification of new areas or removal of old areas which no longer have those resource values will result in the use of the same lease stipulation identified in this plan. These areas will be added to the existing data inventory without a plan amendment. In cases where the changes constitute a change in resource allocation outside the scope of this plan, a plan amendment would be required.

Lease Stipulations
Certain resources in the planning area require protection from impacts associated with oil and gas activities. The specific resource and the method of protection are contained in lease stipulations. Lease stipulations are usually no surface occupancy, controlled surface use, or timing limitation. A notice may be included with a lease to provide guidance regarding resources or land uses. While the actual wording of the stipulations may be adjusted at the time of leasing, the protection standards described will be maintained. The following lease stipulations and notices will be included with leases issued in the planning area.

Controlled Surface Use
Use or occupancy is allowed (unless restricted by another stipulation), but identified resource values require special operational constraints that may modify the lease rights. Controlled surface use is used for operating guidance, not as a substitute for the no surface occupancy or timing stipulations.

APPENDIX Minerals RESOURCE: Soils. STIPULATION: Prior to surface disturbance on slopes over 30 percent, an engineering and reclamation plan must be approved by the authorized officer. The plan must demonstrate how the following will be accomplished: - site productivity restored. - surface runoff adequately controlled. - off-site areas protected from accelerated erosion, such as rilling, gullying, piping, and mass wasting. - water quality and quantity in conformance with state and federal water quality laws. - surface-disturbing activities prohibited during extended wet periods. - construction not allowed when soils are frozen. OBJECTIVE: To maintain soil productivity, provide necessary protection to prevent excessive soil erosion on steep slopes, and to avoid areas subject to slope failure, mass wasting, piping, or having excessive reclamation problems. EXCEPTION: None. MODIFICATION: The area affected by this stipulation can be modified by the authorized officer if it is determined that portions of the area do not include slopes over 30 percent. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived by the authorized officer if it is determined that none of the leasehold includes slopes over 30 percent. RESOURCE: Visual Resource Management Class II. STIPULATION: All surface-disturbing activities, semipermanent and permanent facilities in visual resource management Class II areas may require special design, including location, painting, and camouflage, to blend with the natural surroundings and meet the visual quality objectives for the area. OBJECTIVE: To control the visual impacts of activities and facilities within acceptable levels. EXCEPTION: None. MODIFICATION: None. WAIVER: None. NOTE: This stipulation will not prevent surface access. There are no Waivers, Exceptions, or Modifications because a land use plan amendment would be needed to change the classification of lands. In order to maintain the visual qualities of Class II lands the operations plan for the well must meet the objectives for that class. RESOURCE: Makoshika State Park and surrounding area of management concern. STIPULATION: Surface use is prohibited within Makoshika State Park and the surrounding area of management concern except on designated sites identified in the 1989 Memorandum of Understanding between BLM, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, and Dawson County. OBJECTIVE: To maintain the recreational, scenic, and other values for which Makoshika State Park was established. EXCEPTION, MODIFICATION, AND WAIVER: This stipulation can be excepted, modified, or waived only through changes to the 1989 Memorandum of Understanding. A land-use plan amendment can also be required. RESOURCE: Prairie dog towns within potential blackfooted ferret reintroduction areas that have been determined to be essential for black-footed ferret recovery. STIPULATION: The Draft Guidelines for Oil and Gas Activities in Prairie Dog Ecosystems Managed for Blackfooted ferret Recovery (USDI, USFWS 1990) will be used as appropriate to develop site-specific conditions of approval to protect black-footed ferret reintroduction and recovery. Specific conditions of approval will depend on type and duration of proposed activity, proximity to occupied black-footed ferret habitat, and other site-specific conditions. OBJECTIVE: To maintain the integrity of designated black-footed ferret reintroduction area habitat for reintroduction and recovery of black-footed ferrets. EXCEPTION: May be granted by the authorized officer for activities that are determined, through coordination with the Montana Black-Footed Ferret Coordination Committee to have no adverse impacts on reintroduction and recovery of black-footed ferrets. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified if the authorized officer, in coordination with the Montana Black-Footed Ferret Coordination Committee, determines that portions of the area are no longer essential for black-footed ferret reintroduction and recovery. WAIVER: The stipulation may be waived if the authorized officer, in coordination with the Montana Black-Footed Ferret Coordination Committee, determines that the entire leasehold no longer contains habitat essential for the reintroduction and recovery of the black-footed ferret or if the black-footed ferret is removed from protection under the Endangered Species Act. RESOURCE: Potential black-footed ferret habitat (prairie dog colonies and complexes 80 acres or more in size that are not designated as black-footed ferret reintroduction sites). STIPULATION: Prior to surface disturbance, prairie dog colonies and complexes 80 acres or more in size will be examined to determine the absence or presence of blackfooted ferrets. The findings of this examination may result in some restrictions to the operator’s plans or may even preclude use and occupancy that would be in violation of the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The lessee or operator may, at their own option, conduct an examination on the leased lands to determine if black-

305

APPENDIX Minerals footed ferrets are present, or if the proposed activity would have an adverse effect, or if the area can be cleared. This examination must be done by or under the supervision of a qualified resource specialist approved by the Surface Management Agency. An acceptable report must be provided to the Surface Management Agency documenting the presence or absence of black-footed ferrets and identifying the anticipated effects of the proposed action on the blackfooted ferret and its habitat. This stipulation does not apply to the operation and maintenance of production facilities. OBJECTIVE: To assure compliance with the Endangered Species Act by locating and protecting black-footed ferrets and their habitat. EXCEPTION: An exception may be granted by the authorized officer for surface-disturbing activities determined to have no adverse effect on black-footed ferrets and ferret habitat. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified by the authorized officer if portions of the leasehold are cleared, based on current and/or past blackfooted ferret surveys. WAIVER: This stipulation may be waived if the entire leasehold is block cleared, or permanently cleared based on current and/or past black-footed ferret surveys, or if the black-footed ferret is declared recovered and no longer subject to the Endangered Species Act. leasehold are allocated to other uses as a result of a land use plan amendment. RESOURCE: Riparian and Hydrology. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within riparian areas, 100-year floodplains of major rivers, and on water bodies and streams. OBJECTIVE: To protect the unique biological and hydrological features associated with riparian areas, 100-year floodplains of major rivers, and water bodies and streams. EXCEPTION: An exception to this stipulation can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. MODIFICATION: The area affected by this stipulation can be modified by the authorized officer if it is determined that portions of the area do not include riparian areas, floodplains, or water bodies. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived by the authorized officer if it is determined that the entire leasehold does not include riparian areas, flood plains, or water bodies. RESOURCE: Coal. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within existing coal leases with approved mining plans. OBJECTIVE: To protect existing coal leases with approved mining plans. EXCEPTION: An exception can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan of operation which is compatible with existing or planned coal mining operations and is approved by all affected parties. MODIFICATION: The area affected by this stipulation can be modified by the authorized officer if it is determined that portions of the area are not needed for existing or planned mining operations, or where mining operations have been completed, and the modification is approved by all affected parties. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived by the authorized officer if it is determined that all coal lease operations within the leasehold have been completed, or if the lease is terminated, canceled, or relinquished. RESOURCE: Recreation. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within developed recreation areas and undeveloped recreation areas receiving concentrated public use. OBJECTIVE: To protect developed recreation areas and undeveloped recreation areas receiving concentrated public use. EXCEPTION: An exception to this stipulation can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan demonstrating that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified by the authorized officer if the recreation

No Surface Occupancy
Use or occupancy of the land surface for fluid mineral exploration or development is prohibited in order to protect identified resource values. The no surface occupancy stipulation includes stipulations which may have been worded as “No Surface Use and Occupancy,” “No Surface Disturbance,” “Conditional No Surface Occupancy,” and “Surface Disturbance or Occupancy Restriction (by location).” RESOURCE: Terry Badlands Limber Pine. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within identified Terry Badlands limber pine areas. OBJECTIVE: To protect a unique stand of limber pine (Pinus flexilis) in the Terry Badlands. This stand is at the edge of the species’ range and is found at a lower elevation than the typical occurrence. EXCEPTION: An exception to this stipulation can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified by the authorized officer if the boundaries of the identified limber pine are changed as a result of a land use plan amendment. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived by the authorized officer if all identified limber pine areas within the

306

APPENDIX Minerals area boundaries are changed. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer determines that the entire leasehold no longer contains developed recreation areas or undeveloped recreation areas receiving concentrated public use. RESOURCE: Visual Resource Management Class I. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited in visual resource management Class I areas (for example, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers). OBJECTIVE: To preserve the existing character of the landscape. EXCEPTION: An exception to this stipulation can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan demonstrating that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified by the authorized officer if the boundaries of the visual resource management Class I area are changed. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived by the authorized officer if all visual resource management Class I areas within the leasehold are reduced to a lower visual resource management class. Areas reduced to a lower visual resource management class will be subject to the controlled surface use stipulation for visual resources. RESOURCE : Least Tern. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within 1/4 mile of wetlands identified as least tern habitat. OBJECTIVE: To protect the habitat of the least tern, an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act. EXCEPTIONS: An exception can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates that the proposed action will not affect the least tern or its habitat. If the authorized officer determines that the action can affect the least tern or its habitat, consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will be required prior to final determination on the exception. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified if the authorized officer, in consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, determines that portions of the area are no longer essential to the least tern. WAIVER: The stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer, in consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, determines that the entire leasehold no longer contains habitat essential to the least tern, or if the least tern is declared recovered and is no longer protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. RESOURCE: Wildlife - Peregrine Falcon STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within 1 mile of identified peregrine falcon nesting sites. OBJECTIVE: To protect the habitat of the peregrine falcon, an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. EXCEPTION: An exception may be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates that the proposed action will not affect the peregrine falcon or its habitat. If the authorized officer determines that the action may or will have an adverse effect, the operator may submit a plan demonstrating that the impacts can be adequately mitigated. This plan must be approved by BLM in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified if the authorized officer, in consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, determines that portions of the area no longer are critical to the peregrine falcon. WAIVER: The stipulation maybe waived if the authorized officer, in consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, determines that the entire leasehold no longer contains habitat critical to the peregrine falcon, or if the peregrine falcon is declared recovered and is no longer protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. RESOURCE: Piping Plover. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within 1/4 mile of wetlands identified as piping plover habitat. OBJECTIVE: To protect the habitat of the piping plover, a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. EXCEPTION: An exception can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates that the proposed action will not affect the piping plover or its habitat. If the authorized officer determines that the action can affect the piping plover or its habitat, consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will be required prior to final determination on the exception. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified if the authorized officer, in consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, determines that portions of the area are no longer essential to the piping plover. WAIVER: The stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer, in consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, determines that the entire leasehold no longer contains habitat essential to the piping plover, or if the piping plover is declared recovered and is no longer protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. RESOURCE: Bald Eagle Nest Sites and Nesting Habitat. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within 1/2 mile of known bald eagle nest sites which have been active within the past 7 years, and within bald eagle nesting habitat in riparian areas. OBJECTIVE: To protect bald eagle nesting sites and/or nesting habitat in accordance with the Endangered Species Act and the Montana Bald Eagle Management Plan (USDI, BLM 1986c). EXCEPTION: An exception can be granted by the autho-

307

APPENDIX Minerals rized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates that the proposed action will not affect the bald eagle or its habitat. If the authorized officer determines that the action can affect the bald eagle or its habitat, consultation with the FWS will be required prior to final determination on the exception. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified if the authorized officer, in consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, determines that portions of the area can be occupied without adversely affecting bald eagle nest sites or nesting habitat. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer, in consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, determines that the entire leasehold can be occupied without adversely affecting bald eagle nest sites or nesting habitat, or if the bald eagle is declared recovered and is no longer protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. RESOURCE: Ferruginous Hawk. STIPULATIONS: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within 1/2 mile of known ferruginous hawk nest sites which have been active within the past 2 years. OBJECTIVE: To maintain the production potential of ferruginous hawk nest sites. Ferruginous hawks are sensitive to disturbance and have been identified as a category 2 species under the Endangered Species Act. EXCEPTION: An exception to this stipulation can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates that the impacts from the proposed action will not adversely affect the ferruginous hawk or its habitat. Seasonal exceptions can be allowed from August 1 to March 1 (the nonbreeding season) if the authorized officer determines that the proposed activity will not disturb the production potential of ferruginous hawk nest sites. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified if the authorized officer determines that portions of the area can be occupied without adversely affecting the production potential of ferruginous hawk nest sites. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer determines that the entire leasehold can be occupied without adversely affecting the production potential of ferruginous hawk nest sites or if the ferruginous hawk is downgraded from any protective category. RESOURCE: Grouse Leks. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within 1/4 mile of grouse leks. OBJECTIVE: To protect sharp-tailed and sage grouse lek sites necessary for the long-term maintenance of grouse populations in the area. EXCEPTION: An exception to this stipulation can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified if the authorized officer determines that portions of the area can be occupied without adversely affecting grouse lek sites. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer determines that the entire leasehold can be occupied without adversely affecting grouse lek sites, or if grouse lek sites within 1/4 mile of the leasehold have not been used for 5 consecutive years. RESOURCE: Reservoirs with Fisheries. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within 1/4 mile of designated reservoirs with fisheries. OBJECTIVE: This stipulation is intended to protect the fisheries and recreational values of reservoirs. EXCEPTION: An exception to this stipulation can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified if the authorized officer determines that portions of the area can be occupied without adversely affecting the fisheries and recreational values of the reservoir. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer determines that the entire leasehold can be occupied without adversely affecting the fisheries and recreational values of the reservoir. RESOURCE: Cultural Resources. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within sites or areas designated for conservation use, public use, or sociocultural use. OBJECTIVE: To protect those cultural properties including Rosebud and Reynolds Battlefields, identified for conservation use, public use, and sociocultural use (see definitions for use categories within BLM Manual 8111). EXCEPTION: An exception to this stipulation can be granted by the authorized officer if the lessee or operator submits a plan which demonstrates that the cultural resource values which formed the basis for designation are not affected, or if adverse impacts are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified if the authorized officer determines that portions of the designated site or area can be occupied without adversely affecting the cultural resource values for which the site or area was designated. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer determines that all designated sites or areas within the leasehold can be occupied without adversely affecting the cultural resource values for which such sites or areas were designated, or if all designated sites or areas within the leasehold are allocated for other uses. 308

APPENDIX Minerals NOTE: Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act is required for all actions which can affect cultural properties eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. RESOURCE: Paleontological Resources. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within designated paleontological localities. OBJECTIVE: To protect significant paleontological localities. EXCEPTION: An exception to this stipulation can be granted by the authorized officer if the lessee or operator submits a plan which demonstrates that the paleontological resource values which formed the basis for designation are not affected, or if adverse impacts are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified if the authorized officer determines that portions of the designated locality can be occupied without adversely affecting the paleontological resource values for which the locality was designated, or if the boundaries of the designated locality are changed. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer determines that all designated localities within the leasehold can be occupied without adversely affecting the paleontological resource values for which the localities were designated, or if all designated localities within the leasehold are allocated for other uses. The dates for the timing restrictions can be modified if new information indicates that the March 1 to August 1 dates are not valid for the leasehold. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer determines that the entire leasehold no longer is within 1/2 mile of raptor nest sites which have been active within the past 2 years. RESOURCE: Grouse Nesting Zone. STIPULATION: Surface use is prohibited from March 1 to June 15 in grouse nesting habitat within 2 miles of a lek. This stipulation does not apply to the operation and maintenance of production facilities. OBJECTIVE: To protect sharp-tailed and sage grouse nesting habitat from disturbance during spring and early summer in order to maximize annual production of young, and to protect nesting activities adjacent to nesting sites for the long-term maintenance of sharp-tailed and sage grouse populations in the area. EXCEPTION: An exception to this stipulation can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified if the authorized officer determines that portions of the area no longer contain sharp-tail or sage grouse nesting habitat within 2 miles of a lek. The dates for the timing restriction can be modified if new information indicates that the March 1 to June 15 dates are not valid for the leasehold. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer determines that the entire leasehold no longer contains sharp-tailed or sage grouse nesting habitat within 2 miles of lek. RESOURCE: Crucial Winter Range. STIPULATION: Surface use is prohibited from December 1 to March 31 within crucial winter range for wildlife. This stipulation does not apply to the operation and maintenance of production facilities. OBJECTIVE: To protect white-tailed deer, mule deer, elk, antelope, moose, bighorn sheep, and sage grouse crucial winter range from disturbance during the winter use season, and to facilitate long-term maintenance of wildlife populations. EXCEPTION: An exception to this stipulation can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified if the authorized officer determines that portions of the area no longer contain crucial winter range for wildlife. The dates for the timing restriction can be modified if new wildlife use information indicates that the December 1 to March 31 dates are not valid for the lease-

Timing Limitation (Seasonal Restriction)
Prohibits surface use during specified time periods to protect identified resource values. This stipulation does not apply to the operation and maintenance of production facilities unless the findings of analysis demonstrate the continued need for such mitigation and that less stringent, project-specific mitigation measures would be insufficient. RESOURCE: Raptor Nests. STIPULATION: Surface use is prohibited from March 1 to August 1, within 1/2 mile of raptor nest sites which have been active within the past 2 years. This stipulation does not apply to the operation and maintenance of production facilities. OBJECTIVE: To protect nest sites of raptors which have been identified as species of special concern in Montana, North or South Dakota. EXCEPTION: An exception to this stipulation can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified if the authorized officer determines that portions of the area no longer are within 1/2 mile of raptor nest sites which have been active within the past 2 years. 309

APPENDIX Minerals hold. WAIVER: This stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer determines that the entire leasehold no longer contains crucial winter range for wildlife. RESOURCE: Elk Spring Calving Range STIPULATION: Surface use is prohibited from April 1 to June 15 within established spring calving range for elk. This stipulation does not apply to the operation and maintenance of production facilities. OBJECTIVE: To protect elk spring calving range from disturbance during the spring use season, and to facilitate long-term maintenance of wildlife populations. EXCEPTION: An exception to this stipulation may be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified if the authorized officer determines that portions of the area no longer contain spring calving range for elk. The dates for the timing restriction may be modified if new elk use information indicates that the April 1 to June 15 dates are not valid for the leasehold. WAIVER: This stipulation may be waived if the authorized officer determines that the entire leasehold no longer contains spring calving range for elk. rizations are noted on the oil and gas plats and in Automated Lands and Minerals Record System/On-line Recordation and Case Access. The plats are a visual source noting location; On-line Recordation and Case Access provides location by legal description through the geographic cross reference program. The specifically authorized acreage for land use should be avoided by oil and gas exploration and development activities. All authorized surface land uses are valid claims to prior existing rights unless the authorization states otherwise. The rights of the Secretary to issue future land use authorizations on an oil and gas lease is reserved by provision of Section 29 of the 1982 Mineral Leasing Act, 30 U.S.C. § 186 {Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) 88-258, vol. 110 pg 89}. All Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 {Section 701(b)} authorizations are subject to valid existing rights. Land uses are authorized in accordance to the law which applies to that specific use at the time of issuance. AUTHORITIES: Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976. Mineral Leasing Act of 1921, as amended. Recreation and Public Purposes Act of 1926, as amended. Pre-Federal Land Policy Management Act Revised Statute 2477 Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 Mining Law of 1872, as amended. Acquired Mineral Leasing Act of 1947. Executive Orders.

Lease Notices
CULTURAL RESOURCES: The surface management agency is responsible for assuring that the leased lands are examined to determine if cultural resources are present and to specify mitigation measures. Guidance for application of this requirement can be found in the Notice to Lessee (Montana State Office [MSO]-85-1). OBJECTIVE: This notice would be consistent with the present Montana guidance for cultural resource protection related to oil and gas operations. RESOURCE: Land Use Authorizations MANAGEMENT DECISION: Land use authorizations incorporate specific surface land uses allowed on BLMadministered lands by authorized officers and those surface uses acquired by BLM on lands administered by other entities. These BLM authorizations include rights-of-way, leases, permits, conservation easements, and recreation and public purposes leases and patents. The rights acquired, reserved, or withdrawn by BLM for specified purposes include non-oil and gas lease, conservation easements, archaeological easements, road and fence easements, and administrative site withdrawals. The existence of such land use authorizations shall not preclude the leasing of the oil and gas. The locations of land use autho310

APPENDIX Minerals

PERMITTING
The lessee may conduct lease operations after lease issuance. Before beginning construction or drilling a well, the lessee must have an approved Application for Permit to Drill, including requirements for surface and subsurface operations. Other lease operations, including surface and subsurface, must be approved by a Sundry Notice. When a well is no longer useful, the well is plugged and the surface reclaimed. Well plugging and reclamation operations are approved by a Sundry Notice, although verbal approval for plugging may be given for a well that was drilled but not completed for production. The period of bond liability is terminated after all wells covered by the bond are properly plugged and the surface reclaimed. The lands may become available for future leasing. Proposed drilling and associated activities must be approved before beginning operations. The operator must file an Application for Permit to Drill with the BLM District Office. A copy of the application will be posted in the District Office, and if applicable, in the office of the Surface Management Agency for a minimum of 30 days for review by the public. After 30 days, the application can be approved in accordance with (a) lease stipulations, (b) Onshore Oil and Gas Orders, and (c) Onshore Oil and Gas regulations (43 CFR 3160) if it is administratively and technically complete. Evidence of bond coverage for lease operations must be submitted with the application. Bond amount must not be less than a $10,000 lease bond, a $25,000 statewide bond or a $150,000 nationwide bond. On-site inspections usually are required for all exploratory wells. On-site inspections of proposed development or infill well locations may not be required if an appropriate environmental assessment has been completed for the field that includes the proposed location. The inspection makes possible selection of the most feasible well site and access road from environmental, geological, and engineering points of view. Surface use and reclamation requirements are developed during the on-site inspection which is usually conducted within 15 days after receipt of the Notice of Staking or Application for Permit to Drill. Conditions of approval implement the lease stipulations and are part of the permit when environmental and field reviews demonstrate the necessity for operating constraints or requirements. A surface restoration plan is part of an approved permit, either an Application for Permit to Drill or Sundry Notice that includes surface-disturbing activities. The authorized officer will act on the application in one of two ways: 315

Approves the application (a) as submitted or (b) with appropriate modifications or conditions of approval; or Returns the application and (a) advises the lessee or operator of the reasons for disapproval or (b) advises the lessee or operator of the reason why final action has been delayed and the date such final action is expected. For drilling operations on lands with state or private mineral ownership, the lessee must meet the requirements of the mineral owner and the state regulatory agency. The BLM does not have jurisdiction over nonfederal minerals; however, the BLM has surface management responsibility in situations of BLM surface over nonfederal mineral ownership.

APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO DRILL
Applications for Permit to Drill are approved for the Miles City District by the Assistant District Manager, Division of Mineral Resources. The approved Application for Permit to Drill includes Conditions of Approval, and Informational Notices which cite the regulatory requirements from the Code of Federal Regulations, Onshore Operating Orders and other guidance.

Conditions of Approval
Conditions of approval are mitigative measures which implement lease restrictions to site specific conditions. General guidance for conditions of approval is found in the BLM and U.S. Forest Service brochure entitled “Surface Operating Standards for Oil and Gas Exploration and Development” (USDI, BLM 1989c) and BLM Manual 9113 entitled “Roads”. The following mitigative measures may be applied to approved permits as conditions of approval. The listing is not all inclusive, but presents the most often used conditions of approval in the planning area. The wording of the condition of approval may be modified or additional conditions of approval may be developed to address specific conditions. A. Access Road 1. Prior to construction, a minimum of 4 inches of topsoil must be removed from the area necessary for road and ditch construction, including backslopes. Topsoil must be stored for use in reclamation. For drilling and production operations, the access road must be flat-bladed, but sloped to provide

2.

APPENDIX Minerals drainage off of the road. The access road width must not exceed 16 feet. 3. For drilling and production operations, the access road must be crowned and ditched. The access road width must not exceed 16 feet. Ditches must have flat or rounded bottoms. The access road must be surfaced with and maintained at a minimum 3 inch layer of gravel. Minimum 18-inch diameter culvert(s) must be installed in the designated drainage(s). The culvert(s) must be installed on undisturbed ground and extend a minimum of 1 foot beyond the toe of the fill slopes. Riprap material must be place at the inlet and outlet ends of the culvert(s). A cattleguard must be installed at the designated fence crossing(s). A low-water crossing must be constructed at the designated drainage(s). A minimum 6-inch layer of gravel must be placed on the road in the crossing. The access road and associated structures must be maintained in a safe condition. Off-road vehicle travel is not authorized. 5. 6. Erosion control measures must be constructed or installed as prescribed.

C. Production Facilities 1. Storage tanks and treater must be located on the cut portion of the well pad. The storage tanks and treater or the entire well pad must be surrounded by an earthen dike. The dike must be of sufficient size to contain 110 percent of the volume of the largest single tank in use. Production facilities such as storage tanks, treater and pump unit must be painted a specified color from the Munsell Soil Color Chart. Fluid storage pits must be permitted, constructed and maintained in accordance with State requirements. The well site and production facility site must be maintained in a safe and orderly manner. All trash and debris must be stored in an enclosed container and disposed of at an approved disposal facility. All unused equipment must be stored in an orderly manner or removed. All containers must be installed and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s and Occupational Safety and Health Act requirements.

4.

2.

5.

3.

4. 6.

7.

8.

B. Well Pad D. Reclamation 1. Prior to construction, a minimum of 4 inches of topsoil must be removed from the area necessary for pad construction, including to the toe of the cut and fill slopes. Topsoil must be stockpiled separately from all other material. The reserve pit must be lined with an impervious plastic liner with a minimum 140 pounds per square inch burst strength and 30 pounds tear strength. The liner must be installed over material that will not puncture or tear the liner. The reserve pit must be fenced on three sides during drilling operations and the fourth side after completion of drilling operations. Netting may be required over the reserve pit. All storage tanks must be located on the well pad. Storage tanks must be surrounded with a dike or trench sloped to the reserve pit. All trash must be stored in an enclosed container and disposed of in an approved disposal facility. Trash or debris is not allowed in the reserve pit. 316 1. Pit reclamation: a. The pit must be closed properly to assure protection of soil, water and vegetation. The pit may not be cut or trenched. Prior to pit closure, free fluids must be removed and disposed of properly. Pit mud and sludge material may be buried onsite after the material has been tested and has met the following criteria: *range of pH: 6 to 9 *moisture content: <50 percent by weight *oil and grease content: <3 percent by weight *electrical conductivity: <12 mmhos (unit of measure of conductivity) per centimeter *unconfined compressive strength: >20 pounds per square inch

2.

b. c.

d. 3.

4.

5.

APPENDIX Minerals *total metals content must not exceed Environmental Protect Agency limits e. The liner may be cut off above the pit material or pushed over the pit material. The pit material must be covered with a minimum of 5 feet of native soil. h. g. For final abandonment on privately owned surface, reclamation must be completed in accordance with the surface owner’s requirements, unless the surface owner defers to BLM requirements. The reclamation work will be considered successful when the seeded area is stabilized, potential water erosion is effectively controlled and the vegetative stand is established with at least a 60 percent cover of the prescribed grass species. An interim reclamation plan may be required if the site has been constructed but no other work has been accomplished within 6 months after permit approval.

f.

2.

Site reclamation: a. For production, the unused portion of the pad must be recontoured with slopes not steeper than 3:1. Proper drainage must be established. Erosion control measures may be required. For final abandonment, the site must be cleaned up of all equipment, material and debris. All surfacing material must be removed. For final abandonment, the site must be recontoured to blend in with the adjacent terrain. b. d. Specific erosion control measures will be prescribed as necessary. For production or abandonment, recontoured areas must be scarified, mulched and seeded. After scarification to a depth of 12 inches, topsoil must be spread evenly over the recontoured area. Weed-free straw mulch must then be applied evenly over the recontoured area at a rate of 1 ton per acre. The mulch must be crimped into the soil. The recontoured area must then be seeded with a prescribed seed mixture. Seed must be drilled on the contour at 6 inch drill row spacing at a depth of 1/2 to 3/4 inch. The most commonly prescribed grass species include: *western wheatgrass *slender wheatgrass *intermediate wheatgrass *thickspike wheatgrass *green needlegrass *dryland alfalfa *yellow sweetclover 4. f. After seeding, the site must be fenced with four strands of barbed wire, metal line posts and wood corner and brace posts. The fence must be maintained to keep out livestock until reclamation work has been approved. 317 c.

i.

b.

3.

Road reclamation: a. For final abandonment, the surfacing material and structures (culverts, cattleguards) must be removed. For final abandonment, the road and ditches must be recontoured. Erosion control measures may be required. For final abandonment, the recontoured area must be scarified, mulched and seeded in the same manner as well sites. For final abandonment, drainages must be restored to a free-flowing condition and the reclaimed area protected to prevent eroding and scouring. For final abandonment on privately owned surface, reclamation must be completed in accordance with the surface owner’s requirements, unless the surface owner defers to BLM requirements. The reclamation work will be considered successful when the seeded area is stabilized, potential water erosion is effectively controlled and the vegetative stand is established with at least 60 percent cover of the prescribed grass species.

c.

e.

d.

e.

f.

Pipeline reclamation: a. The pipeline must be tested for leaks prior to backfilling the trench.

APPENDIX Minerals b. The trench must be backfilled immediately after completion of pipeline leak testing procedures. The fill material must be compacted. Topsoil must be spread evenly over the disturbed area. Erosion control measures must be installed as prescribed. Drainages must be restored to a free-flowing condition and the reclaimed area protected to prevent eroding and scouring. The disturbed area must be seeded in the same manner as well sites. reference at the well site during the construction and drilling phases. This drilling permit is valid for either 1 year from the approval date or until lease expiration, whichever occurs first. Construction of access roads and well pads, and installation of cattleguards, culverts, fences, and other structures shall be in accordance with the BLM and Forest Service brochure entitled “Surface Operating Standards for Oil and Gas Exploration and Development” (USDI, BLM 1989c) which is available in the Miles City District Office. The operator is responsible for informing all persons in the area who are associated with this project that they will be subject to prosecution for knowingly disturbing historic or archaeological sites. If historic or archaeological materials are uncovered during construction, the operator is to immediately stop work that might further disturb such materials, and contact the authorized officer. Within 5 working days the authorized officer will inform the operator as to: whether the materials appear eligible for the National Register of Historic Places; the mitigation measures the operator will likely have to undertake before the site can be used (assuming site preservation is not necessary); and, a time frame for the authorized officer to complete an expedited review under 36 CFR 800.11 to confirm, through the State Historic Preservation Officer, that the findings of the authorized officer are correct and that mitigation is appropriate.

c.

d.

e.

f.

Site specific operating requirements (conditions of approval) are based on analysis of the proposed location for the wellsite. Operating requirements may affect the drilling program, access road, production facilities, water supply, waste disposal, well site layout, and surface restoration. The following conditions of approval in addition to any site specific conditions are included with each approved application for Permit to Drill. Verbal notifications will be made to the BLM, Miles City District Office, 406-232-4331, or after business hours to the appropriate individual’s home phone.

-

notify this office verbally at least 48 hours prior to beginning construction. notify this office verbally at least 12 hours prior to spudding the well. (To be followed up in writing within 5 days.) notify this office verbally (follow up in writing within 5 days) at least 12 hours prior to running any casing or blow-out preventer tests. notify this office verbally at least 24 hours prior to plugging the well to receive verbal plugging orders. notify this office verbally at least 24 hours prior to removal of fluids from the reserve pit. failure to comply within specified notification time frames may incur an assessment under 43 CFR 3163.1 and civil penalties under 43 CFR 3163.2.

-

-

-

-

If the operator wishes, at any time, to relocate activities to avoid the expense of mitigation and/or the delays associated with this process, the authorized officer will assume responsibility for whatever recordation and stabilization of the exposed materials may be required. Otherwise, the operator will be responsible for mitigation costs. The authorized officer will provide technical and procedural guidelines for the conduct of mitigation. Upon verification from the authorized officer that the required mitigation has been completed, the operator will then be allowed to resume construction. It is the responsibility of the operator to control noxious weeds on lands disturbed in association with oil and gas lease operations. Lease associated weed control strategies, when required by the BLM, are to be coordinated with any involved surface owners and local weed control boards. A pesticide-use proposal must be prepared, and then be reviewed and approved by the BLM, prior to any herbicide

-

A complete copy of the approved Application for Permit to Drill, including conditions, stipulations, and the hydrogen sulfide contingency plan (if required) shall be available for

318

APPENDIX Minerals application on lands disturbed by federal oil and gas lease operations. A pesticide application record must be completed within 24 hours after completion of application of herbicides. The abandonment marker shall exhibit the same information required for the well sign and must be installed when the well is plugged. A steel pipe (minimum 4-inch diameter, capped, minimum 4 feet above ground) set in cement. A steel plate welded to surface casing at the recontoured ground level. A steel plate welded to surface casing below ground level. If drill stem tests are run, the Miles City District office shall be notified at least 6 hours prior to testing. All applicable safety precautions outlined in Onshore Order 2 shall be observed. All indications of usable water (10,000 parts per million or less total dissolved solids) shall be reported to Miles City District office prior to running the next string of casing or before plugging orders are requested, whichever occurs first. Well Abandonment (43 CFR 3162.3-4, Onshore Order 1-Sec. V) Approval for abandonment shall be obtained prior to beginning plugging operations. Initial approval for plugging operations may be verbal, but shall be followed up in writing within 30 days. Subsequent and final abandonment notifications are required and shall be submitted on Sundry Notice and Reports on Wells (form 3160-5), in triplicate. Reports and Notifications (43 CFR 3162.4-1, 3162.4-3) Within 30 days of completion of the well as a dry hole or producer, a copy of all logs, core descriptions, core analyses, well-test data, geologic summaries, sample descriptions or data obtained and compiled during the drilling, workover, and/or completion operations shall be submitted with Well Completion or Recompletion Report and Log (form 3160-4), in duplicate. In accordance with 43 CFR 3162.4-3 this well shall be reported on Minerals Management Service form 3160, Monthly Report of Operations, starting with the month in which drilling operations commence, and continuing each month until the well is physically plugged and abandoned. Notify this office within 5 business days of production start-up if either of the following two conditions occur: The well is placed on production. “Placed on production” means shipment or sales of hydrocarbons from temporary tanks, production into permanent facilities or measurement through permanent facilities. The well resumes production after being off production for more than 90 days. Notification may be written or verbal with written follow-up within 15 days, and must include the following information: Operator name, address, and telephone number.

-

-

Additional requirements may be imposed if changes in operational and/or environmental conditions dictate. These conditions of approval are subject to the State Director review and appeals provisions of 43 CFR 3165.3 and 3165.4.

Informational Notice
The following items are from the Federal Oil and Gas regulations (43 CFR 3160, Onshore Orders 1 and 2, Notice to Lessees, and other guidance). This is not a complete list of requirements, but is an abstract of some major requirements. General Requirements The lessee or designated operator shall comply with applicable laws and regulations; with the lease terms, Onshore Oil and Gas Orders, Notice to Lessees; and with other orders and instructions of the authorized officer. Any deviation from the terms of the approved Application for Permit to Drill requires prior approval from BLM (43 CFR 3162.1(a)) If at any time the facilities located on public lands authorized by the terms of the lease are no longer included in the lease (due to a contraction in the unit or other lease or unit boundary change) the BLM will process a change in authorization to the appropriate statute. The authorization will be subject to appropriate rental or other financial obligations determined by the authorized officer. Drilling Operations (Onshore Order 2) Onshore Order 2 requires surface casing shall have centralizers on at least every fourth joint starting with the shoe joint. 319

APPENDIX Minerals Well name and number, county and state. Well location, “1/4-1/4, Section, Township, Range, P.M.” Date well begins or resumes production. The nature of the well’s production; that is, crude oil, or crude oil casing gas, or natural gas and entrained liquid hydrocarbons. The Federal or Indian lease number. As appropriate, the unit agreement name, number and participating area name. As appropriate, the Communitization Agreement number. Environmental Obligations and Disposition of Production (43 CFR 3162.5-1, 3162.7-1 and 40 CFR 302.4) With BLM approval, water produced from newly completed wells may be temporarily disposed of into unlined pits up to 90 days. During this initial period, application for the permanent disposal method shall be made to this office in accordance with NTL-2B. If underground injection is proposed, an Environmental Protection Agency or State Permit shall also be obtained. Spills, accidents, fires, injuries, blowouts and other undesirable events must be reported to this office within the time frames in NTL-3A. Gas may be vented or flared during emergencies, well evaluation, or initial production tests for a time period of up to 30 days or the production of 50 million cubic feet of gas, whichever occurs first. After this period, approval from this office shall be obtained to flare or vent gas in accordance with NTL-4A. Well Identification (43 CFR 3162.6) Each drilling, producing, or abandoned well shall be identified with the operator’s name, the lease serial number, the well number, and the surveyed description of the well (either footages or the quarter-quarter section, the section, township and range). The Indian allottee lessor’s name may be required. Markings shall be legible and in a conspicuous place. Site Security (43 CFR 3162.7.5) Oil storage facilities shall be clearly identified with a sign, and tanks must be individually identified (43 CFR 3162.6 (c)). Site security plans shall be completed within 60 days of production startup (43 CFR 3162.7-5(c)). Site facility diagrams shall be filed in this office within 60 days after facilities are installed or modified (43 CFR 3162.7-5(d)(1)). Confidentiality (43 CFR 3162.8) Submitted information not marked “CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION” will be available for public inspection upon request.

District Office Address and Contacts
The approval letter concludes with the complete address, phone number, and business hours for the Miles City District office. A list of staff members, their job titles, and home phone numbers is provided for the company to use when the office is closed.

CONSTRUCTION
Construction of the access road and the well site is necessary before drilling operations begin. The extent of surface disturbance necessary for construction depends on the terrain, depth of the well, drill rig size, circulating system, and safety standards. The depth of the drill test determines the size of the work area necessary, the need for all-weather roads, water requirements, and other needs. The terrain influences the construction problems and the amount of surface area to be disturbed. Reserve pit size may vary because of well depth, drill rig size, or circulating system. Access roads to well sites in the planning area usually consist of running surfaces 14 to 18 feet wide that are ditched on one or both sides. Many of the roads constructed will follow existing roads or trails. New roads might be necessary because existing roads are not at an acceptable standard. For example, a road may be too steep so that realignment is necessary. Roads can be permanent or temporary, depending on the success of the well. The initial construction can be for a temporary road; however, it is designed so that it can become permanent if the well produces. Not all temporary roads constructed are rehabilitated when the drilling stops. A temporary road is often used as access to other drill sites. The main roads and temporary roads, require graveling to be maintained as all-weather roads. This is especially important in the spring. Access roads may be required to cross public lands to a well site located on private or state

320

APPENDIX Minerals lands. The portion of the access road on public land would require a BLM right-of-way. Approximately 1 to 4 acres are impacted by well site construction. The area is cleared of large vegetation, boulders, or debris. Then the topsoil is removed and saved for reclamation. A level area from 1 to 4 acres is then constructed for the well site, which includes the reserve pit. The well pad is constructed by bulldozers and motor scrapers. The well pad is flat (to accommodate the drill rig and support equipment) and large enough to store all the equipment and supplies without restricting safe work areas. The drill rig must be placed on “cut” material rather than on “fill” material to provide a stable foundation for the rig. The degree of cutting and filling depends on terrain; that is, the flatter the site, the less dirt work is required. Hillside locations are common, and the amount of dirt work varies with the steepness. A typical well pad will require a cut 10 feet deep against the hill and a fill 8 feet high on the outside. It is normal to have more cut than fill to allow for compaction, and any excess material is then stockpiled. Eventually, when the well is plugged and abandoned, excavated material is put back in its original place. Reserve pits are normally constructed on the well pad. Usually the reserve pit is excavated in “cut” material on the well pad. The reserve pit is designed to hold drill cuttings and used drilling fluids. The size and number of pits depends on the depth of the well, circulating system and anticipated down hole problems, such as excess water flows. The reserve pit can be lined with a synthetic liner to contain pit contents and reduce pit seepage. Not all reserve pits are lined; however, BLM can require a synthetic liner based upon factors such as soils, pit locations, ground water and drilling mud constituents. The operator can elect to line the reserve pit without that requirement. An adequate supply of water is required for drilling operations and other uses. The sources of water can be a water well at the drill site or remote sources such as streams, ponds, or wells. The water is transported to the site by truck or pipeline. Pipelines are normally small diameter surface lines. The operator must file for and obtain all necessary permits for water from the state of Montana. On public lands an operator must have the BLM’s permission before surface water can be used. hole. The first string of pipe is the conductor pipe which stabilizes the hole near the surface. The second string of pipe placed in the hole is for surface casing which is set deep enough to reach an impervious layer of clay below the deepest usable freshwater aquifer. The surface casing is set and cemented in the hole by pumping cement between the casing and the hole wall. Surface casing acts as a safety device to protect freshwater zones from drilling fluid contamination. To prevent the well from “blowing-out” in the event the drill bit hits a high pressure zone, blowout preventers are mounted on top of the surface casing. If high pressure zones are encountered that cannot be controlled with mud additives, the blowout preventers can be closed to effectively seal the well. After the surface casing is set, a smaller drill bit that fits inside the surface casing is installed and drilling resumes. Depending on well conditions, additional strings of casing called intermediate casing may be installed and cemented into place. Conditions resulting in the need for intermediate casing include freshwater zones and sloughing formation zones. Casing prevents the flow of freshwater into the wellbore, and conversely prevents drilling fluids from infiltrating porous formations with low internal pressures. Casing also prevents mixing of waters from different formations (interformational mixing) where water within the formations are of differing quality. All cementing operation plans are reviewed to assure cement is placed at the appropriate depths and a sufficient quantity is utilized to effectively seal all freshwater-bearing formations from contamination by interformational mixing or migration of fluids. If no oil or gas is encountered, the well is plugged with cement and abandoned in accordance with state and federal requirements. If the well is a producer, casing is set and cemented in place. Directional drilling may be used where the drill site cannot be located directly over the drilling target. There are limits to both the degree that the wellbore can be deviated from the vertical and the horizontal distance the well can be drilled away from the well site. Horizontal wells are drilled similarly to directional wells, except that the bottomhole location of the well is not a single point, but rather a lateral horizontal section. They are drilled to increase the recovery oil and gas reserves from vertically fractured reservoirs, or reservoirs with directional permeability. In the Cedar Creek Anticline, operators have drilled horizontal wells to access oil reserves which might normally remain undeveloped.

DRILLING OPERATIONS
As drilling progresses for a vertical well, the hole is drilled, pipe is placed in the hole to maintain the integrity of the 321

APPENDIX Minerals

PRODUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT Production
Production begins when a well yields oil or gas in commercial quantities. If formation pressure is sufficient to raise oil to the surface, the well is completed as a flowing well. A pumping unit is installed if the formation pressure is not sufficient to bring the oil to the surface. When the well is completed as a free-flowing well, an assembly of valves and special connections known as a “Christmas tree” (so called because of its many branch-like fittings) is installed on top of the casing to regulate the flow of the well. Later, when the natural pressure declines, the Christmas tree can give way to a simple wellhead arrangement of valves and a pumping unit to lift the oil artificially. Most pumping units in the planning area are “beam” style pumps which are powered by electric or gasoline engines. The majority of gas wells produce by natural flow and do not require pumping. Surface use at a flowing well is usually a small area containing a gas well Christmas tree, a dehydrator, a produced water pit, and a meter house. Separators, condensate tanks, and compressors may be included. Some gas wells require continuous water pumping as water entering the well chokes off the gas flow.

ment of a spacing pattern includes data from the discovery well on porosity, permeability, pressure, composition, and depth of formations in the reservoir; well production rates and type (predominantly oil or gas); and the economic effect of the proposed spacing on recovery. The state of Montana establishes well spacing patterns for both exploratory and development wells. The state specifies the minimum distance from lease lines or government survey lines for bottom hole location of the wellbore depending upon depth of the oil well and specifies a minimum distance for gas wells. The spacing regulations determine the acres assigned to each well. Spacing unit size is established to provide for the most efficient and economic recovery of oil or gas from a reservoir. Well spacing ranges from 40 acres to 640 acres. Wells below 11,000 feet can be no closer than 1,650 feet to other producing wells below 11,000 feet. Only one producing well per formation in each 40, 80, 160, 320, and 640 acre unit. Figures 13 and 14 show the different spacing patterns for oil and gas wells and the minimum distance from spacing unit boundaries to the well.

Drilling of Development Wells
The procedures used in drilling development wells are the same as those used for wildcat wells, but usually with less subsurface sampling, testing, and evaluation. The rate at which development wells are drilled in a field depends on factors such as whether the field is developed on a lease basis or unitized basis, the probability of profitable production, the availability of drilling equipment, lease requirements, and the degree to which limits of the field are known. Some fields go through several development phases, the first resulting from the original discovery and others from later discovery. A field can be considered fully developed and produce for several years, and then a well may be drilled to a deeper or shallower pay zone. Discovery of a new pay zone in an existing field is a “pool” discovery (as distinguished from a new field discovery). A pool discovery may lead to the drilling of additional wells, often from the same drilling pad as existing wells. SECONDARY RECOVERY Oil cannot be produced unless the reservoir pressure is great enough to drive the oil into the wellbore. Oil production declines as the formation’s natural pressure declines. Secondary recovery is initiated to increase reservoir pressures artificially and to maintain the oil recovery factor. This is done by injecting water (water flooding), gas, air, or polymerized liquid into the formation.

Development
Development can take years and include from one or two wells to more than a hundred wells per field. Roads to producing wells are upgraded to all-weather roads as necessary. Pipelines, electrical transmission lines, separators, dehydrators, sump pits, and compressor stations soon follow. Sometimes oil and gas processing facilities are built in or adjacent to the field.

Further Seismic Testing
More detailed seismic work can be done to achieve better definition of the petroleum reservoir. Diagonal seismic lines can be required to tie the previous seismic work to the discovery well. The discovery well can be used to conduct studies to correct the previous seismic work and provide more accurate subsurface data.

Spacing Requirements
A well spacing pattern must be established before development drilling begins. Information considered in establish-

322

APPENDIX Minerals FIGURE 13 GAS WELL SPACING SECTION PLAT

640 Acre Spacing

3300'

990

SOURCE: Montana Oil & Gas Commission Area in which well should be drilled Well Depth (feet) 0 -3,500 0> 3,501 - 7,000 7,001 - >
323

Minimum Well Distance (feet) 990 990 990

APPENDIX Minerals FIGURE 14 OIL WELL SPACING SECTION PLAT

40 Acre 660 255 330 320 Acre 1320 660

80 Acre 330 255

160 Acre 510 660 1320

SOURCE: Montana Oil & Gas Commission Area in which well should be drilled Well Depth (feet) 0 - 6,000 6,001 - 11,000 11,001 - > Spacing (acre) 40 &80 160 320 Nearest Boundary (feet) 330 660 660 Topographic Tolerance (feet) 75 150 none Minimum Well Distance (feet) 255 510 none

For the 320 acre spacing (1,650 well tolerance) and the 80 acre spacing the drilling unit will be delineated either N-S or E-W.
324

APPENDIX Minerals

Inspections
Geophysical operations and lease operations are inspected to determine compliance with approved permits, to resolve conflicts or correct problems and to determine effectiveness and need of lease stipulations. All inspections are documented. Operators are required to correct problems or violations. Lease stipulations and permit conditions may be changed or eliminated as a result of an inspection.

fuel requirements on the lease but gas sales are not possible, the gas can be flared or vented into the atmosphere when authorized by permit in accordance with state and federal regulations. When water is produced with the hydrocarbons, it is separated before the gas is removed. In primary operations, where natural pressures or gravity cause the petroleum in the reservoir to flow to the wellbores, the degree of mixing is high enough to require chemical and heat treatment to separate the oil and water. In secondary production, where water injection or other methods are used to force additional petroleum to the wellbore, the oil and water often are not highly emulsified. In this case, the oil and water can be separated by gravity in a tall settling tank. Produced water can be disposed of by injection into the subsurface, surface evaporation or beneficial purposes such as water for livestock or irrigation. Produced water from oil and gas operations is normally disposed of by subsurface injection or in surface pits. Regardless of the method of disposal, it must be acceptable to the BLM, in accordance with the requirements of Onshore Oil and Gas Order No. 7, titled “Disposal of Produced Water.” Disposal of produced water by injection wells requires permits from the Environmental Protection Agency. When produced water is disposed underground, it is introduced or injected under pressure into a subsurface horizon containing water of equal or poorer quality. In the oil and gas producing areas of the planning area, this disposal horizon is usually found within the Dakota Group Formation or in the Judith River Formation, although other formations have been used within the area. Produced water may be injected into the producing zone from which it originated to stimulate oil production. Oil and gas units within the planning area utilize this method of reinjection. Dry holes or depleted wells are commonly converted for saltwater disposal and occasionally new wells are drilled for this purpose. The Environmental Protection Agency requires that all injection wells be permitted under the Underground Injection Control program. Under the Underground Injection Control approval process, the disposal well must be pressure tested to ensure the integrity of the casing. The disposal zone must also be isolated by use of tubing and mechanical plug called a packer. The packer seals off the inside of the casing and only allows the injected water to enter the disposal zone. The tubing and packer are also pressure tested to ensure their integrity. These pressure tests confirm isolation of the disposal zone from possible usable water zones. The tests are repeated on a schedule basis set by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Surface Requirements
Field development activities that cause surface disturbance include access roads, well sites, production facility sites, flow line and utility line routes and waste disposal sites. Surface uses in a gas field will be less than in an oil field, because gas wells are usually drilled on larger spacing units. The spacing pattern of 640 acres per well, which is common in gas fields, will require only one well per section and might require only 1/2 mile of access roads and pipelines. Production facilities include separation and storage equipment. Separation equipment is required when production includes a combination of oil, gas or water and storage equipment is required for holding liquids prior to sales.

Flow Lines
Oil and gas are transferred from the well to storage facilities through small diameter (<6 inches) flow lines. Flow lines can be on the surface, buried or elevated. Produced water, gas or polymerized liquid is transferred from storage facilities to injection wells for secondary recovery.

Separating, Treating, and Storage
Any water or gas associated with produced oil is separated from the oil before it is placed in storage tanks. The treating facilities are located at a storage tank battery. Low-pressure petroleum that must be pumped from the well is treated in a single separation. High-pressure, flowing petroleum can require several stages or separation, with a pressure reduction accompanying each stage. Produced gas is sold when there is sufficient volume, necessary transportation, a market, and it is economical. Generally, if the volume of produced gas is too low for sales, it is used as fuel for well pump engines and heating fuel for the treaters. If the volume of produced gas exceeds

325

APPENDIX Minerals The oil is transported to storage tanks through flow lines after separation from any water or gas. Storage tanks are usually located on the lease either at the producing well or at a central production facility. The number and size of tanks are dependent upon the type and amount of production on the lease. to separate lease ownerships. An exploratory unit is used for the discovery and development of the field in an orderly and efficient manner. Paying and nonpaying well determinations are made for each well drilled. If the well is nonpaying as defined by the agreement, the production is allocated on a lease basis. If the well is a paying unit well, a participating area is formed and the production is allocated to all interest owners in the participating area on the basis of surface area. A secondary unit is formed after the field has been defined and enhanced recovery techniques are being utilized. Secondary recovery techniques include water injection, natural gas injection, or carbon dioxide injection. Injection is initiated to maintain the reservoir pressure to maintain oil production. The agreement provides for the allocation of production among all the interest owners. A communitization agreement combines two or more leases that otherwise could not be independently developed in conformity with established well spacing patterns. The leases within the spacing unit share in the costs and benefits of the well drilled in the spacing unit. Therefore, unit and communitization agreements can lessen the amount of damage to the environment and save dollars by eliminating unnecessary wells, roads, pipelines, and lease equipment.

ABANDONMENT
When drilling wells are unsuccessful or production wells are no longer useful, the well is plugged, equipment is removed from the well site or production facility site, and the site is abandoned. The well bore is secured by placing cement plugs to isolate hydrocarbon producing formations from contaminating other mineral or water bearing formations. The site and roads are then restored as near as possible to original contours. Topsoil is replaced and the recontoured areas are seeded. Reclamation of access roads and well sites on privately owned surface is completed according to the surface owner’s requirements. Rehabilitation requirements generally are made a part of the Application for Permit to Drill. Upon completion of abandonment and rehabilitation operations, the lessee or operator notifies the BLM district that the location is ready for inspection. Final abandonment will not be approved until the required surface reclamation work has been completed to the satisfaction of the BLM or surface owner. The period of bond liability for the well site is terminated after approval of final abandonment. Reclamation of the reserve pit is part of the well site reclamation process. Reserve pit reclamation includes removal of fluids to a disposal well or commercial pit and burial of solids in the pit. Solids should not be buried until dry and then covered with a minimum of 6 feet of native soil. Any pit liner may be buried in place. Methods such as solidification or dewatering may be used to help dry the solids.

DRAINAGE PROVISIONS
Federal oil and gas leases include a clause that the lessee must protect the leased area from drainage by off-lease wells. If the BLM determines that federal oil or gas is being drained (physically removed) by an off-lease well, the federal lessee will be notified. The lessee has the option of drilling a protective well on lease or paying compensatory royalty for the lost oil or gas. The lessee also has the options of submitting data showing that drainage is not occurring or relinquish the portion of the lease subject to drainage after payment of compensatory royalty for drainage which did occur. The objective of the drainage program is to prevent the loss of federal oil and gas due to drainage by requiring the drilling of protective wells and, where appropriate, to assess compensatory royalty for such losses.

Regulations, Laws, and Special Procedures
UNIT AND COMMUNITIZATION AGREEMENTS
Unit and communitization agreements can be formed in the interest of conservation and to allow for the orderly development of oil and gas reserves. A unit agreement provides for the recovery of oil and gas from the lands as a single consolidated entity without regard 326

DRILLING ACCESS WITH NO SURFACE OCCUPANCY STIPULATIONS ON OIL LEASES
The no surface occupancy stipulations can restrict the development potential of a federal oil and gas lease. The no surface occupancy stipulations can limit the area that can be

APPENDIX Minerals developed by restricting the amount of surface acreage available for occupancy. No surface occupancy restrictions often do not affect access to oil and gas resources unless there are blocks of contiguous land with no surface occupancy stipulation or the drilling depth is presumed to be shallow. The drilling access area is that area under a no surface occupancy lease or lease parcel that can be accessed by the well bore from a surface location outside of the areas (see figure 15). Lands near the outer boundary of a lease affected by a no surface occupancy stipulation can theoretically be developed by directional drilling. The BLM cannot assume that a prudent operator would use new technology such as horizontal drilling to access an entire lease area. Although the technology might allow exploration, the expense might make the venture uneconomical. However, BLM can assume that an operator might be willing to directionally drill wells using equipment and drilling techniques that make the venture economical. For a directionally drilled well, a maximum deviation of approximately five degrees is a commonly used rule of thumb for how much a vertical hole can be economically deviated using a standard drilling rig. The BLM has estimated typical oil well depths for various parts of the District based on drilling history and geologic data. Gas wells in this planning area probably cannot and will not be deviated for technical and economic reasons. A “directional drilling accessibility” concept has been developed for leases affected by no surface occupancy stipulations. Shallow wells in Montana, less than 6,000 feet deep, can be deviated up to 1/8 mile and have the angle of deviation remain reasonably close to five degrees. This will place the bottom hole location in the center of a 40-acre tract. Because these wells are commonly spaced on a 40acre basis, all spacing units within 1/4 mile of the outer boundary of the lease can be tested. Wells between 6,000 and 11,000 feet deep can also be deviated up to 1/4 mile. This will place the bottom hole location of the well the maximum allowable distance from the lease line for a well

FIGURE 15 DIRECTIONAL DRILLING ACCESSIBILITY CONCEPT

State, Private, or Federal Minerals

No Surface Occupancy(NSO)
1/4 Mile 1/2 Mile

Surface

5% Wellbore Deviation
2500'

Subsurface Area Unavailable to Directional Drilling

5000'

Federal Minerals

7500'

10,000'

DRAWING NOT TO SCALE

Subsurface Area Accessible to Drilling

327

APPENDIX Minerals of this depth. Because these wells are spaced on a 160-acre basis, all spacing units within 1/2 mile of the exterior boundary of the lease can be tested. The oil wells in Montana, with a total depth greater than 11,000 feet are normally spaced on a 320-acre basis. These wells can be deviated up to 1/4 mile using the above criteria. Using this distance, all spacing units within 1/2 mile of the outer boundaries of an affected lease can be tested. Using the “directional drilling accessibility” concept and associated work maps, the planning area was analyzed for the potential loss in production due to the impact of no surface occupancy stipulations. The area was examined for the occurrence of one or more no surface occupancy stipulations, and the no surface occupancy area made inaccessible due to the “directional drilling accessibility” concept was calculated. No surface occupancy has more effect in areas of blocked ownership than in scattered tracts due to inaccessibility from off-lease well locations to much of the blocked area. Usually four-blocked sections with no surface occupancy stipulations result in an inaccessible area of 640 acres. The area around the 640 acres would be accessible by directional drilling. These areas were categorized to permit calculation of wells foregone and the resultant potential loss in production according to the data compiled by the Miles City District. For example, in an area where shallow gas wells are typical, there will be no buffer or offset that will permit access to a shallow production zone within standard deviation limits. The angle of approach will result in a bottom hole location below the production horizon. Deeper production horizons would be accessible to directional drilling because of the well bore deviation concept. Directional drilling will not allow all of the acreage covered by a no surface occupancy stipulation to be properly tested under the above conditions. In many cases, the most favorable location in a spacing unit will not be available for testing because it will not be economically or technologically possible to directionally drill to it from outside the lease. The best way to economically test a spacing unit is to allow surface occupancy to provide opportunities for vertical well bores. Because it will be more expensive to explore a tract covered by no surface occupancy stipulations, some companies may not offer to lease these lands. This represents an unquantifiable loss in lease revenue. Management of federal oil and gas resources on these lands is somewhat different from management on lands where both surface and mineral ownership is federal. On split estate lands where the surface ownership is private, the BLM places necessary restrictions and requirements on its leases and permit approvals and works in cooperation with the surface owner. BLM has established policies for the management of federal oil and gas resources in accordance with federal laws and regulations. The BLM does not have the legal authority to regulate how private surface is managed. BLM does have the statutory authority to require measures by lessees to avoid or minimize adverse impacts that may result from federally authorized mineral lease activities. These measures, in the form of lease stipulations or permit conditions of approval, are intended to protect or preserve the privately owned resources and prevent adverse impacts to adjoining lands, not to dictate management to the surface owner. The term split estate can also refer to lands where the surface ownership is federal and the mineral ownership is private. In this situation, BLM is the surface owner, and works in cooperation with the proponent and the state regulatory agency that approves private mineral applications. BLM has responsibilities in this situation under the previously mentioned statutes; however, BLM does not have the authority to approve or disapprove the mineral owner’s actions. The mineral estate owner usually has the right to enter the land and use the surface that is necessary and reasonable for mineral development through either a reserved or an outstanding right contained in the deed.

SUMATRA AREA Introduction
This narrative discusses the Sumatra oil and gas development potential area. It includes portions of Garfield and Rosebud counties and is considered to be in the Montana Plains province. The principal structural feature is the Sumatra anticline. The majority of this area is covered by Cretaceous exposures, ranging from Hell Creek Formation downward into the Colorado Group. In the past 15 years, 783 wells have been drilled in the 23township area of the Tyler Formation play on, or near, the Sumatra anticline. An additional 50 exploratory wells can be expected throughout the area over the next 15 years.

SPLIT ESTATE
Much of the area included in the planning area contains lands known as split estate lands. These are lands where the surface ownership is different from the mineral ownership.

Occurrence Potential
There is a high occurrence potential nearly throughout the area. 328

APPENDIX Minerals The type log used for this map is from the Madison Limestone Test Well 3 (T. 2 N., R. 27 E., sec. 35, NW1/ 4SE1/4), Yellowstone County. This well was drilled to 7,190 feet into the Precambrian. It illustrates the permeability of potential reservoir beds in the lower Cretaceous, Pennsylvanian, Mississippian, Devonian, Ordovician, and Cambrian formations through drill stem tests which flowed water to the surface. The well was not completed for hydrocarbon production. reserves will cause this area to experience drilling activity in the next 15 years (similar to the past 15 years), despite the present depressed conditions in the domestic oil industry.

Discussion of Development Potential Ratings
All active producing townships have been rated as high oil and gas development potential in the Cedar Creek area. Along the Cedar Creek anticline, primary targets have been the Cretaceous Eagle gas sands and the oil-bearing Ordovician Red River Formation. Because exploration and development typically centers around traditional producing areas, these townships can expect a high amount of development activity over the next 15 years. Based on this analysis, anywhere from 1 to 45 additional wells could be drilled in each of these townships, with numerous producers expected in the next fifteen years. The remainder of the Cedar Creek area is classified moderate development potential because the sedimentary rocks are just as thick as adjacent producing areas of the Williston basin. Wildcatting and limited development will occur in these townships in the next 15 years. This will involve anywhere from one to three wildcat wells being drilled per township.

Discussion of Development Potential
The 23-township area along the Sumatra anticline has high development potential. It contains 28 oil fields ranging in size from one producing well, such as Howard Coulee, to 68 producing wells in the Sumatra complex. Most of the wells are completed in the Tyler sands; however, Big Wall and Sumatra fields also produce from the Amsden. The Tyler sands are Pennsylvanian in age and are deposited in fluvial beds that fill channels eroded into Mississippian Chester age marine shales and limestone. The resulting oil traps are abruptly discontinuous. Smaller tributary channels will continue to be targets for Tyler drilling but at a reduced rate of perhaps one well per township per year. The remaining lands in this area have moderate development potential. During the next 15 years, 5 new wells are anticipated in this area.

CEDAR CREEK AREA Introduction
The Cedar Creek oil and gas development potential area includes portions of Dawson, Fallon, Prairie, and Wibaux counties. The Williston basin crosses the northeast corner of this area. The Cedar Creek anticline is the major producing structure in the map area and separates the Williston basin from the Powder River basin.

POPLAR-GLENDIVE AREA Introduction
This report discusses the Poplar-Glendive oil and gas development potential area outside of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation. The Fort Peck Reservation is not being classified for the purposes of this study. This is the most active oil and gas drilling area in the BLM Miles City District. Drilling is expected to be just as active over the next 15 years as it has been the last 15 years. It includes portions of Dawson, McCone, Prairie, Sheridan, Wibaux, and all of Roosevelt and Richland Counties. The east half of the area is in the Williston basin. The north extent of the Cedar Creek anticline and Sheep Mountain Syncline occurs in the southwest corner of the area.

Occurrence Potential
All of the Cedar Creek area is classified high oil & gas occurrence potential. Regional geologic mapping (Mallory 1972) indicates the area contains sedimentary rock in excess of 5,000 feet thick. The type log for the map, taken from the Marathon 1 State well (T. 2 N., R. 61 E., sec. 16, NW1/4SW1/4), logged 10,262 feet of sedimentary rock before drilling into the preCambrian. The source rocks and reservoirs are proven by the number of producing oil and gas wells in this area. This area has been a target for oil and gas exploration for over 60 years (Tonnsen 1985). The source rocks and proven 329

Occurrence Potential
All of the Poplar-Glendive area is classified as high oil and gas occurrence potential. Regional geologic mapping (Mallory 1972) indicates the area contains more than 5,000 feet of sedimentary rocks. The type log for the county, taken

APPENDIX Minerals from the Dome Petroleum 3 Panasuk (T. 29 N., R. 59 E., sec. 28, SW1/4NW1/4), Ordovician Red River Formation. The source rocks and reservoirs are proven by the number of producing oil and gas wells in this area. This area has been a target for oil and gas exploration for over 30 years (Billings Geological Society 1951). Since then, over 100 oil and gas fields have been developed in this area (Tonnsen 1985). With the successful introduction of horizontal drilling in the Williston basin in the last two years, many unproductive townships and sections will likely experience significant drilling activity and production in the next 15 years. (5) the Devonian Winnipegosis Formation, (6) the Ordovician Gunton Formation, and (7) the Ordovician Red River Formation. It is this multiple pay potential that gives this area of Montana such high development potential despite the depth of most of these wells and the current depressed oil prices. Because exploration and development typically centers around traditional producing areas, these townships can expect a high amount of development activity over the next fifteen years. Based on this analysis, anywhere from 8 to 95 additional wells could be drilled in each of these townships, with numerous producers and new fields expected in the next fifteen years. The rest of the Poplar-Glendive area is classified moderate development potential because: (1) the numerous wells that have encountered shows throughout the formations mentioned above, (2) the thickness of the sedimentary rocks, and (3) the number of wells that have been drilled in these townships in the last fifteen years (0-7). Wildcatting and limited development may occur in these townships in the next 15 years. This will involve anywhere from one to seven wildcat wells being drilled per township. Should a discovery be found in any of these townships, that particular township will experience additional drilling activity.

Discussion of Development Potential Ratings
All of the active producing townships, outside the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, have been rated as high oil and gas development potential in the Poplar-Glendive area. There are multiple producing horizons in these townships. The following horizons are productive throughout the area: (1) the Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation, (2) the Mississippian/ Devonian Bakken Formation, (3) the Devonian Nisku Formation, (4) the Devonian Duperow Formation,

330

APPENDIX Monitoring

MONITORING APPENDIX
INTRODUCTION
For each resource there are a series of items that will be monitored. Each item is evaluated by location, technique for data gathering, unit of measure, and frequency and duration of data gathering. When duration is not specifically stated, the duration is for the next 20 years. The monitoring and evaluation plan states the event that will be evaluated and lists the key resources that will be managed by the Big Dry Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement. If an adverse impact can be corrected by a management action within the scope of this plan, the change will be implemented. If the adverse impact can be corrected only by a management action that is outside the scope of this plan, the management change will be a formal amendment.

331

APPENDIX Monitoring

TABLE 58 MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN Information Warranting a Decision Change samples show high concentrations, BLM will be notified by the National Biological Survey and will investigate and make recommendations for mitigation any noticeable trend indicating increased disturbance - natural or caused by man any noticeable trend indicating increased disturbance -natural or caused by man any noticeable trend indicating increased disturbance - natural or caused by man

Element AIR QUALITY air

Item

Location Terry Badlands

Technique filter pack and pump

Unit of Measure parts per million

Frequency and Duration monthly

CULTURAL RESOURCES 332 MINERALS Oil and gas

areas of critical environmental concern

areawide

site inspection

site and surrounding area

bimonthly between April and November

20 percent of National Register eligible sites

areawide

site inspection

site and surrounding area

annually

1 percent of remaining total of sites

areawide

site inspection

site and surrounding area

annually

geophysical Notice of Intent

areawide

line inspection

operations conducted in compliance with Notice of Intent

minimum of once during operations

violation of regulations, change from approved Notice of Intent, unnecessary or undue degradation

geophysical Notice of areawide Completion

line inspection

operations conducted in compliance with Notice of Intent

minimum of once during plugging and once after reclamation

violation of regulations, change from approved Notice of Intent unnecessary or undue degradation violation of regulations, change from approved Application for Permit to Drill violation of regulations, change from approved Application for Permit to Drill, unnecessary or undue degradation violation of regulations, change from approved permit, unnecessary or undue degradation violation of regulations, change from approved permit, unnecessary or undue degradation violation of regulations, change from approved permit, unnecessary or undue degradation

Application for Permit to Drill drilling

areawide

site inspection

operations conducted in compliance with Application for Permit to Drill operations conducted in compliance with the Sundry Notice

minimum of once and as necessary

Sundry Notice

areawide

site inspection

as necessary

333

produced water disposal

areawide

site inspection

operations conducted in compliance with permit

minimum of once annually

spill

areawide

site inspection

area cleaned up and reclaimed

minimum of once after event

plugged and abandoned wells

areawide

site inspection

operations conducted in compliance with permit

minimum of once during operations

APPENDIX Monitoring

TABLE 58 (continued) MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN Information Warranting a Decision Change

Element

Item abandoned well reclamation

Location areawide

Technique site inspection

Unit of Measure operations conducted in compliance with permit

Frequency and Duration

minimum of once and violation of regulaas necessary until tions, change from reclamation complete approved permit, unnecessary or undue degradation any noticeable trend indicating increased disturbance such as excavations

PALEONTOLOGY

locality degradation caused by human activity

significant paleontologic localities and areas of critical environmental concern significant paleontologic localities and areas of critical environmental concern areawide with emphasis on dispersed use of undeveloped recreational sites special recreation management areas and sites with recreation facilities

inspection of area disturbed

percentage of locality once yearly

334 RECREATION

environmental degradation, such as erosion or trampling

inspection of displaced or altered area

number of fossils

once yearly

accelerated loss or damage to significant fossils

general recreation use

area inspection to look for vandalism, resource abuse, and install photo points

site condition

twice a year (e.g. once in June and once in October) photograph annually

user conflicts, resource degradation, or safety hazards

concentrated recreation use and demand

visitor registration, traffic counters, estimates, and photo points

visitor days, site condition

visitor registration boxes and counters checked once monthly at the minimum and weekly or biweekly during heavy use periods, photograph annually

increased visitor use/ year or sustained use that requires additional or improved facilities

areawide commercial and competitive activities

administrative review and site inspection for complexes with permit stipulations

permit stipulations, resource condition, success of reclamation

on site during competitive events, periodic site inspection for commercial operations, administrative review annually

violation of permit stipulations, irreparable resource damage, compromise of visitor safety and recreation experience

SOIL AND WATER Soil and site productivity compaction Tertiary Age volcanic use of proving ring soils which will be pentrometer1 and have been disturbed pounds per square inch twice a year over a 5year period when compacted areas exceed 10 percent of ground surface and do not recover through natural processes within 5 years when regeneration is impaired due to inadequate soil moisture induced by management practices water quality parameters which exceed state of Montana water quality standards water quality measurements, especially suspended sediments, which render the water unsuitable for its classified usage

soil moisture

selected fine-grained volcanic soils, course-grained soils

manual sampling and gravimetric 2 analysis

percent by weight

once monthly June through September

335 Water

water quality

areawide - where management activities are occurring or to expand baseline data

standard U.S. Geological Survey methods (or modified to meet specific conditions) - field and laboratory analyses done for selected stream basins that have continuous discharge measurements (April through September or runoff period) automated suspended

standard quantitative measurements of discharge for water quality

field measurements 10 to 15 times per year, base line data collected for 5 years prior to disturbance activities in basins without prior data monitoring will continue throughout the activity period and up to 4 years following completion of activities

APPENDIX Monitoring

APPENDIX Monitoring

TABLE 58 (continued) MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN Information Warranting a Decision Change

Element

Item

Location

Technique sediment sampling and continuous temperature measurements will occur in selected streams (April through October)

Unit of Measure

Frequency and Duration

VEGETATION

actual use

all existing allotment actual use report management plans submitted by and allotments within livestock operation 3 years of allotment management plan development all existing allotment management plans and allotments within 3 years of allotment management plan development all allotments; top priority to allotment management plans “I” and “M” allotments

time, location, numbers and type of livestock use

annually for all allotment management plans, others as needed

actual use exceeds acceptable levels

336 climate ecological status

National Oceanic and precipitation (amount and intensity) Atmospheric Administration report ranges, temperature (1992) and site specific rain gauges where needed ecological site method in key areas composition and production compared to potential natural community for each site

monthly during the growing season

extremes considered a factor

status is reduced by updated when allotment is evaluated 15 percent or a drop - grazing cycle to 10- in class year cycle

trend

all allotments, top priority to allotment management plans, proposed adjustments to preference “I,” “M,” then “C”

density, cover, frequency, and comparison of species composition over time as described in TR 4400-4 and the National Range Handbook

number of individuals per unit area, percent cover, percent frequency, and percent species composition

“I” category AMPs every grazing cycle or 5 years. “M” category AMPs every grazing cycle or 10 years. “I”, “M”, or “C” category allotments without an AMP every 10 years or less. annually with proposed allotment management plans otherwise as needed

a change in the direction of trend away from management objectives

utilization or carry over

allotments within 3 years of allotment management plan development as needed to meet management objectives “M” and “I” allotments

key forage method

percent of the forage left

utilization of desired plants exceeds desired use levels

337 Riparian/wetlands

noxious weeds

map location and estimate density

acres and plants per square feet

every 5 years

10 percent increase beyond objective for the area trend away from objective or when no improvement occurs, in unsatisfactory habitat condition

condition, trend, age class structure, streambank alteration, streambank stability, stubble heights, and utilization.

“M” and “I” allotments with activity plans and potential for woody riparian vegetation

photo plot, estimate key areas by sight inspection, Cole Browse Method, Key Forage Method, and other methods found in Technical References (TR4400-3, TR4400-4, TR44007, TR1737-3, TR1737-8, and TR1737-9).

percent species composition, percent in each age class, percent utilization, height, percent of the streambank.

based on activity plan schedule - a minimum of once every 5 years

APPENDIX Monitoring

APPENDIX Monitoring

TABLE 58 (continued) MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN Information Warranting a Decision Change whenever an authorized action is in violation of the stipulations or Interim Management Policy or whenever an unauthorized action occurs decision may required reclamation or possible civil or criminal action and public notification

Element WILDERNESS

Item wilderness study areas

Location Seven Blackfoot, Terry Badlands, Musselshell Breaks, Billy Creek, and Bridge Coulee Wilderness Study Areas

Technique monitoring by flight, vehicle, or foot based review

Unit of Measure surface disturbance

Frequency and Duration once a month if the area is accessible unless an alternate schedule is approved by the State Director

338 WILDLIFE Big game condition and trend big game crucial winter range use of Coverboard3 and Cole browse4 utilization percent use of available annual growth seasonal habitat use big game crucial winter ranges aerial surveys - using a global5 positioning system or pellet group indices distribution of big when winter condigame animals and use tions are such that animals are concentrated on the winter ranges

objectives for big tied to allotment game habitat not management plan, coordinated resource being met management plan, or habitat management plan objectivesstudies conducted at the end of the grazing season or at the end of the winter, early spring (March through May), and other uses as needed objectives for big game habitat are not being met

Fisheries habitat

habitat condition and trend

fishing reservoirs

test for dissolved oxygen, alkalinity other tests as needed

parts per million

annually, or as needed

change in water quality resulting in damage to fish population or carrying capacity change in species could require poisoning - lack of adequate production could require change in species planted

species and numbers

fisheries reservoirs, creeks, and rivers

test area with net for species, occurrence, growth and density

number and types of fish

3 to 5 years or as requested by Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (June through August)

Nongame habitat

use

raptor reproduction sites

nest site visitations and route surveys

number of birds or occupied nests

annually for the route downward trend in surveys (early spring) production or and every 5 to 10 occupancy years for nest site monitoring once annually, or as needed complexes of 1,000 acres or greater will be monitored every 5 years 3 year downward trend in occupancy deterioration in the colonies size that would make the area unacceptable for further consideration for black-footed ferret reintroduction 1 to 3 years downward trend in production or occupancy APPENDIX Monitoring

339 Threatened and endangered species habitat habitat use and trend

breeding bird survey routes black-tailed prairie dog colonies

field survey routes

number of birds

black-footed ferret habitat - the prairie dog colonies will be monitored for size and for burrow density

acres and number of prairie dog colonies and burrows per acre

least tern nesting sites on the Yellowstone River

the Yellowstone number of sites and River will be floated least terns and historic nesting sites monitored for number of adults, and young or nests observed

historic sites will be monitored annually for use -other suitable habitat will be monitored every 3 to 5 years for the possible expansion of nesting colonies (June through August)

APPENDIX Monitoring

TABLE 58 (continued) MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN Information Warranting a Decision Change 1 to 3 year downward trend in production or occupancy

Element

Item

Location piping plover nesting sites

Technique historic nest site will be monitored for number of nesting pairs and nest and young by aerial or boat or field surveys

Unit of Measure number of piping plovers, nests, and number of sites

Frequency and Duration every 1 to 5 years depending on the recommendations of the piping plover working group (May through July) as bald eagles continue to expand their nesting territories east and as nests are located on BLM land - monitor for reproduction (midMarch through July) winter roost sites (December 1 through February) rotation will be developed where leks will be monitored on 3 to 5 year rotation key leks could be monitored 1 to 2 years (March 15 to May 15)

bald eagle reproduction and wintering sites

number of sitings

1 to 3 year downward trend in production or occupancy

340 Upland game use and trend sharp-tailed and sage grouse leks field inspect leks number of males condition sharp-tailed and sage grouse nesting habitat coverboard Daubenmire6 height of residual vegetation

Downward trend (1 to 3 years) when compared to other leks in the study area that show a stable or upward trend

monitoring will be objectives for upland tied to allotment game habitat not being management plan, met habitat management plan, or coordinated resource management plan objectives (after the grazing season)

Waterfowl

use

wetland habitat

spring and summer brood counts

number of broods, young per brood

tied to habitat management plan, coordinated resource management plan, or allotment management plan objectives - highest value wetlands monitored annually May to July tied to habitat management plan, coordinated resource management plan, or allotment management plan objectives (end of the grazing season)

1 to 3 years of downward trend

habitat condition

wetland vegetation and nesting habitat

coverboard

height and amount of residual vegetation

1 to 5 years of downward trend

341

1 A device used for measuring soil compaction. 2 The measuring of specific gravities of solids, liquids, or gases. 3 A measurement board used in photographing the growth of vegetation. 4 Measuring the shrub to evaluate use by big game. 5 Pinpoints locations by utilizing satellites. 6 A method of utilizing a transect to monitor vegetation trend.

APPENDIX Monitoring

APPENDIX Recreation

RECREATION APPENDIX
INTRODUCTION
Recreation area management plans and recreation project plans will be prepared for facility development in special recreation management areas and extensive recreation management areas. It will be a policy to charge a fee for overnight camping at developed recreation sites that meet or exceed the Land and Water Conservation Fund standards. A day use fee may also be charged, providing the facilities warrant a charge. An example of this would be a fee for use of boat launch facilities. sized for average reservoir conditions, and for maintaining water surface not lower than 10 feet below the spillway crest elevation. Pumping would begin when the water surface drops to 5 feet below the spillway crest. Fluctuations greater than 10 feet are to be expected in the early years of operation because initially the storage capacity, evaporation, and seepage from the reservoir are greater than the average conditions. As the reservoir operations are refined to meet the objectives, the capacity of the pumping station and pipeline can be reexamined.

40-FOOT POOL DEPTH

Cherry Creek Dam
Four potential dam sites were considered on the Cherry Creek drainage near the confluence of Cherry Creek and the Yellowstone River. The dam site used in this document is the most feasible. Previous exploration geology confirms this premise. The site offers the best options for an auxiliary spillway, requires the shortest embankment, and is the least expensive of the four considered sites. A reservoir at this site appears to provide the best combination of surface area, pool depth and accessible beaches while not impacting existing roads. Proposed for this site is a concrete chute service spillway with a capacity of 6,400 cubic feet-per-second (the flow produced from a 100-year storm). A grass-lined auxiliary spillway, designed to discharge 3,500 cubic feet-per-second, is cut into the right abutment of the dam (looking downstream). The capacity of both spillways total 10,000 cubic feet-per-second (flow produced by a 500-year storm). The auxiliary spillway design includes a 100-foot long concrete control crest set at the same elevation as the service spillway. An earthen fuse plug constructed over the concrete sill would wash away if the reservoir were to rise above the design elevation of the service spillway. The auxiliary spillway channel is approximately 1,800 feet long, with some excavation as deep as 30 feet. The pumping station will be located on the river’s north bank (T. 12 N., R., 51 E., sec. 10, SE 1/4), approximately 300 feet east of the Yellowstone River bridge. Water would be pumped through a buried pipeline approximately 2 miles long to the reservoir. The pumping station and pipeline are

The dam would be an earth-filled structure. Based on preliminary designs, the dam would be 2,600 feet long, with a crest width of 34 feet. A dam designed to provide a maximum pool depth of 40 feet requires a maximum height of 50 feet, providing 10 feet of flood surcharge and freeboard above the spillway crest. A dam embankment 50 feet high needs a bottom width of 235 feet. Soil cement would be used for erosion protection on the upstream side of the structure because of the unavailability of riprap. It may be necessary to excavate into the left abutment bedrock for a short cutoff trench. When the reservoir is full, the trench prevents seepage through the terrace deposit at the end of the structure. The dam must comply with the Montana State codes design standards for dam safety.

50-FOOT POOL DEPTH
The dam would be an earth-filled structure. Based on preliminary designs the dam would be 3,000 feet long with a crest width of 24 feet. A dam designed to provide a maximum pool depth of 50 feet requires a maximum height of 60 feet, providing 10 feet of flood surcharge and freeboard above the spillway crest. A dam embankment 60 feet high would have a bottom width of 263 feet. Soil cement would be used for erosion protection on the upstream side of the structure because of the unavailability of the riprap. It may be necessary to excavate into the left abutment bedrock for a short cutoff trench. When the reservoir is full, the trench prevents seepage through the terrace deposit at the end of the structure. The dam must comply with the Montana State codes design standards for dam safety.

343

APPENDIX Socioeconomics

SOCIOECONOMICS APPENDIX
SOCIOLOGY
TABLE 59 POPULATION OF COUNTIES AND COMMUNITIES IN THE STUDY AREA (1940-1990) Percent of Change 1980-1990 -20 -38 -17 -20 -20 -38 -18 -23 -27 -4 2 -16 -14 -25 -29 -13 -36 -9 5 -33 -2 -10 -40 -12 -6 -13 -13 -11 -14 -13 -19 -20 -12

County/Community Daniels Flaxville Scobey* Dawson Glendive* Richey Fallon Baker* Plevna Garfield Jordan* McCone Circle* Prairie Terry* Richland Fairview Sidney* Roosevelt Bainville Brockton Culbertson Froid Poplar Wolf Point* Sheridan Medicine Lake Outlook Plentywood* Westby Wibaux Wibaux* Total

1940 4,563 — — 8,618 — — 3,719 — — 2,641 — 3,798 — 2,410 — 10,209 — — 9,806 — — — — — — 7,814 — — — — 2,161 — 55,739

1950 3,946 — — 9,092 — — 3,360 — — 2,172 — 3,258 — 2,377 — 10,366 — — 9,580 — — — — — — 6,674 — — — — 1,907 — 53,032

1960 3,755 — — 12,314 — — 3,997 — — 1,981 — 3,321 — 2,318 — 10,504 — — 11,731 — — — — — — 6,458 — — — — 1,698 — 58,077

1970 3,083 185 1,486 11,269 6,305 389 4,050 2,584 189 1,796 529 2,875 964 1,752 870 9,837 956 4,543 10,365 217 401 821 330 1,389 3,095 5,779 393 153 2,381 287 1,465 644 52,271

1980 2,835 142 1,382 11,805 5,978 417 3,763 2,354 191 1,656 485 2,702 931 1,836 929 12,243 1,366 5,726 10,467 245 374 887 323 995 3,074 5,414 408 122 2,476 291 1,476 782 54,197

1990

2,266 88 1,382 9,505 4,802 259 3,103 1,818 140 1,589 494 2,276 805 1,383 659 10,716 869 5,217 10,999 165 365 796 195 881 2,880 4,732 357 109 2,136 253 1,191 628 47,760

SOURCE: State of Montana, Department of Commerce 1991. NOTE: *indicates community is a county seat.

345

OBJECTIVE
Daniels

INDICATORS
Fallon

TABLE 60 OF SOCIAL WELL-BEING
Garfield McCone Prairie

IN THE STUDY AREA
Richland Roosevelt Sheridan Wibaux Montana U.S.

Dawson

Physicians (nonFederal per 10,000 population 1980) Education levels - percent population completing at least 4 yr high school 1980 Percent housing lacking some or all plumbing facilities in 1980 Per capita personal income 1986 Median family income 1979 Percent families below the poverty level 1979 Percent population in the working age group (18-64) 1980 Percent net migration 1980- 1988 Persons per square mile 1988 Unemployment rate 1987 Crime rate per 10,000 population (major crimes) 1987 Marital termination rate (per 1,000 population) 1987 Change in number of farms 1982- 1987 Change in land in farms 1982-1987 Changes in average size farm 1982- 1987 Percent 1987 farms/farmland in nonfamily corporations or other SOURCE: Farms Farmland

7.1

5.1

8.0

6.0

3.7

0.0

8.2

5.7

3.7

0.0

12.7

17.4

66.1

71.3

63.7

72.9

69.5

59.5

66.6

68.4

67.7

60.1

74.4

66.5

3.0 $15,800 $16,106

1.9

1.5

2.9 $14,400 $13,480

2.8 $12,900 $14,295

2.8 $12,000 $10,724

1.9 $11,800 $19,865

2.3 $10,500 $16,622

2.0 $14,300 $17,270

1.8 $11,400 $13,784

2.3 $12,400 $18,413

2.2 NA $19,917

$12,600 $12,700 $19,621 $18,329

10.6

6.8

13.4

19.3

19.3

27.7

7.5

11.2

11.2

18.0

9.2

9.6

55.8 -10.3 .8 4.6

59.4 -23.2 4.3 6.1

57.5 -20.1 2.0 7.2

59.0 -10.3 0.4 3.4

55.8 -13.8 1.0 2.8

53.1 -15.0 0.9 5.6

58.4 -15.7 5.7 9.1

55.5 -7.3 4.7 8.8

57.8 -8.4 3.1 4.8

53.9 -18.7 1.5 5.4

59.8 -5.0 2.4 7.4

60.6 NA NA NA

77.5

83.4

71.9

NA

12.1

NA

248.0

307.4

195.7

62.0

400.3

NA

2.3 1.0% -5% -5% 1% 3%

4.4 0% -2% -2% 1% NA

3.1 14% 4% -9% >.5% NA

0.0 13% -2% -13% 1% NA

1.2 4% -1% -4% 1% NA

1.2 4% -2% -6% 1% NA

4.5 12% 10% -1% 2% 3%

3.6 2% -1% -3% 1% 18%

5.8 2% -2% -5% 1% NA

0.8 4% 10% 5% 0% 0%

5.1 4% -1% >.05% 1% 9%

NA NA NA NA NA NA

State of Montana, Department of Commerce 1988; Department of Justice 1989; Department of Health and Environmental Sciences 1987. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census 1987.

346

APPENDIX Socioeconomics

Big Dry Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Interviews
During March and April of 1991, BLM employees held telephone discussions with 102 study area residents and other interested people such as leaders of groups oriented toward recreation, resource protection, and agriculture. Study area government officials such as county commissioners, planners and mayors were also contacted in study area communities. Efforts were made to contact a variety of people representing agriculture, recreation, business and resource protection interests. The discussions covered familiarity with BLM lands and management, changes and problems observed on BLM lands, recreation behaviors, community perceptions and concerns, and preferences for BLM management. Because participants were not randomly chosen, the data must be interpreted cautiously but it can be used to give an indication of how local residents and other concerned individuals view their communities and the decisions made by BLM.

ECONOMICS Assumptions and Method of Analysis
The economic analysis used in the resource management plan and environmental impact statement is based on the ability of the resource specialists to identify and quantify changes in resource outputs that result from the implementation of the numerous management actions across the alternatives. The basis for comparison was the existing situation, rather than a baseline projection. The changes in outputs were converted to l990 dollar values and the analysis was based on the gross output, earnings, and employment multipliers developed by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (U.S. Department of Commerce, BEA 1991) in the Regional Input-Output Modeling System for a 39sector Montana economy. The multipliers used in the analysis are shown in table 61.

Social Impact Assessment
The only social impacts from this resource management plan and environmental impact statement would be changes in social well-being except for the impacts from coal development. Discussions with area residents and other interested individuals indicated concern with local economic development, preserving the agricultural way of life, provision of recreation opportunities, and protection of the natural resources on which the area depends. Preserving the agricultural way of life is important because of the unique lifestyle it offers and because local communities are economically dependent on agriculture. BLM resource decisions could affect social well-being in a variety of ways. These include changes in the amount and quality of resources such as recreational opportunities and livestock grazing, and resolution of problems related to resource use, such as access problems. BLM’s decisions could affect the ability to earn a living from a resource due to changes in the amount and quality of the resource, which could in turn affect the standard of living and therefore, social well-being. Other intangible beliefs that could affect social well-being include individuals having a sense of control over the decisions that affect their future, and feeling that the government strives to act in ways that benefits everyone equitably, rather than benefitting just a privileged few.

TABLE 61 OUTPUT, EARNINGS AND EMPLOYMENT MULTIPLIERS Sector Agriculture Oil and Gas Construction Recreation4 Output 1 2.481 1.3826 1.9199 1.7802 Earnings2 0.4943 0.2070 0.6267 0.6407 Employment3 30.7 10.2 35.3 57.15

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, BEA 1991. Total dollar change for each additional dollar of output delivered by the impacted sector.
1

Total dollar change in earnings of households employed by all sectors for each additional dollar of output delivered to the impacted sector.
2

Total changes in number of jobs in all sectors for each additional l million dollars of output delivered to the impacted sector.
3

The recreation multipliers were calculated using a weighted average of the following economic sectors: .5 retail trade + .25 lodging + .25 eating and drinking places.
4

347

APPENDIX Socioeconomics The following describe the assumptions and methodology used to quantify and value the units of outputs identified by the various resource specialists. of the incoming population. Negative impacts to social well-being would be greatest in situations where predevelopment services and infrastructure were inadequate, the town is small relative to the population increase, and the types of in-migrants are different than the current residents. These impacts may be mostly of a short-term nature, noticeable primarily during periods of peak construction. Beneficial changes in social well-being would accrue to those people who were able to acquire employment or who benefitted from business expansion as a result of the increased income in the community. The availability of local employment may allow some younger people to remain in their communities to work if they desire, reversing youth out-migration trends which currently characterize many rural areas. The increase in income which would accompany the increase in employment could enhance the well-being and possibly raise the standard of living of those positively affected. It could also create disparity in groups or between individuals who did not benefit. Population growth would cause increased demand for public and private services of all types. In some cases the capacity of towns to respond would be overwhelmed, especially if services were currently inadequate or providers were not used to handling the types of problems which they would encounter. This strain on services would reduce the availability or distribution of resources to long-time users and newcomers alike. An increase in the number of strangers passing through town, noise, crowds, traffic, and other stresses would also occur. These disturbances could be particularly distressing for those residents who never had to deal with such problems before. Although people would likely adapt to these changes, which would be most intense during peak construction phases, they might regret the loss of the quiet, slow-paced small town atmosphere they previously enjoyed. Some area ranchers and farmers may object to the changes if coal development occurs. In smaller communities, differences in wages and possibly a change in politics caused by population growth could leave ranchers and farmers feeling separated from the community. These generic impacts are based on discussions in the Guide to Social Assessment (USDI, BLM 1982d) and the North Dakota Resource Management Plan (USDI, BLM, 1986a). Some area ranchers and farmers have organized in opposition to development because of their concern over regional impacts to air and water resources which they feel could affect their economic and social welfare and ultimately

COAL
The type and magnitude of social impacts from coal are based on the ability of the community to adapt to change and the change itself (USDI, BLM 1982d). In general, communities that have a large diverse population base, experience with development, ties to outside organizations, a diverse labor force, adequate services and facilities, experienced leadership and a positive attitude toward growth will be able to deal with population growth. Small communities with no historical experience with development, few linkages to nonlocal organizations, a fairly uniform population, an inadequate service base, and inexperienced leadership are more likely to have problems dealing with population growth. Social impacts may include changes to social organization and social well-being. Social organization refers to the way in which the people in the community relate to each other. Social well-being refers to the way individuals feel about their community and the quality of life that it offers. The following paragraphs describe the types of changes that could occur to community social organization and social well-being in an energy growth scenario, as described in the Minerals appendix. These generic impacts are based on discussions in the Guide to Social Assessment (USDI, BLM 1982d) and the North Dakota Resource Management Plan (USDI, BLM 1986a). Potential changes in social organization include residents no longer knowing everyone, greater diversity in resident lifestyles, changes in business transactions and government structures from casual to more formalized, increases in the level of outside influences in the community, and erosion of the traditional community power bases. These changes could be permanent, substantial, and intense. In extreme cases, change might be so great that long-term residents would feel like strangers in their own community. The severity of these impacts would depend on the predevelopment social organization of the community (i.e., whether the community is a relatively informal agricultural area or whether it has become more formal and urbanized) and the size and character of incoming populations. Change would be greatest in situations where the predevelopment community social organization was very informal, the population influx was large, and the types of in-migrants were different than current residents. Impacts to social well-being depend upon the pre-existing level of community social well-being and the size and type

348

APPENDIX Socioeconomics limit their future options. These agricultural producers are not convinced that the coal in the Big Dry Resource Area is needed to meet national energy goals or that the successful reclamation of agricultural land can be guaranteed. Because of regionwide impacts to service and facility provision, Native Americans may find themselves negatively impacted if they travel off the reservation for shopping, medical services, etc. The increased traffic, crowded conditions, and other stressful situations they could encounter could make such trips unpleasant. These conditions would be most noticeable during the peak construction periods. Positive impacts to social well-being would be most apparent if Native Americans were able to acquire employment on energy projects. With increased employment opportunities, Native Americans who have had to leave the reservation to look for work may find they are able to stay in the area. Coal mine and facility development would eventually help to diversify the economy of eastern Montana. Expansion, due to new energy growth, would result in a change from an agricultural to a construction-trade oriented economy. At the community level this would translate into a broader range of goods and services being offered and greater employment opportunities; however, in the short run, public service costs associated with energy growth might well exceed base tax revenues. Short-term, energy-related impacts may have an adverse effect on baseline municipal services in some of the communities identified. Adequate planning and management capabilities are essential in developing mitigation strategies. The lack of planning may result in fiscal problems, inadequate or excessive investment in community infrastructure, and a decrease in the quality of life. There appear to be five critical factors that must be present to mitigate some of the adverse economic or social impacts that could result from rapid energy growth. These factors are: accurate information, adequate lead time, planning expertise, adequate financial resources, and political leadership. If any of these five factors are missing, it is likely that a community will not be able to ease the adverse effects of energy related growth. These factors are discussed in detail in the Fort Union Coal Region Draft Environmental Impact Statement (USDI, BLM 1982c). Direct employment would peak at approximately 1,550 people during the third year of the project (see table 62). Long-term operation employment would total approximately 450. Direct annual payroll would peak at approximately $61 million in the third year of construction (see table 63). Payroll during the operation phase would total

TABLE 62 MINE AND COAL-FIRED ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION PLANT Construction and Operation Work Force Requirements 1990-20001
Total Construction & Operation Mine Plant

Year

Construction

Operation

Construction

Operation

Construction Operation

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10-40

500 1,300 1,550 1,100 1,000 950 1,050 600 450 450

450 1,200 1,400 850 650 600 700 150 0 0

50 100 150 250 350 350 350 450 450 450

150 50 150 50 0 0 0 0 0 0

50 100 150 200 250 250 250 250 250 250

300 1,150 1,250 800 650 600 700 150 0 0

0 0 0 50 100 100 100 200 200 200

SOURCE: USDI, BLM 1978; 1981a.
1

Assumming a 4-year construction period for the mine and 8 years for the facility with periods overlapping. Numbers rounded to the nearest 50. 349

APPENDIX Socioeconomics about $19 million annually for the life of the project. Indirect employment would peak at about 900 and decrease to 700 in the operations phase (see table 64). Payroll to indirect workers (in 1990 dollars) would peak at approximately $15.5 million and decrease to $12 million in the long run. TABLE 63 DIRECT PERSONAL INCOME GENERATED BY THE MINE AND FACILITY (Thousands of 1990 Dollars) Direct Construction Year Income 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10-40 17,453 46,541 54,298 32,967 25,210 23,271 27,150 5,817 0 0 Direct Operations Income 2,256 4,513 6,768 11,069 15,371 15,371 15,371 19,462 19,462 19,462 Total Direct Income 19,709 51,054 61,066 44,036 40,582 38,642 42,521 25,278 19,462 19,462 The proportion of workers hired locally depends upon a variety of factors including community size, the distance between the project and the communities, the size of the project, the presence of other projects in the area, the number of unemployed or underemployed workers in the area, skill types available, and area wage levels (Weiland et al. 1977). Local workers may be willing to commute as far a 60 miles or more for temporary construction work (Murdock and Leistritz 1979). The figures used in this analysis to determine the proportion of local workers hired have been taken from studies of existing mine and facility work forces. Local hires would peak at about 1,400 during construction (see table 65). Long-term local hires would total approximately 700 and most would be engaged in employment indirectly related to the mine and facility. Total population in-migration would peak at approximately 2,050 during the third year (see table 66). This figure would decline to about 1,100 during the long-term operation of the project. The population size of existing communities and the distance between the project and communities are major determining factors for where people settle. Population size is important because it is closely associated with the service structure of communities; different size cities generally can support different levels and types of community services. In previous studies of similar developments, areas over 30 miles from the project appeared to be relatively unattractive to in-migrants. Construction workers hired for a fixed duration of time were more likely to commute longer distances than those hired for the lifetime of the project (Murdock and Leistritz 1979). The impact of in-migrating population on services and infrastructure cannot be analyzed in detail, because site specific development proposals are necessary before service and infrastructure analysis becomes meaningful. The distribution and type of incoming population and the current community service and infrastructure capacity are both critical in determining how in-migrants affect services and infrastructure. During the initial construction period of large-scale energy projects, considerable stress may be placed on local services and infrastructures such as housing, schools, police, sewage, etc. Unless specific plans are made to avoid the situation (see mitigation discussion), there is a lag period between the time the service and infrastructure demands increase and when monies such as coal conversion and coal severance taxes are available to deal with the increased demand. Those communities that experience significant long-term fiscal deficits could have problems in providing an ad-

SOURCE: North Dakota Labor Market Advisor 1975.

TABLE 64 INDIRECT EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME FOR THE MINE AND FACILITY Number of1 Indirect Employees 300 750 900 800 850 800 900 750 700 700 Indirect2 Employees (Payroll) 5,180 12,950 15,540 13,814 14,677 13,814 15,540 12,950 12,087 12,087

Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10-40

SOURCE: North Dakota Labor Market Advisor 1975. NOTE: See Table 66 for an explanation of how these figures were calculated. Employment is rounded to the nearest 50. 2Figures are in thousands of 1990 dollars.
1

350

APPENDIX Socioeconomics TABLE 65 LOCAL EMPLOYMENT GENERATED BY THE MINE AND FACILITY Local Construction Employment 250 600 700 400 300 300 350 100 0 0 Local Operations Employment 50 50 100 100 200 200 200 250 250 250 Local Indirect Employment 200 500 600 550 550 550 600 500 450 450

Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10-40

Total Local Employment 500 1,150 1,400 1,050 1,050 1,050 1,150 750 700 700

NOTE: Based on assumptions detailed in table 66. Employment is rounded to the nearest 50.

TABLE 66 POPULATION IN-MIGRATION ASSOCIATED WITH THE MINE AND FACILITY Population Associated with Direct Employment Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10-40 Construction1 350 1,000 1,150 700 550 500 600 150 0 0 Operation 50 100 200 250 400 400 400 550 550 550 Population Associated with Indirect Employment 250 600 700 650 650 650 700 600 550 550

Total Incoming Population 650 1,700 2,050 1,600 1,600 1,550 1,700 1,300 1,100 1,100

NOTE: Population is rounded to the nearest 50.
1

There would be a 6-month lag period between direct construction and operation employment and associated indirect employment.

351

APPENDIX Socioeconomics equate overall level of services. Additional funding, over that which would legislatively flow to the community as a result of economic development and/or population increases, would be necessary if the incoming population is to be provided with adequate public services. region. The economic ultimate recovery for wells in the Williston basin was 290,000 barrels over an estimated 20year life. For analysis purposes, average annual production was calculated by dividing the economic ultimate recovery by 20 years, or l4,500 barrels per year. Oil wells do not produce equal volumes over time. The rate of production is a function of initial reservoir pressures and individual well production decline curves. Because the location, timing, and producing horizons of the foregone wells could not be determined, the average is used for the analysis. The gross output was the result of multiplying the average annual production by the number of wells lost by the average price of oil in l990 dollars. That value was used for the multiplier analysis. Similarly, federal royalties were calculated by multiplying the average value of the products lost by the federal royalty rate, l2.5 percent. Federal rents were the number of acres closed to leasing times the weighted average annual rental rate of $l.80 per acre. The state of Montana’s share of the rents and royalties is 50 percent of the total.

LIVESTOCK GRAZING MANAGEMENT
The resource specialist identified changes in animal unit months by alternative. Animal unit months were converted to livestock sold by assuming that each head of livestock would require l2 animal unit months per year. Of the estimated 250 plus permittees affected by the management actions, only a dozen or so would be sheep operators. Changes in grazing fee receipts to the federal government were based on the l990 animal unit month value of $1.81. The output measure for livestock grazing was the average value of livestock sold in the planning area. The average value was calculated by dividing the total value of livestock sold in the counties in the planning area in 1987 by the number of livestock sold (State of Montana, Department of Commerce, 1989). The average value was adjusted to l990 dollars using the average annual change in the implicit price deflator for gross national product. The average value per head of livestock sold in l990 dollars was $494.

RECREATION
The recreation analysis focused on the activities and the sites affected by the proposed management actions and the resource allocation alternatives discussed in the resource management plan and environmental impact statement. These activities include big game, waterfowl, upland bird hunting, and fishing throughout the planning area. They include the day use activities associated with the Powder River Depot and Calypso recreation areas, Makoshika State Park, and the activities associated with development of these sites and construction of the Cherry Creek reservoir and dam. Hunter days and harvest rates are compiled by the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks annually for each hunting district. The 1988 data was used for the hunting districts in Regions 6 and 7 included in the planning area boundary. Lake angler days were based on the average use from 1982 to 1985 as reported in a mail survey, “Montana Statewide Angling Pressure” (State of Montana, MDFW&P 1989). Visitor use estimates for the recreation sites came from the BLM’s Recreation Management Information System and the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks. Reservoir use estimates were based on the Bureau of Reclamation’s annual wildlife and recreation summaries. Outdoor recreation participation rates by age classes and region were found in the “Montana Outdoor Recreation

OIL AND GAS
The resource specialist estimated the number of wells that would be affected for each alternative. The effect could be increased costs resulting from site relocations and delays, or in some cases, a number of wells could not be drilled. While the increased costs of relocating well sites and delays are important from an individual operator’s standpoint, the increased costs were not estimated due to the small number of wells potentially affected. In the case of the wells that could not be drilled, estimates of producing wells and dry holes were made using the Williston basin averages because exact well locations were not known. The success rate for drilling in the Williston basin was approximately one in four (27 percent). Dry holes were valued at the 1988 average cost for wells drilled to l0,000 to l2,495 feet, average depths for the Williston basin (American Petroleum Institute 1988). The 1988 value was adjusted to l990 using the gross national product deflator. The value used for each dry hole was $625,000 dollars. Producing wells were valued based on the average economic ultimate recovery for wells in the Williston basin 352

APPENDIX Socioeconomics Needs Survey” by the University of Montana Forestry School. Adjustments were made based on the preliminary 1990 census data for Montana. Estimates of nonresident highway visitors and expenditures data were found in the Institute of Tourism Research, University of Montana, April 1990 report entitled “Estimates of Economic Impact of Nonresident Travelers to Montana.” The hunting and fishing expenditure data came from the following reports prepared for the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks. The Net Economic Value of Deer Hunting in Montana, 2/88. The Net Economic Value of Elk Hunting in Montana, 2/88. The Net Economic Value of Antelope Hunting in Montana, 1/88. The Net Economic Value of Fishing in Montana, 8/87. In order to estimate changes in visitor use of developing the recreation sites and Cherry Creek Special Recreation Management Area, the following assumptions were made. The resident visitor use for the Terry area sites, exclusive of Cherry Creek, was based on the participation rates from the 1985 Outdoor Recreation Survey and the estimated population within 1-hour’s drive (55 miles). The estimated operation and maintenance costs for the recreational facilities are $199,000 (10% of the construction costs minus estimated user fees). TABLE 67 COST SUMMARY FOR 40-FOOT POOL DEPTH EARTH-FILLED DAM Total Construction Costs 4,003,165 1,316,806 2,188,508 357,500 17,875 7,883,854

Item Dam Outlet Works Spillway Grouting River Control and Dewatering Total

SOURCE: USDI, Bureau of Reclamation 1990a

ational developments. Estimated costs for annual operation and maintenance for the dam are $75,000 ($40,000 for labor, and $35,000 for material and equipment). The annual energy cost for pumping water is estimated at $7,900. The average annual evaporation and seepage loss from the reservoir would be 4,740 acre-feet with a pump, and 3,179 acre-feet without a pump. The minimum pool depth is 27 feet with a pump, and 16 feet without a pump. The minimum surface area is 309 acres with a pump, and 187 acres without a pump. A pumping station is necessary to provide a relatively constant water level for quality recreational use. During the life of the reservoir, approximately 1,099 acrefeet of water would be pumped from the Yellowstone River annually. The pump (6 cubic feet-per-second) would run an estimated 93 days a year. A 40-year reservoir with supplemental pumping meets the stated objectives: it sustains a fishery, is large enough to provide quality recreation, and has a useable life of 77 years, exceeding the 50-year life objective. A 40-foot pool depth reservoir without supplemental pumping cannot sustain a fishery because the pool depth drops below 20 feet.

Cherry Creek Reservoir
The two options considered are a 40- or a 50-foot pool maximum depth reservoirs. Each option was measured by three objectives. The reservoir must (1) sustain a fishery, (2) provide recreational use, and (3) have a useful life exceeding 50 years.

CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES FOR 40FOOT POOL DEPTH DAM This reservoir would cover 455 acres with a maximum pool depth of 40 feet and an initial storage capacity of approximately 8,893 acre-feet. A pipeline is proposed in order to maintain a relatively constant reservoir level. The total cost for the construction of the 40-foot pool depth reservoir would be $10.8 million. This cost includes $7.9 million for construction of the dam, outlet works and spillways (see table 67); $640,000 for a 6 cubic feet-per-second capacity pumping station and a 15-inch diameter pipeline ($300,000 and $340,000 respectively); and $2.23 million for recre353

CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES FOR 50FOOT POOL DEPTH DAM This reservoir would cover 569 acres with a maximum pool depth of 50 feet and an initial storage capacity of approximately 14,078 acre-feet. A pumping station and a pipeline would maintain a relatively constant reservoir level. The total cost for the construction of the 50-foot pool depth reservoir would be $13 million. This cost includes $9.9 million for construction of the dam, outlet works, and spillways (see table 68); and $890,000 for a 10 cubic feet-

APPENDIX Socioeconomics per-second capacity pumping station, an 18-inch diameter pipeline; and $2.23 million for recreational developments. Estimated costs for annual operation and maintenance for the dam are $75,000 ($40,000 for labor, and $35,000 for material and equipment). The annual energy cost for pumping water is estimated at $16,000. The average annual evaporation and seepage loss from the reservoir would be 6,678 acre-feet with a pump, and 3,752 acre-feet without a pump. The minimum pool depth is 32 feet with a pump, and 16 feet without a pump. The minimum surface area is 372 acres with a pump, and 190 acres without a pump. TABLE 68 COST SUMMARY FOR 50-FOOT POOL DEPTH EARTH-FILLED DAM Total Construction Costs 5,228,740 1,612,873 2,723,477 357,500 17,875 9,940,465 TABLE 69 ANNUAL RESERVOIR COSTS Reservoir Operations Pool & Maintenance Total Depth Capital Cost Costs Annual Cost 40-foot 50-foot 896,976 1,092,965 265,000 265,000 1,161,967 1,357,965

VISITOR USE AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS The benefits from recreation projects are figured from an estimated annual number of visitors and the economic values placed on those visits. The estimated number of visitors for the Cherry Creek Special Recreation Management Area is based on a comparison of similar reservoir sites in Montana. The Bureau of Reclamation’s Montana Projects Office prepares an annual recreation and wildlife summary for each reservoir it manages in Montana. This summary includes visitor use estimates, a list of facilities, and the types of activities available. Upon review of that summary data the Tiber Reservoir which is southeast of Shelby, the Fresno Reservoir which is northwest of Havre, the Nelson Reservoir which is northeast of Malta, and the Intake Diversion Dam which is northeast of Glendive were used for comparison. In order to calculate visitor use per thousand population, an area of origin was defined for each reservoir. These areas are within a 2-hour (100-mile) driving radius with the dams at the center of the circle. The visitor population has two components: total county population, and the number of fishing licenses sold in those counties within a 2-hour driving radius of each reservoir. The visitor population is the average of 1980 and 1988 populations of those counties entirely or partially within the circle. County populations were adjusted to reflect highway access, proximity to similar recreational facilities, and physical barriers such as the Fort Peck Reservoir. The second component of the visitor population is the average number of nonresident fishing licenses compared to resident fishing licenses sold in these counties in 1980, 1985, and 1988. The fishing license numbers are multiplied by the ratio of lake angler days to total angler days for each Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks region. The counties within the 2-hour driving radius are placed into three categories. For those counties immediately adjacent to the reservoir, the visitor population equals the total population plus the nonresident fishing licenses sold. The second category includes counties with access to similar recreation areas. The visitor population is defined as a portion of the total population in addition to nonresident

Item Dam Outlet Spillway Grouting River Control and Dewatering Total

SOURCE: USDI, Bureau of Reclamation 1990a A pumping station is necessary to provide constant water levels for quality recreation. During the life of the reservoir, approximately 2,265 acre-feet of water would be pumped from the Yellowstone River annually. The pump (10 cubic feet-per-second) would run an estimated 114 days a year. A 50-foot pool depth reservoir with supplemental pumping meets the stated objectives: it sustains a fishery, is large enough to provide quality recreation, and has a useable life of 136 years, exceeding the 50-year life objective. A 50foot pool depth reservoir without supplemental pumping cannot sustain a fishery because the pool depth drops below 20 feet.

ANNUAL COST ESTIMATES The annual reservoir costs for each reservoir is the sum of the total capital costs, including energy costs, amortized over the life of each reservoir plus the annual operation and maintenance costs.

354

APPENDIX Socioeconomics fishing licenses sold. The third category includes counties in the 2-hour driving radius with access to similar recreation facilities. The visitor population of these counties equals the number of resident fishing licenses sold. Table 70 shows the estimated visitor use per thousand population for the four selected reservoirs. TABLE 70 ESTIMATED VISITOR USE PER 1,000 POPULATION Average Number Of Visits 32,985 32,736 21,977 37,697 Average Visitor Population 48,793 43,297 25,299 55,689 Visits Per 1,000 676 756 869 677 Using the average 745 visits per thousand (see table 70), the projected annual visits for Cherry Creek Reservoir would be approximately 25,000. The visitor use estimates represent the total for this site. Some are people who otherwise would visit other reservoirs if this one were not built. The remainder are people who would not use any other reservoir at all. Some use by interstate travelers passing through is probable but the amount of use is unpredictable. The BLM conducted a telephone survey in March of 1991 in order to estimate the percent of use that would shift to the proposed Cherry Creek Reservoir from other reservoirs in the region (Trent 1991). Selected public land users and representatives of interest groups in eastern Montana were surveyed. While the sample size was not large enough to be totally representative for the purpose of validity, it was sufficient for estimating visitor use at this stage in the evaluation process. The survey respondents who fish regularly indicated they would increase their angler days by approximately 35 percent. They also estimated they would use the Cherry Creek Reservoir approximately 30 percent of the time if constructed. According to the Montana Statewide Angling Preserve Mail Survey for 1982-1985 (State of Montana, MDFW&P 1989), the average number of lake angler days for Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks Region 7 was 25,000. Hypothetically, if angler days were to increase by 35 percent, and existing use transferred to Cherry Creek Reservoir, the potential number of angler days at Cherry Creek could reach a conservative annual estimate of 16,000, or as much as 65 percent of the total estimate. Recreational activities created by federal water projects provide economic benefits measured by the visitors willingness to pay. The willingness to pay concept (the amount of money that people are willing to pay, over and above actual expenditures), is required by the U.S. Water Resources Council and is explained in the Principles and Guidelines document published in 1983. The willingness to pay values used in this analysis are shown in table 72 by type of activity. Tables 73 and 74 show the visitor use scenarios. The first scenario for the 40-foot pool depth dam is based on the assumption that 25,000 visitor days include 40 percent fishermen, 30 percent boaters, and 30 percent nonspecific users. The second scenario for the 50-foot dam is based on the assumption that the 25,000 visitor days are representing 50 percent fishermen, 25 percent boaters, and 25 percent nonspecific users.

Population Fresno Intake Nelson Tiber

SOURCE: USDI, BLM 1991a. The estimated visitor population at the Cherry Creek Reservoir is approximately 33,455.

TABLE 71 ESTIMATED VISITOR POPULATION Population 1 Fishing Licenses2 1990 Resident Nonresident 11,697 3,103 1,383 4,753 1,172 795 1,138 5,253 596 29,890 185 19 44 144 11 48 96 1,200 775 39 2,561 167 25 8 565 23 18 150 48 1,004

County

Custer Fallon Prairie Dawson3 Golden Valley, ND3 Garfield3 McCone3 Rosebud3 Wibaux3 Carter Powder River Richland Roosevelt Treasure Total

SOURCE: Montana State Office unpublished visitor files.
State of Montana, Department of Commerce 1991. Average number of fishing licenses sold in 1980, 1985 and 1988 multiplied by the ratio of lake angler days to the total angler days (1982-1985) for Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks Regions 6 and 7. 3One-half of the population use is due to the proximity of similar recreational facilities.
1 2

355

APPENDIX Socioeconomics TABLE 72 ESTIMATED WILLINGNESS TO PAY VALUES PER VISITOR DAY Type of Activity Fishing Boating (motor) Bankside Dollars per Visitor 83 23 10

SOURCE: State of Montana, MDFW&P 1988; USDI, BLM 1991a. NOTE: Dollar values are adjusted to 1990, using the implicit price deflator for the gross national product.

TABLE 73 ANNUAL VISITOR USE 40-FOOT POOL DEPTH DAM Activity Fishing Boating Other Total Visitor Days 10,000 7,500 7,500 25,000 Willingness to Pay $ 830,000 172,500 75,000 $1,077,500

TABLE 74 ANNUAL VISITOR USE 50-FOOT POOL DEPTH DAM Activity Fishing Boating Other Total Visitor Days 12,500 6,250 6,250 25,000 Willingness to Pay $1,037,500 143,750 62,500 $1,243,750

356

APPENDIX Soil and Water

SOIL AND WATER APPENDIX
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
Special practices required to control erosion and protect water quality will be prescribed for oil and gas case-by-case through on-site investigations during the application for permit to drill process. Reclamation plans established according to present and developed guidelines will be required for existing fields and wellsites. The objectives of the reclamation plans will be to reduce the amount of bare ground caused by past oil and gas development, to control surface water runoff, and to dispose properly of produced water. Construction and reclamation techniques and procedures would be monitored to quantify the effects of these plans. As management plans or rangeland improvements are developed, watershed concerns related to project construction will be addressed. Old, unreclaimed disturbance will be inventoried and reclaimed. Reclamation will be prescribed case-by-case and monitored to evaluate the effects of the reclamation used. Rehabilitation of fire lines and areas disturbed through the use of heavy equipment for fire suppression, will begin towards the end of a fire or immediately after. Heavy equipment is highly effective in fire suppression but use of this equipment can cause considerable surface disturbance which can lead to accelerated soil erosion and sedimentation of streams. Many of the potential impacts to the soil and water resource can be mitigated early on using heavy equipment while it is still on site at the fire for rehabilitation work. Reseeding of these disturbed areas may be required. Annual evaluations with possible additional rehabilitation work recommendations will be made until satisfactory reclamation is achieved. assist in cooperative approaches toward basin-wide water quality objectives. The following watershed areas have been identified as needing continued or improved management and monitoring; included are the actions taken in 1992.

CHERRY CREEK
Cherry Creek, a tributary to the Yellowstone River (segment 42M002), is located entirely in Prairie County and is approximately 384 square miles in size. Forty-eight percent of the drainage is public land. This watershed has soil, water, wildlife, riparian, grazing and recreational values. A Memorandum of Understanding has been signed with other federal and state agencies and private landowners. The objective of this Memorandum of Understanding is to develop a cooperative watershed plan which will identify and implement standard operating procedures to maintain and improve the water quality within the watershed. An intensive monitoring program on the Cherry Creek Watershed will be undertaken to determine what practices are necessary to achieve overall improvement in the watershed. Five monitoring stations have been established. Other sites will be monitored on a limited term basis to further delineate potential problem areas. Beneficial uses of warmwater aquatic life are not being met. Beneficial water uses for livestock, wildlife, and irrigation are threatened in the lower 16 miles of this stream. Low flows are due to degradation of most riparian areas and poor hydrologic conditions of the associated upland rangelands. The BLM has entered into an agreement with the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology to predict long-term salinity in the proposed Cherry Creek Dam based on intermixing of ground water, surface water, and evaporative residuals. There is a continuous recording stream gaging station in place approximately three miles above Cherry Creek’s confluence with the Yellowstone River. BLM will continue to fund the operation of the U.S. Geological Survey gage. Streamflow and sediment are monitored at this location.

Critical Watersheds
In accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the BLM and the State of Montana, Department of Health and Environmental Sciences, Water Quality Bureau, an annual report is prepared by BLM and submitted to the Water Quality Bureau and the Environmental Protection Agency. This report focuses on specific water quality problems and presents a proposed action plan to solve the problems. Where appropriate, the report identifies the site, presents a problem description, and the best management practice to remedy the problem. It also provides a time schedule for implementation of the solutions. Due to the mixed landownership patterns, cooperative effort is usually needed to solve problems in an entire watershed. BLM will 357

CUSTER CREEK
Custer Creek, a tributary to the Yellowstone River (segment 42KJ001), is located in Custer and Prairie counties. Landownership is public, private and state. This watershed contains soil, water, wildlife, riparian, grazing, and recreational values. Some cooperative management with the private landowner, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Ducks Unlimited, Soil Conservation Service and

APPENDIX Soil and Water BLM has been implemented. The creek had previously been identified as having a high sediment rate. A Great Plains contract is being developed through the Soil Conservation Service which will improve water quality on Custer Creek. The contract will implement a grazing system that isolates the riparian areas of Custer Creek into a single pasture. It will also provide water sources away from the creek bottom. Most of the high sediment load in Custer Creek is the result of geologic erosion from badlands in the headwaters. concern for water quality due to livestock concentration along the creek. Livestock impacts are adding to beneficial use impairment of warmwater aquatic life, public water supply, and agricultural uses. Monitoring began in 1993 and procedures will be formulated to address these problems. The creek flows near livestock handling and holding facilities based on private land. The creek exits private land and flows across public land. An allotment management plan is in the process of being developed which will include fences to keep stock further away from the creek on public land. Some grazing improvements have been implemented.

CABIN CREEK
Cabin Creek is located in Dawson, Fallon, Prairie, and Wibaux counties. Cabin Creek is a tributary of the Yellowstone River. Landownership is public, private, and state. This watershed contains soil, water, wildlife, riparian, grazing, and recreational values. The watershed is within a portion of a major oil field. Some grazing and watershed improvements have been implemented.

PENNEL CREEK
Pennel Creek, a tributary of O’Fallon Creek (segment 42L001), is located in Custer and Fallon counties. The majority of landownership is private, intermingled with public and state. This watershed contains soil, water, wildlife, riparian, grazing, and recreational values. Pennel Creek is within a portion of a major oil field. There is concern due to oil field development and discharge of production waters. The creek has partial impairment of agricultural use due to moderate levels of total dissolved solids. Monitoring production waters will determine what corrective actions may be necessary, as an onsite review will determine the source of the contamination. Geologic erosion is no longer considered a problem in Pennel Creek, above O’Fallon Creek.

CEDAR CREEK
Cedar Creek, a tributary to the Yellowstone River (segment 42M002), is located in Dawson, Prairie and Wibaux counties. Landownership is public, private, and state. The BLM constructed several reservoirs (approximately 20 years use) on public land at the lower end of this watershed to control runoff and provide livestock and wildlife watering. This watershed contains soil, water, wildlife, riparian, grazing, and recreational values. The creek has partial impairment of warmwater aquatic life, public water supply, and agriculture (irrigation, stock water) due to sulfates, total dissolved solids and suspended sediment contributed from agriculture practices and natural processes. The watershed is within a portion of a major oil field. There is water flowing from a pipe from the base of a pad upon which a tank battery is located. Once a location is determined for this tank battery, the owners of the battery will be queried as to its source and use. The water may be production water discharge, water used for lubrication/priming or may be for stock watering. If it is production waters, the water will be analyzed, and appropriate action taken.

POWDER RIVER
Powder River is located in Custer and Prairie counties. The Powder River is a tributary of the Yellowstone River. Landownership is private, public, and state. This watershed contains soil, water, wildlife, riparian, grazing, and recreational values. Some of the tributaries contain high volume spring areas with riparian values (Ten Mile Creek). The state of Montana has identified the Powder River watershed as an area to maintain or improve water quality.

MUSSELSHELL RIVER O’FALLON CREEK
O’Fallon Creek, (segment 42L001), is located in Custer, Fallon, and Prairie counties. O’Fallon Creek is a tributary of the Yellowstone River. Landownership is public, private, and state. There are small blocks of public land within the watershed. This watershed contains soil, water, wildlife, riparian, grazing, and recreational values. There is 358 Musselshell River is located in Garfield and Rosebud counties. The Musselshell River is a tributary of the Missouri River (Fort Peck Reservoir). Landownership is private, public, and state. This watershed contains soil, water, wildlife, riparian, grazing, and recreational values and is within portions of major oil fields. The state of Montana has identified the Musselshell River watershed as an area to maintain or improve water quality.

APPENDIX Soil and Water

BIG SHEEP MOUNTAIN
Big Sheep Mountain is located in Prairie County and is the highest elevation point (3,600 feet above sea level) in the planning area. Big Sheep Mountain is also the beginning of some high-value watersheds such as Cherry Creek, Timber Creek, and Lisk Creek. Landownership in the Big Sheep Mountain area is private, public, and state. This area contains soil, water, wildlife, riparian, grazing, recreational, and cultural resource values. Some of the riparian values are associated with unique, high-volume spring areas. Timber Creek is located in Prairie, Garfield, and McCone counties and is a tributary of Big Dry Creek which is a tributary of the Missouri River (Fort Peck Reservoir). Lisk Creek is located in Prairie and McCone counties and is a tributary of the Redwater River which is a tributary of the Missouri River with its confluence well below Fort Peck Reservoir.

Other Watersheds
The remaining streams listed in the State of Montana 1992 305(b) report will not be managed as critical watersheds. Mizpah Creek and Little Powder River and their tributaries are outside of the area planned for in this document, as are the tributaries of the Powder River below the Little Powder River. BLM has no control (land) along the following streams: Bennie Peer Creek, Crane Creek, First Hay Creek, Fourmile Creek, Lone Tree Creek, O’Brien Creek, Beaver Creek, Butte Creek, Medicine Lake and Poplar River. Fox Creek, Glendive Creek, Muster Creek, Sand Creek, Sandstone Creek, Smith Creek, Sundry Creek, Big Muddy Creek, East Fork of Charlie Creek, Prairie Elk Creek, and the Yellowstone and Redwater rivers have so little public land that BLM management attention would have no effect. In order to improve or have an effect in these areas, BLM would need more control.

MISSOURI RIVER BREAKS
Missouri River breaks is located in McCone County below Fort Peck Dam. This is the area that is described as the south bank of the river starting at Fort Peck Dam and including the area from this point to 12 miles downstream. The tributaries to the Missouri River in this area drain from rugged terrain which contain high water, wildlife, riparian, and recreational values. The Missouri River breaks is an area of high geologic erosion so in some areas has marginally productive soils. Many of the riparian values are associated with high volume springs that strongly influence the riparian characteristics of the drainages. Landownership is private, public, and state.

Water Management in Recreation Areas
Drinking water at BLM facilities, such as campgrounds, picnic grounds, trailheads and visitor centers, would meet water quality standards for consumptive use. The following are prohibited: washing of any personal property, fish, animal, or food. In developed recreation areas, the disposing of waste will be in authorized areas. An inventory of the location of designated potable water supplies on public lands must be prepared and maintained, documenting dates and results of water quality tests and related information when making analyses and interpretations with respect to potable water systems. The standards for water quality testing frequency, contamination levels (bacteriological, chemical, physical) and data documentation standards are provided by the Environmental Protection Agency, state, and local health departments.

359

APPENDIX Vegetation

VEGETATION APPENDIX
VEGETATION CONDITION
Adequate vegetation condition, composition and production is needed to provide for multiple use and sustained yield on public lands. When rating vegetation condition the common unit or area for measurement is called a site. The site is a distinctive kind of land, based on soils and environmental factors that differ from other land in its ability to produce a characteristic potential natural plant community. Many of the methods for rating vegetation condition incorporate the climax theory. This theory proposes that there is a specific vegetation community which will occur on each site in the absence of disturbance such as fire, grazing, or plowing. A climax community has attained a steady state with its environment. Therefore, whenever a disturbance occurs and then is removed, it is proposed that the site would eventually return to a climax state. In rangelands the site is referred to as a range site. A site which deteriorates under continuous disturbance is rated as poor condition. Rangeland in poor condition would have very few if any plant species that would commonly be found in the climax community for the site. Condition is divided into four categories of poor, fair, good, or excellent. An excellent condition rating may be similar to the climax on that range site. The early surveys (some of which occurred in the 1950s) such as the Missouri River basin study (USDI, BLM 1979a) rated range condition in the Big Dry Resource Area and established stocking rates. These surveys were based on range sites and the climax theory. The climax vegetation composition was identified based on information available at that time. The 1976 Soil Conservation Service Technical Guide (available in the Big Dry Resource Area office) identifies vegetation composition for each range site. These guides were revised in 1983 and 1985. In some cases, range condition ratings would change using the revised Soil Conservation Service Technical Guides. Approximately 1.18 million acres of public land included in the Big Dry Environmental Impact Statement Vegetation Allocation (USDI, BLM 1982b) were inventoried using the Soil Vegetation and Inventory Method. These inventories were conducted in 1979 to 1980. Sites were referred to as range sites and condition classes of poor, fair, good, and excellent were used. The range site condition was rated based on vegetation composition described in the Soil Conservation Service Technical Guide. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, these guides have been and are being updated. A range site rated in good condition in 1979 may have been rated differently if the current Soil Conservation Service Technical Guides were used. Range condition undefined may have a variety of meanings to different people. A recreationist may have a different picture of what good and excellent range condition is compared to a livestock producer. In this document, range condition ratings are based on the climax theory. An ecological site is also a distinctive kind of land based on soils and environmental factors that differ from other land in its ability to produce a characteristic potential natural plant community. It is not restricted to rangelands and may refer to other lands such as forested areas. Ecologically, the vegetation is rated as early, mid, late seral and potential natural community. Currently, the BLM inventories rangeland vegetation using Ecological Site Inventories. The plant composition for the ecological site is described in the Soil Conservation Service Technical Guide for rangeland and Classification and Management of Riparian and Wetland Sites in Central and Eastern Montana (Hansen et al. 1990) for riparian/wetland areas. The “desired plant community” concept has been proposed as another method for describing vegetation based on multiple-use objectives. The objectives for an area would be identified. The species of plants that could occur within the ecological site would be listed. Then the composition, production, or cover of species which would meet the objectives would be identified. For example, an ecological site is capable of producing a mature cottonwood canopy cover of 20 to 50 percent. A 30 percent canopy cover of mature cottonwood trees may be desired in a recreation area. Management actions would be undertaken to favor maintaining or increasing mature cottonwood trees at 30 percent canopy cover. Recreation, wildlife, livestock, vegetation, and watershed are some of the factors which may be considered when identifying a desired plant community. In most cases, the vegetation will be managed to achieve an ecological seral stage of late seral plant communities or potential natural community with the exception of tame pastures. Areas in a late seral stage or potential natural community should be able to provide for the wide range of uses and objectives for public lands. New activity plans could describe a desired plant community. The desired plant community may be any ecological

361

APPENDIX Vegetation seral stage. The desired plant community must: -be within the capability of the site. -be measurable and be related to a specific location. -be attainable within a specific time frame. -not result in irreversible site degradation. -be determined and reviewed by an interdisciplinary team. The desired plant community could be described in terms of percent composition, production, cover, frequency, or age class for a species or group of species. The objective will usually be written to describe the desired mix of life forms (grasses, forbs, and shrubs) for a site or area. Current guidance on desired plant communities for BLM is in draft form (Instruction Memorandum 91-290). In 1991, a report by the Society for Range Management stated: “Once the desired plant community has been decided upon for a given situation, existing vegetation should be rated according to its similarity to the desired plant community. If present vegetation is reasonably close to the desired plant community it should be described as ‘meeting management objectives’ and, if it is not, as ‘not meeting management objectives.’ The trend in similarity to desired plant community may be more important to managers and other interested parties. Trend could be described as toward the desired plant community, away from desired plant community, or not apparent.”

RIPARIAN/WETLAND MANAGEMENT
TABLE 75 RIPARIAN/WETLAND COMMUNITIES IN THE PLANNING AREA Coniferous Tree Communities Ponderosa Pine/Common Chokecherry Habitat Type Rocky Mountain Juniper Habitat Type Deciduous Tree Communities Box Elder/Common Chokecherry Habitat Type Green Ash/Common Chokecherry Habitat Type Quaking Aspen/Red-Osier Habitat Type1 Shrub Communities Black Greasewood/Western Wheatgrass Habitat Type Geyer Willow/Beaked Sedge Habitat Type Geyer Willow/Bluejoint Reedgrass Habitat Type1 Shrubby Cinquefoil/Tufted Hairgrass Habitat Type1 Silver Sagebrush/Western Wheatgrass Habitat Type Yellow Willow/Beaked Sedge Habitat Type Yellow Willow/Bluejoint Reedgrass Habitat Type Graminoid Communities Alkali Bulrush Habitat Type Beaked Sedge Habitat Type Bluejoint Reedgrass Habitat Type Common Reed Habitat Type Hardstem Bulrush Habitat Type Inland Saltgrass Habitat Type Prairie Cordgrass Habitat Type Reed Canarygrass Habitat Type Sharp Bulrush Habitat Type1 Water Sedge Habitat Type1 Western Wheatgrass Habitat Type Forb Communities Common Cattail Habitat Type Water Horsetail Habitat Type SOURCE: Hansen et al. 1990.
1

Minor or uncommon in the planning area.

362

APPENDIX Vegetation

WEED MANAGEMENT
Desirable plant species such as sagebrush may be intermixed with noxious weeds. Although chemical treatment would not normally be designed to reduce sagebrush, occasionally nontarget species may be damaged.

TABLE 76 MONTANA NOXIOUS WEED LIST MARCH 1991 CATEGORY 1 * Currently established and generally widespread * Awareness and education * Containment and suppression * Prevention Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) Field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) Whitetop or Hoary Cress (Cardaria draba) Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) Russian knapweed (Acropetilon repens) Spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa) Diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa) Dalmation toadflax (Linaria dalmatica) St. Johnswort (Hypericum perforatum) CATEGORY 2 * Recently introduced or rapidly spreading * Awareness and education * Early detection * Monitoring and containment * Eradication when possible Dyers Woad (Isatis tinctoria) Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria and L. virgatum) Sulfur (erect) cinquefoil (Potentilla recta) CATEGORY 3 * Not detected in the state or found only in small, scattered, localized infestations * Awareness and education * Early detection * Immediate action to eradicate Yellow Starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) Common Crupina (Crupina vulgaris) Rush Skeletonweed (Chondrilla juncea) SOURCE: State of Montana, Department of Agriculture 1991. NOTE: Category 1. These species are currently established and widespread in the state of Montana. Management actions include containment, suppression, and prevention of these weeds. Category 2. These species are recently introduced or rapidly spreading. Management actions include early detection, monitoring and containment, and eradication when possible. Category 3. These species have not been detected or are found only in small, scattered, localized infestations. Management actions include early detection and immediate action to eradicate. 363

APPENDIX Vegetation TABLE 77 MAXIMUM HERBICIDE APPLICATION RATES BY AREA (Pounds Active Ingredient Per Acre) Oil and Gas Sites 40 16 20 .140 3 6 32 3 10.8 1.5 0.25 1.2 1 10 .56 6 8 2, 2.5 2, 0.5 Recreation Sites 1 .125 12 3 6 3 3 1.5 1 4 4 1.5 2, 2.5 2, 0.5

Herbicide* Atrazine Bromacil Bromacil+ Diuron Chlorsulfuron Clopyralid 2,4-D Dicamba Diuron Glyphosate Haxazinone Imazapyr Mefluidide Metsulfuron Methyl Picloram Simazine Sulfometuron Methyl Tebuthiuron Triclopyr 2, 4 - D and Dicamba 2, 4 - D and Picloran

Rangeland 1 0.5 3 6 3 0.67 1 1 4 1.5 2, 2.5 1, 0.5

Forestland 4 .125 3 6 3 3 1.5 1 4 5 4 2, 2.5 2, 0.5

Rights-of-Way 40 16 20 .140 12 3 6 32 3 10.8 1.5 0.25 1.2 1 10 .56 6 8 2, 0.5 2, 0.5

SOURCE: USDI, BLM 1991b. *Tradenames are found in appendix M of the Final Environmental Impact Statement Vegetation Treatment on BLM Lands in Thirteen Western States (USDI, BLM 1991b).

364

APPENDIX Wild and Scenic Rivers

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS APPENDIX
SUMMARY
A total of 96 rivers and streams in the planning area were evaluated to determine if any were eligible to be studied for possible inclusion into the National Wild and Scenic River System. All 96 rivers and streams were determined to be ineligible for further study. They would be unmanageable due to the lack of public lands along the shoreline. Bad Route Creek Beaver Creek Bennie Peer Creek Big Dry Creek Big Muddy Creek Box Elder Creek Box Elder School Creek Brakett Creek Burns Creek Butte Creek Cabin Creek* Calf Creek Cedar Creek Cherry Creek Clear Creek Coal Creek* Cotton Creek Cow Creek Crane Creek Crooked Creek Crow Rock Creek Custer Creek Deer Creek Dry Creek Dunlap Creek East Redwater Creek First Hay Creek Flat Creek Fourmile Creek Fox Creek Frazier Creek Glendive Creek Great Porcupine Creek Griffith Creek Harris Creek Hell Creek Hodges Creek Horse Creek Krug Creek Lisk Creek Little Dry Creek Little Porcupine Creek Locate Creek Lodgepole Creek Lone Tree Creek Lost Mans Creek Lower 7 Mile Creek Magpie Creek McGuire Creek Missouri River Morgan Creek Muggins Creek Musselshell River Muster Creek Fox Creek Nelson Creek O’Brien Creek O’Fallon Creek Pennel Creek Poplar River* Powder River Prairie Elk Creek Rattlesnake Creek Redwater River Sage Hen Creek Sand Arroyo Creek Sand Creek Sand Creek North Bank Sand Creek South Bank Sarpy Creek Sears Creek Shadwell Creek Sheep Creek Smith Creek Smoke Creek Snow Creek South Fork Fox Creek Squaw Creek Sunday Creek Tenmile Creek Thirteenmile Creek Timber Creek* Tule Creek Uall Creek Upper Sevenmile Creek War Dance Creek West Fork Poplar River Whitetail Creek Whitney Creek Wolf Creek Woody Creek Yellowstone River*

Wild and Scenic River Study Process
A complete list of the river and streams evaluated was developed using the Bonneville Power Pacific Northwest Rivers Study. No additional rivers were identified through either public scoping or by the BLM planning team. For each river and stream on the list, the extent of public shoreline ownership was evaluated. In all cases, there were no blocks of public shoreline ownership large enough to effectively manage those values identified by the Pacific Northwest Rivers Study. Therefore, based on the lack of sufficient public shoreline ownership, it was concluded that no rivers or streams would be recommended for further study.

Rivers and Streams Reviewed in the Planning Area
The following is an alphabetical list of streams and rivers evaluated for potential addition to the National Wild and Scenic River System.

* Stream or river was evaluated for more than one segment.

365

APPENDIX Wildlife

WILDLIFE APPENDIX
TABLE 78 SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES

The following is BLM’s approved Special Status Species List for animals in Montana, North, and South Dakota as directed by BLM Manual 6840. Mammals: Black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus) Fisher (Martes pennati) Meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius) Merriam’s shrew (Sorex merriami) Northern bog lemming (Synaptomys borealis) Spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius) Townsend’s big eared bat (Plecotus townsendii) White-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys leucurus) Birds: Fish: Black backed woodpecker (Picoides arcticus) Boreal owl (Aegolius funereus) Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) Common loon (Gavia immer) Canvasback duck (Aythya valisineria) Dickcissel (Spiza americana) Flammulated owl (Otus flammeolus) Great gray owl (Strix nebulosa) Hairy woodpecker (Picoides villosus) LeConte’s sparrow (Ammodramus leconteii) Long billed curlew (Numenius americanus) Pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus) Sage sparrow (Amphispiza belli) Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni) Three-toed woodpecker (Picoides tridactylus) Northern redbelly X Finescale dace (Phoxinus eos) X (Phoxinus neogaeus) Pearl dace (Margariscus margarita nachtriebi) Shortnose gar (Lepisosteus platostomus) Westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhychus clarki lewisi) Yellowstone cutthroat trout (Oncorhychus clarki bouvieri) Reptiles: Snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) Spiny softshell turtle (Trionyx spiniferus) Amphibians: Canandian toad (Bufo hemiophrys) Coeur d’Alene salamander (Plethodon idahoensis) Tailed frog (Ascaphus truei) Wood frog (Rana sylvatica)

367

APPENDIX Wildlife

United States Department

of the Interior
IN REPLY REFER TO:

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Big Dry Resource Area Miles City Plaza Miles City, Montana 59301-2844

6500

JUL 14 1994
Kemper M. McMaster U. S. Fish and Wildlife P. O. Box 10023 Helena. Montana 59626 Dear Mr. McMaster; On November 8. 1993, we sent Mr. Dale Harms the Biological Assessment actions identified in the Big Dry Resource Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement. for

Service

Based on comments from your agency, as well as the Montana Black-Footed Ferret Work Group. the proposal to make an area in Custer and Prairie Counties a Black-Footed Ferret Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) was dropped. However, after analyzing your comments as well as the comments of other affected interests. was made to continue with the ACEC the decision nomination. In addition, the Board of Directors of the Prairie County Cooperative State Grazing District was briefed on this decision. In addition. all references toward allowing prairie dog expansion. provided the licensed AUMs of the grazing permittees could be met has been dropped Although our goal is to not reduce a permittees AUMs. we felt this statement was not warranted. All of the other management actions affecting or their habitat are the same as identified Biological Assessment. If you have any questions. above address or telephone in threatened or endangered the previously submitted Dale Tribby
species

please feel free to contact him at 406-232-7000.

at the

Area Manager Big Dry Resource

Area

368

APPENDIX Wildlife BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT BIG DRY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT INTRODUCTION This biological assessment evaluates the impacts associated with actions or activities proposed in the Big Dry Resource Area’s (BDRA) Resource Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (RMP/EIS) on threatened and endangered (T & E) wildlife species. This assessment is in response to the requirements of Section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as amended. This assessment is a summary of the RMP/EIS, and a detailed description of the alternatives and other factors put forth in the document will not be extensively duplicated here. The wildlife values affected are described in Chapter 3 and the anticipated effects are presented in Chapter 4 of the RMP/EIS. The planning area (Chapter 1, page 2) includes the majority of the BDRA. The planning area encompasses 15,210,177 acres, of which 1,703,830 surface acres (11.2%) and 7,329,400 acres of mineral estate (48.2%) are administered by the BLM. The majority of the landownership is private. Other significant landownership includes the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Fort Keogh Livestock and Range Research Station and the State of Montana (DSL). The RMP/EIS provides a comprehensive plan for managing land and resources administered by the BLM. The RMP/EIS is primarily focused on resolving two resource management issues. These issues are: 1. 2. Special Management Designation Resource Accessibility and Availability

Four alternatives are presented for analysis within the RMP/EIS to resolve the issues. Alternative A, the “no action” alternative would continue present management direction. No special management areas would be designated, and accessibility and availability would remain the same; Alternative B, the “protection” alternative, presents management actions which designate special management areas with restrictive management actions, reducing resource accessibility and availability; Alternative C, the “development” alternative, presents management actions designating special management areas while allowing more resource accessibility and availability; and Alternative D is the “preferred” alternative. This alternative presents management actions which designate special management areas. Alternative D allows accessibility and availability to resources when no significant impacts are anticipated. Management Common to All Alternatives (Chapter 2) discusses BLM management regardless of alternative. The preferred alternative (alternative D) combined with Management Common to All Alternatives will provide management direction for all resources.

AFFECTED SPECIES Letters from the FWS, dated October 27, 1992 and March 25, 1993 listed the following T & E species which may be present in the planning area. Listed Species Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) Status Endangered Expected Occurrence Year-round resident, Nesting, Winter Resident, Migrant

Whooping crane (Grus americana)

Endangered

Migrant

369

APPENDIX Wildlife Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) Piping plover (Charadrius melodus) Least tern (Sterna antillarum) Black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes) Pallid sturgeon (Scaphirynchus albus) Endangered Summer resident, Migrant

Threatened

Summer resident, Nesting

Endangered

Summer resident, Nesting

Endangered

Potential resident in prairie dog(Cynomys sp.) towns Year-round resident, Missouri & Yellowstone Rivers

Endangered

A description of the occurrence of these species can be found in chapter 3 under “Wildlife” in the RMP/EIS. The following is a summary of that information. Bald Eagle Nesting bald eagles occur along the Yellowstone River in Rosebud and Custer counties. The Missouri, Yellowstone, Musselshell and Powder rivers provide habitat during spring and fall migrations, and during the winter months. Bald eagles concentrate around areas of open water where waterfowl and fish are available. Bald eagles are currently expanding their nesting territories down the Yellowstone River (Flath 1990). No bald eagle nests are known to occur on BLM land within the planning area. Whooping Crane Whooping cranes migrate through the planning area and are occasionally seen on reservoirs. Peregrine Falcon Peregrine falcons migrate through the planning area, but do not nest or winter here. A historical eyrie may have existed within the Terry badlands, but recent inventories of this eyrie have not revealed any peregrine falcons. Piping Plover Piping plovers, migratory shorebirds, nest in the northeastern portion of the planning area. High value habitat is associated with natural saline wetlands. Recent surveys have indicated one parcel of public land is used by nesting piping plovers. Least Tern The least tern nests on graveled islands on the Yellowstone River. High value habitat for this specie are the graveled islands associated with the Missouri and Yellowstone rivers and their tributaries. Inventories by personnel from the BLM and Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP) have shown least terns are somewhat nomadic when selecting islands for nesting, often selecting different islands each spring. During spring and fall migrations, least terns have been observed in the vicinity of stockwater reservoirs. Black-Footed Ferret There have been no sightings of black-footed ferrets in recent years. Ferrets are essentially obligate species in that their existence is closely tied to the occurrence of black-tailed prairie dog colonies. Prairie dog colonies occurring in the area could provide habitat for the ferret. BLM is cooperating in the black-footed ferret recovery program. Potential for reintroduction of the black-footed ferret occurs in the Custer and Hunter Creek drainages and adjacent to the Powder River in Prairie and Custer counties. Approximately 2,000 acres of prairie dogs occur on public land within this area.

370

APPENDIX Wildlife Pallid Sturgeon The pallid sturgeon is a large river fish known to occur in the Missouri and Yellowstone Rivers and their tributaries. This species is endangered through habitat modification, lack of natural reproduction, commercial harvest, and hybridization in part of its range.

MITIGATION MEASURES The primary objective of the wildlife program in the BLM is to maintain and enhance suitable habitat for all species of wildlife. The emphasis for habitat maintenance and development will be directed toward present and potential habitat for sensitive, T & E species, nesting waterfowl, upland game birds, crucial winter ranges, non-game habitat and fisheries. BLM will consult with the FWS when any action may affect a T & E species or their habitat. No action will be initiated on BLM land which may jeopardize any candidate or federally listed T&E species. Impacts to designated state “Species of Special Interest or Concern” will be evaluated and applicable mitigation developed prior to the initiation of an action on BLM land. Chapter 3 under “Wildlife” lists these species of special interest or concern. BLM will cooperate to recover T & E species, including reintroduction efforts. Currently there are no known peregrine falcon, bald eagle or least tern nest sites or black-footed ferrets on BLM land in the planning area. However, if a nest site were discovered or a reintroduction proposed, BLM will adhere to the species specific approved recovery plan and guidance.

ISSUE ANALYSIS This analysis is divided into two issue areas, as presented in the RMP/EIS. They are: Special Management Designations and Resource Accessibility and Availability.

SPECIAL MANAGEMENT DESIGNATIONS Proposed Action: The piping plover (16 acres) (map 27) would be designated an ACEC. The area would be managed to protect the habitat for the piping plover, as well as associated species. Decision: Positive Impact. Rationale: The BLM would provide habitat for the piping plover and associated species. This is a positive benefit. Proposed Action: The black-footed ferret reintroduction area (11,166 acres) (map 23) would be designated an ACEC. Active prairie dog colonies on public land (1,151 acres) as well as future colonies within the ACEC would be managed for blackfooted ferret reintroduction and recovery and for associated species. Prairie dogs would be allowed to expand within the ACEC. Decision: Positive Impact. Rationale: This area would be proactively managed for prairie dogs and associated species. This is a positive benefit.

371

APPENDIX Wildlife RESOURCE ACCESSIBILITY AND AVAILABILITY Proposed Action: Prairie dogs and black-footed ferrets Prairie dog management would be subject to the Miles City District Black-tailed Prairie Dog Management Plan (USDI-BLM 1986b). See wildlife appendix. BLM would protect existing prairie dog habitat for black-footed ferrets, associated species, viewing, and recreational shooting. Based on the 1991 inventory, the potential reintroduction area contains approximately 1,151 acres of active prairie dogs on public land. Actions affecting prairie dogs or their habitat would be a cooperative effort among affected landowners, BLM, FWS, DSL, and FWP. Management actions could include, prairie dog expansion, reintroduction, management of the recreational shooting of prairie dogs, plague abatement, or prairie dog control. Should the decision be made to reintroduce black-footed ferrets, a cooperative management plan covering the reintroduction of the ferret, future ferret management and prairie dog management would be developed in cooperation with the affected landowners, BLM, FWS, DSL, and FWP. Oil and gas will be leased subject to the following “Controlled Surface Use” stipulations: RESOURCE: Prairie dog towns within potential black-footed ferret reintroduction areas determined to be essential for blackfooted ferret recovery. STIPULATION: The “Draft Guidelines for Oil and Gas Activities in Prairie Dog Ecosystems Managed for Black-footed Ferret Recovery” (Fish and Wildlife Service, 1990) will be used as appropriate to develop site-specific conditions of approval to protect black-footed ferret habitat needed for reintroduction and recovery. Specific conditions of approval will depend on type and duration of proposed activity, proximity to ferret habitat, and other site-specific conditions. OBJECTIVE: To maintain the integrity of potential black-footed ferret habitat for reintroduction and recovery of blackfooted ferret. EXCEPTION: May be granted by the authorized officer for activities determined, through coordination with the Montana Black-footed Ferret Work Group (MBFFWG) to have no adverse impacts on reintroduction and recovery of black-footed ferrets. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified if the authorized officer, in cooperation with the MBFFWG, determines portions of the area are no longer essential for black-footed ferret reintroduction and recovery. WAIVER: This stipulation may be waived if the authorized officer, in coordination with the MBFFWG, determines the entire leasehold no longer contains habitat essential for reintroduction and recovery of the ferret or if the ferret is removed from protection under the ESA. RESOURCE: Potential black-footed ferret habitat (prairie dog colonies and complexes 80 acres or more in size and not designated as black-footed ferret reintroduction sites.) STIPULATION: Prior to surface disturbance, prairie dog colonies and complexes of 80 acres or more will be examined to determine the absence or presence of black-footed ferrets. The findings of this examination may result in some restrictions to the operator’s plans or may even preclude use and occupancy that would be in violation of the ESA of 1973. The lessee or operator may, at their own option, conduct an examination on the leased lands to determine if black-footed ferrets are present, if the proposed activity would have an adverse effect, or if the area can be cleared. This examination must be done by or under the supervision of a qualified resource specialist approved by the Surface Management Agency (SMA). An acceptable report must be provided to the SMA documenting the presence or absence of black-footed ferrets and identifying the anticipated effects of the proposed action on the black-footed ferret or its habitat. This stipulation does not apply to the operation and maintenance of production facilities. OBJECTIVE: To assure compliance with the ESA by locating and protecting black-footed ferrets and their habitat.

372

APPENDIX Wildlife EXCEPTION: An exception may be granted by the authorized officer for surface-disturbing activities determined to have no adverse effect on black-footed ferrets or their habitat. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified by the authorized officer if portions of the leasehold are cleared based on current and/or past ferret surveys. WAIVER: This stipulation may be waived if the entire leasehold is block cleared, permanently cleared based on current and/ or past ferret surveys, or if the ferret is declared recovered and no longer subject to the ESA. Least terns Surface disturbance would not be allowed on least tern nesting habitat along the Yellowstone River. The following “No Surface Occupancy” stipulations, apply to oil and gas development only. RESOURCE: Least Tern. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within 1/4 mile of wetlands identified as least tern habitat. OBJECTIVE: To protect habitat of the least tern, an endangered species under the ESA. EXCEPTIONS: An exception can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates the proposed action will not affect the least tern or its habitat. If the authorized officer determines the action can affect the least tern or its habitat, consultation with the FWS will be required prior to final determination on the exception. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified if the authorized officer, in consultation with FWS, determines portions of the area are no longer essential to the least tern. WAIVER: The stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer, in consultation with FWS, determines the entire leasehold no longer contains habitat essential to the least tern, or if the least tern is declared recovered and is no longer subject to the ESA of 1973. Piping plovers Sixteen acres of piping plover habitat would be designated an ACEC. Locatable mineral entry would be withdrawn. Nonenergy leasable mineral leasing would be closed. Rights-of-way construction would be avoided. Mineral material sales and permits, livestock grazing and geophysical exploration would not be allowed. Off-road vehicle use would be designated as limited to existing roads and trails. The following “No Surface Occupancy” stipulations, apply to oil and gas development only. RESOURCE: Piping Plover. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within 1/4 mile of wetlands identified as piping plover habitat. OBJECTIVE: To protect habitat of the piping plover, a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. EXCEPTION: An exception can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates the proposed action will not affect the piping plover or its habitat. If the officer determines the action can affect the piping plover or its habitat, consultation with the FWS will be required prior to final determination on the exception. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified if the authorized officer, in consultation with the FWS, determines portions of the area no longer are essential to the piping plover. WAIVER: The stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer, in consultation with FWS, determines the entire leasehold no longer contains habitat essential to the piping plover, or if the piping plover is no longer subject to the ESA of 1973. Peregrine falcon The following “No Surface Occupancy” stipulations, apply to oil and gas development only. RESOURCE: Wildlife - Peregrine Falcon STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within 1 mile of identified peregrine falcon nesting sites. OBJECTIVE: To protect the habitat of the peregrine falcon, an endangered species under the ESA of 1973. EXCEPTION: An exception may be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates the proposed action will not affect the peregrine falcon or its habitat. If the officer determines the action may or will have an

373

APPENDIX Wildlife adverse affect, the operator may submit a plan demonstrating the impacts can be adequately mitigated. This plan must be approved by BLM in consultation with the FWS. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified if the authorized officer, in consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, determines portions of the area no longer are critical to peregrine falcon. WAIVER: The stipulation may be waived if the authorized officer, in consultation with the FWS, determines the entire leasehold no longer contains habitat critical to the peregrine falcon, or if the peregrine falcon is declared recovered and is no longer subject to the ESA of 1973. Bald eagle nest sites and nesting habitat No surface disturbance would be allowed from March 1 to August 1 within one-half mile of all raptor nests, including bald eagles. The following “No Surface Occupancy” stipulations, apply to oil and gas development only. RESOURCE: Bald Eagle Nest Sites and Nesting Habitat. STIPULATION: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited within 1/2 mile of known bald eagle nest sites which have been active at any time within the past 7 years, and within bald eagle nesting habitat in riparian areas. OBJECTIVE: To protect bald eagle nesting sites and/or nesting habitat in accordance with the ESA of 1973 and the Montana Bald Eagle Management Plan (USDI, BLM 1986c). EXCEPTION: An exception can be granted by the authorized officer if the operator submits a plan which demonstrates the proposed action will not affect the bald eagle or its habitat. If the authorized officer determines the action can affect the bald eagle or its habitat, consultation with the FWS will be required prior to final determination on the exception. MODIFICATION: The boundaries of the stipulated area can be modified if the authorized officer, in consultation with the FWS, determines portions of the area can be occupied without adversely affecting bald eagle nest sites or nesting habitat. WAIVER: The stipulation can be waived if the authorized officer, in consultation with the FWS, determines the entire leasehold can be occupied without adversely affecting the bald eagle nest sites or nesting habitat, or if the bald eagle is declared recovered and is no longer subject to the ESA of 1973. Decision: Positive Impact Rationale: BLM would protect habitat for black-tailed prairie dogs and associated species. The acreage and distribution of existing prairie dog towns may provide an opportunity to release and study reintroduction of black-footed ferrets. A management plan would be prepared in cooperation with the affected parties which would help alleviate negative impacts of a reintroduction. Prairie dogs, least terns, piping plovers, Peregrine falcons and bald eagles would be provided some protection from surface disturbing activities. Oil and gas leases would be issued with stipulations attached. Management actions initiated by this agency would not impact the pallid sturgeon.

DETERMINATION OF EFFECT (SUMMARY) It is our opinion that we have a “may affect-beneficial” with regard to piping plover habitat. With regard to all of the other listed species in the planning area, we feel the proposed actions associated with this RMP/EIS will have a “Not Likely to Adversely Affect” on these species or their habitat.

CONSULTATION WITH OTHERS Dennis Christopherson, Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Personal Communication

374

APPENDIX Wildlife

BLACK-TAILED PRAIRIE DOG MANAGEMENT PLAN MILES CITY DISTRICT Introduction
This plan is primarily an analysis of the current status of prairie dog populations within the boundaries of the Miles City District and a statement of the approach that will be used to manage these populations. Included is a brief discussion of the current prairie dog situation in each of the four Resource Areas that comprise the district, including the use of prairie dog colonies by associated wildlife species. A statement of management policy regarding the circumstances under which management actions may occur will be made under the “Management Policy” section. This plan is not intended to be a programmatic environmental assessment regarding prairie dog management/control in the district. It is anticipated that actual control efforts in the district will be minimal and a site specific environmental assessment will be written for all individual control proposals. The plan recognizes prairie dogs as an integral component of the rangeland ecosystem.

Background
Historically, black-tailed prairie dogs, Cynomys ludovicianus, were widely distributed over the grasslands of the central plains and adjacent areas to the west. At one time extensive prairie dog colonies occurred along the Powder and Tongue Rivers, as well as along other heavily grazed river drainages within the district. During the 1920s and 1930s intensive poisoning efforts were conducted in eastern Montana and prairie dog populations were reduced significantly. Prairie dogs have never reoccupied all of the areas they occupied prior to the intensive poisoning programs. Prairie dogs today, in the Miles City District, occur for the most part in small scattered colonies. Prairie dog management has, at times, become an emotional issue among special interest groups. Prairie dogs are considered pests by some interest groups and destructive to range resources. Public health, range degradation and competition for livestock forage have been the primary rationale for reducing prairie dog populations in the past. Nationally, there is as strong a voice for maintaining prairie dogs as there is for eliminating them. Ecological importance, scientific study, casual observation/photography and recreational shooting have been used to justify the preservation of prairie dog towns. The local agricultural faction largely favors extermination or significant reduction and control of prairie dogs because of their competition with livestock for forage. Prairie dog towns are an important habitat component of the plains ecosystem. At least 50 species of wildlife are, to some degree, associated with prairie dog towns (Appendix). Perhaps the associated species of most concern is the federally endangered black-footed ferret. Black-footed ferrets are protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, and the regulations, policies and guidelines developed to protect them affect the management of prairie dog towns. The Black-Footed Ferret Recovery Plan sets forth guidelines to reestablish their population numbers above threatened and endangered levels. The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks has listed several of the 50 species with prairie dog towns as species of special interest and concern. Six of the associated species are migratory birds of high federal interest. Recent grazing permittee requests in Montana have indicated some demand for prairie dog control on BLM-administered public lands. In contrast, advocate groups strongly favor maintaining prairie dog towns. Conflicting interests have focused attention upon the need for a planned approach to prairie dog habitat management. The most current guidelines for Montana BLM requires a regional prairie dog analysis as a prerequisite to future management actions (Instruction Memorandum MT83-217, Change 1).

Analysis of Resource Area Situations
The location and assessment of additional prairie dog towns is an ongoing annual effort in the resource areas in the Miles City District. The following is a brief statement of the known situation in each Resource Area:

375

APPENDIX Wildlife Powder River Resource Area There are 115 black-tailed prairie dog towns totaling approximately 3,200 acres that are known to occur on public lands in the Powder River Resource Area. In the recent past these prairie dog towns have been managed primarily for wildlife and recreational values. In 1978, a confirmed sighting of a black-footed ferret was recorded in this resource area. No subsequent sightings of ferrets have been made. Burrowing owls as well as other associated wildlife species are known to occur on prairie dog towns in this resource area. Big Dry Resource Area There are approximately 3,000 acres of known black-tailed prairie dog towns on public lands in the Big Dry Resource Area. Historically, black-footed ferrets occurred on prairie dog towns in this resource area, but none have been sighted in recent years. Burrowing owls as well as other associated wildlife species are known to occur on prairie dog towns in this resource area. Billings Resource Area There are approximately 2,000 acres of prairie dog towns known to occur on public lands in the Billings Resource Area. Seven hundred acres of these prairie dog towns in the extreme southern end of Carbon County are occupied by white-tailed prairie dogs, Cynomys leucurus. An intensive control effort in the 1960s, directly primarily at Yellowstone and Musselshell counties, Montana, significantly reduced the total population of black-tailed prairie dogs in this resource area. Since that control effort, many of the abandoned prairie dog colonies have been reinhabited by Richardsons ground squirrels. Historically, there have been reported sightings of black-footed ferrets in this resource area but there have not been any confirmed sightings in recent years. Burrowing owls as well as other associated wildlife species are known to occur on prairie dog towns in this resource area. South Dakota Resource Area There are 15 known black-tailed prairie dog towns on public lands in the South Dakota Resource Area. Five of these towns occur in Butte County, six in Meade County, two in Harding County and two in Fall River County. These towns range in approximate size from 5 acres to 150 acres. Historically, black-footed ferrets have been known to occur in South Dakota, but there have been no confirmed ferret sightings on public lands in the resource area in recent years. Burrowing owls, as well as other associated wildlife species are known to occur on prairie dog towns in this resource area.

Management Policy
In keeping with the State Director’s policy regarding prairie dog management and to clarify Miles City District policy, all future prairie dog control/management activities within the District will conform to the following guidelines: It shall be the district policy that prairie dog towns that occur entirely on public land and are not causing significant adverse impacts to soil and vegetation resources will be managed for their wildlife and recreation values. The BLM does not anticipate getting into a large-scale prairie dog control program as most public lands within the district do not support high enough prairie dog densities to warrant major damage concern, nor will we have the manpower or funding capability to support such an effort in the foreseeable future. First priority for prairie dog management actions will be given to areas that have an Allotment Management Plan or some similar activity plan. The plan will integrate any proposed prairie dog management or control actions into the overall objective of upgrading range conditions (particularly on “I” category allotments). Follow-up treatments such as plowing and seeding may be done after prairie dogs are removed, in areas where this is necessary to ensure the restoration of range productivity in a reasonable period of time (i.e. lack of on-site seed source). Resource area range and wildlife personnel will provide onthe-ground documentation to substantiate that actual degradation of public lands is occurring before control measures will be considered. Resource area wildlife personnel will provide black-footed ferret clearance surveys as needed.

376

APPENDIX Wildlife Though of a lesser priority, prairie dog control projects may be proposed for “M” and “C” category allotments if a comprehensive control plan is written to support the proposal. Documentation of range degradation will be required just as an AMP area control proposals. A black-footed ferret clearance survey will also be required. The only time it is really justifiable to eradicate prairie dogs is when they are seriously degrading public range lands, and it is necessary to remove them in order to restore vegetation productivity to protect the soil from accelerated erosion. Control proposals that do not meet this criteria will not be undertaken. From a cost-benefit standpoint, where control is deemed necessary, it is most cost effective to completely eliminate a given prairie dog population. However, there may be instances where it would be feasible or desirable to consider partial control to limit the expansion of a specific prairie dog town. A decision to undertake a partial control effort carries with it an obligation to provide maintenance funding on a continuing basis, as it will likely be necessary to repeat the control effort periodically. If control is really necessary, first consideration should be given to complete eradication. Funding liability for control projects on public land will be with the range program. In situations where a problem prairie dog population originates on public land and spreads on to private land, control will only be undertaken if the adjoining landowner is willing to enter into an agreement to control the prairie dogs on his land at the same time that they are being controlled on public land. In instances where a prairie dog population originates on private land and spread onto public land, the primary obligation for control (particularly funding) will be the responsibility of the private landowner. In cases where a prairie dog town occurs on both private and public land and the public land portion is currently supporting a wildlife species that is threatened or endangered or of special concern to a state or federal agency, (i.e. nesting burrowing owl, etc.), the portion of the prairie dog town that occurs on public land will not be controlled. In all cases, regardless of the source of funding, it will still be necessary to conduct the appropriate vegetation condition and black-footed ferret surveys prior to any control activities. All approved control plans will be fully coordinated with appropriate state and federal agencies and with range permittees and adjoining private landowners. Interagency Coordination All prairie dog management and control proposals will be coordinated with the appropriate state and federal wildlife management agencies. This would include the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, and the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks. The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks has contracted with a private consulting firm to determine whether or not black-footed ferrets still occur in eastern Montana. At this time, no black-footed ferrets have been located. The consulting firm has generated two important publications dealing with black-footed ferrets. One publication deals with methods of locating black-footed ferrets and the other publication deals with management and reintroduction consideration for blackfooted ferrets. Eastern Montana, including the Miles City District, will be analyzed regarding the suitability of existing ferret habitat and the potential for the reestablishment of a black-footed ferret population through reintroduction from an existing population such as the one that occurs at Meeteetse, Wyoming. Periodically, wildlife personnel from the Miles City District meet with biologists that are on the black-footed ferret recovery team to update strategy regarding the ferret recovery program in eastern Montana. New inventory information is exchanged at these meetings and time frames for current objectives or goals of the program are agreed upon. While the Miles City District may not currently contain a prime ferret reintroduction site, the future discovery of an existing black-footed ferret population in the district, however small, would warrant a reevaluation of the feasibility of reintroducing ferrets in the district.

/s/ Bruce G. Whitmarsh Acting District Manager

4/22/86 Date

Note: Currently, only zinc phosphide may be used to control prairie dogs on public lands.

377

APPENDIX Wildlife APPENDIX WILDLIFE SPECIES ASSOCIATED WITH BLACK-TAILED PRAIRIE DOG TOWNS Species of Special Concern to State of Montana Migratory Species of High Federal Interest

Species BIRDS Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) Ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis) Red-tailed hawk (B. jamaicensis) Swainson’s hawk (B. swainsoni) Marshhawk (Circus cyaneus) Prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus) American kestrel (F. sparverius) Burrowing owl (Speotyto cunicularia) Great horned own (Bubo virginianus) Sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) Mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura) Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus) Common nighthawk (Chordeiles minor) Mountain plover (Eupoda montana) Horned lark (Eremophila alpestris) Western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) Chestnut-collared longspur (Carcarius ornatus) McCown’s longspur (Rhynchophanes mccownii) Vesper sparrow (Pooecetes gramineus) Lark bunting (Calamospiza melanocorys) Western kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis) Magpie (Pica pica) Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) Brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater) Savannah sparrow (Passercules sandwichensis) Barn swallow (Hirundo rustica) Cliff swallow (Petrochelidon pyrrhonota) Snow bunting (Plectrophenax nivalis)

X X

X

X X

X X

X

X

X

X

378

APPENDIX Wildlife APPENDIX WILDLIFE SPECIES ASSOCIATED WITH BLACK-TAILED PRAIRIE DOG TOWNS Species of Special Concern to State of Montana Migratory Species of High Federal Interest

Species AMPHIBIANS Leopard frog (Rana pipiens) Tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum) Western toad (Bufo boreas) REPTILES Eastern short-horned lizard (Phrynosoma douglassi) Sagebrush lizard (Sceloporus graciosus) Red-sided garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis) Prairie rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis) Bullsnake (Pituophis melaneleucus)

MAMMALS Coyote (Canis latrans) Striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis) Mink (Mustela vision) Long-tailed weasel (M. frenata) Badger (Taxidea taxus) Raccoon (Procyon lotor) Red fox (Vulpes vulpes) Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) Pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) White-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus townsendi) Desert cottontail (Sylvilagus auduboni) Deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus) Thirteen-lined ground squirrel (Citellus tridecemlineatus) Pocket gopher (Thomomys sp.) Least chipmunk (Eutamius minimus) Grasshopper mouse (Onycomys leucogaster)

379

APPENDIX
Wildlife

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Ecological Services 100 North Park, Suite 320 Helena Montana 59601 July 20, 1994
(I)

IN REPLY REFER TO:

ES-61130-Billings
M.02 BLM

To: From: Subject:

Area Manager, Big Dry Resource MT Miles City,

Area,

Bureau

of Land Management, Services, Management Fish

Field Supervisor, Montana Field Office, and Wildlife Service, Helena, MT Revised Biological Plan/Environmental

Ecological

Assessment for Big Dry Resource Impact Statement (RMP)

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), based on information in the July 14, 1994 revised biological assessment for the Big Dry Resource Management Plan, concurs with the "may affect - beneficial" finding for the piping plover and with the "is not likely to adversely affect" finding for bald eagle, whooping crane, peregrine falcon, least tern, black-footed ferret, and pallid sturgeon. If this program's final decisions are further altered so as to have effects on threatened or endangered species other than those described in draft Big Dry Resource Management Plan, the Bureau of Land Management will need to reinitiate informal consultation with the Service. We appreciate planning. your efforts to consider endangered species in your project

DMC/jf

cc:

Suboffice

Coordinator,

Ecological

Services

(Billings,

MT)

380