BLM Montana Dakotas GRSG ROD ARMPA Habitat Management Areas

The Approved RMP Amendment identifies two rangewide HMAs: PHMA and GHMA. The Approved Plan also contains three Montana/Dakotas-specific UHMAs: CHMA, the Little Missouri Habitat Management Area (LMHMA) and South Carter Habitat Management Area (SCHMA) that respond to local habitat priorities. PHMAs have the highest value to maintaining sustainable GRSG populations and can include breeding, late brood-rearing, winter concentration areas, and migration or connectivity corridors. GHMAs are lands that are or have the potential to become occupied seasonal or year-round habitat outside of PHMA, managed to sustain GRSG populations. 

In Montana, CHMAs are areas that provide regions of connectivity important to facilitate the movement of GRSG and maintain ecological processes, including between priority populations, adjacent states, and across international borders.

The LMHMA is identified core area by the states of Montana and North Dakota. This area contained high-quality GRSG habitat in Montana and encompasses the remaining GRSG habitat in North Dakota. However, a substantial portion of the area is a unitized oil and gas field (the Cedar Creek Anticline). Unique management is needed to maintain connectivity of sagebrush and GRSG habitat between Montana and North Dakota and focus restoration efforts.

The SCHMA is identified as part of a core area by the State of Montana. However, this area is primarily developed or existing bentonite claims. Unique management is needed to balance GRSG habitat and mineral development in the short term, while planning for longer-term reclamation.

To create HMAs for this current planning effort the BLM built off prior efforts and further engaged cooperating agencies and stakeholders in the process. The PHMA, GHMA, CHMA, LMHMA and SCHMA reflect updates from the 2015 HMA delineation process and combined local knowledge, experience since the 2015 plans, and updated state information to compliment and provide context to new range wide and management zone habitat modeling efforts. The new GRSG science was used to identify areas to consider emphasizing based on management zone or rangewide importance, and to refine the type, quality, and location of habitat areas. Throughout the process the BLM sought consistency, as appropriate and supported, with state natural resource entity core and general (also connectivity in MT) habitat areas. BLM considered areas that should be added (or omitted) that provide (or do not) habitat for GRSG; and also considered, what changes to HMA types should be made across Montana-Dakotas. Additional information from the public comment period on the Draft EIS and continued coordination led to minor changes in HMAs from the preferred alternative (Alternative 5) presented in the Draft EIS and the Proposed Plan HMAs. Overall, changes between the Draft EIS and the Proposed RMP Amendment were made to avoid confusion and allow for specific objectives and management to address unique (e.g., peripheral) habitat. HMAs are delineated as approximate boundaries and representations of habitat, utilize models and coarse grain data, and don’t account for the dynamic nature of GRSG populations. Therefore, habitat characteristics should be verified with local data and efforts and there may be areas of non-habitat contained within HMAs.

The identified HMA boundaries reflect updated habitat information that are based on monitoring data and updated scientific literature and the input and collaboration on the identification of boundaries with the States of Montana, South Dakota, and North Dakota

Tags: armpa, biota, blm, chma, core-areas, eis, environment, ghma, greater-sage-grouse, grsg, lmhma, management, montana, north-dakota, phma, rod, sage-grouse, schma, south-dakota, wildlife
Organization: Department of the Interior