Final EIS Appendix 2 

APPENDIX 2—WYOMING BUREAU OF LAND 

MANAGEMENT MITIGATION GUIDELINES FOR 

SURFACE DISTURBING AND DISRUPTIVE ACTIVITIES 

UNDER ALTERNATIVE 1 

INTRODUCTION

The Wyoming Mitigation Guidelines is a compilation of practices that the Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM) has employed to mitigate impacts from surface disturbance. These guidelines apply to activities 

such as road or pipeline construction, range improvements, permitted recreation activities, and oil and gas 

development. They are designed to protect resources such as soils and vegetation, wildlife habitat, or 

cultural or historic properties. Because they apply to many resources and derive from many laws, these 

guidelines are presented for easy reference as an appendix of the Resource Management Plan (RMP) 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). All BLM RMPs have included these guidelines as appendices, 

and public comment on the guidelines, per se, has not been requested. The guidelines are not land use 

decisions; rather, they are examples of mitigation measures that could be applied, as appropriate, based on 

site-specific National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis for individual proposals. Comment on 

the use and application of specific mitigation measures can be made during the NEPA process for 

individual proposals. Because mitigation measures change or are modified, based on new information, the 

guidelines are updated periodically for all BLM Field Offices in Wyoming. 

WYOMING BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT MITIGATION GUIDELINES 

FOR SURFACE DISTURBING AND DISRUPTIVE ACTIVITIES

Introduction 

These guidelines are primarily for the purpose of achieving statewide consistency in the process used to 

determine requirements for avoiding and mitigating environmental impacts and resource and land use 

conflicts. Consistency in this context does not mean that identical requirements would be applied for all 

similar types of land use activities that may cause similar types of impacts nor does it mean that the 

requirements or guidelines for a single land use activity would be identical in all areas. 

The mitigation guidelines are used in two ways in the RMP and EIS process: (1) as part of the planning 

criteria in developing the RMP alternatives, and (2) in the analytical processes of developing the 

alternatives and analyzing the impacts of the alternatives. In the first case, an assumption is made that one 

or more of the mitigations will be appropriately included as conditions of relevant actions being proposed 

or considered in each alternative. In the second case, the mitigations are used to (1) develop a baseline for 

measuring and comparing impacts among the alternatives; (2) identify other actions and alternatives that 

should be considered, and (3) help determine whether more stringent or less stringent mitigations should 

be considered. 

The EIS for the RMP does not determine or dictate the exact wording or inclusion of these guidelines. 

Rather, the guidelines are used in the RMP EIS process as a tool to help develop the RMP alternatives 

and to provide a baseline for comparative impact analysis in arriving at RMP decisions. These guidelines 

will be used in the same manner in analyzing activity plans and other site-specific proposals. These 

guidelines and their wording are matters of policy. Therefore, specific wording is subject to change 

Pinedale RMP A2-1 
Appendix 2 Final EIS 

primarily through administrative review, not through the RMP EIS process. Any further changes that may 

be made in the continuing refinement of these guidelines and any development of program-specific 

standard stipulations will be handled in another forum, including appropriate public involvement and 

input. 

PURPOSE

The purposes of the Wyoming BLM Mitigation Guidelines are (1) to reserve, for the BLM, the right to 

modify the operations of all surface and other human presence disturbance activities as part of the 

statutory requirements for environmental protection, and (2) to inform a potential lessee, permittee, or 

operator of the requirements that must be met when using BLM-administered public lands. These 

guidelines have been written in a format that will allow for (1) their direct use as stipulations and (2) the 

addition of specific or specialized mitigation following the submission of a detailed plan of development 

or other project proposal, and an environmental analysis. 

Those resource activities or programs currently without a standardized set of permit or operation 

stipulations can use the mitigation guidelines as stipulations or as conditions of approval, or as a baseline 

for developing specific stipulations for a given activity or program. 

As a result of the integration of the mitigation guidelines into the RMP EIS process and the site-specific 

environmental analysis process, stipulations or mitigation requirements derived through those guidelines 

will ensure more consistency across planning decisions and plan implementation than has occurred in the 

past. In addition, application of the mitigation guidelines to all surface and other human presence 

disturbance activities concerning BLM-administered public lands and resources will provide more 

uniformity in the application of mitigation than has occurred in the past. 

MITIGATION GUIDELINES

1. Surface Disturbance Mitigation Guideline 

Surface disturbance would be prohibited in any of the following areas or conditions, unless site-specific 

analysis determined that any anticipated impacts would be satisfactorily mitigated: 

a. Slopes in excess of 25% 

b. Within important scenic areas (Class I and II Visual Resource Management Areas) 

c. Within 500 feet of surface water and/or riparian areas 

d. Within either one-quarter mile or the visual horizon (whichever is closer) of historic trails 

e. Construction with frozen material or during periods when the soil material is saturated or when 

watershed damage is likely to occur. 

Exception, waiver, or modification of this limitation may be approved in writing, including documented 

supporting analysis, by the Authorized Officer. 

A2-2 Pinedale RMP 
Final EIS Appendix 2 

Guidance 

The intent of the Surface Disturbance Mitigation Guideline is to inform interested parties (e.g., potential 

lessees, permittees, or operators) that when one or more of the five conditions (a–e) exist, surface 

disturbing activities will be prohibited unless or until a permittee or his designated representative and the 

surface management agency (SMA) arrive at an acceptable plan for mitigation of anticipated impacts. 

This negotiation will occur prior to development. 

Specific criteria (e.g., 500 feet from water) have been established based on the best information available. 

However, items such as geographical areas and seasons must be delineated at the field level. 

Exception, waiver, or modification of requirements developed from this guideline must be based on 

environmental analysis of proposals (e.g., activity plans, plans of development, plans of operation, and 

applications for permit to drill) and, if necessary, must allow for other mitigation to be applied on a sitespecific basis. 

2. Wildlife Mitigation Guideline 

a. To protect important big game winter habitat, activities or surface use will not be allowed from 

November 15 to April 30 within certain areas encompassed by the authorization. The same criteria apply 

to defined big game birthing areas from May 1 to June 30. 

Application of this limitation to operation and maintenance of a developed project must be based on 

environmental analysis of the operational or production aspects. 

Exception, waiver, or modification of this limitation in any year may be approved in writing, including 

documented supporting analysis, by the Authorized Officer. 

b. To protect important raptor and/or sage and sharp-tailed grouse nesting habitat, activities or surface 

use will not be allowed from February 1 to July 31 within certain areas encompassed by the authorization. 

The same criteria apply to defined raptor and game bird winter concentration areas from November 15 to 

April 30. 

Application of this limitation to operation and maintenance of a developed project must be based on 

environmental analysis of the operational or production aspects. 

Exception, waiver, or modification of this limitation in any year may be approved in writing, including 

documented supporting analysis, by the Authorized Officer. 

c. No activities or surface use will be allowed on that portion of the authorization area identified within 

(legal description) for the purpose of protecting (e.g., sage/sharp-tailed grouse breeding grounds, and/or 

other species/activities) habitat. 

Exception, waiver, or modification of this limitation in any year may be approved in writing, including 

documented supporting analysis, by the Authorized Officer. 

d. Portions of the authorized use area described legally as (legal description) are known or suspected to 

be essential habitat for (name), which is a threatened or endangered species. Prior to conducting any 

onsite activities, the lessee/permittee will be required to conduct inventories or studies in accordance with 

BLM and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) guidelines to verify the presence or absence of this 

species. In the event that (name) occurrence is identified, the lessee/permittee will be required to modify 

Pinedale RMP A2-3 
Appendix 2 Final EIS 

operational plans to include the protection requirements of this species and its habitat (e.g., seasonal use 

restrictions, occupancy limitations, facility design modifications). 

Guidance 

The Wildlife Mitigation Guideline provides two basic types of protection: seasonal restriction (2a and 2b) 

and prohibition of activities or surface use (2c). Item 2d is specific to situations involving threatened or 

endangered species. Legal descriptions ultimately will be required and should be measurable and legally 

definable. There are no minimum subdivision requirements at this time. The delineated area can and 

should be defined as necessary, based on current biological data, prior to the time of processing an 

application and issuing the use authorization. The legal description must eventually become a part of the 

condition for approval of the permit, plan of development, and/or other use authorization. 

The seasonal restriction section identifies three example groups of species and delineates three similar 

time frame restrictions. The big game species, including elk, moose, deer, pronghorn, and bighorn sheep, 

all require protection of crucial winter range between November 15 and April 30. Elk and bighorn sheep 

also require protection from disturbance from May 1 to June 30, when they typically occupy distinct 

calving and lambing areas. Raptors include eagles, accipiters, falcons (peregrine, prairie, and merlin), 

buteos (ferruginous and Swainson’s hawks), osprey, and burrowing owls. The raptors and sage and 

sharp-tailed grouse require nesting protection between February 1 and July 31. Bald eagles are the only 

raptor species with a winter use timing restriction. 

Item 2c, the prohibition of activity or surface use, is intended for protection of specific wildlife habitat 

areas or values within the use area that cannot be protected by using seasonal restrictions. These areas or 

values must be factors that limit life-cycle activities (e.g., sage grouse strutting grounds, known 

threatened and endangered species habitat). 

Exception, waiver, or modification of requirements developed from this guideline must be based on 

environmental analysis of proposals (e.g., activity plans, plans of development, plans of operation, 

applications for permit to drill) and, if necessary, must allow for other mitigation to be applied on a sitespecific basis. 

3. Cultural Resource Mitigation Guideline 

When a proposed discretionary land use could potentially affect the characteristics that qualify a cultural 

property for the National Register of Historic Places (National Register), mitigation will be considered. In 

accordance with Section 106 of the Historic Preservation Act, procedures specified in 36 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) §800 will be used in consultation with the Wyoming State Historic Preservation 

Officer and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation in arriving at determinations regarding the 

need and type of mitigation to be required. 

Guidance 

The preferred strategy for treating potential adverse effects on cultural properties is “avoidance.” If 

avoidance involves project relocation, the new project area also may require cultural resource inventory. 

If avoidance is imprudent or unfeasible, appropriate mitigation may include excavation (i.e., data 

recovery), stabilization, monitoring, protection barriers and signs, or other physical and administrative 

measures. 

Reports documenting results of cultural resource inventory, evaluation, and the establishment of 

mitigation alternatives (if necessary) shall be written according to standards contained in BLM Manuals, 

A2-4 Pinedale RMP 
Final EIS Appendix 2 

cultural resource permit stipulations, and other BLM-issued policy. These reports shall provide sufficient 

information for Section 106 consultation. An appropriate BLM cultural resource specialist shall review 

reports for adequacy. If cultural properties on, or eligible for, the National Register are located within 

these areas of potential impact and cannot be avoided, the AO shall begin the Section 106 consultation 

process in accordance with the procedures contained in 36 CFR §800. 

Mitigation measures shall be implemented according to the mitigation plan approved by the BLM AO. 

The land use applicant usually prepares such plans in accordance with BLM specifications. Mitigation 

plans will be reviewed as part of Section 106 consultation for National Register eligible or listed 

properties. The extent and nature of recommended mitigation shall be commensurate with the significance 

of the cultural resource involved and the anticipated extent of damage. The land use applicant shall bear 

reasonable costs for mitigation. Mitigation must be cost effective and realistic. It must consider project 

requirements and limitations, and input from concerned parties and must be BLM approved or BLM 

formulated. 

Mitigation of paleontological and natural history sites will be treated on a case-by-case basis. Factors such 

as site significance, economics, safety, and project urgency must be considered when making a decision 

to mitigate. The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), Section 102(a)(8), provides for the 

authority to protect (through mitigation) such values. When avoidance is not possible, appropriate 

mitigation may include excavation (i.e., data recovery), stabilization, monitoring, protection barriers and 

signs, or other physical and administrative protection measures. 

4. Special Resource Mitigation Guideline 

To protect (resource value), activities or surface use will not be allowed (i.e., within a specific distance of 

the resource value or between date to date) in (legal description). 

Application of this limitation to operation and maintenance of a developed project must be based on 

environmental analysis of the operational or production aspects. 

Exception, waiver, or modification of this limitation in any year may be approved in writing, including 

documented supporting analysis, by the Authorized Officer. 

Example Resource Categories (Select or identify category and specific resource value): 

• Recreation areas 

• Special natural history or paleontological features 

• Special designations and management areas 

• Sections of major rivers 

• Prior existing rights-of-way 

• Occupied dwellings 

• Other (specify). 

Guidance 

The Special Resource Mitigation Guideline is intended for use only in site-specific situations in which 

one of the first three general mitigation guidelines will not adequately address the concern. The resource 

value, location, and specific restrictions must be clearly identified. A detailed plan addressing specific 

mitigation and special restrictions will be required prior to disturbance or development and will become a 

condition for approval of the permit, plan of development, or other use authorization. 

Pinedale RMP A2-5 
Appendix 2 Final EIS 

Exception, waiver, or modification of requirements developed from this guideline must be based on 

environmental analysis of proposals (e.g., activity plans, plans of development, plans of operation, 

applications for permit to drill) and, if necessary, must allow for other mitigation to be applied on a sitespecific basis. 

5. No Surface Occupancy Guideline 

No surface occupancy (NSO) will be allowed on the following described lands (legal description) because 

of (resource value). 

Example Resource Categories (Select or identify category and specific resource value): 

• Recreation areas (e.g., campgrounds, historic trails, national monuments) 

• Major reservoirs/dams 

• Special designations and management areas (e.g., known threatened or endangered species 

habitat, areas suitable for consideration for wild and scenic rivers designation) 

• Other (specify). 

Guidance 

The NSO Mitigation Guideline is intended for use only when other mitigation is determined insufficient 

to adequately protect the public interest and is the only alternative to “no development” or “no leasing.” 

The legal description and resource value of concern must be identified and be tied to an NSO land use 

planning decision. 

Waiver of, or exception(s) to, the NSO requirement will be subject to the same test used to initially justify 

its imposition. If, upon evaluation of a site-specific proposal, it is found that less restrictive mitigation 

would adequately protect the public interest or value of concern, then a waiver or exception to the NSO 

requirement is possible. The record must show that because conditions or uses have changed, less 

restrictive requirements will protect the public interest. An environmental analysis must be conducted and 

documented (e.g., environmental assessment, EIS, as necessary) to provide a basis for a waiver or 

exception to an NSO planning decision. Modification of the NSO requirement will pertain only to 

refinement or correction of the location(s) to which it applied. If the waiver, exception, or modification is 

determined to be consistent with the intent of the planning decision, it may be granted. If determined 

inconsistent with the intent of the planning decision, a plan amendment would be required before the 

waiver, exception, or modification could be granted. 

When considering the “no development” or “no leasing” option, a rigorous test must be met and fully 

documented in the record. This test must be based on stringent standards described in the land use 

planning document. Because rejection of all development rights is more severe than the most restrictive 

mitigation requirement, the record must show that consideration was given to development subject to 

reasonable mitigation, including NSO. The record also must show that other mitigation was determined to 

be insufficient to adequately protect the public interest. A “no development” or “no leasing” decision 

should not be made solely because it appears that conventional methods of development would be 

unfeasible, especially when an NSO restriction may be acceptable to a potential permittee. In such cases, 

the potential permittee should have the opportunity to decide whether to go ahead with the proposal (or 

accept the use authorization), recognizing that an NSO restriction is involved. 

A2-6 Pinedale RMP