Final EIS Appendix 18 

APPENDIX 18—THREATENED, ENDANGERED AND 

BLM SENSITIVE SPECIES WITH THE POTENTIAL 

TO OCCUR IN THE PINEDALE PLANNING AREA 

THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES

As conditions, law, and policy change over time or new data are collected, the Resource Management 

Plan (RMP) would be updated through maintenance actions or amendments, as appropriate, to ensure 

management decisions reflect those changes. For example, if a species were delisted, the conservation 

measures and best management practices (BMP) for that species may no longer apply or could change 

upon delisting but still be included in this appendix. Conversely, if a new species were listed, 

conservation measures and BMPs for that species would be added to this appendix. 

Ute Ladies’ Tresses (Threatened) 

Naturally occurring, reintroduced, and introduced populations of Ute ladies’ tresses and their habitats will 

be protected. No projects will be permitted that would adversely affect the hydrology and vegetation of 

the species’ riparian ecosystem or have a negative impact on Ute ladies’ tresses orchids that would lead to 

a jeopardy opinion. Herbicide use will not be allowed in the vicinity of known populations. 

In pastures known to contain riparian wet meadow habitat for Ute ladies’ tresses, livestock grazing 

management will allow the plants to bloom and go to seed. Livestock grazing may also be used as a tool 

to reduce competing vegetation. Mineral supplements or emergency feed for livestock must be placed at 

least 2 miles from known occupied habitats. 

To protect Ute ladies’ tresses and their pollinators, prohibition of biological and chemical control of 

weeds and insects will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. 

Conservation Measures 

These conservation measures are intended to directly conserve the orchid, and to reduce or eliminate 

adverse effects from the spectrum of management activities on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land. 

These measures are provided to outline opportunities to benefit the orchid, and to help avoid negative 

impacts through the thoughtful planning of activities. Plans that incorporate them, and projects that 

implement them, are generally not expected to have adverse effects on the orchid, and implementation of 

these measures is expected to lead to conservation of the species. 

These conservation measures are binding measures that BLM shall implement to facilitate conservation of 

the orchid. However, because it is impossible to provide measures that will address all possible actions in 

all locations across the range of the orchid, it is imperative that project-specific analysis and design be 

completed for all actions that have the potential to affect the orchid. Circumstances unique to individual 

projects or actions and their locations may still result in adverse effects to this plant. In these cases, 

additional or modified conservation measures may be necessary to avoid or minimize adverse effects or 

further consultation with the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) will be required. The order in which the 

conservation measures appear below does not imply their relative priority. 

1. The Wyoming BLM Standard Mitigation Guidelines for Surface-Disturbing Activities requires any 

lessee or permittee to conduct inventories or studies in accordance with BLM and U.S. Fish and 

Pinedale RMP A18-1 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

Wildlife Service (USFWS) guidelines to verify the presence or absence of threatened or endangered 

species before any activities can begin onsite. When the presence of one or more of these species is 

verified, the operation plans of a proposed action will be modified to include protection of the species 

and its habitat, as necessary. Possible protective measures include seasonal or activity limitations, or 

other surface management and occupancy constraints (BLM 1990). 

• Surface disturbance will be prohibited within 500 feet of surface water and/or riparian areas 

(Wyoming BLM Mitigation Guidelines for Surface-disturbing and Disruptive Activities). 

• No surface occupancy will be allowed within special management areas (e.g., known threatened 

or endangered species habitat) (Wyoming BLM Mitigation Guidelines for Surface-Disturbing and 

Disruptive Activities). 

• Portions of the authorized use area are known or suspected to be essential habitat for 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 USFWS guidelines to 

verify the presence or absence of this species. In the event that an occurrence is identified, the 

lessee/permittee will be required to modify operational plans to include the protection 

requirements of this species and its habitat (e.g., seasonal use restrictions, occupancy limitations, 

facility design modifications) (Wyoming BLM Mitigation Guidelines for Surface-Disturbing and 

Disruptive Activities). 

2. Standards for Healthy Rangelands and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management for the Public 

Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management in the State of Wyoming, specifically: 

• Standard 1—Within the potential of the ecological site (soil type, landform, climate, and 

geology), soils are stable and allow for water infiltration to provide for optimal plant growth and 

minimal surface runoff. 

• Standard 2—Grazing management practices will restore, maintain, or improve plant 

communities. Grazing management strategies consider hydrology, physical attributes, and 

potential for the watershed and the ecological site (BLM Wyoming Guidelines for Livestock 

Grazing Management). 

• Standard 3—Upland vegetation on each ecological site consists of plant communities appropriate 

to the site which are resilient, diverse, and able to recover from natural and human disturbance. 

• Standard 4—Rangelands are capable of sustaining viable populations and a diversity of native 

plant and animal species appropriate to the habitat. Habitats that support or could support 

threatened species, endangered species, species of special concern, or sensitive species will be 

maintained or enhanced. 

• Grazing management practices will incorporate the kinds and amounts of use that will restore, 

maintain, or enhance habitats to assist in the recovery of federal threatened and endangered 

species or the conservation of federally listed species of concern and other state-designated 

Special Status Species. Grazing management practices will maintain existing habitat or facilitate 

vegetation change toward desired habitats. Grazing management will consider threatened and 

endangered species and their habitats (BLM Wyoming Guidelines for Livestock Grazing 

Management). 

3. The BLM will maintain biological diversity of plant and animal species; support Wyoming Game and 

Fish Department (WGFD) strategic plan population objective levels to the extent practical and to the 

extent consistent with BLM multiple use management requirements; maintain, and where possible, 

A18-2 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

improve forage production and quality of rangelands, fisheries, and wildlife habitat; and to the extent 

possible, provide habitat for threatened and endangered and Special Status Plant and Animal Species 

on all public lands in compliance with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and approved recovery 

plans. 

4. In any proposed new access, wetland and riparian areas will be avoided where possible (18 Code of 

Federal Regulations [CFR] §725.2 – Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands). 

The following two conservation measures (5 and 6), will be added to grazing permit renewals in 

allotments with known populations of the orchid. 

5. Place mineral supplements, new water sources (permanent or temporary), or supplemental feed for 

livestock, wild horses, or wildlife at least 1 mile from known orchid populations. Hay or other feed 

and straw must be certified weed-free. These restrictions are intended to keep free-ranging livestock 

away from populations of the orchid and prevent subsequent grazing on individual orchid plants. 

Surveys for the orchid will be conducted in potential orchid habitat prior to livestock operations 

projects. Placement of mineral supplements, straw, or other feed for livestock within 1 mile of known 

populations of the orchid will be evaluated and approved by the BLM with concurrence by USFWS 

and implemented on a case-by-case basis only. 

6. The BLM will not increase permitted livestock stocking levels in any allotment with pastures 

containing known orchid populations without consulting with the USFWS. The overall impact that 

livestock grazing has on the orchid is unknown—whether it is detrimental due to actual grazing and 

trampling of plants or beneficial due to livestock removal of adjacent competing vegetation. 

7. Grazing will be intensively managed within known habitat containing populations from July through 

September to allow plants to bloom and go to seed. 

8. Recreational site development will not be authorized in known Ute ladies’ tresses habitat. 

9. The BLM will manage stream habitats to retain, re-create, or mimic natural hydrology, water quality, 

and related vegetation dynamics. Projects that may alter natural hydrology or water quality, change 

the vegetation of the riparian ecosystem, and cause direct ground disturbance will be evaluated and 

redesigned to ensure that adverse effects to populations of the orchid do not occur. 

10. Biological control of noxious plant species will be prohibited within 1.0 mile from known orchid 

habitat until the impact of the control agent has been fully evaluated and determined not to adversely 

affect the plant population. BLM will monitor biological control vectors. 

11. Except in cases of extreme ecological health (insect or weed outbreaks/infestations), herbicide 

treatment of noxious plants/weeds will be prohibited within one-quarter mile of known populations of 

the orchid and insecticide/pesticide treatments will be prohibited within 1 mile of known populations 

of the orchid to protect pollinators. 

Where insect or weed outbreaks have the potential to degrade area ecological health inside the buffers 

listed above, at the discretion of BLM’s Authorized Officer and with concurrence by the USFWS, the 

following will apply: where needed, and only on a case-by-case basis, a pesticide use proposal or 

other site-specific plan will address concerns of proper timing, methods of use, and chemicals. 

Pesticides specific to dicots will be preferred where these are adequate to control the noxious weeds 

present. 

Pinedale RMP A18-3 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

Aerial application of herbicides will be carefully planned to prevent drift in areas near known 

populations of the orchid (outside of the one-quarter-mile buffer). BLM will work with the Animal 

and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), the USFWS, and county weed and pest agencies to 

select pesticides and methods of application that will most effectively manage the infestation and 

least affect the orchid. 

12. If revegetation projects are conducted within one-quarter mile of known habitat for the orchid, only 

native species will be selected. This conservation measure will keep non-native species from 

competing with the orchid. 

13. Limit the use of off-highway vehicles (OHV) to designated roads and trails within one-half mile of 

known populations of the orchid, with no exceptions for the “performance of necessary tasks” other 

than fire fighting and hazardous material cleanup allowed using vehicles off of highways. No OHV 

competitive events will be allowed within 1 mile of known populations of the orchid. Roads that have 

the potential to impact the orchid and are not required for routine operations or maintenance of 

developed projects or that lead to abandoned projects will be reclaimed as directed by BLM. 

14. Apply a condition of approval (COA) on all Applications for Permit to Drill (APD) oil and gas wells 

for sites within one-quarter mile of any known populations of the orchid. This condition will prohibit 

all authorized surface disturbance and OHV travel from sites containing populations of the orchid. 

Operations outside of the one-quarter-mile buffer of orchid populations, such as “directional drilling” 

to reach oil or gas resources underneath the orchid’s habitat, would be acceptable. 

15. For known Ute ladies’ tresses populations, BLM will place a Controlled Surface Use (CSU) 

stipulation prohibiting all surface disturbances on new oil and gas leases, buffering the area within 

one-quarter mile of known Ute ladies’ tresses populations. For existing oil and gas leases with known 

Ute ladies’ tresses populations (these would be for newly discovered populations rather than those 

currently documented), BLM will require the COA in conservation measure 14 above, including the 

same one-quarter-mile buffer area around those known Ute ladies’ tresses populations. 

16. Prohibit the sale and disposal of salable minerals in habitat containing known populations of the 

orchid (within a quarter-mile buffer area of known orchid populations), and where possible, pursue 

acquisition of property with known populations of the orchid with salable minerals. The disposal (sale 

and removal) of salable minerals is a discretionary BLM action and is prohibited within a onequarter-mile buffer area of known populations of the orchid. 

17. To prevent loss of habitat for the orchid, BLM “shall retain in federal ownership all habitats essential 

for the survival and recovery of any listed species, including habitat that was used historically, that 

has retained its potential to sustain listed species, and is deemed to be essential to their survival” 

(BLM 2001). Prior to any land tenure adjustments in known habitat for the orchid, BLM will survey 

to assess the habitat boundary and retain that area in federal ownership. BLM-administered public 

lands that contain identified habitat for the orchid will not be exchanged or sold unless it benefits the 

species. 

18. All proposed rights-of-way projects (power lines, pipelines, roads, etc.) will be designed and locations 

selected at least one-quarter mile from any known orchid habitat to minimize disturbances. Rights-ofway actions for roads, power lines, pipelines, etc., will avoid occupied habitat for the orchid. If 

avoidance of adverse effects is impossible, BLM will reinitiate consultation with the USFWS. 

19. All proposed projects will be designed and locations selected to minimize disturbances to known 

populations of the orchid; and if it is impossible to avoid adverse affects, BLM will reinitiate 

A18-4 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

consultation with the USFWS. Projects will not be authorized closer than one-quarter mile from any 

known populations of the orchid without concurrence of the USFWS and the BLM Authorized 

Officer. No ground-disturbing construction activities will be authorized within one-quarter mile of 

any known populations of the orchid during the essential growing season time period (from July to 

September, the growing, flowering and fruiting stages) to reduce impacts to this species. 

20. To conserve and protect natural areas, planned recreational foot trails are created to control human 

traffic. BLM will create programs that will strive to protect the orchid’s habitat and prevent new trails 

from being constructed within a quarter mile from known occurrences of the orchid. 

Best Management Practices 

The following BMPs are to be considered on a case-by-case basis at the project level, and implemented 

where appropriate, to further protect the orchid. 

1. When project proposals are received, BLM will initiate coordination with the USFWS at the earliest 

possible date so that both agencies can advise on project design. This should minimize the need to 

redesign projects at a later date to include orchid conservation measures, determined as appropriate by 

the USFWS. 

2. The BLM will participate in the development of a conservation agreement/assessment strategy and a 

species-specific recovery plan for the orchid in coordination with the USFWS and other agencies as 

appropriate. Orchid habitat on BLM-administered lands will be monitored to determine if 

recovery/conservation objectives are being met. 

3. The BLM will coordinate with the USFWS, the National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), 

and private landowners to ensure adequate protection for the orchid and its habitat when new 

activities are proposed, and to work proactively to enhance plant survival. 

4. In the event that a new population of the orchid is found, the USFWS Wyoming Field Office (307-

772-2374) will be notified within 48 hours of discovery. 

5. Livestock grazing, mowing/haying, and some burning are specific management tools that the BLM 

may use to maintain favorable habitat conditions for the orchid where feasible. With proper timing 

and intensity, mowing and grazing reduce the native and exotic plant competition for light and 

possibly for water, space, and nutrients. 

6. Recreational foot trails that may be located adjacent to Ute ladies’ tresses plant habitat should be 

constructed to reduce impacts to this species. 

7. To prevent loss of habitat for the orchid, BLM “shall retain in federal ownership all habitats essential 

for the survival and recovery of any listed species, including habitat that was used historically, that 

has retained its potential to sustain listed species, and is deemed to be essential to their survival” 

(BLM 2001). Prior to any land tenure adjustments in potential orchid habitat, BLM will survey to 

assess the potential for existence of the orchid. Although it is difficult to assess whether the orchid 

was historically present on such sites, BLM should try to retain in federal ownership all habitats 

essential for the survival and recovery of the orchid, including habitat that was used historically, that 

has retained its potential to sustain this listed species and may be used for reintroduction efforts, and 

is important for the recovery and enhancement of the species. 

Pinedale RMP A18-5 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

8. Prescribed fire and grazing activities shall be coordinated between biologists, rangeland management 

specialists, and fire personnel to ensure that no damage occurs to the plant habitat when being used to 

maintain the habitat for the species. 

9. Maintain and restore the dynamics of stream systems, including the movement of streams within their 

flood plains, that are vital for the life cycle of the orchid. Flow timing, flow quantity, and water table 

characteristics should be evaluated to ensure that the riparian system is maintained where these plants 

occur. BLM should continue water use in a manner that maintains suitable habitat for the Ute ladies’ 

tresses orchid to benefit the species. 

10. Maintain and restore the natural species composition and structural diversity of plant communities in 

riparian zones and wetlands. 

11. For the protection of the orchid and its potential habitat, surface-disturbing activities listed above 

should be avoided in the following areas when they occur outside of the protective 0.25 buffer from 

populations of the orchid: (a) identified 100-year flood plains; (b) areas within 500 feet from 

perennial waters, springs, wells, and wetlands; and (c) areas within 100 feet from the inner gorge of 

ephemeral channels. 

Research/Monitoring/Inventories 

12. Form a steering committee to develop and prioritize management practices and assist BLM and 

USFWS with research projects. 

13. Conduct inventories for the orchid in areas with potential habitat. 

14. Maintain a database of all searched, inventoried, or monitored orchid sites. 

15. Analyze vegetation treatments (mowing, prescribed fire, mechanical treatments, etc.) in known or 

potential habitat for the orchid to determine impacts to the species. 

16. Establish monitoring, biological, ecological, population demographics, and life history studies as 

funding and staffing allow, such as monitoring current populations each year for trends; conducting 

studies to identify pollinators, genetics, life history, effects of pesticides and herbicides, seed viability 

and germination; and conducting studies to monitor the success of reintroduction efforts. Monitor 

orchid population sites for invasion by noxious and invasive plant species. 

17. Perform monitoring and analysis pertaining to flow timing, flow quantity, and water table 

characteristics with the goal of ensuring that riparian vegetation in areas of known and potential 

habitat for the orchid is maintained. 

Collection 

18. When possible, collect and bank orchid seeds at local, regional, national, and international arboreta, 

seed banks, and botanical gardens as insurance against catastrophic events, for use in biological 

studies, and for possible introduction/reintroduction into potential habitat. 

Education 

19. Train law enforcement personnel on protection measures for the orchid and its habitat, its status, and 

current threats to its existence. 

A18-6 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

20. Educate resource specialists, rangers, and fire crews about the orchid and its habitat to help with 

project design for the general area and for fire suppression actions occurring in potential habitat for 

the orchid and on the habitat characteristics and plant identification for the plant, so that if they 

encounter the orchid occurring in riparian habitat, they can report it to their office threatened and 

endangered species specialist. 

Introduction/Reintroduction 

21. The BLM should work towards developing reintroduction sites in coordination with the USFWS and 

then maintain the integrity of these sites for the orchid’s survival. The objective would be to 

reintroduce populations of the orchid into areas of historic occurrence and introduce new populations 

in suitable habitat within the plant’s historic range. 

22. Develop propagation techniques and use them to reintroduce/introduce the orchid and to repopulate 

known populations should population recovery become necessary. 

Black-Footed Ferret (Endangered) 

Project and development activities will be avoided in white-tailed prairie dog towns/complexes greater 

than 200 acres. These areas will be assessed and mapped at the proposed project level and associated 

burrow densities on potentially affected towns will be determined, when necessary, pursuant to USFWSand BLM-approved techniques. Assessments should be repeated every 3 to 5 years thereafter to determine 

whether the criteria established in the USFWS (1989) guidelines for black-footed ferrets are met. 

If any black-footed ferrets or their sign is found within a prairie dog town or complex previously 

determined to be unsuitable for or free of ferrets, all previously authorized project-related activities (or 

actions on any future application that may directly, indirectly, or cumulatively affect the colony/complex) 

ongoing in such towns or complexes will be suspended immediately; and Section 7 consultation will be 

reinitiated with USFWS. 

If suitable prairie dog town/complex avoidance is impossible, surveys of towns/complexes for blackfooted ferrets will be conducted in accordance with USFWS guidelines and requirements. This 

information will be provided to BLM and USFWS in accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered 

Species Act and the Interagency Cooperation Regulations. 

BLM will conduct educational outreach to employees and project proponents regarding the nature, hosts, 

and symptoms of canine distemper and its effects on black-footed ferrets. Attention will be focused on the 

reasons why employees should not have pets on work sites during or after hours. 

Conservation Measures 

The conservation measures listed below are separated into species conservation measures, which affect 

the species directly; habitat and mapping measures, which protect habitat and address prairie dog colonies 

and mapping activities; and recovery/reintroduction measures, which address BLM’s role in and 

commitment to recovery of the species. 

Species Conservation Measures 

1. When project proposals are received for areas that still require black-footed ferret surveys [i.e., nonblock-cleared (see Map 3 of the black-footed ferret biological assessment (BLM 2005) or USFWS’ 

block clearance letter of February 2, 2004 (USFWS 2004)] and meet potential habitat criteria as 

Pinedale RMP A18-7 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

defined by USFWS guidelines (USFWS 1989), BLM shall initiate coordination with the USFWS at 

the earliest possible date so that USFWS can provide input. This should minimize the need to 

subsequently redesign projects to include black-footed ferret conservation measures, determined as 

appropriate by USFWS. 

2. In areas identified in conservation measure number 1 above (non-block-cleared areas), if suitable 

prairie dog town/complex avoidance is impossible, surveys of towns/complexes for black-footed 

ferrets shall be conducted in accordance with current USFWS guidelines and recommendations. This 

information shall be provided to BLM and the USFWS in accordance with Section 7 of the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (50 CFR §402.10 and 13), and the Interagency 

Cooperation Regulations. 

3. Observations of black-footed ferrets, their sign, or carcasses on a project area and the location of the 

suspected observation, however obtained, shall be reported within 24 hours to the appropriate local 

BLM Wildlife Biologist and Field Supervisor of BLM’s office in Cheyenne, Wyoming (307-772-

2374). Observations will include a description including what was seen, time, date, exact location, 

suspected cause of death, and observer’s name and telephone number. Carcasses or other “suspected” 

ferret remains shall be collected by USFWS or BLM employees and deposited with the USFWS 

Wyoming Field Office or the Law Enforcement Office. This type of specimen collection is 

authorized as described in 50 CFR §17.21(c)(3-4). It is imperative that any fresh black-footed ferret 

carcass be salvaged and immediately transported to USFWS so pertinent information concerning the 

cause of death can be gathered, including photographs to preserve an accurate depiction of the 

fatality. 

4. Discovery of a live black-footed ferret outside of the nonessential experimental population areas in 

Wyoming would have profound importance to the species’ recovery. Reporting of such a discovery 

by staff, contractors, permittees, etc., will be fully encouraged by BLM staff and management. 

5. If black-footed ferrets or their sign is found on public lands outside of the nonessential experimental 

population areas in Wyoming, all previously authorized surface-disturbing activities (or actions on 

any future application that may directly, indirectly, or cumulatively affect the colony/complex 

ongoing) in the complex in which black-footed ferrets are found shall temporarily cease until further 

direction is developed by a task force consisting of the BLM Field Office Manager, the USFWS Field 

Office Supervisor, the WGFD Non-game Coordinator, and other potentially affected parties. This 

task force will be formed within 48 hours of the find to determine appropriate conservation/protection 

actions. BLM shall coordinate with these affected parties to ensure that ferret surveys or appropriate 

actions are conducted as deemed necessary. BLM will also reinitiate Section 7 consultation with 

USFWS. An emergency road closure limiting access to the site will be enacted by BLM within 48 

hours of the find to protect the newly discovered black-footed ferrets. This emergency road closure 

will be for all nonpaved roads within at least 1 mile of the find. On a case-by-case basis and with 

approval of the USFWS, certain surface-disturbing activities within the town or complex may be 

allowed to continue. 

Habitat and Mapping Measures 

6. Information on ferret identification shall be provided and posted in common areas and circulated in a 

memorandum among all employees and service providers. This information shall illustrate the blackfooted ferret and its sign; describe morphology, tracks, scat, skull, habitat characteristics, behavior, 

and current status; and outline the relationship between project development and possible impacts to 

black-footed ferrets, especially regarding canine distemper and recreational shooting. 

A18-8 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

7. New prairie dog towns shall be allowed to become established on public lands in all circumstances 

where they would not interfere with other previously established activities. 

Recovery/Reintroduction Measures 

8. The BLM shall work with the USFWS and the WGFD to identify and select special management 

areas for potential reintroduction sites for black-footed ferrets. These areas will be selected based 

upon a number of factors, including BLM’s ability to protect and manage them, their size (5,000 to 

10,000 acre sites, optimally), and potential utility to black-footed ferrets. Because of the need to 

manage reintroduction sites (of prairie dog complexes) on a landscape scale, and because plague is a 

significant but unpredictable event, special management areas may be selected that are currently 

“plagued out” but may recover in time. Complexes can be selected from, but not necessarily 

restricted to, those shown in block cleared areas (see Map 3 of BLM 2005). Protective measures will 

be drawn up for these special management areas, and may include being withdrawn from leasing and 

protected from commercial development (e.g., land disposal through Recreation and Public Purpose 

[R&PP] Act actions). The following are examples of protective measures that will be included in 

these special management areas: 

• BLM shall work with respective state game and fish agencies and USFWS offices to ensure that 

enough reintroduction sites are maintained to successfully recover the black-footed ferret. If 

areas available for reintroduction are removed through BLM’s authorized actions below a 

threshold level, so that the black-footed ferret can no longer be recovered, then those actions 

reducing availability of reintroduction sites will be modified or discontinued until the blackfooted ferret has been recovered. 

• BLM shall monitor and post restrictions, if necessary, on recreational opportunities and other uses 

on BLM-administered lands within 1 mile of formally proposed and active reintroduction sites for 

black-footed ferrets. 

• BLM and operators shall conduct educational outreach to employees regarding the nature, hosts, 

and symptoms of canine distemper and its effects on black-footed ferrets, focusing attention on 

why employees should not have pets on work sites during or after hours. BLM shall encourage 

operators to develop policies to prohibit dogs from operation sites or require current distemper 

vaccinations within black-footed ferret reintroduction areas. It is recommended that vaccinated 

puppies not be allowed in these areas until one month after their final distemper vaccination due 

to potential effects of the modified live virus vaccine. 

Best Management Practices 

1. Develop prairie dog management plans with ongoing monitoring and protection of prairie dog towns 

and complexes with high priority for black-footed ferret reintroductions. 

2. Follow the guidelines outlined in the Wyoming Black-tailed Prairie Dog Management Plan 

(Wyoming Black-tailed Prairie Dog Working Group 2001) and the White-tailed Prairie Dog 

Conservation Assessment (Seglund et al. 2004). Encourage the Wyoming Board of Agriculture to 

transfer regulatory management of prairie dogs to the WGFD to remove unprotected, “pest” status on 

prairie dogs and provide regulatory mechanisms for recreational shooting of prairie dogs. 

3. Establish land stewardship agreements with other agencies and/or private landowners where large 

(1,000 acres) prairie dog towns or complexes exist. These agreements can control potential uses that 

may be detrimental to prairie dogs and their habitats while preserving the landowner’s intent for use. 

Pinedale RMP A18-9 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

4. Avoid sale or exchange of lands with the potential for black-footed ferret reintroductions and attempt 

to acquire parcels with prairie dogs on them, especially those that have potential as part of a blackfooted ferret reintroduction effort. 

5. Initiate, to the extent feasible, land exchanges in the Thunder Basin and Shirley Basin in areas with 

potential for black-footed ferrets to increase the land area in federal ownership. 

6. Avoid vegetation stand conversions that have been shown to be detrimental to prairie dogs, and 

reduce or eliminate any other suspected ecosystem-degrading practices. 

7. Encourage, support, and/or establish a prairie dog research program, addressing issues such as the 

effect of recreational shooting and oil and gas development on prairie dogs, sylvatic plague control, 

and population viability analysis. 

8. Because knowledge of the effects of resource extraction on white-tailed prairie dog populations is 

limited, monitoring at sites before, during, and after energy development is recommended (Seglund et 

al. 2004). 

Colorado River Fishes (Endangered) 

Species Conservation Measures 

For projects that cause depletions to the Colorado River system, the BLM will initiate formal consultation 

with the USFWS. 

Best Management Practices 

When developing or improving water sources in the Colorado River system, BLM will consider 

development designs such as water wells and guzzlers rather than surface impoundments to minimize 

impacts to surface water hydrology resulting from attenuation of flood peaks and evaporative loss. 

Canada Lynx (Threatened) 

Development activities will be designed to prevent habitat fragmentation and maintain native plant 

communities and patterns, thereby maintaining lynx movement abilities. Burn prescriptions will be 

designed to promote response by shrub and tree species that are favored by snowshoe hares and to retain 

or encourage tree species composition and structure that will provide habitat for red squirrels or other 

alternate prey species. During fire suppression activities, the construction of temporary roads and machine 

fire lines will be minimized. The construction of permanent firebreaks on ridges or saddles in lynx habitat 

will be avoided. 

Precommercial thinning will occur only when stands are deemed to no longer provide snowshoe hare 

habitat. Following a disturbance to timber that could positively contribute to lynx denning habitat, such as 

blowdown, fire, or insect/pathogen mortality, no salvage harvest will be conducted when the affected area 

is smaller than 5 acres except in areas where field-validated denning habitat comprises more than 10 

percent of lynx habitat within a lynx analysis unit (LAU). 

In grazing allotments that contain forested lynx habitat, the shrub-steppe habitat would be maintained at 

mid-seral or higher conditions. Livestock will be prevented from grazing in areas of post-fire and postA18-10 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

harvest until successful regeneration of shrub and tree components has occurred. Vegetation condition in 

riparian areas and willow stands will be maintained at mid-seral or higher conditions. 

LAU will be available for oil and gas leasing unless such leasing is made unavailable elsewhere in the 

Resource Management Plan (RMP). Surface-disturbing activities will be subject to the considerations and 

restrictions in the Canada Lynx Conservation Assessment and Strategy (Ruediger et al. 2000) and may 

require consultation with the USFWS under Section 7 of the Act. Management actions will not change 

more than 15 percent of lynx habitat within an LAU to an unsuitable condition within a 10-year period. 

Reclamation plans (e.g., road reclamation and vegetation rehabilitation) for abandoned well sites will be 

required to provide suitable lynx habitat. 

Snow compacting activities such as snowmobiling, cross-country skiing, or snowshoeing will be 

minimized or discouraged in lynx foraging habitat. Natural gas well sites will be operated to minimize 

snow compaction, for example, through the use of remote well monitoring. 

Conservation Strategies 

These conservation measures are intended to conserve the lynx, and to reduce or eliminate adverse effects 

from the spectrum of management activities on BLM land. These measures are provided to outline 

opportunities to benefit the lynx, and to help avoid negative impacts through the thoughtful planning of 

activities. Plans that incorporate them and projects that implement them are generally not expected to 

adversely affect lynx; and implementation of these measures across the range of the lynx is expected to 

lead to conservation of the species (Ruediger et al. 2000). 

These conservation measures are binding measures that BLM shall implement to facilitate conservation of 

lynx. LAUs typically encompass both lynx habitat (may or may not be currently in suitable condition for 

denning or foraging habitat) and other areas (such as lakes, low elevation ponderosa pine forest, and 

alpine tundra). The conservation measures listed below generally apply only to lynx habitat within the 

LAUs. However, their use in areas of lynx habitat or potential lynx habitat not fitting the criteria of an 

LAU is encouraged. 

However, because it is impossible to provide measures that will address all possible actions in all 

locations across the broad range of the lynx, it is imperative that project-specific analysis and design be 

completed for all actions that have the potential to affect lynx. Circumstances unique to individual 

projects or actions and their locations may still result in adverse effects on lynx. In these cases, additional 

or modified conservation measures may be necessary to avoid or minimize adverse effects. The order in 

which the conservation measures appear below does not imply their relative priority. 

Conservation Measures 

1. Within an LAU, BLM shall ensure lynx habitat and nonhabitat, including denning habitat, foraging 

habitat, and topographic features important for lynx movement are mapped. BLM or the project 

proponent shall identify whether all lynx habitat within an LAU is in suitable or unsuitable condition. 

This will involve interagency coordination where LAUs cross administrative boundaries. 

2. BLM shall limit disturbance within each LAU to 30 percent of the suitable habitat within the LAU. If 

30 percent of the habitat within an LAU is currently in unsuitable condition, no further reduction of 

suitable conditions shall occur as a result of management activities. BLM shall map oil and gas 

production and transmission facilities, mining activities and facilities, dams, timber harvest, and 

agricultural lands on public lands and evaluate projects on adjacent private lands to assess cumulative 

Pinedale RMP A18-11 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

effects. This will involve interagency coordination, primarily with the USFS, where LAUs cross 

administrative boundaries. 

3. BLM management actions shall not change more than 15 percent of lynx habitat within an LAU to an 

unsuitable condition within a 10-year period. This will involve interagency coordination where LAUs 

cross administrative boundaries. 

4. BLM shall maintain denning habitat in patches generally larger than 5 acres and comprising at least 

10 percent of lynx habitat. Where less than 10 percent is currently present within an LAU, BLM will 

defer any management actions that would delay development of denning habitat structure. This will 

involve interagency coordination where LAUs cross administrative boundaries. 

5. BLM shall ensure that key linkage areas that may be important in providing landscape connectivity 

within and between geographic areas across all ownerships are identified using the best available 

science. 

6. BLM shall ensure that habitat connectivity within and between LAUs is maintained. 

7. BLM shall document lynx observations (tracks, sightings, along with date, location, and habitat), 

provide these to the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, and request from it an annual update on all 

sightings for review in each field office. 

8. Following a disturbance (blowdown, fire, and insects) that could contribute to lynx denning habitat, 

BLM shall allow no salvage harvest when the affected area is smaller than 5 acres. Some exceptions 

apply, as specified in the LCAS timber management project planning standards. 

9. BLM shall allow precommercial thinning only when stands no longer provide snowshoe hare habitat. 

10. In aspen stands, BLM shall ensure that harvest prescriptions favoring the regeneration of aspen apply. 

11. BLM shall ensure that improvement harvests (commercial thinning, selection, etc.) are designed to 

retain and improve recruitment of an understory of small-diameter conifers and shrubs preferred by 

hares. 

12. Should a large wildfire occur, BLM shall ensure that a post-disturbance assessment is conducted prior 

to salvage harvest, particularly in stands that were formerly in late successional stages, to evaluate 

potential for lynx denning and foraging habitat. 

13. BLM shall ensure that construction of temporary roads and fire lines is minimized to the extent 

possible during fire suppression activities and shall ensure revegetation of those that are necessary. 

Construction on ridges and saddles should be avoided if possible. 

14. BLM shall allow no net increase in groomed or designated over-the-snow routes and snowmobile 

play areas in LAUs unless the designation serves to consolidate unregulated use and improves lynx 

habitat through a net reduction of compacted snow areas. This is intended to apply to dispersed 

recreation rather than existing ski areas. Winter logging activity is not subject to this restriction. 

15. In lynx habitat within an LAU, BLM shall ensure that federal actions do not degrade or compromise 

landscape connectivity or linkage areas when planning and operating new or expanded recreation 

developments. 

A18-12 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

16. BLM shall ensure that trails, roads, and lift termini are designed to direct winter use away from 

diurnal security habitat. 

17. To protect the integrity of lynx habitat, BLM shall ensure that (as new information becomes 

available) winter recreational special use permits (outside of permitted ski areas) promoting snow 

compacting activities in lynx habitat are evaluated and amended as needed. 

18. BLM shall ensure that livestock use in openings created by fire or timber harvest that would delay 

successful regeneration of the shrub and tree components is not allowed. This regeneration may take 

3 years or longer and will depend on site-specific conditions. 

19. BLM shall ensure that grazing in aspen stands is managed to ensure sprouting and sprout survival 

sufficient to perpetuate the long-term viability of the clones. 

20. Within lynx habitat, BLM shall ensure that livestock grazing in riparian areas and willow patches is 

managed to maintain or achieve mid-seral or higher condition to provide cover and forage for prey 

species. 

21. On projects where over-snow access is required, BLM shall ensure use is restricted to designated 

routes. 

22. Predator control activities, including trapping or poisoning on domestic livestock allotments on 

federal lands within lynx habitat, shall be conducted by Wildlife Services personnel in accordance 

with USFWS recommendations established through a formal Section 7 consultation process. 

23. BLM shall ensure that the potential importance of shrub-steppe habitats in the lynx habitat matrix and 

in providing landscape connectivity between blocks of lynx habitat is evaluated and considered as 

integral to overall lynx habitat where appropriate. Livestock grazing within shrub-steppe habitats in 

such areas should be managed to maintain or achieve mid-seral or higher condition to maximize cover 

and prey availability. Such areas that are currently in late seral condition should not be degraded. 

24. In high-elevation riparian areas, especially those subject to grazing, BLM shall ensure that weed 

assessments and weed control are conducted to optimize habitat for snowshoe hares. 

25. Within lynx habitat, BLM shall ensure that key linkage areas and potential highway crossing areas are 

identified using best available science. 

26. BLM shall work cooperatively and proactively with the Federal Highway Administration (FHA) and 

the Wyoming State Department of Transportation to identify land corridors necessary to maintain 

connectivity of lynx habitat and map the location of “key linkage areas” where highway crossings 

may be needed to provide habitat connectivity and reduce mortality of lynx (and other wildlife). 

27. Dirt and gravel roads traversing lynx habitat (particularly those that could become highways) should 

not be paved or otherwise upgraded (e.g., straightening of curves, widening of roadways) in a manner 

that is likely to lead to significant increases in traffic volumes, traffic speeds, or width of the cleared 

right-of-way (ROW) or would contribute to development or increased human activity in lynx habitat. 

Whenever rural dirt and gravel roads traversing lynx habitat are proposed for such upgrades, a 

thorough analysis should be conducted on the potential direct and indirect effects to lynx and lynx 

habitat. 

Pinedale RMP A18-13 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

28. BLM shall ensure that proposed land exchanges, land sales, and special use permits are evaluated for 

effects on key linkage areas. 

29. If activities are proposed in lynx habitat, BLM shall ensure that stipulation and conditions of approval 

for limitation on the timing of activities and surface use and occupancy are developed at the leasing 

and Notice of Stacking/APD stages. An example of these conditions is requiring that activities not be 

conducted at night when lynx are active and avoiding activity near denning habitat during the 

breeding season (April or May to July) to protect vulnerable kittens. 

30. BLM shall ensure that snow compaction is minimized when authorizing and monitoring 

developments. BLM shall encourage remote monitoring of sites that are located in lynx habitat so 

they do not have to be visited daily. 

Best Management Practices 

BLM considers the following BMPs to be nonbinding conservation practices that will, if implemented, 

aid in the conservation of the Canada lynx. BMPs for the Canada lynx may be applied to areas within and 

outside LAUs. These BMPs for the Canada lynx may be implemented on a case-by-case basis as 

appropriate. 

1. Design regeneration prescriptions to mimic historical fire (or other natural disturbance) events, 

including retention of fire-killed dead trees and coarse woody debris. 

2. Design harvest units to mimic the pattern and scale of natural disturbances and retain natural 

connectivity across the landscape. Evaluate the potential of riparian zones, ridges, and saddles to 

provide connectivity. 

3. Provide for continuing availability of foraging habitat in proximity to denning habitat. 

4. In areas where recruitment of additional denning habitat is desired, or to extend the production of 

snowshoe hare foraging habitat where forage quality and quantity are declining because of plant 

succession, consider improvement harvests (commercial thinning, selection, etc). Improvement 

harvests should be designed to retain and recruit the understory of small diameter conifers and shrubs 

preferred by hares; retain and recruit coarse woody debris consistent with the likely availability of 

such material under natural disturbance regimes; and maintain or improve the juxtaposition of 

denning and foraging habitat. 

5. Provide habitat conditions through time that support dense horizontal understory cover and a high 

density of snowshoe hares. This includes, for example, mature multistoried conifer vegetation. Focus 

vegetation management, including timber harvest and use of prescribed fire, in areas that have 

potential to improve snowshoe hare habitat (dense horizontal cover) but that presently have poorly 

developed understories with little value to snowshoe hares. 

6. Design burn prescriptions to promote response by shrub and tree species that are favored by the 

snowshoe hare and thus regenerate or create snowshoe hare habitat (e.g., regeneration of aspen and 

lodgepole pine). 

7. Design burn prescriptions to retain or encourage tree species composition and structure that will 

provide habitat for red squirrels or other alternate prey species. 

8. Consider the need for pretreatment of fuels before conducting management ignitions. 

A18-14 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

9. Design burn prescriptions and, where feasible, conduct fire suppression actions in a manner that 

maximizes lynx denning habitat. 

10. Map and monitor the location and intensity of snow compacting activities (for example, 

snowmobiling, snowshoeing, cross-county skiing, dog sledding) that coincide with lynx habitat to 

facilitate future evaluation of effects on lynx as information becomes available. Discourage 

recreational use in areas where it is shown to compromise lynx habitat. Such actions should be 

undertaken on a priority basis considering habitat function and importance. 

11. Provide a landscape with interconnected blocks of foraging habitat where snowmobile, cross-country 

skiing, snowshoeing, or other snow compacting activities are minimized or discouraged. 

12. Identify and protect potential security habitats in and around proposed developments or expansions. 

13. Determine where high total road densities (>2 miles per square mile) coincide with lynx habitat and 

prioritize roads for seasonal restrictions or reclamation in those areas. 

14. Minimize roadside brushing to provide snowshoe hare habitat. 

15. Limit public use on temporary roads constructed for timber sales. Design new roads, especially the 

entrance, for effective closure upon completion of sale activities. 

16. Limit public use on temporary and permanent roads constructed for access to timber sales, mines, and 

leases. Design new roads, especially the entrance, for effective closure. Upon project completion, 

reclaim or obliterate these roads. 

17. Minimize building of roads directly on ridge tops or areas identified as important for lynx habitat 

connectivity. 

18. To reduce mistaken shooting of lynx, initiate and/or augment interagency information and education 

efforts throughout the range of lynx in the contiguous states. Use trailhead posters, magazine articles, 

news releases, state hunting and trapping regulation booklets, and so on, to inform the public of the 

possible presence of lynx and their field identification and status. 

19. Where needed, develop measures such as wildlife fencing and associated underpasses or overpasses 

to reduce mortality risk. 

20. Where feasible within identified key linkage areas, maintain or enhance native plant communities, 

patterns, and habitat for potential lynx prey. Pursue opportunities for cooperative management with 

other landowners. Evaluate whether land ownership and management practices are compatible with 

maintaining lynx highway crossings in key linkage areas. On public lands, management practices will 

be compatible with providing habitat connectivity. On private lands, agencies will strive to work with 

landowners to develop conservation easements, exchanges, or other solutions. 

21. Dirt and gravel roads traversing lynx habitat (particularly those that could become highways) should 

not be paved or otherwise upgraded (e.g., straightening of curves, widening of roadways) in a manner 

that is likely to lead to significant increases in traffic volumes, traffic speeds, or width of the cleared 

ROW or would contribute to development of increased human activity in lynx habitat. Whenever 

rural dirt and gravel roads traversing lynx habitat are proposed for such upgrades, a thorough analysis 

should be conducted on the potential direct and indirect effects to lynx and lynx habitat. 

Pinedale RMP A18-15 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

22. In land adjustment programs, identify key linkage areas. Work towards unified management direction 

via habitat conservation plans, conservation easements or agreements, and land acquisition. 

23. Plan recreational development and manage recreational and operational uses to provide for lynx 

movement and to maintain effectiveness of lynx habitat. 

24. Identify, map, and prioritize site-specific locations, using topographic and vegetation features to 

determine where highway crossings are needed to reduce highway impacts on lynx. 

25. Using the best available science, develop a plan to protect key linkage areas on federal lands from 

activities that would create barriers to movement. Barriers could result from an accumulation of 

incremental projects, as opposed to any one project. 

26. When opportunities for vegetation treatments arise, develop treatments that provide or develop 

characteristics suitable for snowshoe hare. 

27. Protect existing snowshoe hare and red squirrel habitat. 

BLM SENSITIVE SPECIES

Bald Eagle 

The bald eagle has recently been removed from the Endangered Species List; however, it is protected 

under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and is considered a 

BLM sensitive species. 

Conservation Measures 

1. When project proposals are received, BLM should initiate coordination with the USFWS at the 

earliest possible date so that USFWS can advise on project design. This should minimize the need to 

redesign projects at a later date to include bald eagle conservation measures, determined as 

appropriate by the USFWS. 

2. Appropriately timed surveys in bald eagle habitats should be conducted prior to any activities and 

subsequent authorization that may disturb bald eagles or their habitats. A qualified biologist (not 

limited by job title) would be approved by the BLM to conduct such bald eagle surveys. All nest 

surveys should be conducted using procedures that minimize the potential for adverse effects to 

nesting raptors. 

3. In the event species occurrence is verified, the proponent may be required to modify operational 

plans, at the discretion of the authorized officer, to include the appropriate measures for minimization 

of effects to the bald eagle and its habitats. 

4. Each year BLM should verify the status of known bald eagle nests, communal winter roosts, and 

concentration areas on lands administered by BLM. As a matter of maintaining inventory 

information, BLM should coordinate annually with USFWS, WGFD, and other appropriate entities to 

determine the status of known and new bald eagle nests, communal winter roosts, and other 

concentration areas. Known bald eagle nests, communal winter roosts, and concentration areas will be 

assumed active if status has not been verified. 

A18-16 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

5. Activities and habitat alterations that may disturb bald eagles will be restricted within suitable 

habitats that occur within bald eagle buffer zones (see Appendix D for detailed descriptions). 

• Zone 1 (within one-half mile February 1 to August 15) is intended to protect active and 

alternative nests. For active nests, minimal human activity levels are allowed during the period of 

first occupancy to 2 weeks after fledging. 

• Zone 2 (within one-half to 1 mile from the nest) is intended to protect bald eagle primary use 

areas and permits light human activity levels. 

• Zone 3 is designated to protect foraging/concentration areas year-round. Zone 3 would include 

one of two larger areas, depending on habitat types: a) 2.5 miles extending in all directions from 

the nest or b) one-half mile from the bank of all streams within 2.5 miles of the nest. Site-specific 

habitat types and foraging areas will be evaluated to determine which Zone 3 buffer applies. Zone 

delineation depends on habitat types. Exceptions may be made after consultation with USFWS. 

6. Activities that may disturb bald eagles will be restricted within 1 mile of known communal winter 

roosts during the period of November 1 to April 1. No ground-disturbing activities will be permitted 

within 1 mile of active roost sites year round. 

7. BLM-administered lands that are within 1 mile of an integral part of bald eagle habitats, including 

nests, communal winter roosts, and foraging/concentration areas, should not be exchanged or sold. 

8. Power lines should be built to standards identified by the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee 

(APLIC 1996). 

9. Proponents of BLM-authorized actions should be advised that roadside carrion can attract foraging 

bald eagles and potentially increase the risk of vehicle collisions with bald eagles feeding on carrion. 

When large carrion occurs on the road, appropriate officials should be notified for necessary removal. 

10. BLM should coordinate with APHIS, Wildlife Services Division, to minimize potential impacts to the 

bald eagle and its habitats from pest/predator control programs that may be included in the local 

animal damage control plan. USFWS should also be included in this coordination. 

11. Proposed and future water projects should not be designed to discharge into drainages or reservoirs 

occurring within 500 feet of county roads and highways. This measure is intended to minimize 

vehicle collisions with wildlife using the water source. 

12. BLM should provide educational information to project proponents and the general public pertaining 

to the following topics: appropriate vehicle speeds and the associated benefit of reduced vehicle 

collisions with wildlife; use of lead shot (particularly over water bodies); use of lead fishing weights; 

and general ecological awareness of habitat disturbance. 

13. In the event a dead or injured bald eagle is observed, the USFWS Wyoming Field Office (307-772-

2374) and the USFWS Law Enforcement Office (307-261-6365) should be notified within 24 hours 

of the discovery. 

14. BLM should coordinate with other agencies and private landowners to identify voluntary 

opportunities to modify current land stewardship practices that may impact the bald eagle and its 

habitats. 

Pinedale RMP A18-17 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

A18-18 Pinedale RMP

15. BLM should monitor and restrict, when and where necessary, authorized or casual use activities that 

may impact bald eagles or their habitats, including, but not limited to, recreational mining and oil and 

gas activities. 

16. BLM should periodically review existing water quality records (e.g., Wyoming Department of 

Environmental Quality [WDEQ], WGFD, United States Geological Survey [USGS]) from monitoring 

stations on or near important bald eagle habitats (i.e., nests, roosts, concentration areas) on public 

land for any conditions that could potentially adversely affect the species. If water quality problems 

are identified, the BLM should contact the appropriate jurisdictional entity to cooperatively monitor 

the condition and/or take corrective action. 

17. Projects with the potential to disturb bald eagles should be implemented in the least amount of time 

and during periods least likely to affect the bald eagle. 

18. Projects with the potential to disturb bald eagles or their habitats should be monitored, and the 

monitoring results should be considered in the design and implementation of future projects. 

Bald Eagle Survey Methodology 

Guidelines For Breeding/Nesting Site Populations1

Traditional monitoring methods for bald eagle breeding/nesting populations involve annual completion of 

three temporally separate surveys (collectively designated productivity surveys) to determine 1) 

occupancy, 2) activity, and 3) results of all breeding attempts in the population. 

Modification of accepted productivity survey practices for more efficient, less disruptive, and more 

representative methods of determining population threads are recommended. Number of active breeding 

pairs and number of total young of advanced age produced adequately represent annual status and 

reproductive performance of the population. Analysis of these annual statistics in a historical context will 

indicate trends. 

Absence of occupancy surveys will not affect detection of new breeding areas because Flath et al. (1991) 

almost always found new nest sites or pairs during activity surveys, seldom during occupancy surveys, 

and rarely during production surveys or thereafter. Continued determination of occupancy would be at the 

discretion of the entity responsible for completion of productivity surveys. 

Specific timing of surveys must be based on local nesting chronology. Surveys should be designed to 

minimize disturbance as much as possible. When planning surveys, agency personnel should be aware 

that nesting phenology among breeding areas may vary as much as 45 days, but general guidelines for 

timing are— 

• Occupancy surveys (not mandatory) —may occur as early as February 7 but should be 

concentrated in the third week of March for most breeding areas. 

• Activity surveys and searches for new nests—should generally occur from April 15 to May 5 

(cottonwood leaf-out). 

• Production surveys—should occur in late June but may extend into early July. 

 

1 Adapted from Montana Bald Eagle Management Plan, July 1994 
Final EIS Appendix 18 

Pinedale RMP A18-19 

Task: Annually survey in a standard manner all breeding areas known to be viable to determine 

status and annual productivity. 

Guidelines: 

1. A Bald Eagle Nest Survey Form standardizes data collection during nesting surveys and should be 

used. Individuals or agencies assigned specific nest survey responsibilities will receive from the Working 

Group survey forms prior to each year’s survey effort. 

2. At least once every 5 years, survey historical breeding areas that have not been active since 1990 to 

determine current status. 

These surveys should follow the timing guidelines provided above and use the Bald Eagle Nest Survey 

Form. 

Task: Maintain current nest record information for all bald eagle nests. 

Guideline: 

The Bald Eagle Nest Record Form establishes a permanent record of each nest location in the state. This 

form includes general descriptive information about the nest site. A map of the nest location and 

instructions on how to find the nest should be included whenever a new nest is found. It is the 

responsibility of the respective land management agency to complete the Bald Eagle Nest Record Form. 

Guidelines for Wintering Period Surveys2

The guidelines in this appendix address four main questions: 1) What areas should be surveyed? 2) How 

often are surveys needed? 3) What information should be obtained? 4) What procedures should be used? 

Survey Locations 

The vicinities of known nest sites should be checked to determine whether eagles are resident during part 

or all of the nonbreeding season. If eagles are present, attempts should be made to identify their feeding 

area(s) and night roost(s), and to determine the period of time the eagles remain in the area. 

The selection of survey locations outside of nesting habitat depends on whether the objective is to check 

feeding areas. Night roosts usually are checked in separate surveys because they may be as much as 15 

miles apart (the longest recorded distance is approximately 17 miles), and because the number of eagles 

present at them varies with the time of day and several other factors. 

To date, most surveys of feeding areas have been confined to locations associated with water. However, 

where food other than fish or waterfowl is available, open water is not a habitat requirement. Food 

resources from terrestrial habitats, such as big game and livestock carrion, jack and cottontail rabbits, and 

ground squirrels, are the major food items of wintering bald eagles in several locations. Thus, in addition 

to aquatic habitats, surveys of feeding areas should include terrestrial habitats. 

Priorities for areas to check can be established on the basis of known or suspected levels of prey 

availability. Other things equal, the number of eagles is likely to be greatest where the most food is 

available. 

Night roosts are found in a variety of habitat types and are not necessarily in the immediate vicinity of 

feeding areas. Trees in ravines, on the leeward side of hills, or in other wind-protected areas are the most 

 

2 Adapted from Northern States Bald Eagle Recovery Plan, July 1983. 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

likely to be used, particularly during harsh weather. In relatively flat terrain where few trees are present, 

eagles usually roost in trees that are clumped or screened from the prevailing wind by other vegetation. 

As a general rule, trees in exposed sites are occupied only during mild weather. 

Survey Frequency 

The number of surveys needed in local wintering areas depends on the amount of information available 

for site-specific management plans. If the approximate date when bald eagles first arrive in an area is not 

known, surveys should begin in mid- to late October. The main value of an early survey is to establish the 

initial date for seasonal restrictions on human activity in important wintering areas. 

At locations where peak periods and levels of use have not been determined, or where preferred feeding 

sites and night roosts are not known, surveys are recommended at 7- to 21-day intervals throughout the 

winter period. Survey frequency can be adjusted so that areas with the greatest potential for high use are 

checked most frequently. 

Biologists unfamiliar with the characteristics of wintering eagles might question the need for more than 

one or two surveys each winter, especially because only two surveys are recommended for the breeding 

season. The need for repeated surveys stems from the high mobility of wintering bald eagles. Some 

remain in one location for months, but others move quite frequently. Reasons for the movements are not 

fully understood, although some clearly are related to changes in prey availability and weather conditions. 

As a result of these movements, distribution and abundance of eagles in local areas fluctuate considerably 

during winter. For example, a location where an average of 10 eagles are seen in January might have an 

average count of 40 in February and a peak of 60 in March. Preferred feeding sites within an area could 

shift from open water early in the winter to adjacent terrestrial habitat later in the season. The level of use 

at night roosts also is variable. Thus, to identify important feeding areas and night roosts, surveys are 

needed throughout the winter period. In many locations, a high level of survey effort probably will be 

required for at least two winters to identify regularly used sites. Thereafter, survey frequency can be 

reduced to whatever is desired for monitoring a particular area of interest. 

Survey Information 

For each survey of a roost or feeding area, a complete record should be made of the date, time, personnel, 

procedures, route, and weather conditions. Determining the distribution of wintering bald eagles is as 

important as determining their abundance. Therefore, the locations of eagles observed during surveys 

should be plotted as precisely as possible on maps. Consistently used feeding areas and even individual 

hunting perches are identified by comparing the observations plotted over a number of surveys. Detailed 

information of this type is essential for delineating the boundaries and special features of wintering areas 

where site-specific management plans are needed. This level of detail also is needed for Endangered 

Species Act (Section 7) formal consultations. 

Survey Procedures 

To the extent possible, survey procedures should be the same all winter. Because observer competence is 

a major source of variability in winter survey results, the same experienced observer(s) should conduct all 

surveys in a particular area with the same pilot and aircraft for aerial surveys. To record detailed 

information during a survey, it may be necessary to have a primary observer to look for eagles and a 

recorder to plot the locations of eagles, carrion, waterfowl, stretches of open water, or other items of 

interest and value. Eagles missed by the primary observer but seen by the recorder or the pilot should be 

noted separately. 

Surveys can be conducted from the air, the ground, or by boat. Visibility from a boat usually is limited by 

shoreline vegetation or topography; therefore, surveys by boat are advisable only for locations 

A18-20 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

inaccessible from the ground or unsafe for aerial survey. Surveys from the ground are recommended 

where vegetation and terrain do not restrict visibility, e.g., small lakes or rivers where the entire shoreline 

can be seen from a few fixed points. Aerial surveys are recommended for large wintering areas and 

locations where ground access is poor or visibility is limited. Some feeding areas and roosts appear 

suitable for both ground and aerial surveys. At such locations, initial surveys can be conducted 

simultaneously from the ground and the air to assess which procedure is better. 

Safety is the foremost consideration during aerial surveys. Pilots should have considerable experience in 

conducting wildlife surveys that require slow, low-level flying. The route and the location of potential 

hazards such as power lines should be determined before each flight. Tight turns should be minimized. 

Aerial surveys can be conducted from helicopters or fixed-wing aircraft. More eagles are likely to be 

detected from helicopters because eagles usually flush ahead of them and are quite noticeable. However, 

flushing eagles from roosts or feeding areas on a regular basis could lead to abandonment of these 

essential wintering sites by some or all of the affected birds. Also, the cost of using a helicopter (about 

five times the hourly cost of a fixed-wing aircraft) is seldom justified. Therefore, helicopters are 

recommended only where use is dictated by safety considerations. 

A small plane such as a Piper PA18 (“Super Cub”) is ideal for aerial surveys by one observer. For surveys 

that require two observers, a small four-seater capable of slow flight (e.g., Cessna 172 or 180) is 

recommended. During aerial surveys, a speed of 60 to 75 mph is optimal; up to 90 mph is acceptable. 

Detection of bald eagles drops sharply above 90 mph. The recommended survey height is 100 to 300 feet 

above ground or tree level. Flights above 300 feet are of limited value because many less conspicuous 

eagles are missed. During surveys along rivers, both shorelines should be visible from one side of the 

plane. Where tree cover is dense or a river is braided or so wide that both shorelines cannot be seen 

adequately on a single pass, the plane should circle and make additional passes until the area is covered 

thoroughly. 

Surveys in feeding areas should coincide with the time of day when most bald eagles are foraging. This 

usually is one to three hours after daylight. It is advisable to check night roosts just before an early 

morning survey of feeding areas, and to delay the survey until later in the morning if a large number of 

birds are still at roosts. Surveys late in the morning or in the afternoon are not recommended because 

some bald eagles soar when weather conditions are appropriate, and others move to roosts or other 

protected sites to rest after feeding. 

Both direct and indirect methods can be used to determine whether bald eagles hunt in terrestrial habitats 

adjacent to water. One indirect, highly recommended method is checking beneath roost trees for prey 

remains and regurgitated pellets of undigested material. This should be done only when no eagles are at 

the roosts, e.g., at mid-day. Because eagles can digest fish completely, few castings are found where fish 

are the major item in the diet. Vegetation from fish stomachs sometimes is regurgitated in pellet form, and 

fish scales and cartilage occasionally are found in castings that contain feathers or hair. A large proportion 

of castings with hair indicates that eagles are obtaining carrion or live prey in terrestrial habitats. By 

analyzing castings, it may be possible to determine which mammals are their prey; in many instances, one 

species clearly is dominant. These data can be used to infer that eagles hunt at particular sites or in certain 

vegetation types known to support the prey species. Roost sites should be checked for castings on a 

regular basis, e.g., once per month. For night roosts, compare the results with a count made the following 

morning in aquatic feeding areas. The morning survey should be preceded by a check of roost areas to 

determine how many eagles are still there. A night roost count that substantially exceeds the count from 

the morning aquatic area survey is an indication that some of the eagles may be in terrestrial areas. 

Pinedale RMP A18-21 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

The general pattern of eagle distribution in terrestrial feeding areas usually can be determined directly by 

conducting surveys in suitable prey habitat. Where there are few suitable sites for bald eagles to hunt, 

each site can be checked. However, where the potential hunting area is vast, aerial surveys along the 

transect lines are recommended. This type of survey provides an index of eagle distribution in relation to 

vegetation types and other habitat characteristics. Transect lines spaced 1.5 miles apart are suggested. The 

length of the lines depends on the suitability of vegetation as prey habitat. In any case, transects normally 

need not extend further than 15 miles from roosts. It should be recognized that a survey along transect 

lines provides an index of distribution and information on the extent of feeding areas; it does not provide 

accurate data on use by eagles. The best means of assessing abundance is to count at night roosts. 

Night roost surveys are conducted at dusk or dawn. Dusk is preferred because most eagles return to roosts 

before dark, while there is still enough light to see them, whereas some eagles leave roosts at or before 

daybreak, when it is too dim for an accurate count. It is important to search periodically for roosts until 

there is a high degree of confidence that all regularly used sites have been identified. 

Occasionally, counts at roosts cannot be made safely from the air, nor can roosts be seen directly from the 

ground. In these situations, observers watch from a distance and count eagles as they fly toward the roost 

site (or from it, if the survey is done in the morning). This procedure results in underestimates of the 

actual number of birds using a roost because eagles remaining there all day are not seen, and some flying 

to (or from) the roost could be missed. 

Other considerations 

There has been confusion over the interpretation of winter survey data, particularly with regard to 

abundance, and a discussion of the matter is appropriate in these guidelines: 

1. Because of visibility biases inherent to surveys, a survey provides an index rather than an absolute 

count of the eagles present at a particular time. 

2. Counts at night roosts generally provide more accurate indices of abundance than counts in feeding 

areas provided all roosts in a wintering area are checked. 

3. The total number of eagles using a particular location during winter cannot be determined because 

individual birds vary in the length of time they remain in any one place. Therefore, the “wintering 

population” in a particular location, county, state, or region is dynamic, not fixed in size. At present 

the range, average, and peak number of eagles observed in feeding areas or at roost sites are the most 

meaningful measures of use in wintering years. Better indices (e.g., estimates of “bald eagle use 

days”) for comparing levels of use in various locations are desirable and hopefully will be developed 

in the future. 

4. Fluctuations in use occur between winters and within winters. As a general rule, however, wintering 

areas where suitable prey resources are regularly available, relatively abundant, and easy for eagles to 

obtain are used each year and support far more eagles than do surrounding, less suitable locations. 

Properly conducted surveys should reflect these types of differences. 

Surveys do not provide all the information necessary for the preparation of site-specific management 

plans. Additional studies are needed for the following: 

• Identifying and assessing important habitat for major prey species 

• Assessing tree regeneration at night roosts and in feeding areas 

A18-22 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

• Identifying vegetation or terrain features that screen roosts and feeding areas from human activity 

or wind. 

Also, in some locations, intensive observations or telemetry studies will be necessary to adequately define 

the extent of bald eagle hunting areas. This is particularly true when eagles use terrestrial habitats 

extensively. 

Sample Bald Eagle Nest Survey Form 

Year: ______________ 

I. ID Territory Name: _________________________________________ Territory Number 

__________________________________ Historical Data: _______ Survey Results _________ 

II. SURVEY SUMMARY Survey: _____ (1) Not Checked _____ (2) Not Located _____ (3) No 

Occupancy Check _____ (4) No Activity _____ (5) Unknown Outcome _____ (6) Complete Survey 

Status: _____ (1) Unoccupied _____ (2) Other Species _____ (3) Single Adult _____ (4) Occupied _____ 

(5) Active _____ (6) Unsuccessful _____ (7) Successful _____ (8) Inactive _____ (9) Unknown _____ 

(A) Found _____ (B) New Territory Nest Condition: _____ (1) New Nest # _____ _____ (2) Good _____ 

(3) Fair _____ (4) Poor _____ (5) Destroyed Nest # _____ Number of Young: ________ 

III. SURVEY RESULTS 

Nesting 

Period 

Date 

Checked 

Survey 

Method 

Nest 

Condition Findings Observer Comments

Occupancy 

(3/1-3/31) 

Activity 

(4/1-4/31) 

Nestlings 

(5/1-5/31) 

Fledglings 

(6/1-7/15) 

IV. Supplemental Nesting Information (if known) 

Date of adult arrival: _____________________________ Date of adult dispersal: __________________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

Date of hatching: ________________________________ Date/number of fledglings at dispersal: 

______________________ 

Date of fledging: ________________________________ Banding data: __________________________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

V. NARRATIVE INFORMATION 

Nesting failure, date/nesting period failure: 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

Reason for failure: 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

Observations, remarks, food habits: 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

Prepared by: _______________________________ Phone: _______________ Date: ________________ 

Pinedale RMP A18-23 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

A18-24 Pinedale RMP

Mailing Address: 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

Date: 

____________________________ 

Agency and Office 

Sample Bald Eagle Nest Record Form 

Species: _____________________________________________________________________________ 

Territory name: _______________________________________________________________________ 

Territory/nest number: _________________________________________________________________ 

Reported by and date: _________________________________________________________________ 

Location: T __________ R ___________ Section __________ 1⁄4 __________ 1⁄4 ____________ 

State:_____________________________________County:___________________________________ 

Elevation:_________________________________Aspect:___________________________________ 

Lat/long:__________________________________Hydrologic unit:____________________________ 

Nest stratum:_______________________________Nest height:_______________________________ 

Position on slope:___________________________Nest condition:_____________________________ 

Land ownership: ______________________________________________________________________ 

Directions to nest:_____________________________________________________________________ 

Other:_______________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

_____________________________________________________________________________________ 

Map (1:24000 USGS quad) and Photos 

• Photograph Showing Nest Site 

• Photograph Showing Nest 

Prepared by: _______________________________Date:_____________________________________ 

Bald Eagle Habitat Management Zones3

Nest Site Management Zones 

Nest site management zones include areas that are progressively farther from a nest constructed by bald 

eagles (i.e., one-half mile; one-half to 1 mile; and one-quarter to 2 and a-half miles). Correspondingly, 

recommended restrictions decrease as distance from the nest site increases. Zone boundaries may be 

altered after intensive study of eagle activity and development of site-specific management plans. 

Definitions of terms used in the zone recommendations: 

1. Habitat alterations—Any removal of trees, snags, or understory (includes such activities as timber 

harvest, firewood cutting of standing snags, or clearing and treatment of vegetation). Habitat 

alterations also include projects dealing with wetland and aquatic habitats, such as levee building, 

channeling, dredging, gravel removal, or wetland draining. Livestock use that significantly impacts 

the habitat or occurs at a level that would prevent habitat or prey base objectives being attained is 

included in habitat alterations. 

2. Minimal human activity levels—(Min) Essentially no human activity with the following exceptions: 

 

3 Adapted from Greater Yellowstone Bald Eagle Management Plan
Final EIS Appendix 18 

a. Existing patterns of ranching and agricultural activities 

b. Nesting surveys and banding by biologists experienced with eagles 

c. River traffic by boats that continue travel at the rate of the main current and at a frequency which 

results in no boat traffic for at least 30 percent of the daylight hours (fishing from boats with such 

movement rates and frequency is acceptable). 

3. Light human activity levels—(L) This level allows for day use and low impact activities, such as 

boating, fishing, and hiking but at low densities and frequencies. Excluded activities include extended 

use and activities such as heavy construction, timber harvest, seismic exploration, blasting, 

concentrated use associated with recreation centers (e.g., picnic areas, boat landings), permanent 

housing, and helicopters or jets within one-half mile of the ground. 

4. Moderate human activity levels—(Mod) Low impact (light) activity levels are included, but intensity 

of such activities is not limited. A limited number of recreation centers designed to avoid eagle 

conflicts may be considered. Other activities, such as construction, seismic exploration, blasting, and 

timber harvest, should also be designed to specifically avoid disturbance. (Mod+) Designing projects 

or land uses to avoid eagle conflicts requires sufficient data to formulate a site-specific management 

plan. 

Zone I: Occupied Nesting Zone 

Zone I is the area within a half-mile radius of an occupied nest. Ideally, this zone should be biologically 

relevant to the tolerance of eagles to human disturbances (i.e., the distance at which the presence of 

humans first causes significant stress or behavior that results in inattentiveness to young or eggs). Since 

human activity patterns are easier to control if restrictions do not fluctuate from year to year, it may be 

desirable that this zone be established for each alternate nest. However, Zone I guidelines for habitat 

alterations should be applied to all alternate nests. 

Recommendations 

1. Human activity should not exceed minimal levels during the period from first occupancy of the nest 

site until 2 weeks following fledging (approximately February 1 to August 15). Light human activity 

levels should not be exceeded during the rest of the year. 

2. Habitat alterations should be restricted to projects specifically designed for maintaining or enhancing 

bald eagle habitat and conducted only during September through January. 

3. Human activity restrictions for Zone I may be relaxed during years when a nest is not occupied. 

However, light human activity levels should not be exceeded, and land use patterns should not 

preclude a return to minimal activity levels. 

Zone II: Primary Use Area 

Zone II includes the area within a one-half to 1 mile radius of the active nest and of all known alternate 

nests. Intensive study of a nesting pair for several years should allow for the boundaries of this zone to be 

altered to include the area where over 75 percent of the adults’ foraging and loafing activity occurs during 

the nesting season (excluding Zone I). The area could be discontinuous if movement data indicate the 

need. 

Pinedale RMP A18-25 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

Recommendations 

1. Light human activity levels should not be exceeded during the nesting season. Moderate levels should 

not be exceeded during other times of the year. 

2. Habitat alterations should be carefully designed and regulated to ensure preferred nesting and 

foraging habitats are not degraded. 

3. Developments that may increase human activity levels and use patterns should not be allowed. 

4. Structures that have the potential for increasing mortality due to collision should not be constructed 

(e.g., power and telephone lines). Existing lines posing a potential problem should be modified to 

minimize the potential for collision or electrocution. 

Zone III: Home Range 

Ideally, the home range should be delineated by monitoring eagle movements during nesting and brood 

rearing for several years. Lacking such data, the zone should include all potential foraging habitat within a 

2 and one-half mile radius of the nest. Areas within the 2 and one-half mile radius of the nest that do not 

include potential foraging habitat may be excluded. However, the zone will include a quarter-mile buffer 

along foraging habitat where the zone has been reduced. The primary purposes of this zone are to 

maintain adequate foraging conditions and aid in maintaining the integrity of Zones I and II. 

Recommendations 

1. Human activity levels should not exceed moderate. 

2. Projects that could potentially alter the habitat of forage species should be carefully designed to 

ensure that availability of prey is not degraded. Adequate design of such projects will require data 

from site-specific management plans. 

3. Terrestrial habitat alterations should ensure important components are maintained (i.e., perch trees 

and snags, visual screening from existing or anticipated areas of human activity, and potential nesting 

habitat). Major habitat alterations should be considered only if site-specific management plans are 

developed and only if alterations are compatible with management plans. 

4. Permanent developments that are suitable for human occupancy should be avoided. 

5. Other developments that may increase human activity levels should be carefully designed to ensure 

objectives will not be exceeded for all three management zones. 

6. Utility lines should be limited and restricted to locations where the potential for eagle collisions and 

electrocutions is minimal. 

7. Pesticide use within the home range should be avoided. 

Zone IV: Communal Winter Roost Protection Zone 

Zone IV is the area within 1 mile of a communal winter roost. Zone IV would be applicable only from 

November 1 to April 1. No ground-disturbing activities will be permitted within one-half mile of active 

communal winter roost sites year-round. 

A18-26 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

Grizzly Bear 

On March 29, 2007, the USFWS published a Federal Register notice (72 CFR §14865) announcing that 

the Yellowstone Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of grizzly bears is a recovered population that no 

longer meets the definition of threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (16 United States Code [USC] 1531 et seq.). The delisting of the Yellowstone DPS does not 

change the threatened status of the remaining grizzly bears in the lower 48 states. BLM is committed to 

implementing the 2007 Final Conservation Strategy for the Grizzly Bear in the Greater Yellowstone Area 

(GYA) and is participating in the Yellowstone Grizzly Bear Coordinating Committee to ensure the 

continued conservation of the grizzly bear in the GYA. 

Conservation Strategies 

The following BLM-committed conservation measures are to be implemented in grizzly bear habitat and 

are intended to minimize or eliminate adverse impacts likely to result from implementation of the 

management actions provided in the RMPs. BLM is committed to the implementation of conservation 

measures (1 through 12), and BLM will also consider implementing any appropriate best management 

practices (BMP), items 13 through 20, at every opportunity to further protect the grizzly bear. In the 

future, it is expected that grizzly bears will reoccupy historic ranges and move into new areas. BLM will 

ensure the implementation of these conservation strategies for the protection and management of newly 

established populations. 

The most important environmental factors affecting grizzly bears are the levels of human activities, 

including food storage, livestock allotments, motorized access, and site development (ICST 2003). One of 

the key habitat factors in the maintenance of grizzly bear populations is the protection of secure habitat, 

defined as all areas more than 500 meters from an open or gated motorized access route or high use 

nonmotorized trail, and larger than 10 acres, and providing all the key elements needed for the survival 

and life functions of these animals (such as food sources, cover, denning areas, and security from human 

disturbance and disruptive activities). Human behavior and habitat are both addressed in the following 

conservation measures and best management practices. 

Conservation Measures 

1. The BLM shall ensure that authorized activities planned to occur in currently occupied grizzly bear 

habitat be analyzed and planned with active grizzly bear protection measures. Restrictions on timing 

of activity and spatial considerations for grizzly bears or other parameters will be implemented to 

avoid or prevent significant disruptions of normal or expected bear behavior and activity in the area. 

2. The BLM shall provide a packet of educational materials to authorized permittees in grizzly habitat, 

including, but not limited to, special recreation permittees, livestock permittees, and timber operators. 

3. In occupied grizzly bear habitat and in areas of bear conflicts, BLM shall install bear-resistant refuse 

containers in those developed campgrounds and picnic areas where refuse containers are provided and 

maintained. In areas receiving dispersed recreational use, BLM shall inform the public of proper 

storage techniques for food and refuse. 

4. The BLM shall ensure that operation plans and special use permits in occupied grizzly bear habitat 

specify food storage and handling and garbage disposal standards. All temporary living facilities 

under temporary use permits in occupied grizzly bear habitat will be required to practice proper food 

storage and keep all potential attractants stored so they are unavailable to bears. Edibles and/or 

Pinedale RMP A18-27 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

garbage will be secured from access by grizzly bears. Bear-proof refuse containers and timely refuse 

collection to prevent overflow shall be required. 

5. Important grizzly bear food resources that may occur on BLM land, particularly whitebark pine, army 

cutworm moths, ungulates (primarily elk calving grounds), and spawning cutthroat trout, shall be 

noted and monitored. Other important foods may be added to those listed above as our understanding 

of grizzly bear food resources on BLM land grows. Monitoring protocols for these food resources can 

be adapted from Appendix E of the Conservation Strategy (ICST 2003) 

(http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/wildlife/igbc/ConservationStrategy/CSappendices.pdf). 

6. BLM shall continue to attend and be a member of the Yellowstone Ecosystem Subcommittee of the 

IGBC. After delisting, BLM shall continue to attend the appropriate coordination group(s). 

7. BLM shall not approve commercial cutting or other removal of whitebark pine in the six field offices 

(FO) analyzed in this document in occupied or potential grizzly bear habitat. 

8. BLM shall implement strategies to reduce human-bear and domestic livestock-bear conflicts by 

evaluating the causes of such conflicts when they do occur and determining what can be done to 

avoid or reduce such conflicts in the future. Currently these conflicts are discussed at the NW 

Wyoming Level One Streamlining Team meetings held approximately every 45–60 days. 

9. All permit holders that conduct activities on public lands in occupied grizzly bear habitat that could 

result in livestock carcasses being left in locations where bears might be attracted to them shall be 

informed that all livestock carcasses or parts of carcasses shall be either packed, dragged, or 

otherwise transported to a location a minimum of one-half mile from any inhabited dwelling, sleeping 

area, tent road, trail, or recreation site in as timely a manner as possible unless otherwise directed by a 

BLM Range/Wildlife Specialist or Ranger. Carcasses shall be moved at least 100 yards from live 

water. Other options for carcass disposal may include using explosives or burning the carcass at the 

discretion of a BLM Range/Wildlife Specialist or Ranger. In cases of uncertainty on carcass 

disposition, the permit holder (or lessee) shall contact the appropriate BLM FO. 

10. BLM shall require that the proper functioning condition (PFC) of existing aquatic systems and 

riparian zones in occupied grizzly bear habitat be maintained for all BLM-administered public lands. 

If these areas are polluted and/or damaged from activities, the lessee/permittee/grantee or BLM will 

be required to assume full responsibility for rehabilitation and restoration of such areas (from IGBC 

1986). 

11. BLM shall require that existing roads, drilling pads, and other areas with vegetation removed due to 

authorized activities in occupied grizzly bear habitat be revegetated and reclaimed by 

lessee/permittee/grantee in a fashion that considers all grizzly bear needs or requirements. 

12. Wild horse roundups and other intensive wild horse management activities will avoid areas in or 

immediately adjacent to occupied grizzly bear habitat. 

Best Management Practices 

1. With the intent of reducing potential conflicts between grizzly bears and livestock, BLM should phase 

out sheep allotments in occupied grizzly bear habitat as the opportunity arises. Existing sheep 

allotments in occupied grizzly bear habitat should be monitored and evaluated for conflicts between 

grizzly bears and sheep. BLM should offer no new permitted sheep animal unit months (AUM) in 

grizzly bear habitat where conflicts have occurred in the past or are likely to occur in the future. 

A18-28 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

2. BLM should adjust management of domestic livestock on public land allotments or leases to 

minimize grizzly bear-livestock conflicts (such as season of use, class of livestock). 

3. BLM should include a clause on all use authorizations that allows for permanent cancellation, 

temporary cancellation, or temporary cessation of activities if such are needed to resolve a grizzlyhuman conflict situation. 

4. Wherever possible, BLM should reduce motorized access routes in occupied grizzly bear habitat and 

will try to avoid authorizing any new motorized access in occupied grizzly bear areas (e.g., big game 

ranges). 

5. Wherever possible, BLM will implement appropriate closures or seasonal restriction areas of crosscountry motorized travel to provide more security in occupied grizzly bear habitat. 

6. Where possible, road densities of less than 1 mile per square mile in occupied grizzly bear habitat 

should be maintained. Where existing road densities are currently below 1 mile per square mile, 

increases in road density should be avoided to maintain management options and secure habitat. All 

big game winter range areas should be considered as areas where road density objectives are less than 

1 mile of road per square mile. 

7. BLM should initiate a habitat mapping and monitoring effort for the grizzly bear. Habitat mapped on 

BLM lands will be done using geographic information system (GIS) technology. Secure habitat, open 

motorized access route density (OMARD, refers to roads that are actively used) greater than 1 

mile/square mile, and total motorized access route density (TMARD, includes all roads, even gated 

roads) greater than 2 miles/square mile will be monitored utilizing the Yellowstone Grizzly Bear 

Cumulative Effects Model (CEM) GIS databases and will be reported annually, as is described in 

ICST (2003) and conducted in the PCA. 

8. In areas of vital importance to grizzly bears (known denning areas, army cutworm moth aggregations, 

cutthroat trout spawning sites, spring ungulate concentration sites, etc.) activities that adversely affect 

grizzly bear populations and/or their habitat should be avoided. Adverse habitat effects could result 

from land surface disturbances; water table alterations; reservoirs, rights-of-way, roads, pipelines, 

canals, transmission lines, or other structures; increased human foods; and reduced availability of 

natural foods. Areas of vital importance to grizzlies are identified through the evaluation process 

described in the Grizzly Bear Management Guidelines (IGBC 1986). 

Reasonable and Prudent Measures 

RPM1. BLM shall implement measures at the individual project level to minimize grizzly bear-livestock 

conflicts, grizzly bear-human conflicts, and grizzly bear habituation to human activities in BLM resource 

areas. 

RPM2. BLM shall implement measures across the Wyoming BLM-managed lands to improve habitat 

conditions for grizzly bears. 

Terms and Conditions 

To be exempt from the prohibitions of Section 9 of the Act, BLM must comply with the following T&C, 

which implement the RPMs described above and outline required reporting/monitoring requirements. 

These T&C are nondiscretionary. Many of them are reiterated here or modified from the BLM Statewide 

Programmatic Grizzly Bear Biological Assessment (BLM 2005). 

Pinedale RMP A18-29 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

T&C1. BLM shall implement all conservation measures as described as part of the proposed action in the 

BA. 

T&C2. As per Section 7 of the Act, BLM will consult individually over the impacts of site-specific 

projects authorized by the Wyoming RMPs that “may affect” grizzly bears. These future consultations 

will provide a means for site-specific analysis and documentation of levels of any potential incidental take 

of grizzly bears. 

T&C3. To monitor the impacts of site-specific projects authorized under BLM’s Wyoming RMPs that are 

likely to adversely affect grizzly bears, BLM shall prepare a report describing the progress of each such 

site-specific project, including implementation of the associated RPMs and impacts to the grizzly bear (50 

CFR §402.14[i][3]). 

The RPMs, with their implementing terms and conditions and the reporting criteria, are designed to 

minimize the impact of incidental take that might otherwise result from the authorized activities under the 

RMPs. If during the course of the authorized activities any level of incidental take has exceeded that 

which is permitted by site-specific formal consultations for grizzly bears, such incidental take represents 

new information requiring reinitiation of consultation and review of the reasonable and prudent measures 

provided. BLM must immediately provide an explanation of the causes of the taking and review with the 

USFWS the need for possible modification of the RPMs. 

Conservation Recommendations 

Section 7(a)(1) of the Act directs federal agencies to use their authorities to further the purposes of the 

Act by carrying out conservation programs for the benefit of endangered and threatened species. CRs are 

discretionary agency activities to minimize or avoid adverse effects of a proposed action on listed species 

or critical habitat, to help implement recovery plans, or to develop information. The recommendations 

provided here relate only to the proposed action and do not necessarily represent complete fulfillment of 

the agency’s Section 7 responsibility for these species. 

CR1. USFWS recommends that BLM (1) phase out sheep allotments in occupied grizzly bear habitat as 

the opportunity arises, (2) monitor and evaluate for conflicts between grizzly bears and sheep in existing 

sheep allotments in occupied grizzly bear habitat, and (3) offer no new permitted sheep AUMs in grizzly 

bear habitat. 

CR2. USFWS recommends that BLM adjust management of domestic livestock on public land allotments 

or leases to minimize grizzly bear-livestock conflicts (such as season of use, class of livestock). 

CR3. USFWS recommends that BLM include a clause on all use authorizations that allows for temporary 

cessation of activities, temporary cancellation, or as a last resort, permanent cancellation if needed to 

resolve a grizzly-human conflict situation. 

CR4. USFWS recommends that BLM (1) initiate a habitat mapping and monitoring effort for the grizzly 

bear using GIS technology, and (2) secure grizzly bear habitat with the appropriate route densities. 

Gray Wolf 

Conservation Strategies 

Because of the wolf’s status in Wyoming as an experimental nonessential species under Section 10(j) of 

the Endangered Species Act, conservation measures are not inherent in the recovery plan. Nor are any 

A18-30 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

conservation measures outlined in the 2003 (unapproved by USFWS) Wyoming State Management Plan 

for wolves (WGF 2003). Wolves are very adaptable and have done very well in Wyoming since their 

release in 1995-1996. Two main factors affecting the continued existence of wolves in an area are the 

maintenance of a good ungulate prey base and the containment of roads and human activity. Habitat 

improvement projects for elk and other big game foraging areas are already part of the RMPs and one of 

the main activities carried out by the individual FOs. The other significant factor is to reduce humancaused mortality. Road density (highly correlated with human causes of death), public outreach and 

education, and cattle-ranching practices as they relate to wolf depredations are overarching elements in 

the maintenance of successful wolf populations. 

The maintenance of a good database on the location of wolf packs is the first step toward protecting the 

animals. It is important to develop and maintain contact with appropriate staff with the USFWS and WGF 

to stay informed of wolf packs in the FO and/or on BLM land. Following delisting and as wolf 

populations expand, it may be necessary to develop monitoring protocols for wolves on BLM lands. 

These would be most effective if coordinated with other agencies. 

These conservation measures are meant to be a tool to clarify what activities have impacted the species in 

the past, what conservation measures have been or could be used to minimize impacts, and to assist the 

agencies in the development of BAs and BOs. Implementation of the following conservation strategies is 

intended to minimize adverse impacts that are likely to result from implementation of the management 

actions provided in the RMPs. BLM has committed to implementing conservation measures 1 through 5. 

BLM will also consider implementing BMPs, items 1 through 6, at every opportunity to further protect 

the gray wolf. All conservation measures and BMPs apply to the known populations of the gray wolf. If 

wolf packs are formed in new areas, these measures would also apply to these areas. 

Conservation Measures 

1. No project actions are to be located within 330 feet of den sites between April 1 and June 30. Areas 

within 0.8 kilometers (one-half mile) of a den site are recommended for protection from disturbance. 

2. Take action to help reduce human-caused mortality wherever possible. For example, provide 

educational material, as appropriate, to avoid the inadvertent killing of a wolf mistaken for a coyote; 

provide information on compatible grazing practices (see number 3 below); and avoid situations that 

lead to the adoption of human foods and garbage by wolves, which could lead to humans being bitten 

and cause the subsequent elimination of the wolf. 

3. Disseminate information useful to livestock producers on wolf/livestock interactions; alternative 

livestock practices that minimize conflicts between wolves and livestock (e.g., dispersed grazing 

rather than concentrated grazing); and compatible lambing and calving methods that reduce or 

eliminate wolf depredation in occupied habitat. 

4. Designate a state representative to attend the annual interagency coordination meeting. 

5. Continue to attend the annual coordination meetings with the WGFD. 

Best Management Practices 

1. Avoid an increase in miles of road in crucial elk winter range. 

2. Avoid situations that allow for wolves to habituate to humans or become exposed to and use human 

refuse as a food source. 

Pinedale RMP A18-31 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

3. Foster public outreach/education programs to provide wolf information in schools, campgrounds, and 

other places. Topics can include but not be limited to personal safety around wolves, wolf ecology, 

wolf mortality factors, and livestock grazing practices harmful to wolves. 

4. Continue to support the research and documentation of wolf/livestock interactions and livestock 

grazing practices to improve these practices so they are more compatible with wolves. 

5. Continue to provide and improve wolf habitat by monitoring elk populations and improving habitat 

for elk. 

6. Encourage reporting of wolf observations by BLM staff and the public to the WGFD. 

Western Yellow-Billed Cuckoo (Candidate) 

Conservation Recommendations 

1. The following habitat conservation measures and species conservation measures will be implemented 

within the PFO in areas where there is the potential for the western yellow-billed cuckoo to occur in 

nesting and/or foraging habitat. 

2. Surface-disturbing activities would be avoided within 500 feet of perennial waters and 

wetland/riparian areas for protection of western yellow-billed cuckoo and identified habitat. Boat and 

raft landing areas will not be developed, and outfitting camps will not be permitted in western yellowbilled cuckoo habitat. 

3. Surface-disturbing or disruptive activities will be prohibited within one-half mile of identified habitat 

during the period of April 15 to August 15 for the protection of nesting western yellow-billed 

cuckoos. 

Best Management Practices 

1. BMPs would be applied to surface-disturbing and disruptive activities to maintain or enhance the 

western yellow-billed cuckoo and their habitats. Incorporate yellow-billed cuckoo habitat guidelines 

into livestock standards and guidelines assessments. 

2. Where possible, biological control of pests would be used rather than chemical control. Where 

needed, pesticide use would be applied by land within one-quarter mile of cuckoo habitat and only in 

cases where insect or weed outbreaks have the potential to degrade area ecological health. Outside the 

one-quarter mile buffer, aerial application of pesticides would be carefully planned to prevent drift. 

BLM shall work with APHIS and USFWS to select a pesticide and method of application that will 

most effectively manage the infestation and least affect the western yellow-billed cuckoo. 

3. Ensure adequate livestock practices to protect yellow-billed cuckoo habitat. These include, but are not 

limited to, placement of salt and mineral blocks, livestock water locations, fencing, livestock handling 

facilities, and season of use. 

4. All high-quality riparian areas of 20 hectares or more shall be managed to preserve, protect, and if 

necessary, restore natural functions to minimize degradation of stream banks and the loss of riparian 

habitat. 

A18-32 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

5. When necessary or required, fence known occupied cuckoo habitat to exclude or shorten the duration 

of livestock use where livestock grazing is determined to impede regeneration of the habitat. This will 

stabilize and protect eroding stream banks in cuckoo habitat. 

6. Avoid building roads or new trails parallel to streams in riparian zones or through wet meadows that 

have the potential, or are identified as containing, habitat for the western yellow-billed cuckoo. If 

stream crossings are required, they shall be constructed at right angles to minimize impacts to riparian 

vegetation, stream banks, soils, and water quality. Roads and trails shall be placed near current habitat 

edge areas to reduce fragmentation of larger blocks of pristine habitat. Combine multiple roads and 

rights-of-way into one stream crossing site. 

7. Avoid depleting ground water and diverting streams outside their natural stream channels in riparian 

areas with potential western yellow-billed cuckoo habitat. 

8. Maintain beaver populations where they occur in cuckoo habitat and encourage reintroduction into 

areas that were historically occupied by beavers in western yellow-billed cuckoo habitat. 

9. In identified western yellow-billed cuckoo habitat, implement riparian monitoring programs to 

establish baseline data and identify changes that have occurred in order to evaluate both long-term 

and short-term impacts and/or benefits to the birds. 

10. Manage for stable or increasing population of cottonwood-willow vegetation in areas identified as 

western yellow-billed cuckoo habitat. Ensure that all age classes are present (seedling, young, mature, 

and decadent), with more seedlings present than decadent plants, and more young plants present than 

mature plants. 

11. Prescribed fire would be used only to maintain or enhance yellow-billed cuckoo habitat. Restrictions 

such as smoke dispersal, heat intensity, buffer zones, or timing stipulations would be incorporated 

into the fire plan. 

Recommended Conservation Measures 

Riparian Area Management 

All riparian areas of 20 hectares or more should be managed to preserve, protect, and if necessary, restore 

natural functions in compliance with Executive Orders (EO) 11988 (requires agencies to preserve natural 

values served by flood plains) and 11990 (requires avoidance of adverse impacts associated with 

destruction or modification of wetlands), with the objective of minimizing degradation of stream banks 

and the loss of riparian habitat. 

Apply appropriate distance and seasonal restrictions and rehabilitation standards in or adjacent to yellowbilled cuckoo habitat when necessary. Seasonal restrictions should include the breeding season of May 15 

through August 15 (Bennett and Keinath 2001). 

Where possible, acquisition of additional riparian area acreage should be pursued to enhance riparian area 

management per EOs 11988 and 11990. 

To evaluate both long- and short-term impacts and/or benefits, implement riparian monitoring programs 

to establish baseline data and identify changes in habitat quality (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds 

in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Pinedale RMP A18-33 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

Protected riparian corridors should be established on BLM-managed lands along the Green, Snake, 

Sweetwater (above Mud Spring), Bear (Woodruff Narrows area), and New Fork River systems. 

Remaining corridors of riparian habitat along Cottonwood Creek and Horse Creek should also be 

protected. 

Consideration should be given to any activities within or adjacent to cuckoo habitat (Wyoming Partners in 

Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Manage for a stable or increasing population of cottonwood/willow vegetation in yellow-billed cuckoo 

habitat. Ensure that all age classes are present (seedling, young, mature, and decadent), with more 

seedlings present than decadent plants, and more young plants than mature ones. (Wyoming Partners In 

Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

When planting trees, select only native species and avoid Russian olive and tamarisk (salt cedar) 

(Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Stabilize and protect eroding stream banks in cuckoo habitat. Activities that could erode the stream bank 

should be restricted (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management 

Practices). 

Livestock Grazing Management 

Livestock management practices should be used to minimize impacts to the riparian area. Examples of 

practices include planned grazing systems, riparian pasture fences, exclosures, herding, changes in class 

of livestock, timing and season of use, seasonal changes, managing use levels, off-site water and salting, 

resting for 1 or more years, and reduction in livestock numbers 

When possible, fence occupied cuckoo habitat to exclude livestock where livestock grazing is determined 

to impede regeneration of the habitat (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best 

Management Practices). 

Improve livestock distribution and forage use by using salt and mineral blocks, but avoid placing them 

within riparian areas (keep them at least one-quarter mile from streams) or in immediately adjacent 

uplands (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Improve adjacent upland forage to lure livestock out of riparian areas (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. 

Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Develop shade and water (wells, windmills, guzzlers, or water piped from the stream) in upland areas to 

help spread grazing pressure. Provide escape ramps in water tanks to prevent drowning (Wyoming 

Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Locate livestock-handling facilities and collection points outside of riparian areas. Branding, loading, and 

other handling efforts should be limited to areas and times that do not harm soils and plants in riparian 

zones (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Construction 

Where roads, pipelines, and power lines must be routed through riparian habitat, the construction work 

should not be accomplished during the period from mid-May to mid-August while the cuckoos are 

nesting (Dates per Dorn and Dorn 1999). 

A18-34 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

Topography should be returned to its original condition to the greatest extent possible to ensure the 

hydrology remains intact. 

Vegetation removed for the project should be spread over the ground to provide protection, nutrient 

recycling, and a natural seed source for vegetation rejuvenation. 

ROWs should be placed near current habitat edge areas to reduce fragmentation of larger blocks of 

pristine habitat. 

Avoid building roads or new trails parallel to streams in riparian zones or through wet meadows. Stream 

crossings should be at right angles to minimize impacts on riparian vegetation, stream banks, soils, and 

water quality (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Combine multiple roads and ROWs into one stream crossing site (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. 

Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Maintain buffer zones between riparian areas and mining, oil, gas, sand/gravel, and geothermal activities, 

including structures, roads, and support facilities (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green 

Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Avoid straightening or diverting sections of stream channels. These activities increase stream velocity and 

erosion, reduce stream bank stability, and negatively affect upstream and downstream habitat (Wyoming 

Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Developed Recreation Areas 

Boat and raft landing areas should not be developed in yellow-billed cuckoo habitat (discussed at yellowbilled cuckoo meeting in Rock Springs, Wyoming, April 18–19, 2003). 

Outfitting camps should not be permitted in yellow-billed cuckoo habitat (discussed at yellow-billed 

cuckoo meeting in Rock Springs, Wyoming, April 18–19, 2003). 

Provide firewood at developed campgrounds to decrease the use of riparian forest as a wood source 

(Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Promote “Tread Lightly” recreation ethics. Educate recreationists about problems humans can cause in 

riparian habitat and how they can avoid damaging these areas (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in 

Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Plant dense native vegetation such as willows to screen and reduce human use of fragile or vulnerable 

riparian areas (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Avoid using foggers for mosquito control in riparian habitats, especially during the nesting season, so a 

food source remains available for birds (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best 

Management Practices). 

Pesticide Use 

Chemical insecticides should not be used within 500 feet of riparian areas, and chemical herbicides, 

which do not break down upon contact with soil or water, should be prohibited within 500 feet of riparian 

areas. (The use of Demolin to control grasshopper outbreaks does not appear to move through ecological 

systems. The chemical is an agent that affects only the ability of young grasshoppers to develop an 

Pinedale RMP A18-35 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

exoskeleton. It is applied only when a potential outbreak is identified and application would not reduce 

grasshopper numbers to lower than those that would occur during a nonoutbreak year. It does not affect 

insects that do not have exoskeletons. BLM state weed coordinator, Ken Henke, recommends as a 

conservation measure: “Chemical insecticides should not be utilized in occupied cuckoo habitat. In case 

of a grasshopper outbreak, insecticides other than Demolin should not be utilized within yellow-billed 

cuckoo habitat. A quarter-mile buffer zone around active nests could be applied.”) 

Chemical insecticides or herbicides, if used, should be applied by hand in cuckoo habitat and only in 

cases where insect invasion or noxious weed outbreak has the potential to degrade area ecological health. 

BLM should work with APHIS and USFWS to select a pesticide and method of application that would 

most effectively manage the insect infestation and least affect the yellow-billed cuckoo. Where possible, 

biological control should be used rather than chemical control (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in 

Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices; K. Henke, BLM SO). 

In areas adjacent to yellow-billed cuckoo habitat, carefully plan aerial application of herbicides to prevent 

drift of chemicals into riparian areas (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best 

Management Practices). 

Prescribed Burning 

Prescribed burning should not be used within a quarter mile of suitable cuckoo habitat between mid-May 

and mid-August during the breeding season of the yellow-billed cuckoo (Dates per Dorn and Dorn 1999). 

Prescribed fire activities will be used only to maintain or enhance cuckoo habitat. Restrictions such as for 

smoke dispersal, heat intensity, buffer zones, or timing will be incorporated into the fire plan and 

approved by a BLM biologist prior to conducting the burn (developed at yellow-billed cuckoo meeting in 

Rock Springs, Wyoming, April 18–19, 2003). 

Water Use 

Avoid depleting groundwater and diverting streams outside their natural stream channels (Wyoming 

Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices). 

Wildlife Management 

Maintain beaver populations where they occur in cuckoo habitat and encourage reintroduction into areas 

that were historically occupied by beavers in cuckoo habitat (Wyoming Partners in Flight 2002. Birds in 

Green Ribbons: Best Management Practices and discussed at yellow-billed cuckoo meeting in Rock 

Springs, Wyoming, April 18–19, 2003). 

Lands and Realty 

Lands containing occupied cuckoo habitat should not be sold or exchanged. If lands containing yellowbilled cuckoo habitat are exchanged, sold, or acquired, a strategy to protect the species should be 

developed (developed at yellow-billed cuckoo meeting in Rock Springs, Wyoming, April 18–19, 2003). 

Mountain Plover 

Implementation of the following conservation measures is intended to minimize adverse impacts resulting 

from the previously described management actions in each of the 11 affected RMPs. In addition to the 

existing mountain plover conservation measures in the RMPs (items 1 through 4), the BLM has 

A18-36 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

committed to implementing conservation measures 5 and 6. The BLM will also consider the 

implementation of BMPs that include, but may not be limited to, items 7 through 25, to further protect the 

mountain plover and its habitat. 

Existing Protections in the RMPs 

1. The Wyoming BLM Standard Mitigation Guidelines for Surface-Disturbing Activities requires any 

lessee or permittee to conduct inventories or studies in accordance with BLM and USFWS guidelines 

to verify the presence or absence of threatened or endangered species before any activities can begin 

on site. In the event the presence of one or more of these species is verified, the operation plans of a 

proposed action will be modified to include the protection of the species and its habitat, as necessary. 

Possible protective measures may include seasonal or activity limitations, or other surface 

management and occupancy constraints (BLM 1990). 

2. Standards for Healthy Rangelands and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management for the Public 

Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management in the State of Wyoming, specifically— 

Standard 1 Within the potential of the ecological site (soil type, landform, climate, and geology), 

soils are stable and allow for water infiltration to provide for optimal plant growth and minimal 

surface runoff. 

Standard 3 Upland vegetation on each ecological site consists of plant communities appropriate to 

the site that are resilient, diverse, and able to recover from natural and human disturbance. 

Standard 4 Rangelands are capable of sustaining viable populations and a diversity of native plant 

and animal species appropriate to the habitat. Habitats that support or could support threatened 

species, endangered species, species of special concern, or sensitive species will be maintained or 

enhanced. 

3. Grazing management practices will incorporate the kinds and amounts of use that will restore, 

maintain, or enhance habitats to assist in the recovery of federal threatened and endangered species or 

the conservation of federally listed species of concern and other state-designated Special Status 

Species. Grazing management practices will maintain existing habitat or facilitate vegetation change 

toward desired habitats. Grazing management will consider threatened and endangered species and 

their habitats (BLM Wyoming Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management). 

4. BLM will maintain biological diversity of plant and animal species; support WGFD strategic plan 

population objective levels to the extent practical and to the extent consistent with BLM multiple use 

management requirements; maintain, and where possible, improve forage production and quality of 

rangelands, fisheries, and wildlife habitat; and to the extent possible, provide habitat for threatened 

and endangered and Special Status Plant and Animal Species on all public lands in compliance with 

ESA and approved recovery plans. 

Conservation Measures 

5. BLM will use the plover project screen in the preliminary analysis of the impacts associated with 

proposed projects in areas with occupied or potential mountain plover habitat. This multi-agency 

document is designed to quickly determine if the effects of a proposed action should be altered to 

avoid impacts to the species. 

Pinedale RMP A18-37 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

6. Implement the Mountain Plover Survey Guidelines (USFWS 2002b) when surface-disturbing 

activities are proposed in suitable mountain plover nesting habitats. No ground-disturbing activities 

shall occur in suitable nesting habitat prior to surveys conducted. Specifically, BLM will establish a 

quarter-mile buffer around occupied mountain plover nests and include timing restrictions to protect 

the species. In cases where an exception will be provided to the proponent during the April 10 to July 

10 breeding and nesting time period, BLM personnel will adhere to approved protocols describing 

survey protocol for exceptions. 

7. Building on previous research and census efforts (Plumb et al. 2005), continue to census and monitor 

the mountain plover population on BLM-administered lands in Wyoming. 

Best Management Practices 

The following BMPs are to be considered on a case-by-case basis at the project level and implemented 

where appropriate to further protect the mountain plover. 

1. BLM should apply a COA on all APDs within areas containing known populations of mountain 

plovers to protect breeding and nesting activities from April 10 through July 10. 

2. There should be No Surface Occupancy (NSO) of ancillary facilities (e.g. compressor stations, 

processing plants, etc.) within one-half mile of known mountain plover nesting areas. Variance may 

be granted only after consultation with and agreement of the BLM, USFWS, and WGFD. 

3. The amount and nature of ground-disturbing activities should be limited within identified nesting 

aggregation areas to avoid the abandonment of these areas. Directional drilling, the piping and storage 

of condensate off of the nesting concentration area, or to a centralized facility, or other techniques for 

the minimization of ground disturbance and habitat degradation should be implemented where 

practicable and feasible. Construction of ancillary facilities (e.g., compressor stations, processing 

plants) should be avoided within one-half mile of known aggregation areas where possible. 

4. Because adult mountain plovers and broods may forage along roads, particularly at night, traffic 

speed and volume should be limited during night-time hours within the breeding season in identified 

plover breeding areas. Whenever possible, avoid constructing roads through plover breeding and 

nesting habitat. Within one-half mile of identified aggregation areas, speed limits should be posted at 

25 mph on dirt surface resource roads, and 35 mph on local county dirt surface roads during the brood 

rearing period (June 1 to July 31). Traffic should be minimized by car-pooling and organizing work 

activities to minimize trips on dirt surfaced roads within one-half mile of known plover breeding 

aggregation areas from June 1 to July 31. If possible, work schedules and shift changes should be set 

to avoid the periods from one-half hour before sunrise to 9:00 am and from 5:00 pm to one-half hour 

after sunset from June 1 to July 31, when mountain plovers and other wildlife are most active. 

5. Project related features that increase the population levels or hunting efficiency of predators of the 

mountain plover should be strictly limited. Creation of artificial hunting perches or nest structures for 

avian predators within one-half mile of identified aggregation areas should be avoided by burying 

power lines or including perch inhibitors in their design and using the lowest possible structures for 

fences, condensate storage, and other elevated structures and incorporating perch inhibitors into their 

design. Capped and abandoned wells within one-half mile of nesting aggregation areas should be 

identified with markers no more than 4 feet tall with perch inhibitors on top to avoid creation of 

raptor hunting perches, or better yet, placed at or below ground level (according to Onshore Oil and 

Gas Order No. 2 – issued under 43 CFR §3164). 

A18-38 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

6. Road-killed animals should be promptly removed from areas within one-half mile of identified 

aggregation areas to avoid attracting avian and mammalian predators and supplementing their natural 

food supplies. 

7. Seed mixes and application rates for reclamation should produce stands of vegetation suitable for 

plover nesting in plover aggregation areas, while meeting BLM’s requirements for stabilizing soil and 

controlling weeds. Seed mixes and application rates for reclamation should be designed to produce 

stands of sparse, low-growing vegetation suitable for plover nesting in previously suitable mountain 

plover habitat. Reclamation should attempt to return the plant community to the preexisting condition 

as soon as possible. 

8. To minimize destruction of nests and disturbance to breeding plovers from reclamation activities, no 

grading, seeding, or other ground-disturbing activities should occur from April 10 to July 10 each 

year unless surveys consistent with the current Mountain Plover Survey Guidelines or other USFWS 

approved method find that no plovers are nesting in the area. 

9. In mountain plover habitat, native seed mixes will be used to reestablish short grass prairie vegetation 

during reclamation. 

10. In the event that a dead or injured mountain plover is located during construction and operation, the 

USFWS, Wyoming Field Office (307-772-2374) and the BLM, Wyoming State Office (307-775-

6256) should be notified within 24 hours to ensure proper protection measures are implemented in an 

attempt to avoid further injury or death. 

11. Develop and implement a statewide monitoring plan for the mountain plover to establish baseline 

data for protection of the species. 

12. Where feasible, prohibit the sale and disposal of salable minerals in areas containing known mountain 

plover populations. Also, pursue acquisition of property with known mountain plover populations, 

where possible. 

13. Livestock grazing and some prescribed burning are specific management tools that BLM may use to 

maintain favorable habitat conditions for mountain plover where feasible. Grazing, with proper 

timing and intensity, may reduce the native and exotic plant competition for light and possibly for 

water, space and nutrients. 

14. Herbicide and pesticide use should be analyzed for their effects on mountain plover prey-base prior to 

use in the vicinity of known populations or suitable habitats. 

15. Coordinate with the USFWS, WGFD, and private landowners to ensure adequate protection for the 

mountain plover and its habitat. 

16. Form a steering committee to develop and prioritize management practices and assist WGFD and 

USFWS with research efforts. 

17. Train and educate resource specialists, rangers, fire crews, and enforcement personnel on protection 

of the mountain plover and its habitat, its status, and current threats to its existence. 

18. Establish monitoring, biological, ecological, and life history studies as funding and staffing allow. 

Pinedale RMP A18-39 
Appendix 18 Final EIS 

19. The following actions or projects will likely cause no significant long-term changes to mountain 

plover habitat if constructed outside of the nesting season (April 10–July 10): 

– conducting 

prescribed burns 

– water wells not 

requiring windmills 

– waterbars for 

erosion control 

– livestock fences (if 

constructed greater 

than one-half mile from 

aggregation areas) 

– buried power lines 

– small pits 

– spring 

developments 

– water troughs 

– in-stream structures 

– chaining vegetation 

– wildlife exclosures 

– construction of 

pipelines 

– pesticide application 

– herbicide 

application 

– weed control 

– seismic exploration 

– wildlife guzzlers 

Exception Policy for Mountain Plover 

If surface-disturbing activity is requested to take place in mountain plover habitat between April 10 and 

July 10, presence/absence surveys are required. Survey results will determine when activities will be 

permitted. 

Mountain plovers are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. On February 16, 1999, the USFWS 

proposed the mountain plover for federal listing as threatened. On September 9, 2003, the USFWS 

withdrew its proposed rule to list the mountain plover; currently, they are considered sensitive by the 

BLM. 

Mountain Plover Breeding/Nesting Season Exception Protocol: If a surface-disturbing activity is 

requested to take place in mountain plover (MP) habitat (e.g., areas with low, sparse vegetation, bare 

ground, prairie dog colonies) during the MP breeding/nesting season (April 10 to July 10), 

presence/absence surveys would be required. These surveys would take place within one-quarter mile 

buffer around the activity and must not occur during poor weather conditions (e.g., high winds, 

precipitation). The initial survey would begin on or after April 20 and be followed by a second survey 14 

days later (earliest date for second survey would be May 4). If cold, wet weather pushes the nesting 

period later into spring, the initial survey would also need to be delayed accordingly. These two surveys 

will capture the vast majority of nesting MPs, with the intent of reducing the risk of concluding that the 

site is not nesting habitat because no nesting birds were observed during a single survey. No surfacedisturbing activity is allowed to occur until both surveys have been completed and one of the following 

two findings has taken place: 

If no MPs are found during either survey, the disturbing activity must begin within 72 hours. If the 

disturbing activity does not commence within 72 hours, an additional survey will be required to check for 

late nesting MPs, which will start the clock again—giving another 72-hour time period. 

If MPs are found during the first or second survey, then either— 

1. The activity can be postponed until July 10 with no additional surveys required. 

2. Additional surveys could be done to locate active nests. Because of the colonial nature of MPs, the 

entire quarter-mile buffer area would need to be thoroughly surveyed. When nests are found, the 

activity could commence after 37 days to allow the young MPs to hatch and be mobile, or the nest 

A18-40 Pinedale RMP
Final EIS Appendix 18 

could be monitored and activity could commence after 7 days post-hatching. If a brood of flightless 

chicks is observed, activities could commence after at least 7 days. 

MP survey or field data should be forwarded to the local USFWS office, and this information should 

include the locations and dates when MPs are showing up on their breeding grounds so that the USFWS 

may document this information. This Interim Management Policy was developed with the input and 

review of the Wyoming Endangered Species Office of the USFWS. 

Pinedale RMP A18-41