Chapter 6. Consultation and Coordination
 
This page intentionally

left blank
_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

Draft Resource Management iii

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Table of Contents
 

Dear Reader Letter ...................................................................................................................... vii
 

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... ix
 

1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1
 

2. Proposed Action and Alternatives .......................................................................................... 1
 

3. Affected Environment ............................................................................................................. 3
 

4. Environmental Consequences ................................................................................................. 5
 

5. Cumulative Impacts ................................................................................................................. 7
 

6. Consultation and Coordination .............................................................................................. 9
 

6.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 11
 

6.2. Collaboration ................................................................................................................. 11
 

6.2.1. Native American Tribal Consultation .................................................................. 11
 

6.2.2. California and Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer Consultation ............ 12
 

6.2.3. US Fish and Wildlife Service Consultation ......................................................... 12
 

6.3. Cooperating Agencies ................................................................................................... 12
 

6.4. Public Involvement ....................................................................................................... 14
 

6.4.1. Scoping Process ................................................................................................... 14
 

6.4.2. Future Public Involvement ................................................................................... 16
 

6.5. List of Preparers ............................................................................................................ 16
 

7. References ............................................................................................................................... 19
 

8. Acronyms and Glossary ........................................................................................................ 65
 

8.1. Acronyms ...................................................................................................................... 67
 

8.2. Glossary ........................................................................................................................ 73
 

Table of Contents
This page intentionally

left blank
Draft Resource Management
 v

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement
 

List of Tables

Table 6.1. Cooperating Agencies ................................................................................................... 12
 

Table 6.2. List of Preparers ............................................................................................................ 16
 

List of Tables
This page intentionally

left blank
Draft Resource Management 11

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

6.1. Introduction

This chapter describes the public outreach and participation opportunities made available

through the development of this LUPA/EIS and consultation and coordination efforts with tribes,

government agencies, and other stakeholders. This chapter also lists the interdisciplinary team of

staff who prepared the LUPA/EIS.

The BLM and Forest Service land use planning activities are conducted in accordance with

requirements of the NEPA, CEQ regulations, BLM policies and procedures implementing NEPA,

and US Department of Agriculture and Forest Service policies and procedures implementing

NEPA. The NEPA and associated laws, regulations, and policies require the BLM and

Forest Service to seek public involvement early in and throughout the planning process to

develop a reasonable range of alternatives to proposed actions and to prepare environmental

documents that disclose the potential impacts of proposed actions and alternatives. Public

involvement and agency consultation and coordination, which have been at the heart of the

planning process leading to this draft LUPA/EIS, were achieved through Federal Register

notices, public and informal meetings, individual contacts, media releases, and the Greater

Sage-Grouse Planning Strategy Northeastern California and Nevada Sub-Region project website

(http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/more/sagegrouse/western. html).

6.2. Collaboration

Federal laws require the lead agency to consult with certain federal and state agencies and entities

and Native American tribes (40 CFR 1502.25) during the NEPA decision-making process.

Federal agencies are also directed to integrate NEPA requirements with other environmental

review and consultation requirements to reduce paperwork and delays (40 CFR 1500.4-5).

In addition to formal scoping (Section 6.4.1, Scoping Process), the BLM and Forest Service

have implemented an extensive collaborative outreach and public involvement process that has

included coordinating with cooperating agencies, holding public scoping meetings, and holding a

socioeconomic workshop. The BLM and Forest Service will continue to meet with interested

agencies and organizations throughout the planning process, as appropriate, and will continue

coordinating closely with cooperating partners.

6.2.1. Native American Tribal Consultation

The BLM and Forest Service began tribal consultation by requesting a consultation meeting with

area tribes to discuss the details of the GRSG planning efforts. Each of the tribes was also invited

to participate in the planning effort as cooperating agencies. The list of tribes contacted, as well

as the results of consultation to date, are described in Section 3.6.4, Tribal Interests, and are

detailed in Table 3-87, Tribal Consultation and Outreach Efforts for the Nevada and Northeastern

California Sub-region Sage-Grouse LUPA/EIS.

The draft LUPA/EIS will be provided to the tribes concurrently with its release to the public.

Chapter 6 Consultation and Coordination

Introduction
12 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

6.2.2. California and Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer

Consultation

The draft LUPA/EIS will be provided to the California and Nevada State Historic Preservation

Offices concurrently with its release to the public.

6.2.3. US Fish and Wildlife Service Consultation

To comply with Section 7(c) of the ESA, the BLM and Forest Service consulted USFWS early in

the planning process. USFWS provided input on planning issues, data collection and review, and

alternatives development in their role as a cooperating agency.

6.3. Cooperating Agencies

A cooperating agency is any federal, state, or local government agency or Native American tribe

that enters into a formal agreement with a lead federal agency to help develop an environmental

analysis. More specifically, cooperating agencies “work with the BLM, sharing knowledge and

resources, to achieve desired outcomes for public lands and communities within statutory and

regulatory frameworks” (BLM Land Use Planning Handbook H-1601-1).

On December 7, 2011, the BLM wrote to 52 local, state, federal, and tribal representatives,

inviting them to participate as cooperating agencies for the Nevada and Northeastern California

Greater Sage-Grouse Sub-region LUPA/EIS. Twenty-two agencies agreed to participate on the

EIS as designated cooperating agencies, all of which have signed Memorandums of Understanding

(MOUs) with the BLM (Table 6-1, Cooperating Agencies). Some agencies are participating as

cooperating agencies under the larger umbrella of the national-level MOUs described below.

The Forest Service and USFWS are participating in the EIS process as cooperating agencies at a

national level, and both agencies have signed MOUs at a national level.

Since starting on May 18, 2012, the BLM has conducted eight meetings to date with cooperating

agencies. Cooperating agencies were also encouraged to attend the scoping open houses and

provide comments during the scoping period (Section 6.4.1, Scoping Process). These agencies

have been engaged throughout the planning process, including during alternatives development.

Table 6.1. Cooperating Agencies

Agencies and Tribes Invited to be Cooperators Agencies that Accepted Agencies that Signed

MOUs

Counties

Churchill County X X

County of Carson City

Douglas County

Elko County X X

Esmeralda County

Eureka County X X

Humboldt County X X

Lander County X

Lassen County X X

Lincoln County X X

Chapter 6 Consultation and Coordination

California and Nevada State Historic Preservation

Officer Consultation
Draft Resource Management 13

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Agencies and Tribes Invited to be Cooperators Agencies that Accepted Agencies that Signed

MOUs

Lyon County

Mineral County

Modoc County X X

Nye County X X

Pershing County X X

Storey County

Washoe County X X

White Pine County X X

State Agencies

Nevada Department of Agriculture

Nevada Division of Minerals X

Nevada Department of Transportation X X

Nevada Department of Wildlife X X

Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources X X

Office of the Governor - Nevada N/A

Federal Agencies

Department of Defense Fallon Naval Air Station X X

Department of Defense Nellis Air Force Base X X

Federal Highway Planning Administration - Nevada X X

Natural Resources Conservation Service X X

US Fish and Wildlife Service X X

US Forest Service X X

Tribes

Alturas Rancheria

Battle Mountain Band

Cedarville Rancheria

Confederated Tribes of Goshute

Duck Valley Shoshone-Paiute Tribe

Duckwater Shoshone Tribe X

Elko Band

Ely Shoshone Tribe

Fallon Paiute Shoshone Tribe X

Fort Bidwell Reservation

Fort McDermitt Paiute-Shoshone Tribe X

Goshute Tribe

Greenville Rancheria

Hanylekim Maidu

Hungry Valley Community

Ibapah Goshute Tribe X

Klamath Tribes

Lovelock Indian Colony

Pit River Tribe of California

Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe X X

Reno-Sparks Indian Colony

South Fork Band

Summit Lake Paiute Tribe X X

Susanville Indian Rancheria X X

Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone

Walker River Paiute Tribe X

Washoe Tribe X X

Wells Band

Winnemucca Colony Council

Chapter 6 Consultation and Coordination

Cooperating Agencies
14 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Agencies and Tribes Invited to be Cooperators Agencies that Accepted Agencies that Signed

MOUs

Yerington Paiute Tribe

Yomba Shoshone Tribe X

Other

Nevada Mining Association N/A

Nevada National Association of Counties

6.4. Public Involvement

Public involvement is a vital and legal component of both the LUPA and EIS processes. Public

involvement vests the public in the decision-making process and allows for full environmental

disclosure. Guidance for implementing public involvement under NEPA is codified in 40 CFR

Part 1506.6, thereby ensuring that federal agencies make a diligent effort to involve the public in

the NEPA process. Section 202 of the FLPMA directs the Secretary of the Interior to establish

procedures for public involvement during land use planning actions on BLM-administered lands.

These procedures can be found in the BLM’s Land Use Planning Handbook (H-1601-1; BLM

2005a). Public involvement for the Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-Grouse

Sub-region LUPA/EIS includes the following:

● Public scoping before beginning NEPA analysis to determine the scope of issues and
 

alternatives to be addressed in the LUPA/EIS
 

● Public outreach via newsletters and press releases throughout the LUPA/EIS process

● Collaboration with federal, state, local, and tribal governments, and cooperating agencies
 

throughout the LUPA/EIS process
 

● Public review and comment on the draft LUPA/EIS

● Public review and comment on the final LUPA/EIS

6.4.1. Scoping Process

The formal public scoping process for the Nevada and Northeastern California Greater

Sage-Grouse Sub-region LUPA/EIS began on December 9, 2011, with the publication of the

notice of intent in the Federal Register (76 Federal Register 77008-77011). The notice of intent

notified the public of the BLM’s intent to prepare EISs and supplemental EISs to incorporate

Greater Sage-Grouse conservation measures into LUPs; it also initiated the public scoping period.

A notice of correction to the notice of intent was released on February 10, 2012 (77 Federal

Register 7178-7179). The notice of correction extended the scoping period until March 23, 2012.

Project Website

The BLM launched a national GRSG conservation website as part of its efforts to maintain

and restore GRSG habitat on public lands. The national website is available on the Internet at

http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/more/sagegrouse.html. The BLM has also launched a Great

Basin regional website: http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/ more/sagegrouse/western.html.

These sites are regularly updated to provide the public with the latest information about the

planning process. The Great Basin website provides background information about the project,

Chapter 6 Consultation and Coordination

Public Involvement
Draft Resource Management 15

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

a public involvement timeline, maps of the planning areas, and copies of public information

documents and notice of intent. The dates and locations of scoping open houses were also

announced on the Great Basin website.

Press Release

A press release was made available on the national and Great Basin region websites on December

8, 2011, announcing the scoping period for the EIS process. The Nevada and California BLM

State Offices also distributed press releases on January 4, 2012, announcing the scoping period

for the EIS process. The press releases provided information on the scoping open houses being

held and described the various methods for submitting comments. A second press release was

posted on the national and Great Basin websites on February 7, 2012, announcing the extension

of the public scoping period to March 23, 2012. A third press release was issued on the national

and Great Basin websites on February 9, 2012, announcing the addition of National Forests to

the GRSG planning efforts.

Public Scoping Open House

The BLM hosted seven open houses to provide the public with an opportunity to become

involved, learn about the project and the planning process, meet the planning team members, and

offer comments. The open house was advertised via press release and the Great Basin website.

The scoping meetings were held in an open house format to encourage participants to discuss

concerns and questions with the BLM and other agency staff representatives. The location and

date of the open houses were as follows:

● Tonopah, Nevada – January 9, 2012

● Ely, Nevada – January 10, 2012

● Elko, Nevada – January 11, 2012

● Winnemucca, Nevada – January 12, 2012

● Alturas, CA – January 18, 2012

● Susanville, CA – January 19, 2012

● Reno, Nevada – January 30, 2012

Scoping Comments Received

Detailed information about the comments received can be found in the National Greater

Sage-Grouse Planning Strategy Scoping Summary Report, finalized in May 2012 (BLM 2012b).

A total of 585 unique written submissions were received for the Great Basin region. Of these,

428 were specific to California and Nevada. The issues identified during public scoping and

outreach are described in Section 1.5.2, Issues Identified for Consideration in the Nevada and

Northeastern California Sub-Region Greater Sage-Grouse LUP Amendments, of this LUPA/EIS.

These issues guided the development of alternative management strategies outlined in Chapter

2 of this LUPA/EIS.

Chapter 6 Consultation and Coordination

Scoping Process
16 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

6.4.2. Future Public Involvement

Public participation efforts will be ongoing throughout the remainder of the LUPA/EIS process.

One substantial part of this effort is the opportunity for members of the public to comment on this

draft LUPA/EIS during the comment period. The proposed LUPA/Final EIS will respond to all

substantive comments received during the 90-day comment period. Records of Decision will

then be issued by the BLM and the Forest Service after the release of the proposed LUPA/Final

EIS, the Governor’s Consistency Review, and any resolution of protests received on the proposed

LUPA/Final EIS.

6.5. List of Preparers

This LUPA/EIS was prepared by an interdisciplinary team of staff from the BLM, Forest Service,

and Environmental Management and Planning Solutions, Inc. (see Table 6-2, List of Preparers).

In addition, staff from numerous federal, state, and local agencies, and nonprofit organizations

contributed to developing the LUPA/EIS.

The following is a list of people that prepared or contributed to the development of the LUPA/EIS.

Table 6.2. List of Preparers

Name Role/Responsibility

BLM-Nevada

Nevada State Office

Joe Tague Branch Chief

Marguerite Adams Planning and Environmental Coordinator

Chris Rose Public Affairs

Dan Kozar Lead GIS Specialist

Paul Roush Contract Sage Grouse Wildlife Biologist

Sandra Brewer Wildlife Biologist

Paul Petersen Asst. Fire Management Officer

Sarah Peterson Hydrologist

Mike Boomer Fire Planner

Sandy Gregory Fuels Management Specialist

Mark Coca Weed Management Specialist

Alan Shepherd Wild Horse and Burro Specialist

Robert Bunkall GIS Specialist

Michael Schade GIS Specialist

Scott Murrellwright Geologist

Sheila Mallory Geologist

Mike Tietmeyer Range Management Program Lead

Mary Figarelle Lead Realty Specialist

Bryan Hockett Archaeologist

Barb Keleher Outdoor Recreation Planner

Leo Drumm Outdoor Recreation Planner

Leisa Wesch GIS Specialist

John Wilson Wildlife Biologist/Healthy Landscapes

Dave Davis Geologist

Lorenzo Trimble Geologist

John Menghini Petroleum Engineer

Battle Mountain District

Doug Furtado District Manager

Chapter 6 Consultation and Coordination

Future Public Involvement
Draft Resource Management 17

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Name Role/Responsibility

Michael Vermeys Assistant Field Manager, Renewable Resources, Mt. Lewis Field Office

Wendy Seley Realty Specialist, Tonopah Field Office

Carson City District

John Neill Assistant Manager, Stillwater Field Office

Elko District

Tyson Gripp Natural Resource Specialist

Carol Evans Fisheries Biologist

Victoria Anne Planning and Environmental Coordinator

Ely District

Mike Herder Associate District Manager

Paul Podborny Wildlife Biologist

Winnemucca District

Amanda De Forest Supervisory Natural Resource Specialist

BLM-California

Northern California District

Nancy Haug District Manager

Jeff Fontana Public Affairs Officer

Alturas Field Office

Megan Oyarzun GIS Specialist

Arlene Kosic Wildlife Biologist

Casey Boespflug Zone Fuels Specialist

Alan Uchida Rangeland Management Specialist, Noxious Weed, and ES&R Coordinator

Eagle Lake Field Office

Rhonda (Sue) Noggles Planner

Dereck Wilson Supervisory Rangeland Management Specialist

Marisa Williams Outdoor Recreation Planner

Surprise Field Office

Elias Flores Wildlife Biologist

Dan Ryan Realty Specialist

Roger Farschon Contract Planning and Environmental Coordinator

BLM-National Operations Center

Josh Sidon Socioeconomics

Frank Quamen Wildlife Biologist

US Forest Service

Randy Sharp Contractor Project Liaison

David Reis Travel Management

Dustin Bambrough Range

Paul Bartschi GIS

Pam Bode NEPA/Planning

Chris Colt Wildlife Biologist

Madelyn Dillon Land/ Special Uses

Dale Harber Minerals

Pam Heavysege NEPA Records Management

Kolleen Kralick Cultural/Tribal

Tim Love GIS

Tim Metzger Fire

Chris Miller Economist

Craig Morris Analyst

Cory Norman Fire/Fuels

Lara Oles GIS

Glen Stein Team Lead

EMPSi: Environmental Management and Planning Solutions, Inc.

David Batts Program Manager

Chapter 6 Consultation and Coordination

List of Preparers
18 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Name Role/Responsibility

Holly Prohaska Project Manager

Peter Gower Deputy Project Manager

Meredith Zaccherio Biologist and Project Support

Drew Vankat Project Support

Jennifer Thies Project Support

Marcia Rickey GIS Specialist

Jenna Jonker GIS Specialist

Jordan Tucker GIS Specialist and Project Support

Kate Krebs Special Designations and Project Support

Amy Cordle QA/QC

Constance Callahan QA/QC and Project Support

Jeff Johnson QA/QC

Annie Daly Project Support

Laura Long Technical Editor

Randy Varney Technical Editor

Cindy Schad Word Processor

Lauren Zielinski Project Support

ICF International Team

Rob Fetter Project Manager – Socioeconomics

Alex Uriarte Project Assistance

Roy Allen Project Assistance

Chapter 6 Consultation and Coordination
Chapter 7. References
 
This page intentionally

left blank
Draft Resource Management 21

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Abatzoglou, J. T. and C. A. Kolden. 2011. “Climate change in western deserts: Potential for

increased wildfire and invasive annual grasses.” Rangeland Ecology and Management 64

(5):471-478.

Agee, J. K. 1993. Fire ecology of Pacific Northwest Forests. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Aldrich, J. W. 1963. “Geographic orientation of American tetraonidae.” Journal of Wildlife

Management 27:529-545.

Aldridge, C. L., and M. S. Boyce. 2007. “Linking occurrence and fitness to persistence:

Habitat-based approach for endangered greater sage-grouse.” Ecological Applications 17:508-526.

Aldridge, C. L., and R. M. Brigham. 2002. “Sage-grouse nesting and brood habitat use in

southern Canada.” Journal of Wildlife Management 66:433-444.

. 2003. “Distribution, status and abundance of Greater Sage-Grouse, Centrocercus urophasianus,

in Canada.” Canadian Field Naturalist 117:25-34.

Aldridge, C. L., S. E. Nielsen, H. L. Beyer, M. S. Boyce, J. W. Connelly, S. T. Knick, and M.

A. Schroeder. 2008. “Range-wide patterns of greater sage-grouse persistence.” Diversity and

Distributions 14:983-994.

Alevy, Jonathan, Elizabeth Fadali, and Thomas Harris. 2007. Analysis of Impacts of Public Land

Grazing on the Elko County Economy: Part III: Economic Impacts of Federal Grazing in Elko

County. Technical Report UCED 2006/7-03. University of Nevada, Reno.

Alliance for Green Heat. 2011. 2010 Census shows wood is fastest growing heating fuel in US:

Rural low-income families the new growth leaders in renewable energy production. Internet

website: http://www.forgreenheat.org/resources/press.pdf.

Amstrup, S. C., and R. L. Phillips. 1977. Effects of Coal Extraction and Related Development on

Wildlife Populations: Effects of Coal Strip Mining on Habitat Use, Activities and Population

Trends of Sharp-Tailed Grouse (Pedioecetes phasianellus). Annual progress report. Denver

Wildlife Research Center. US Fish and Wildlife Service. Denver, Colorado.

AOU (American Ornithologists’ Union). 1983. Check-list of North American Birds, 6th ed.

American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, DC.

_____. 1998. Check-list of North American Birds, 7th ed. American Ornithologists’ Union,

Washington, DC.

Armentrout, D. J., and F. Hall (compilers). 2005. Conservation Strategy for Sage-Grouse

(Centrocercus urophansianus) and Sagebrush Ecosystems within the Buffalo-Skedaddle

Population Management Unit. Bureau of Land Management, Eagle Lake Field Office, Susanville,

California.

Armour, C. L., D. A. Duff, and W. Elmore. 1991. “The effects of livestock grazing on riparian

and stream ecosystems.” Fisheries 16(1): 7-11.

Armstrong, J. C. 2007. “Improving sustainable seed yield in Wyoming big sagebrush.” Thesis.

Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah.

Chapter 7 References
22 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Atamian, M. T., J. S. Sedinger, J. S. Heaton, and E. J. Blomberg. 2010. “Landscape-level

assessment of brood rearing habitat for greater sage-grouse in Nevada.” Journal of Wildlife

Management 74:1533-1543.

Baker, W. L. 2006. “Fire and restoration of sagebrush ecosystems.” Wildlife Society Bulletin

34:177-185.

_____. 2009. Fire Ecology in Rocky Mountain landscapes. Island Press, Washington DC.

_____. 2011. Pre-Euro-American and recent fire in sagebrush ecosystems. In: S. T. Knick and J.

W. Connelly (editors). Greater Sage-Grouse: Ecology and Conservation of a Landscape Species

and Its Habitats. University of California Press, Berkeley. Pp. 185-201.

Balch, J. K., B. A. Bradley, C. M. D’Antonio, and J. Gómez-Dans. 2012. “Introduced annual

grass increases regional fire activity across the arid western USA (1980-2009).” Global Change

Biology 19:173-183.

Baldwin, Donald. 1970. Bird Feathers from Hogup Cave. In: Hogup Cave, C. Melvin Aikens

(editor), Anthropological Papers No. 93. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. pp. 267-269.

Baldwin, C. K., F. H. Wagner, and U. Lall. 2003. Water Resources. In: F. H. Wagner (editor),

Rocky Mountain/Great Basin Regional Climate-Change Assessment pp. 79-112.

Barnett, J. K., and J. A. Crawford. 1994. “Pre-laying nutrition of sage grouse hens in Oregon.”

Journal of Range Management 47:114-118.

Baxter, R. J., J. T. Flinders, and D. L. Mitchell. 2008. “Survival, movements, and reproduction

of translocated Greater Sage-Grouse in Strawberry Valley.” Journal of Wildlife Management

72:179-186.

BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce). 2012a.

Local area personal income and employment methodology. Internet website:

http://www.bea.gov/regional/pdf/lapi2010.pdf.

_____. 2012b. Regional Economic Information System, local area personal income and

employment. Internet website: http://www.bea.gov/regional/index.htm.

_____. 2013. Widespread economic growth in 2012 (Table 4, Current-Dollar GDP by State).

Internet website: https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regional/gdp_state/2013/pdf/gsp0613.pdf.

Accessed in June 2013.

Beck, T. D. I. 1977. “Sage grouse flock characteristics and habitat selection in winter.” Journal

of Wildlife Management 41:18-26.

Beck, J. L., J. W. Connelly, and K. P. Reese. 2009. “Recovery of greater sage-grouse habitat

features in Wyoming big sagebrush following prescribed fire.” Restoration Ecology 17:393-403.

Becker, J. M., C. A. Duberstein, J. D. Tagestad, J. L. Downs. 2009. Sage-Grouse and Wind

Energy: Biology, Habits, and Potential Effects from Development. Prepared for the US

Department of Energy by Pacific Northwest Energy. PNNL-18567.

Beever, E. A., and C. L. Aldridge. 2011. “Influences of free-roaming equids on sagebrush

ecosystems, with a focus on greater sage-grouse.” In: S. T. Knick and J. W. Connelly (editors),

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 23

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Greater Grouse: Ecology and Conservation of a Landscape Species and Its Habitats. Studies in

Avian Biology 38. University of California Press. Berkeley. Pp. 273-290.

Belnap, J., J. H. Kaltenecker, R. Rosentreter, J. Williams, S. Leonard, and D. Eldridge. 2001.

“Biological soil crusts: Ecology and management.” US Department of the Interior. Tech. Ref.

1730-2.

Belsky, A. J. 1986. “Does herbivory benefit plants? A review of the evidence.” The American

Naturalist, Vol. 127, No. 6:870-892.

Bengston, Ginny. 2006. Bureau of Land Management Winnemucca Field Office Resource

Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement Final Ethnographic Assessment. Report on

file with the Winnemucca District Office, Nevada.

_____. 2010. Ethnographic Assessment for the Newe (Western Shoshone): Proposed Ruby

Pipeline Project in Nevada. Report on file with the Bureau of Land Management Winnemucca

District Office, Nevada.

Berger, J. 1986. Wild Horses of the Great Basin: Social Competition and Population Size.

University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.

Bergquist, E., P. Evangelista, T. J. Stohlgren, and N. Alley. 2007. “Invasive species and coal bed

methane development in the Powder River Basin, Wyoming.” Environmental Monitoring and

Assessment 128:381-394.

Beschta, R. L., R. E. Bilby, G. W. Brown, L. B. Holtby, and T. D. Hofstra. 1987. “Stream

temperature and aquatic habitat: fisheries and forestry interactions.” Streamsides Management:

Forestry and Fishery Interaction. University of Washington, College of Forest Research, Seattle.

Pp. 191-232.

Bestelmeyer, Brandon T., Joel R. Brown, Kris M. Havstad, Robert Alexander, George Chavez,

and Jeffrey Herrick. 2003. “Development and use of state-and-transition models for rangelands.”

Journal of Range Management 56:114-126.

BIA (US Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs). 2012. BIA 2012 Tribal Entities

List. Internet website: http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/BIA/OIS/TribalGovernmentServices/

TribalDirectory/. Accessed September 5, 2013.

Blackburn, W. H., P. T. Tueller. 1970. “Pinyon and juniper invasion in black sagebrush

communities in east central Nevada.” Ecology 51:841-848.

Blaisdell, J. P., R. B. Murray, and E. D. McArthur. 1982. Managing Intermountain

Rangelands-Sagebrush Steppe Ranges. US Forest Service General Technical Report INT-134.

Ogden, Utah.

Blank, R. R., and T. A. Morgan. 2012. “Cheatgrass invasion ‘engineers’ the soil to facilitate its

growth.” Abstract. Society for Range Management. 65:0162.

BLM (United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management). 1969. Habitat

Management Plan: Disaster Peak Wildlife Habitat Area. Paradise Resource Area. Winnemucca

District Office, Nevada.

Chapter 7 References
24 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 1974. Revised Aquatic Habitat Management Plan: Mahogany Creek Habitat Area.
 

Winnemucca District Office, Nevada. December 1974.
 

_____. 1975. Sonoma Mountain Habitat Management Plan. Sonoma-Gerlach Resource Area.
 

Winnemucca District Office, Winnemucca, Nevada. July 1975.
 

_____. 1976. Owyhee Desert Habitat Management Plan. Surprise Field Office.
 

_____. 1978. Fox Mountain-Granite Range Habitat Management Plan. Sonoma-Gerlach
 

Resource Area. Winnemucca District Office, Nevada. Revised 1989.
 

_____. 1980. Jackson Mountains Wildlife Habitat Management Plan. Paradise-Denio Resource
 

Area. Winnemucca District Office, Nevada.
 

_____. 1981. Pine Forest Habitat Management Plan. Sonoma-Gerlach Resource Area.
 

Winnemucca District Office, Nevada.
 

_____. 1982a. Paradise Denio Management Framework Plan. Winnemucca District Office,
 

Nevada.
 

_____. 1982b. Sonoma-Gerlach Management Framework Plan. Winnemucca District Office,
 

Nevada.
 

_____. 1982c. Aquatic Habitat Management Plan: North Fork, Little Humboldt River.
 

Winnemucca District Office, Nevada. October 1982.
 

_____. 1983. Soldier Meadows Desert Dace Habitat Management Plan. Winnemucca District
 

Office, Nevada.
 

_____. 1984. Manual 8400—Visual Resource Management. Rel. 8-24. BLM, Washington, DC.
 

April 5, 1984.
 

_____. 1985a. Wells Resource Management Plan. Elko District Office, Nevada. July 1985.
 

_____. 1985b. Sonoma Creek Aquatic Management Plan. Sonoma-Gerlach Resource Area.
 

Winnemucca District Office, Nevada.
 

_____. 1985c. Northwest Area Noxious Weed Control Program, Final Environmental Impact
 

Statement. Washington, DC.
 

_____. 1986a. Shoshone-Eureka Resource Management Plan. Mt. Lewis Field Office, Battle
 

Mountain District, Battle Mountain, NV, March 1986.
 

_____. 1986b. Handbook H-8410-1—Visual Resource Inventory. Rel. 8-28. Washington, DC.
 

January 17, 1986.
 

_____. 1986c. Handbook H-8431-1—Visual Resource Contrast Rating. Rel. 8-30. Washington,
 

DC. January 17, 1986.
 

_____. 1986d. Northwest Area Noxious Weed Control Program Environmental Impact Statement
 

Record of Decision. Washington, DC.
 

_____. 1987a. Elko Resource Management Plan. Elko District Office, Nevada. March 1987.
 

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 25

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 1987b. Shoshone-Eureka RMP Amendment. Battle Mountain Field Office, Nevada.
 

_____. 1987c. Pine Dunes Research Natural Area Management Plan. Susanville District Office,
 

California.
 

_____. 1987d. Shoshone-Eureka Wilderness Recommendations. Battle Mountain District Office,
 

Nevada. February 3, 1987.
 

_____. 1987e. Little Owyhee-Snowstorm Habitat Management Plan. Paradise-Denio Resource
 

Area. Winnemucca District Office, Nevada.
 

_____. 1987f. Pine Nut Habitat Management Plan. Carson City District Office, Carson City,
 

Nevada.
 

_____. 1987g. BLM Manual H-4120-1: Grazing Management. Rel. 4-85. Washington, DC.
 

August 24, 1987.
 

_____. 1988a. Shoshone-Eureka Rangeland Program Summary. Battle Mountain District,
 

Nevada. December 1988.
 

_____. 1988b. Policy Manual 1613—Areas of Critical Environmental Concern. Washington,
 

DC. September 29, 1988.
 

_____. 1990a. Handbook H-1624-1—Planning for Fluid Mineral Resources. Washington, DC.
 

May 1990.
 

_____. 1990b. Condor Canyon Habitat Management Plan: Las Vegas, Nevada, Caliente Resource
 

Area. N5-WHA-T27. Las Vegas District Office.
 

_____. 1990c. Habitat Management Plan: Montana-Double H Wildlife Habitat Area.
 

Paradise-Denio Resource Area. Winnemucca District Office, Nevada. November 1990.
 

_____. 1990d. Manual 8160—Native American Coordination and Consultation. Rel. 8-58.
 

Washington, DC. January 26, 1990.
 

_____. 1991a. Vegetation Treatment on BLM Lands in Thirteen Western States. Washington, DC.
 

_____. 1991b. Eagle Lake Basin Plan. Eagle Lake Field Office, Susanville, California.
 

_____. 1991c. Riparian-Wetland Initiative for the 1990s. BLM/WO/GI-91/001+4340.
 

_____. 1991d. Record of Decision for California Statewide Wilderness Study Report. California
 

State Office, Sacramento, CA.
 

_____. 1991e Record of Decision for the Nevada Statewide Wilderness Study Report. Nevada
 

State Office, Reno, NV.
 

_____. 1992a. Pine Forest Recreation Management Plan. Winnemucca District Office, Nevada.
 

September 1992.
 

_____. 1992b. Manual 9015—Integrated Weed Management. Washington, DC. December 2,
 

1992.
 

Chapter 7 References
26 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 1994. Handbook H-8160—General Procedural Guidance for Native American

Consultation. Rel. 8-65. Washington DC. November 3, 1994.

_____. 1996. Partners Against Weeds; Final Action Plan for the Bureau of Land Management,

Denver Federal Center, Denver, CO, January 1996.

_____. 1997a. Tonopah Resource Management Plan. Battle Mountain District Office, Nevada.

October 1997.

_____. 1997b. Geothermal Leasing—Tonopah Planning Area. Battle Mountain District Office,

Nevada. October 1997.

_____. 1997c. Water Canyon Recreation Area Environmental Assessment, Management Plan,

Record of Decision and Cooperative Management Agreement. Winnemucca District Office,

Nevada. August 15, 1997.

_____. 1997d. Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing

Management. Idaho State Office, Boise.

_____. 1998a. Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing

Management on BLM-Administered Lands in California and Northwestern Nevada, Final

Environmental Impact Statement. California State Office, Sacramento, CA, April 1998.

_____. 1998b. Central Nevada Communications Sites Amendment. Battle Mountain District

Office, Nevada. August 21, 1998.

_____. 1998c. PulIing Together: A National Strategy for Management of Invasive Plants.

Federal Interagency Committee for Management of Noxious and Exotic Weeds. 2nd edition. US

Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.

_____. 1999. Desatoya Mountains Ecosystem Management Plan. Battle Mountain Field Office

and Carson City Field Office, Nevada. July 7, 1999.

_____. 2000. Interdisciplinary Management Plan for the Silver Saddle Ranch and the Ambrose

Carson River Natural Area. Carson City Field Office, Carson City, Nevada. November 2000.

_____. 2001a. Carson City Consolidated Resource Management Plan. Carson City Field Office,

Nevada. May 2001.

_____. 2001b. North Douglas County Specific Management Plan Amendment. Carson City

Field Office, Nevada. June 2001.

_____. 2001c. Southern Washoe County Urban Interface Plan Amendment. Carson City Field

Office, Nevada. January 2001.

_____. 2001d. Pine Forest Recreation Plan Activity Plan for Pine Forest Recreation Area.

Winnemucca District Office, Nevada.

_____. 2002a. Programmatic Environmental Assessment Geothermal Leasing and Exploration

Shoshone-Eureka Planning Area. Battle Mountain Field Office, Nevada. August 2002.

_____. 2002b. Geothermal Resources Leasing—Winnemucca District Office Programmatic

Environmental Assessment. Winnemucca District Office, Nevada.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 27

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 2002c.Shoshone-Eureka RMP Amendment for Fire Management. Mt. Lewis Field Office,

Battle Mountain District Office, Nevada.

_____. 2002d. Aquatic Habitat Inventory and Monitoring Level III Survey Procedures—Transect

Method. Elko Revised Handbook, BLM Manual 6720-1. Elko District Office, Nevada.

_____. 2003a. Forestry Plan Amendment and Environmental Assessment. NV-020-02-05.

Winnemucca District Office, Nevada. December 2003.

_____. 2003b. Manual 620—Wildland Fire Management, Chapter 3, Interagency Burned Area

Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation. Washington, DC. September 2003.

_____. 2004a. Black Rock Desert-High Rock Canyon Emigrant Trails National Conservation

Area Resource Management Plan. Black Rock Desert-High Rock Canyon Emigrant Trails

National Conservation Area. Black Rock Field Office, Winnemucca District Office, July 2004.

_____. 2004b. Carson City Field Office Fire Management Plan. Carson City District Office,

Nevada.

_____. 2004c. Normal Year Fire Rehabilitation Plan Programmatic Environmental Assessment

and Record of Decision. Winnemucca District Office, Nevada. June 2004.

_____. 2004d. BLM Conservation Efforts for Greater Sage-Grouse and Sagebrush Habitats.

Report to the US Fish and Wildlife Service in response to notice of 90-day petition finding for

the Greater Sage-Grouse. Washington, DC.

_____. 2004e. Instruction Memorandum 2004-227, Bureau of Land Management’s Biomass

Utilization Strategy. Washington, DC. August 16, 2004.

_____. 2004f. Manual 8110—Identifying and Evaluating Cultural Resources. Rel. 8-73.

Washington, DC. December 3, 2004.

_____. 2004g. Handbook H-8120-1—Guidelines for Conducting Tribal Consultation. Rel.

8-75. Washington, DC. December 3, 2004.

_____. 2005a. Handbook H-1601-1—Land Use Planning Handbook. Rel. 1-1693. Washington,

DC. March 11, 2005.

_____. 2005b. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement on Wind Energy

Development on BLM-Administered Lands in the Western United States. FES 05-11. June 2005.

_____. 2005c. Oil and Gas Resources Leasing Environmental Assessment and Record of

Decision. Winnemucca District Office, Nevada. October 2005.

_____. 2005d. Water Canyon Implementation Plan Amendment Environmental Assessment and

Decision Record. Winnemucca District Office, Nevada. August 2005.

BLM 2006. Oil and Gas Leasing within Portions of the Shoshone-Eureka Planning Area, Bureau

of Land Management, Battle Mountain District, Environmental Assessment NV063·EA06·092.

FONSI and Record of Decision. November 27, 2006.

Chapter 7 References
28 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 2007a. Final Vegetation Treatments on Bureau of Land Management Lands in 17 Western

States Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and Associated Record of Decision.

Washington, DC. September 2007.

_____. 2007b. Denton-Rawhide Mine Land Sale Plan Amendment. EA-NV-030-07-021. Carson

City Field Office, Nevada. August 2007.

_____. 2007c. Handbook H-1742-1: Burned Area Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation.

Washington, DC. February 12, 2007.

_____. 2007d. Ely Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement.

Internet website: http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/fo/ely_field_office/blm_programs/planning/

ely_rmp_2007.html.

_____. 2007e. Eagle Lake Field Office—Proposed Resource Management Plan and Final

Environmental Impact Statement. Internet website: http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/fo/eaglelake/

propRMP-FEIS.html.

_____. 2007f. Surprise Field Office—Proposed Resource Management Plan and Final

Environmental Impact Statement. Internet website: http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/fo/surprise/

propRMP-FEIS.html.

_____. 2008a. Alturas Resource Management Plan. Alturas Field Office, California. April 2008.

_____. 2008b. Eagle Lake Resource Management Plan. Eagle Lake Field Office, Susanville,

California. April 2008.

_____. 2008c. Surprise Resource Management Plan. Surprise Field Office, Cedarville,

California. April 2008.

_____. 2008d. Ely Resource Management Plan. Ely District Office, Nevada. August 2008.

_____. 2008e. Handbook H-1790-1—NEPA Handbook. Rel. 1-1710. Washington, DC. January

30, 2008.

_____. 2008f. Sage Steppe Ecosystem Restoration Strategy Final EIS. Alturas Field Office,

California. December 15, 2008.

_____. 2008g. Oil and Gas Leasing within the Western Portion of the Shoshone-Eureka Planning

Area, Bureau of Land Management, Battle Mountain District, Environmental Assessment

NV063·EA08·032. March 2008.

_____. 2008h. Geothermal Resources Leasing in Churchill, Mineral, and Nye Counties, Nevada.

Carson City Field Office, Nevada. March 2008.

_____. 2008i. Instruction Memorandum 2009-043—Wind Energy Development Policy.

Washington, DC. December 19, 2008.

_____. 2008j. Handbook 1740-2—Integrated Vegetation Management. Washington, DC. March

25, 2008.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 29

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 2009a. Approved Resource Management Plan Amendments/Record of Decision (ROD)

for Designation of Energy Corridors on Bureau of Land Management-Administered Lands in the

11 Western States. Washington, DC. January 2009.

_____. 2009b. Environmental Assessment Integrated Weed Management Program. EA Number

CA320-07-13. Alturas Field Office, California.

_____. 2009c. Instruction Memorandum 2009-120—Bureau of Land Management (BLM)

Updated Contract Clause for Utilization of Woody Biomass. Washington, DC. May 12, 2009.

_____. 2010a. Carson City District 2011 Geothermal Leasing. DOI-BLM-NV-C010-2010-0020-

EA. Carson City District, Nevada. October 2010.

_____. 2010b. Instruction Memorandum 2011-061—Solar and Wind Applications—PreApplication and Screening. Washington, DC. October 2010.

_____. 2010c. Instruction Memorandum 2011-060—Solar and Wind Applications—Due

Diligence. Washington, DC. October 2010.

_____. 2010d. Winnemucca District Office – Draft Resource Management Plan/Environmental

Impact Statement. Internet website: http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/fo/wfo/blm_information/rmp/

draftrmp _eis.html.

_____. 2011a. BLM Instructional Memorandum 2012-44—BLM National Greater Sage-Grouse

Land Use Planning Strategy. BLM Washington Office, Washington DC, December 27, 2011.

_____. 2011b. Nobles Trail/Humboldt Wagon Road Management Plan, Shasta and Lassen

Counties, California, and Pershing and Washoe Counties, Nevada. Eagle Lake Field Office,

Susanville, California.

_____. 2011c. Handbook H-1730-1—Resource Management During Drought. Chapter 2.

Washington, DC.

_____. 2011d. Bureau of Land Management, Nevada State Office. Sensitive Species List.

October 2011.

_____. 2011e. BLM Manual 8320—Planning for Recreation and Visitor Services (Public).

Release 8-81. Washington, DC. March 29, 2011.

_____. 2011f. BLM Manual 1626—Travel and Transportation Manual. Release 1-1731.

Washington, DC. July 14, 2011.

_____. 2011g. Instruction Memorandum 2011-059—National Environmental Policy Act

Compliance for Utility-Scale Renewable Energy Right-of-Way Authorizations. Washington,

DC. February 7, 2011.

_____. 2011h. Instruction Memorandum 2011-003—Solar Energy Development Policy.

Washington, DC. October 7, 2010.

_____. 2011i. Supplement to the Draft Programmatic EIS for Solar Energy Development in Six

Southwestern States. Washington State Office, Washington DC. October 2011.

Chapter 7 References
30 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 2011j. Battle Mountain District Office – Socioeconomic Baseline Assessment

Report. Internet website: http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/nv/field_offices/

battle_mountain_field/ blm_information/rmp.Par.7232.File.dat/BMDO_SE_FINAL_112111.pdf.

_____. 2012a. Instruction Memorandum 2012-169—RMP Alternative Development for

Livestock Grazing. Washington, DC.

_____. 2012b. Manual 6340—Management of Designated Wilderness Areas. Rel. 6-135.

Washington, DC. July 13, 2012.

_____. 2012c. BLM Manual 6220—National Monuments, National Conservation Areas, and

Similar Designations. Washington, DC.

_____. 2012d. BLM Manual 6400—Wild and Scenic Rivers – Policy and Program Direction for

Identification, Evaluation, Planning, and Management. Washington, DC.

_____. 2012e. BLM Manual 6280—Management of National Scenic and Historic Trails and

Trails Under Study or Recommended as Suitable for Congressional Designation. Washington, DC.

_____. 2012f. BLM Manual 6310—Conducting Wilderness Characteristics Inventory on BLM

Lands. Rel. 6-129. Washington, DC. March 15, 2012.

_____. 2012g. BLM Manual 6320—Considering Lands with Wilderness Characteristics in the

BLM Land Use Planning Process. Rel. 6-130. Washington, DC. March 15, 2012.

_____. 2012h. Approved Resource Management Plan Amendments and Record of Decision for

Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States. Washington, DC. October 2012.

_____. 2012i. BLM Northern California Region Fire Management Plan.

_____. 2012j. Battle Mountain Drought Environmental Assessment. DOI-BLM-NV-B000-2012-

0005-EA. Battle Mountain District, Nevada. June 14, 2012.

_____. 2012k. Manual 6330—Management of Wilderness Study Areas. Rel. 6-134. BLM,

Washington, DC. July 13, 2012.

_____. 2012l. Data from BLM Rangeland Administration System.

_____. 2012m. BLM Handbook 8342—Travel and Transportation. Release 8-82. Washington,

DC. March 16, 2012.

_____. 2012n. September 2012 Competitive Oil and Gas Lease Sale Environmental Assessment.

DOI-BLM-NV-L000-2012-0003-EA. Ely District Office, Nevada. April 13, 2012.

_____. 2012o. Summary of Nevada-Northeast California Sub-Region Economic Strategies

Workshop: Carson City, Nevada, June 28, 2012.

_____. 2012p. Recreation Management Information System.

_____. 2012q. BLM Defers Final Decision on China Mountain Wind Project.

Internet website: http://www.blm.gov/id/st/en/info/newsroom/2012/March-2012_News/

idaho_blm_defers_final.html.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 31

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 2012r. Biomass. California. Internet website: http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/prog/energy/
 

biomass.html.
 

_____. 2012s. FY2011 BLM Expenditures: FY2011 BLM Labor Summary and FY2011 BLM
 

Non-Labor Summary.
 

_____. 2013a. Carson City District Drought Management Plan, Carson City District Office, NV.
 

_____. 2013b. Land and Mineral Legacy Rehost 2000 System (LR2000).
 

_____. 2013c. Carson City District Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impacts
 

Statement. Socioeconomic Baseline Assessment Report. Internet website: https://www.blm.gov/
 

epl-front-office/projects/lup/22652/42252/44902/CCD_SEbaseline_20130111_508_(2).pdf.
 

_____. 2013d. BLM California Wind Applications and Authorizations. Internet
 

website: http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/ca/pdf/pa/energy.Par.5556.File.dat/
 

BLMWindApplications&AuthorizationsApril2013.pdf.
 

_____. 2013e. Grazing Impacts. Personal communication. Mike Tietmeyer, Rangeland
 

Management Specialist, . Nevada State Office, Reno, NV, May and June 2013.
 

_____. 2013f. Oil and Gas Data. Personal communication. John Menghini, Petroleum Engineer.
 

Nevada State Office, Reno, NV, May and June 2013.
 

_____. 2013g. Locatable, Salable, and Solid Leasable Minerals. Personal communication. Scott
 

Murrellwright, Geologist, Nevada State Office, Reno, NV, May and June 2013.
 

_____. 2013h. Geothermal RFD. Personal communication. Sheila Mallory, Geologist, Nevada
 

State Office. Reno, NV, June 2013.
 

_____. 2013i. Solar and Wind Information. Personal communication. Wendy Seley, Nevada
 

State Office, Reno, NV, May 2013.
 

_____. 2013j. Wind-Based Energy Projects. Bureau of Land Management, Nevada, Ely Field
 

Office. Internet website: http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/fo/ely_field_office/blm_programs/energy/
 

wind-based_energy.print.html.
 

BLM (US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management) and DOE (US Department of
 

Energy). 2003. Assessing the Potential for Renewable Energy on Public Lands. February 2003.
 

Internet website: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy03osti/33530.pdf.
 

BLM and Forest Service (US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, and US
 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service). 2006. Memorandum of Understanding Concerning
 

Oil and Gas Leasing Operations.
 

_____. 2008. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and Record
 

of Decision for Geothermal Leasing in the Western United States. Website:
 

http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/energy/geothermal/geothermal_nationwide.html, accessed on
 

September 1, 2013.
 

_____. 2011. Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Greater Sage-Grouse.
 

Chapter 7 References
32 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 2012. National Greater Sage-Grouse Planning Strategy: Land Use Plan Amendments and

Environmental Impact Statements, Scoping Summary Report. May 2012.

BLM and Forest Service (US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, and US

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service) GIS. 2013. GIS data created in the analysis of the

alternatives, affected environment, and impact analysis on the BLM’s eGIS server, using data

from the Department of the Interior, Nevada State Office and California Alturas, Eagle Lake, and

Surprise Field Offices, and the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest. March-August 2013.

BLM and Forest Service and US Environmental Protection Agency. 2011. Memorandum of

Understanding Regarding Air Quality Analyses and Mitigation for Federal Oil and Gas Decisions

through the National Environmental Policy Act Process. June 23, 2011.

BLM and National Landscape Conservation System. 2006. National Scenic and Historic Trails

Program. Washington, DC.

BLM and Nevada Department of Environmental Protection. 2004. MOU for Water Quality

Management Activities within the State of Nevada. September 2004.

BLM and US Navy (Department of Defense). 2000. Fallon Range Training Complex

Requirements EIS. Carson City and Naval Air Station Fallon, Nevada. April 14, 2000.

Blomberg, E. J., J. S. Sedinger, M. T. Atamian, and D. V. Nonne. 2012. “Characteristics of

climate and landscape disturbance influence the dynamics of greater sage-grouse populations.”

Ecosphere 3(6):55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/ES11-00304.

BLS (US Bureau of Labor Statistics). 2012a. CPI Inflation Calculator. Internet website:

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm/.

_____. 2012b. Local Area Unemployment Statistics. Internet website: http://www.bls.gov/lau/

data.htm.

Boarman, W. I., and B. Heinrich. 1999. Common Raven. In: A. Poole and F. Gill (editors), The

Birds of North America, No. 476. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Bradbury, J. W., R. M. Gibson, C. E. McCarthy, and S. L. Vehrencamp. 1989. “Dispersion

of displaying male sage grouse: II. The role of female dispersion.” Behavioral Ecology and

Sociobiology 24:15-24.

Bradley, B. A. 2010. “Assessing ecosystem threats from global and regional change: Hierarchical

modeling of risk to sagebrush ecosystems from climate change, land use and invasive species in

Nevada, USA.” Ecography 33:198-208.

Bradley, B. A., and J. F. Mustard. 2006. “Characterizing the landscape dynamics of an invasive

plant and risk of invasion using remote sensing.” Ecol. Appl. 16:1132-1147.

Braun, C. E. 1995. “Distribution and status of sage grouse in Colorado.” Prairie Naturalist.

27:1-9.

_____. 1998. “Sage grouse declines in western North America: What are the problems?” In:

Proceedings of the Western Association of State Fish and Wildlife Agencies (Western Association

of Fish and Wildlife Agencies). Pp. 139-156.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 33

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Braun, C. E., M. F. Baker, R. L. Eng, J. W. Gashwiler, and M. H. Schroeder. 1976. “Conservation

committee report on effects of alteration of sagebrush communities on the associated avifauna.”

Wilson Bulletin 88:165-171.

Braun, C. E., O. O. Oedekoven, and C. L. Alderidge. 2002. “Oil and gas development in western

North America: Effects on sagebrush steppe avifauna with particular emphasis on Sage Grouse.”

Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 67:337-349.

Briske, D. D., J. D. Derner, D. G. Milchunas, and K. W. Tate. 2011. “An evidence-based

assessment of prescribed grazing practices.” In: D. D. Briske. Conservation Benefits of

Rangeland Resources: Assessment, Recommendations, and Knowledge Gaps. USDA National

Resources Conservation Service, Washington, DC. Pp. 23-74.

Brooks, M. L., and D. A. Pyke. 2001. “Invasive plants and fire in the deserts of North America.”

In: K. E. M. Galley and T. P. Wilson (editors). Proceedings of the Invasive Species Workshop:

The Role of Fire in the Control and Spread of Invasive Species. Fire Conference 2000: the First

National Congress on Fire Ecology, Prevention, and Management. Miscellaneous Publication

No. 11, Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee, Florida. Pp. 1-14.

Brown, G. W. 1983. Forestry and water quality. Oregon State University Bookstore, Inc.,

Corvallis.

Brown, K. G., and K. M. Clayton. 2004. Ecology of the Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus

urophasianus) in the Coal Mining Landscape of Wyoming’s Powder River Basin. Final Executive

Summary Report 2004. Thunder River Wildlife Consulting, Gillette, Wyoming.

Brown, G. W., and J. T. Krygier. 1970. “Effects of clearcutting on stream temperature.” Water

Resources Research 6:1133-1139.

Brown, J. K. 1982. “Fuel and fire behavior prediction in big sagebrush.” US Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Research

Paper INT-290. Ogden, Utah.

_____. 1995. “Fire regimes and their relevance to ecosystem management.” In: Proceedings of

Society of American Foresters National Convention, September 18-22, 1994. Pp. 171-178.

Brown, T. J., B. L. Hall, and A. L. Westerling. 2004. “The impact of twenty-first century climate

change on wildland fire danger in the western United States: An applications perspective.”

Climate Change 62:365-388.

Bryant, L. D. 1985. ‘Livestock management in the riparian ecosystem.’ Paper presented to North

American Conference, University of Arizona, Tucson. April 16-18, 1985.

Bunting, S. C. 1984. ‘Fires in sagebrush-grass ecosystems: successional changes.” In: K.

Sanders and J. Durham (editors), Rangeland Fire Effects: A Symposium. USDI Bureau of Land

Management, Boise, Idaho. Pp. 7-11.

_____. 1990. “Prescribed fire effects in sagebrush-grasslands and pinyon-juniper woodlands.”

In: M. E. Alexander and G. F. Bisgrove (technical coordinators). “The art and science of fire

management.” Proceedings of the First Interior West Fire Council Annual Meeting and Workshop.

Kananaskis Village, Alberta. Information report NOR-X-309. Forestry Canada, Northwest

Region, Northern Forestry Centre. Edmonton, Alberta. October 24-27, 1988. Pp. 176-181.

Chapter 7 References
34 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Bunting, S. C., B. M. Kilgore, C. L. Bushey. 1987. Guidelines for Prescribed Burning

Sagebrush-Grass Rangelands in the Northern Great Basin. US Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service Intermountain Research Station General Technical Report INT-231. Ogden, Utah.

Burton, T. A., S. J. Smith, and E. R. Cowley. 2011. Riparian area management: Multiple indicator

monitoring (MIM) of stream channels and streamside vegetation. Technical Reference 1737-23.

BLM/OC/ST-10/003+1737+REV. US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management,

National Operations Center, Denver, Colorado.

Cagney, J., E. Bainter, B. Budd, T. Christiansen, V. Herren, M. Holloran, B. Rashford, M.

Smith, and J. Williams. 2010. “Grazing Influence, Objective Development, and Management

in Wyoming’s Greater Sage-Grouse Habitat.” Cooperative Extension Service Bulletin B-1203,

University of Wyoming, Laramie.

California Department of Conservation. 2010. Oil, Gas, and Geothermal – Assessment Process.

Internet website: http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dog/for_operators/Pages/assessments.aspx.

California Legislative Analyst’s Office. 2007. California’s tax system—A primer.

California State Board of Equalization. 2012. California property tax. An overview. Publication

29, November. Internet website: http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/pdf/pub29.pdf.

CalPIF (California Partners in Flight). 2005. Version 1.0. The sagebrush bird conservation

plan: a strategy for protecting and managing sagebrush habitats and associated birds in

California. PRBO Conservation Science, Stinson Beach, California. Internet website:

http://www.prbo.org/calpif/plans.html.

Carpenter, J., C. Aldridge, and M. S. Boyce. 2010. “Sage-grouse habitat selection during winter

in Alberta.” Journal of Wildlife Management -74:1806-1814.

Carson City. 2006. Carson City Master Plan. Carson City, Nevada. April 6, 2006.

Casazza, M. L., P. S. Coates, and C. T. Overton. 2011. “Linking habitat selection to brood success

in greater sage-grouse.” In: M. K. Sandercock, K. Martin, and G Segelbacher (editors). Ecology,

Conservation, and Management of Grouse. University of California Press, Berkeley. Pp. 151-167.

CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2005. State Wildlife Action Plan.

Sacramento, California.

CEC (Commission for Environmental Cooperation). 2012. “Invasive species.” The Northern

American Mosaic: An Overview of Key Environmental Issues. Commission for Environmental

Cooperation document. Pp. 1-4.

CEQ (Council on Environmental Quality). 1997. CEQ Environmental Justice: Guidance

Under the National Environmental Policy Act. US Council on Environmental Quality.

Washington, DC. Internet website: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ej/resources/policy/

ej_guidance_nepa_ceq1297.pdf.

Chambers, J. C. 2008. Invasive Plant Species and the Great Basin. USDA-USFS Rocky Mountain

Research Station, Reno, Nevada. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-204.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 35

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Chaney, E., W. Elmore, and W. S. Platts. 1993. Managing change, livestock grazing on western

riparian areas. Produced for the Environmental Protection Agency by the Northwest Resource

Information Center, Inc., Eagle, Idaho.

Christiansen, T. 2009. Fence Marking to Reduce Greater Sage-Grouse Collisions and Mortality

Near Farson, Wyoming—Summary of Interim Results. Wyoming Game and Fish Department,

unpublished interim report.

Churchill County. 2007. Water Resource Plan. Fallon, Nevada. October 8, 2003.

_____. 2010. Churchill County Master Plan. Fallon, Nevada. September 2, 2010. Internet

website: http://www.churchillcounty.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View/1577.

City of Caliente. 2011. Envision Caliente: City of Caliente, Nevada Master Plan. Caliente,

Nevada.

City of Reno. 2012. Reno Economy. Internet website: http://reno.gov/index.aspx?page=119.

Clark, L., J. Hall, R. McLean, M. Dunbar, K. Klenk, R. Bowen, and C. A. Smeraski. 2006.

“Susceptibility of greater sage-grouse to experimental infection with West Nile virus.” Journal of

Wildlife Diseases 42:14-42.

Clary, W. P., and B. F. Webster. 1989. Managing Grazing of Riparian Areas in the Intermountain

Region. General Technical Report INT-263. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah.

CNIC (Commander Navy Installations Command). Undated. Naval Air Station Fallon,

installation welcome page. Internet Web site: http://www.cnic.navy.mil/Fallon/index.htm.

Accessed September 9, 2013.

Coates, P. S., and D. J. Delehanty. 2004. “The effects of raven removal on sage-grouse nest

success.” Proceedings Vertebrate Pest Conference 21:17.

_____. 2008. “Effects of environmental factors on incubation patterns of Greater Sage-Grouse.”

The Condor 110:627-638.

_____. 2010. “Nest predation of greater sage-grouse in relation to microhabitat factors and

predators.” Journal of Wildlife Management 74:240-248.

Coates, P. S., Z. B. Lockyer, M. A. Farinha, J. M. Sweeney, V. M. Johnson, M. B. Meshriy,

S. P. Espinosa, D. J. Delehanty, and M. L. Casazza. 2011. Preliminary Analysis of Greater

Sage-Grouse Reproduction in the Virginia Mountains of Northwestern Nevada: US Geological

Survey Open-File Report 2011-1182.

Coates, P. S., and M. L. Casazza. In prep. (A). Avoidance by greater sage-grouse of pinyon pine

and juniper tree encroachment within sagebrush ecosystem.

_____. In prep. (B). Winter habitat selection of greater sage-grouse in the Bi-State DPS.

Collins, E. I. 1984. Preliminary classification of Wyoming plant communities. Wyoming Natural

Heritage Programs and The Nature Conservancy. Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Chapter 7 References
36 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Comer, P. J., P. J. Crist, M. S. Reid, J. Hak, H. Hamilton, B. Unnasch, I. Varley, et al. 2012a.

Central Basin and Range Rapid Ecoregional Assessment Report. Prepared for the US Department

of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management.

_____. 2012b. A Rapid Ecoregional Assessment of the Mojave Basin and Range Ecoregion.

Report, appendices, and databases provided to the Bureau of Land Management.

Condon, L., P. J. Wiesberg, and J. C. Chambers. 2011. “Abiotic and biotic influences on Bromus

tectorum invasion and Artemisia tridentata recovery after fire.” International Journal of Wildland

Fire 20:597-604.

Congressional Research Service. 2012. Forest Service Payments to Counties—Title I of the

Federal Forests County Revenue, Schools, and Jobs Act of 2012: Issues for Congress. R42452.

Internet website: http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/R42452.pdf.

Connelly, J. W. 1982. An ecological study of sage grouse in southeastern Idaho. Washington

State University, Pullman.

Connelly, J. W., and C. E. Braun. 1997. “A review of long-term changes in sage grouse

populations in western North America.” Wildlife Biology 3:229-234.

Connelly, J. W., M. A. Schroeder, A. R. Sands, and C. E. Braun. 2000a. “Guidelines to manage

sage grouse populations and their habitats.” Wildlife Society Bulletin 28:967-985.

Connelly, J. W., A. D. Apa, R. B. Smith, and K. P. Reese. 2000b. “Effects of predation and

hunting on adult sage grouse Centrocercus urophasianus in Idaho.” Wildlife Biology 6:227-232.

Connelly, J. W., K. P. Reese, and M. A. Schroeder. 2003. Monitoring of Greater Sage-Grouse

Habitats and Populations. College of Natural Resources Experiment Station. University of

Idaho. Moscow, Idaho, USA.

Connelly, J. W., S. T. Knick, M. A. Schroeder, and S. J. Stiver. 2004. Conservation Assessment of

Greater Sage-grouse and Sagebrush Habitats. Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies.

Unpublished report. Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Connelly, J. W., E. T. Rinkes, and C. E. Braun. 2011. “Characteristics of greater sage-grouse

habitats: A landscape species at micro and macro scales.” Studies in Avian Biology: 69-83.

Cooper, S. V., P. Lesica, and G. M. Kudray. 2007. Post-fire Recovery of Wyoming Big Sagebrush

Shrub-Steppe in Central And Southeast Montana. The Montana Natural Heritage Program,

United States Bureau of Land Management, Montana State Office, Helena.

Crawford, J. A., R. A. Olson, N. E. West, J. C. Mosley, M. A. Schroeder, T. D. Whitson, R. F.

Miller et al. 2004. “Ecology and management of sage-grouse and sage-grouse habitat.” Journal

of Range Management 57:2-19.

Cronquist, A., A. H. Holmgren, N. H. Holmgren, J. L. Reveal, and P. K. Holmgren. 1994.

“Intermountain flora.” Vascular Plants of the Intermountain West, U.S.A., Vol. 5. Asterales. The

New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, New York.

Dalldorf, K. N., S. R. Swanson, D. F. Kozlowski, K. M. Schmidt, R. S. Shane and G. Fernandez.

2013. “Influence of Livestock Grazing Strategies on Riparian Response to Wildfire in Northern

Nevada.” Rangeland Ecology & Management 66:1, 34-42. January 1, 2013.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 37

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Davies, K. W. 2010. “Revegetation of medusahead-invaded sagebrush steppe.” Rangeland

Ecology & Management 63:564-571.

Davies, K. W., C. S. Boyde, J. L. Beck, J. D. Bates, T. J. Svejcar, and J. G. Gregg. 2011. “Saving

the sagebrush sea: An ecosystem conservation plan for big sagebrush.” Biological Conservation

144:2573-2584.

D’Azevedo, Warren I. (editor). 1986. Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 11, Great

Basin. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.

Delong, A. K., J. A. Crawford, and D. C. Delong, Jr. 1995. “Relationships between vegetational

structure and predation of artificial sage grouse nests.” Journal of Wildlife Management 59:88-92.

Deur, Douglas. 2010. Ruby Pipeline Ethnographic Study, Fort Bidwell Indian Community:

Barrel Springs Traditional Cultural Property Report. BLM Winnemucca District Office, Nevada.

Diamond, J. M., C. A. Call, and N. Devoe. 2009. “Effects of targeted cattle grazing on fire

behavior of cheatgrass-dominated rangeland in the northern Great Basin, USA.” International

Journal of Wildland Fire 18:944-950.

Doherty, M. K. 2007. “Mosquito populations in the Powder River Basin, Wyoming: A

comparison of natural, agricultural, and effluent coal-bed natural gas aquatic habitats.” Thesis.

Montana State University, Bozeman.

Doherty, K. E., D. E. Naugle, B. L. Walker, and J. M. Graham. 2008. “Greater sage-grouse winter

habitat selection and energy development.” Journal of Wildlife Management 72:187-195.

Doherty, K. E., D. E. Naugle, H. Copeland, A. Pocewicz, and J. Kiesecker. 2011. Energy

development and conservation tradeoffs: systematic planning for greater sage-grouse in their

eastern range. In: S. T. Knick and J. W. Connelly (editors), Greater Sage-Grouse: Ecology of a

Landscape Species and Its Habitats. University of California Press, Cooper Ornithological

Society, Berkeley. Pp. 505-516.

DOI (US Department of the Interior). 2004. National Sage-Grouse Habitat Conservation Strategy.

WO IM 2005-024. Washington, DC.

_____. 2006. 620 DM 3: Interagency Burned Area Rehabilitation Guidebook. Version 1.3.

October 2006.

_____. 2008. Departmental Manual Part 522: Adaptive Management. February 1, 2008.

_____. 2012. Payments in Lieu of Taxes. Internet website: http://www.doi.gov/pilt/index.cfm.

DOI and USDA 2013. Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation Operations. NFES 2724.

DOI (US Department of the Interior), Forest Service (US Department of Agriculture, National

Forest Service), DOE (US Department of Energy), US Department of Defense, US Department

of Commerce, EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency), Federal Emergency Management

Agency, and National Association of State Foresters. 2001. Review and Update of the 1995

Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy. January 2001.

Douglas County. 2007. Open Space Plan. Minden, Nevada. July 1, 2007.

Chapter 7 References
38 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 2012. Comprehensive Master Plan. Minden, Nevada. March 2012.

Drought Monitor Archives. Not dated. Internet website: http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/

archive.html. Accessed July 11, 2013.

Duke University. 2012. “Hydraulic fracturing likely did not create fissures, but

gas from leaking well casings could exploit them.” ScienceDaily. Internet website:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120709155411.htm.

Dunn, P. O., and C. E. Braun. 1986. “Late summer-spring movements of juvenile sage grouse.”

Wilson Bulletin 98:83-92.

Eberhardt, L. L., A. K. Majorowicz, and J. A. Wilcox. 1982. “Apparent rates of increase for two

feral horse herds.” Journal of Wildlife Management 46 (2):367-374.

Eddleman, L. E., and P. S. Doescher. 1999. “Current issues in the sagebrush steppe ecosystem:

grazing, fire and other disturbances.” In: P. G. Entwistle, A. M. DeBolt, J. H. Kaltenecher, and K.

Steenhof (compilers), Proceedings: Sagebrush Steppe Ecosystems Symposium. BLM Publ. No.

BLM/ID/PT-001001=1150. Boise, Idaho. Pp. 21-23.

Ehrhart, R. C., and P. L. Hansen. 1997. Effective Cattle Management in Riparian Zones: A Field

Survey and Literature Review. Montana Bureau of Land Management Riparian Technical Bulletin

3. Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment Station, University of Montana, Missoula.

EIA (United States Energy Information Administration). 2013. Independent Statistics and
 

Analysis. State-Level Energy-Related Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 2000-2009. N.p., n.d. Internet
 

website: http://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/state/analysis/.
 

Eichhorn, L. C., and C. R. Watts. 1984. “Plant succession of burns in the River Breaks of central
 

Montana.” Proceedings of the Montana Academy of Sciences 43:21-34.
 

Eiswerth, M. E., and J. S. Shonkwiler. 2006. “Examining post-wildfire reseeding on arid
 

rangeland: a multivariate tobit modeling approach.” Ecological Modeling 192:286-298.
 

Elko County. 2003. Elko County, Nevada, General Open Space Plan. Elko, Nevada. September
 

2003.
 

_____. 2007. Water Resource Management Plan. Elko, Nevada. September 2007.
 

_____. 2008. Public Lands Policy Plan. Elko, Nevada.
 

_____. 2010. Elko County Public Land Use and Natural Resources Management Plan. Elko,
 

Nevada.
 

_____. 2012. Elko County, Nevada Division of Natural Resource Management
 

Greater Sage Grouse Management and Conservation Strategy Plan. Internet
 

website: http://www.elkocountynv.net/meetings/board_of_commissioners/docs/
 

Elko_County_Public_Land_Use__Natural_Resource_Management_Plan___Approved_Final.pdf.
 

Ellis, K. L. 1984. “Behavior of lekking sage-grouse in response to a perched golden eagle.”
 

Western Birds 15:37-38.
 

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 39

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

. 1985. Effects of a new transmission line on the distribution and aerial predation of breeding

male sage-grouse. Final report.

Elmore, W., and B. Kauffman. 1994. “Riparian and watershed systems: Degradation.” In: M.

Vavra, W. A. Laycock, and R. D. Pieper (editors), Ecological Implications of Livestock Herbivory

in the West. Soc. for Range Management, Denver, Colorado.

Eng, R. L., and P. Schladweiler. 1972. “Sage grouse winter movements and habitat use in central

Montana.” Journal of Wildlife Management 36: 141-146.

EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1987. Memorandum: Nonpoint Source

Controls and Water Quality Standards. Washington, DC.

_____. 2002. Directional Drilling Technology. Prepared for EPA by Advanced Resources

International. Washington, DC.

_____. 2007. Level III Ecoregions of the Continental United States. Washington, DC.

_____. 2010. Primary Distinguishing Characteristics of Level III Ecoregions of the Continental

United States. Washington, DC. July 2010.

_____. 2012. Emissions from the oil and natural gas industry. Last updated October 10, 2012.

Internet website: http://www.epa.gov/airquality/oilandgas/basic.html. Accessed on February 1,

2013.

Epanchin-Niell, R. S., M. B. Hufford, C. E. Aslan, J. P. Sexton, J. D. Port, and T. M. Waring.

2009. “Controlling invasive species in complex social landscapes.” Front. Ecol. Environ.

doi:10.1890/090029.

Esmeralda County. 2011. Master Plan. Goldfield, Nevada. December 7, 2011.

_____. 2013. Public Lands Policy Plan. Goldfield, Nevada.

Eureka County. 2010. Master Plan. Eureka, Nevada. April 6, 2010. Internet website:

http://www.co.eureka.nv.us/PDF/Master_Plan_Final_2010.pdf.

ENEL Green Power. 2013. Stillwater Solar Geothermal Hybrid Project. Internet website:

http://www.enelgreenpower.com/en-GB/ena/power_plants/wm/Stillwater_Solar/index.aspx.

Fiero, Bill. 1986. Geology of the Great Basin. University of Nevada Press, Reno, NV.

Fischer, A., W. L. Wakkinenk, P. Reesea, and J. W. Connelly. 1997. “Effects of prescribed fire on

movements of female sage grouse from breeding to summer ranges.” Wilson Bulletin 109:82-91.

Fitch, L., and N. Ambrose. 2003. Riparian Areas: A User’s Guide to Health. Lethbridge, Alberta:

Cows and Fish Program. ISBN No. 0-7785-2305-5.

Fleishman, E., J. Thomson, B. G. Dickson, D. S. Dobkin, and M. Leu. 2012. Current and

Projected future Connectivity of Habitat for Breeding Birds in Central Nevada. Nevada

Department of Wildlife, Reno.

Forest Service (United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service). 1986a. Humboldt

National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Humboldt National Forest. Sparks,

NV, August 1986.

Chapter 7 References
40 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 1986b. Toiyabe National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Toiyabe National
 

Forest. Sparks, NV, August 1986.
 

_____. 1990. Manual 1500, External Relations. June 1, 1990.
 

_____. 2000. Protecting People and Sustaining Resources in Fire Adapted Ecosystems: A
 

Cohesive Strategy. US Department of Agriculture, US Forest Service, Washington, DC. October
 

13, 2000.
 

_____. 2004a. National Strategy and Implementation Plan for Invasive Species Management. All
 

US Government Documents (Utah Regional Depository). Paper 538.
 

_____. 2004b. Handbook 1509.13-3—American Indian and Alaska Native Relations Handbook.
 

March 3, 2004.
 

_____. 2005. Travel Management; Designated Routes and Areas for Motor Vehicle Use; Final
 

Rule. 70 Federal Register 68264. November 9, 2005.
 

_____. 2006a. Manual 1920—Land Management Planning. 1900-2006-2. Washington, DC.
 

_____. 2006b. Handbook 1909.12—Land Management Planning. 1909.12-2006-9. Washington,
 

DC.
 

_____. 2007a. Santa Rosa Ranger District Travel Management Plan. Humboldt-Toiyabe National
 

Forest.
 

_____. 2007b. White Pine & Grant-Quinn Oil and Gas Leasing Project. Humboldt-Toiyabe
 

National Forest.
 

_____. 2009a. Record of Decision: USDA Forest Service Designation of Section 368 Energy
 

Corridors on National Forest System Land in 10 Western States. Washington Office, Washington
 

DC. January 15, 2009.
 

_____. 2009b. Austin and Tonopah Ranger Districts Combined Travel Management Project.
 

Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest. Tonopah, NV.
 

_____. 2009c. Ely Ranger District Travel Management Project. Humboldt-Toiyabe National
 

Forest. Ely, NV.
 

_____. 2009d. Guidance for Implementation of Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy.
 

_____. 2009e. Manual 7700—Travel Management. January 8, 2009.
 

_____. 2009f. Handbook 7709.55—Travel Planning. January 8, 2009.
 

_____. 2010. Elkhorn Vegetation Treatment Project. Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest.
 

_____. 2011a. Aurora Area Geothermal Leasing Project. Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest.
 

_____. 2011b. McGinness Hills Geothermal Power Plan Project. Humboldt-Toiyabe National
 

Forest.
 

_____. 2011c. Intermountain Region (R4) Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and, and [sic]
 

Sensitive Species. July 27, 2011, update.
 

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 41

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 2011d. Nationwide Aerial Application of Fire Retardant on National Forest System
 

Lands. Record of Decision. United States Department of Agriculture.
 

_____. 2012a. Forest Service Handbook 1909.15—NEPA Handbook.
 

_____. 2012b. Environmental Impact Statement for Geothermal Leasing on the
 

Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest. Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest. September 18, 2012.
 

_____. 2012c. Mountain City, Ruby Mountains, and Jarbidge Districts Combined Travel
 

Management Project. Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest.
 

_____. 2012d. North Schell Restoration Project. Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest.
 

_____. 2012e. Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail. Internet website: http://www.fs.usda.gov/pct.
 

Accessed on November 26, 2012.
 

_____. 2012f. National Visitor Use Monitoring, Round 2 Results.
 

_____. 2012g. Personal communication. Chris Miller, to Rob Fetter, ICF International. August
 

2012.
 

_____. 2013a. Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest Fire Management Plan.
 

_____. 2013b. FACTS activity database. Forest Service fuels related treatments on Forest
 

Service-administered lands within the planning area. Accessed on May 7, 2013.
 

_____. 2013c. Natural Resource Management Forest Service WEB, Special Use Database
 

System.
 

_____. 2013d. Recreation and Tribal Grazing. Personal communication. Chris Miller. June 2013.
 

_____. 2013e. Secure Rural Schools. Payment and Receipts. Payment Report ASR 10-1 FY2012.
 

Internet website: http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/pts/securepayments/projectedpayments.
 

_____. 2013f. Expenditures on National Forests. Personal communication. Susan Winter, to
 

Alex Uriarte, April 2013.
 

_____. 2013g. Human Resources Management, Human Resources Reporting Center.
 

Active Position Organizational Listing worksheets, by region. Internet website:
 

http://fsweb.asc.fs.fed.us/HRM/reports/gen_reports.php.
 

Forests and Rangelands. 2006. A Collaborative Approach for Reducing Wildland Fire Risks
 

to Communities and the Environment 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy Implementation Plan.
 

December 2006.
 

Formann, R. T. T., and L. E. Alexander. 1998. “Roads and their major ecological effects.” Annual
 

Review of Ecology and Systematics 29:207.
 

Fowler, Catherine. 1986. “Subsistence.” In: W. D’Azevedo (editor), Handbook of North
 

American Indians, Volume 11: Great Basin. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. Pp. 43-97.
 

_____. 2002. “In the Shadow of Fox Peak: An Ethnography of the Cattail-Eater Northern Paiute
 

People of Stillwater Marsh.” Second Edition. Reno: Nevada Humanities Committee.
 

Chapter 7 References
42 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Garate, Donald T. 1975. Red Rock to Ravendale: Memories of a Northern California Community.

Lassen County Historical Society, Susanville, California.

Garrott, R. A., and L. Taylor. 1990. “Dynamics of a feral horse population in Montana.” Journal

of Wildlife Management 54 (4):603-612.

Garrott, R. A., D. B. Siniff, and L. L. Eberhardt. 1991. “Growth rates of feral horse populations.”

Journal of Wildlife Management 55(4):641-648.

Garton, E. O., J. W. Connelly, J. S. Horne, C. A. Hagen, A. Moser, and M. Schroeder. 2011.

“Greater sage-grouse population dynamics and probability of persistence.” In: S. T. Knick and J.

W. Connelly (editors), Greater Sage-Grouse: Ecology of a Landscape Species and Its Habitats.

Cooper Ornithological Union, University of California Press, Berkeley. Pp. 293-381.

GBBO (Great Basin Bird Observatory) 2010. Nevada Comprehensive Bird Conservation

Plan, ver. 1.0. Great Basin Bird Observatory, Reno, Nevada. Internet website:

www.gbbo.or/bird_conservation_plan.html. Accessed May 2013.

_____. 2012. Bird Population Responses to Projected Effects of Climate Change in Nevada:

An Analysis for the 2012 Revision of the Nevada Wildlife Action Plan. Prepared for Nevada

Department of Wildlife, Reno, Nevada. Final Report. February 27, 2012.

Gelbard, J. L., and J. Belnap. 2003. “Roads as conduits for exotic plant invasions in a semiarid

landscape.” Conservation Biology 17:420-432.

Geothermal Energy Association. 2010. Geothermal power booming in Nevada:

GEA expects 30-year economic output of $22.5 billion. Internet website:

http://www.nye-renewables.com/docs/2010_GEA_NV_Geothermal_Boom.pdf.

Germino, M. J. 2012. “Hydro-climate effects on rangeland ecosystems soils in the Great Basin:

thresholds and transformations.” Great Basin Climate Change Forum. Desert Resea.

Gibson, R. M., and J. W. Bradbury. 1986. “Male and Female Mating Strategies on Sage Grouse

Leks. In: Ecological Aspects of Social Evolution: Birds and Mammals, D. I. Rubenstein and R.

W. Wrangham (editors). Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Pp. 379-398.

Gilmore, Harry W. 1953. “Hunting habits of the early Nevada Paiutes.” American Anthropologist,

55, No. 1:148-153.

Gratson, M. W. 1993. “Sexual selection for increased male courtship and acoustic signals and

against large male size at sharp-tailed grouse leks.” Evolution 47:691-696.

Grayson, Donald K. 1977. “A Review Of The Evidence For Early Holocene turkeys in the

Northern Great Basin.” American Antiquity 42:110-114.

_____. 1979. “Mount Mazama, Climatic Change, and Fort Rock Basin Archaeofaunas.” In:

Volcanic Activity and Human Ecology, Payson D. Sheets and Donald K. Grayson (editors).

Academic Press, New York, New York. Pp. 427-457.

_____. 1993. The Desert’s Past: A Natural History of the Great Basin. Smithsonian Institution,

Washington, DC.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 43

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Grayson, Donald K., and Paul W. Parmalee. 1988. “Hanging Rock Shelter.” In: Danger Cave,

Last Supper Cave, and Hanging Rock Shelter: The Faunas, Donald K. Grayson (editor),

Anthropological Papers 66 (Part 1). American Museum of Natural History, New York, New

York. Pp. 105-115.

Green, B. H., and H. D. Smith. 1981. “Habitat utilization by sage sparrows in mixed desert

shrub community.” Abstract. Encyclia 58:159.

Green, J. S., and J. T. Flinders. 1980. “Brachylagus idahoensis. Mammal.”

Species, No. 125. Greenleaf Power. 2013. Honey Lake. Internet website:

http://www.greenleaf-power.com/facilities/honey-lake.html.

Gregg, M. A. 1991. “Use and selection of nesting habitat by sage grouse in Oregon.” Master’s

thesis. Oregon State University, Corvallis.

Gregg, M. A., J. A. Crawford, M. S. Drut, and A. K. DeLong. 1994. “Vegetational cover and

predation of sage grouse nests in Oregon.” Journal of Wildlife Management 58:162-166.

Gregg, M. A., J. K. Barnett, and J. A. Crawford. 2008. “Temporal variation in diet and nutrition

of preincubating Greater Sage-Grouse.” Rangeland Ecol. Mgt. 61(5):535-542.

Hagen, C. A., J. W. Connelly, and M. A. Schroeder. 2007. “A meta-analysis for greater

sage-grouse nesting and brood rearing habitats.” Wildlife Biology 13 (Supplement 1):42-50.

Hanf, J. M., P. A. Schmidt, and E. B. Groshens. 1994. “Sage grouse in the high desert of central

Oregon: results of a study, 1988-1993.” United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Land

Management, Series P-SG-01, Prineville, Oregon.

Hanes, Richard C. 1982. “Cultural persistence in Nevada: Current Native American issues.”

Journal of Great Basin and California Anthropology, Vol. 4, No. 2:203-221.

_____. 1995. Treaties, Spirituality, and Ecosystems, American Indian Interests in the Northern

Intermontane Region of Western North America. All US Government Documents (Utah Regional

Depository). Paper 234. http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/govdocs/234.

Hann, W. J., and D. L. Bunnell. 2001. “Fire and land management planning and implementation

across multiple scales.” International Journal of Wildland Fire 10:389-403.

Hann, Wendel J., Ayn Shlisky, Doug Havlina, Kathy Schon, Stephen W. Barrett, Thomas E.

DeMeo, Kelly Pohl, et al. 2008. Interagency Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) Guidebook.

Version 1.3.0. Homepage of the Interagency and The Nature Conservancy Fire Regime Condition

Class website, USDA Forest Service, US Department of the Interior, The Nature Conservancy,

and Systems for Environmental Management. Internet website: www.frcc.gov.

Harrison, C. 1978. A Field Guide to Nests, Eggs and Nestlings of North American Birds. The

Stephen Green Press, Brattleboro, Vermont.

Headwaters Economics. 2012. Economic Profile System-Human Dimensions Toolkit

(EPS-HDT). Internet website: http://headwaterseconomics.org/tools/eps-hdt.

Heizer, Robert F. (editor). 1978. Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8, California.

Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.

Chapter 7 References
44 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Hironaka, M., M. A. Fosberg, and A. H. Winward. 1983. “Sagebrushgrass habitat types of

southern Idaho.” Idaho Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station, Bulletin 35, Moscow,

Idaho.

Hockett, Bryan. 2007. “Nutritional Ecology of Late Pleistocene to Middle Holocene Subsistence

in the Great Basin: Zooarchaeological Evidence from Bonneville Estates Rockshelter.” In: Kelly

Graf and Dave Schmitt (editors), Paleoindian. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. Pp.

204-230.

Hockett, Bryan, and Eric Dillingham. 2004. Paleontological Investigations at Mineral Hill Cave.

Technical Report 18. Bureau of Land Management, Reno, Nevada.

Hockett, Bryan, and Dennis Jenkins. (In press). “Identifying stone tool cut marks and the

Pre-Clovis occupation of the Paisley Caves.” American Antiquity.

Holechek, J. L. 1988. “An approach for setting the stocking rate.” Rangelands 10(1).

Holechek, J. L., R. D. Piper, and C. H. Herbel. 1998. Range Management: Principles and

Practices. Third edition. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.

Holloran, M. J. R. 2005. Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) Population Response

to Natural Gas Field Development in Western Wyoming. University of Wyoming, Laramie.

Holloran, M. J. R., and S. H. Anderson. 2005. “Spatial distribution of greater sage-grouse nests in

relatively contiguous sagebrush habitat.” Condor 107:742-52.

Holloran, M. J. R., R. C. Kaiser, and W. Hubert. 2010. “Yearling greater sage-grouse response to

energy development in Wyoming.” Journal of Wildlife Management 74:65-72.

Homer, C. G., T. C. Edwards, Jr., R. D. Ramsey, and K. P. Price. 1993. “Use of remote sensing

methods in modeling sage grouse winter habitat.” Journal of Wildlife Management 57:78-84.

Howard, H. 1952. “The prehistoric avifauna of Smith Creek Cave, Nevada, with a description of

a new gigantic raptor. Southern California Academy of Sciences Bulletin 51(Part 2):50-54.

Hulbert, L. C. 1955. “Ecological studies of Bromus tectorum and other annual bromegrasses.”

Ecological Monographs. 25:181-213.

Hultkrantz, Åke. 1986. “Mythology and Religious Concepts.” In: W. D’Azevedo (editor),

Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 11: Great Basin. Smithsonian Institution,

Washington, DC. Pp. 630-640.

Humboldt County. 2002. Humboldt County Master Plan. Nevada.

_____. 2003. Humboldt County Master Plan Open Space Element Amendment. Nevada.

Hupp, J. W., and C. E. Braun. 1989. “Topographic distribution of sage grouse foraging in winter.”

Journal of Wildlife Management 53:823-829.

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2007. “Climate Change 2007: Synthesis

Report.” Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Core writing team: R. K. Pachauri and A. Reisinger

[editors]). IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 45

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Jackson, S. D. 2000. “Overview of Transportation Impacts on Wildlife Movement and

Populations.” In: T. A. Messmer and B. West (editors) “Wildlife and Highways: Seeking

Solutions to an Ecological and Socio-economic Dilemma.” The Wildlife Society: 7-20.

James, S. R. 2004. “Mineral Hill Cave Avifauna.” In: B. Hockett and E. Dillingham (editors),

Paleontological Investigations at Mineral Hill Cave. Technical Report No. 18, Bureau of Land

Management, Reno, Nevada. Pp. 136-142.

Janson, R. G. 1946. “A survey of the rabbits of Utah with reference to their classification,

distribution, life histories and ecology.” Master’s thesis. Utah State University, Logan.

Michael Jennings, D. Faber-Langendoen, R. Peet, O. Loucks, D. Glenn-Lewin, A. Damman, M.

Barbour, et al. 2004. “Guidelines for describing associations and alliances of the US national

vegetation classification.” The Ecological Society of America Vegetation Classification Panel

Version 4.0.

Jenkins, Dennis, L., Davis, L., Stafford, T. W., Campos, P., Hockett, B., Jones, G. Cummings.et

al. 2012. “Clovis Age western stemmed projectile points and human coprolites at the Paisley

Caves.” Science 337:223-228.

Jennings, Jesse D. 1957. “Danger Cave.” Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology 14.

Society for American Archaeology, Washington, DC.

Johnsgard, P. A. 1983. Grouse of the World. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

_____. 2002. Grassland Grouse and Their Conservation. Smithsonian Institution Press,

Washington, DC, and London.

Johnson, D. H., M. J. Holloran, J. W. Connelly, S. E. Hanser, C. L. Amundson, and S. T.

Knick. 2011. “Influences of environmental and anthropogenic features on greater sage-grouse

populations.” In: S. T. Knick and J. W. Connelly (editors), “Greater sage-grouse: ecology and

conservation of a landscape species and its habitats.” Studies in Avian Biology 38. University

of California Press, Berkeley. Pp. 407-450.

Johnson, G. D., and M. S. Boyce. 1991. “Survival, growth, and reproduction of captive-reared

sage grouse.” Wildlife Society Bulletin 19:88-93.

Johnson, G. D., and S. E. Stephens. 2011. “Wind power and biofuels: a green dilemma for

wildlife conservation.” In: D. E. Naugle (editor), Energy Development and Wildlife Conservation

in Western North America. Pp. 131-156.

Jones, A. L. (editor). 2012. Best Management Practices for Siting, Developing, Operating and

Monitoring Renewable Energy in the Intermountain West: A Conservationists Guide. Special

publication. Wild Utah Project. Salt Lake City, Utah.

Kaiser, R. C. 2006. “Recruitment by greater sage-grouse in association with natural gas

development in western Wyoming.” Master’s thesis. University of Wyoming, Laramie.

Karl, T. R., J. M. Melillo, and T. C. Peterson. 2009. “Global climate change impacts in the United

States.” National Science and Technology Council, Cambridge University Press.

Kartesz, J. T. 1994. A Synonymized Checklist of the Vascular Flora of the United States, Canada,

and Greenland. 2nd ed. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, Oregon.

Chapter 7 References
46 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Kelly, Isabel. 1932. “Ethnography of the Surprise Valley Paiutes.” American Archaeology and

Ethnology, Vol. 31, No. 3:67-210.

_____. 1938. “Northern Paiute tales.” The Journal of American Folklore Vol. 51, No.

202:363-438.

Kempthorne, Dirk. 2009. Climate Change and the Department of the Interior. Amendment

No.1, Secretarial Order 3226. January 16, 2009.

Kirol, C. P., J. L. Beck, J. B. Dinkins, and M. R. Conover. 2012. “Greater sage-grouse nesting

and brood-rearing microhabitat selection in xeric big sagebrush.” Condor 114:75-89.

Klebenow, D. A. 1969. “Sage grouse nesting and brood habitat in Idaho.” Journal of Wildlife

Management 33:649-662.

Klebenow, D. A., and G. M. Gray. 1968. “Food habits of juvenile sage grouse.” Journal of

Range Management 21:80-83.

Knapp, P. A. 1996. “Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L.) dominance in the Great Basin Desert.”

Global Environmental Change 6(1):37-52.

Knight, R. L., H. A. L. Knight, and R. J. Camp. 1995. “Common ravens and number and type of

linear rights-of-way.” Biological Conservation 74:6-67.

Knick, S. T. 2011. “Historical development, principal federal legislation and current management

of sagebrush habitats: implications for conservation.” In: S. T. Knick and J. W. Connelly (editors),

“Greater sage-grouse: Ecology and conservation of a landscape species and its habitats.” Studies

in Avian Biology 38:13-32. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Knick, S. T., and S. E. Hanser. 2011. “Connecting pattern and processing greater sage-grouse

populations and sagebrush landscapes.” In: S. T. Knick and J. W. Connelly (editors), “Greater

sage-grouse: Ecology and conservation of a landscape species and its habitats.” Studies in Avian

Biology 38:383-405. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Knick, S. T., and J. W. Connelly. 2011. “Greater sage-grouse and sagebrush—Introduction to

the landscape.” In: S. T. Knick and J. W. Connelly (editors), “Greater sage-grouse: Ecology and

conservation of a landscape species and its habitats.” Cooper Ornithological Society, University

of California Press, Berkeley. Pp. 1-9.

Knick, S. T., S. E. Hanser, R. F. Miller, D. A. Pyke, M. J. Wisdom, et al. 2011. “Ecological

influence and pathways of land use in sagebrush.” In: S. T. Knick and J. W. Connelly (editors),

“Greater sage-grouse: Ecology and conservation of a landscape species and its habitats.”

Kolada, E. J., J. S. Sedinger, M. L. Casazza. 2009a. “Nest site selection by greater sage-grouse in

Mono County, California.” Journal of Wildlife Management 73:1333-1340.

_____. 2009b. “Ecological factors influencing nest survival of greater sage-grouse in Mono

County, California.” Journal of Wildlife Management 73:1341-1347.

Kramer, A. T., and K. Havens. 2009. “Plant conservation genetics in a changing world.” Trends

in Plant Science 14:599-607.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 47

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Kucera, T. E. 1992. “Influences of sex and weather on migration of mule deer in California.”

Great Basin Naturalist 52:122-130.

Lammers, W. M, and M. W. Collopy. 2007. “Effectiveness of avian predator perch deterrents on

electric transmission lines.” Journal of Wildlife Management 71:2752-2758.

Lander County. 2010. Master Plan. Battle Mountain, Nevada. October 28, 2010. Internet

website: http://landercountynv.org/images/stories/general_files/Planning_and_Zoning/

LanderMasterPlanfinalall.pdf.

_____. 2011. Water Resources Plan. Battle Mountain, Nevada. March 24, 2011.

Larrucea, E. S., and P. F. Brussard. 2008. “Habitat selection and current distribution of the pygmy

rabbit in Nevada and California, USA.” Journal of Mammalogy 89:691-699.

Lassen County. 1999. General Plan. September 21, 1999. Internet website: http://

www.co.lassen.ca.us/govt/dept/planning_building/planning_division/general_area_plans.asp.

_____. 2012. Lassen County Fire Safe Plan.

Launchbaugh, K., B. Brammer, M. L. Brooks, S. Bunting, P. Clark, J. Davison, M. Fleming, et

al. 2007. Interactions Among Livestock Grazing, Vegetation Type, and Fire Behavior in the

Murphy Wildland Fire Complex in Idaho and Nevada. US Geological Survey Open-File Report

2008–1214. July 2007.

Leaming, George F. 2010. The Impact of Federal Land Policies on the Economy of Elko County,

Nevada.

LeBeau, C. W. 2012. “Evaluation of Greater sage-grouse reproductive habitat and response to

wind energy development in south-central, Wyoming.” Master’s thesis. University of Wyoming,

Laramie.

Leonard, K. A., K. P. Reese, and J. W. Connelly. 2000. “Distribution, movements and habitats of

sage grouse Centrocercus urophasianus on the Upper Snake River Plain of Idaho: Changes from

the 1950s to the 1990s.” Wildlife Biology 6:265-270.

Leu, M., S. E. Hanser, and S. T. Knick. 2008. “The human footprint in the West: A large-scale

analysis of anthropogenic impacts.” Ecological Applications 18:1119-1139.

Lincoln County (Nevada). 2007. Master Plan. September 4, 2007. Internet website:

http://www.lincolncountynv.org/planning/Master_Plan_09-07.pdf.

_____. 2010. Public Lands Policy Plan.

_____. 2011. Open Space and Community Lands Plan. September 2011.

Little, E. E., and R. D. Calfee. 2003. Effects of Fire-Retardant Chemical Products on Fathead

Minnows in Experimental Streams. US Geological Survey, Columbia Environmental Research

Center, Final report to the USDA Forest Service, Wildland Fire Chemical Systems (91260).

Lockyer, Z., P. S. Coates, M. L. Casazza, S. Espinosa, D. L. Delehanty. In review. Linking nest

site selection to nest survival in greater sage-grouse.

Chapter 7 References
48 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Lyon, A. G. 2000. “The potential effects of natural gas development of sage grouse hear Pinedale,

Wyoming.” Thesis. University of Wyoming, Laramie.

Lyon, A. G., and S. H. Anderson. 2003. “Potential gas development impacts on sage grouse nest

initiation and movement.” Wildlife Society Bulletin 31:486-491.

Lyon County, Nevada. 2010. Comprehensive Master Plan. December 23, 2010.

Mack, R. N., and D. A. Pyke. 1983. “The demography of Bromus tectorum: variation in time and

space.” J. Ecol. 71:69-93.

Manier, D. J., D. J. A. Wood, Z. H. Bowen, R. M. Donovan, M. J. Holloran, L. M. Juliusson, K. S.

Mayne, et al. 2013. Summary of Science, Activities, Programs and Policies that Influence the

Rangewide Conservation of Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus). US Geological

Survey Open-File Report 2013-1098, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Martin, J. W., and B. A. Carlson. 1998. “Sage sparrow (Amphispiza belli).” In: A. Poole and

F. Gill (editors), The Birds of North America, No. 326. The Birds of North America, Inc.,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Martin, R. E., and D. B. Sapsis. 1991. “Fires as agents of biodiversity: pyrodiversity promotes

biodiversity.” In: R. Harris, D. Erman, and H. Kerner (editors), Proceedings of the Symposium on

Biodiversity of Northwestern California, Santa Rosa, California. Pp. 150-157.

Maser, C., J. W. Thomas, and R. G. Anderson. 1984. Wildlife Habitats in Managed

Rangelands—The Great Basins of Southeastern Oregon: The Relationship of Terrestrial

Vertebrates to Plant Communities and Structural Conditions. General Technical Report

PNW-172. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range

Experiment Station.

Masto, Catherine Cortez. 2011. Personal communication. Catherine Cortez Masto, with Ramona

Morrison, Vice Chairman, Nevada Board of Agriculture. January 25, 2011.

McEvoy, D. J., J. L. Huntington, J. Abatzoglou, L. Edwards. 2012. “An Evaluation of multi-scalar

drought indices in Nevada and eastern California.” Earth Interactions 16:1-18.

Meehan, W. R. (editor). 1991. Influences of Forest and Rangeland Management on Salmonid

Fishes and Their Habitats. American Fisheries Society publication.

Meents, J. K., B. W. Anderson, and R. D. Ohmart. 1982. “Vegetation relationships and food of

sage sparrows wintering in honey mesquite habitat.” Wilson Bull. 94:129-138.

Meinke, C. W., S. T. Knick, and D. A. Pyke. 2009. “A spatial model to prioritize sagebrush

landscapes in the intermountain west (U.S.A.) for restoration.” Restoration Ecology 17:652-659.

Menard C., P. Duncan, G. Fleurance, J. Georges, and M. Lila. 2002. “Comparative foraging and

nutrition of horses and cattle in European wetlands.” Journal of Applied Ecology 39:120-133.

Menneer, John C., Stuart Ledgard, Chris McLay, and Warwick Silvester. 2003. “The effect of a

single application of cow urine on annual N2 fixation under varying simulated grazing intensity,

as measured by four 15N isotope techniques.” Plant and Soil 254:469-480.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 49

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

METI Corp./Economic Insights of Colorado. 2012. USDA Forest Service Protocols for

Delineation of Economic Impact Analysis Areas.

Miller, R. F., and L. L. Eddleman. 2000. Spatial and Temporal Changes of Sage Grouse Habitat

in the Sagebrush Biome. Oregon State University Agriculture Experiment Station Technical

Bulletin 151.

Miller, R. F., and J. A. Rose. 1999. “Fire history and western juniper encroachment in sagebrush

steppe.” Journal of Range Management 52:550-559.

Miller, R. F., and R. J. Tausch. 2001. “The role of fire in pinyon and juniper woodlands: A

descriptive analysis.” In: K. E. M. Galley and T. P. Wilson (editors), Proceedings of the Invasive

Species Workshop: The Role of Fire in the Control and Spread of Invasive Species. Fire

Conference 2000: the First National Congress on Fire Ecology, Prevention, and Management.

Miscellaneous Publication No. 11. Tallahassee, Florida, Tall Timbers Research Station. Pp.

15-30.

Miller, R. F., T. J. Svejcar, and N. E. West. 1994. “Implications of livestock grazing in the

intermountain sagebrush region: Plant composition.” In: Ecological Implications of Livestock

Herbivory in the West. Society for Range Management.

Miller, R. F., S. T. Knick, D. A. Pyke, C. W. Meinke, S. E. Hanser, M. J. Wisdom, and A. L. Hild.

2011. “Characteristics of sagebrush habitats and limitations to long-term conservation.” In: S. T.

Knick and C. J. W. (editors), Greater sage-grouse: Ecology of a landscape species and its habitats.

Cooper Ornithological Union, University of California Press, Berkeley. Pp. 145-184.

Modoc County. 1988. Modoc County General Plan. Alturas, California.

_____. 1995. Comprehensive Land Use Plan.

Mote, P. W., A. F. Hamlet, M. P. Clark, D. P. Lettenmaier. 2005. “Declining mountain snowpack

in western North America.” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 86:39-49.

NACO (National Association of Counties). 2012. Find a county. Internet website:

http://www.naco.org/counties/pages/findacounty.aspx.

_____. 2013. Policy Brief. Continue mandatory funding for the payment in lieu of taxes (PILT)

program. Internet website: http://www.naco.org/legislation/policies/Documents/PublicLands/

ry--pilt.pdf

National Center for Education Statistics. 2012. Public school revenue sources. Internet website:

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_sft.asp.

National Fire Planning Operations Reporting System. Data included 2008-2012.

National Research Council. 2002. Riparian Areas: Functions and Strategies for Management.

National Academy of Science. Washington, DC.

Natural Resource Industry Institute. 2011. An Economic Overview of Nevada’s Minerals Industry,

2010-2011. Internet website: http://www.nevadamining.org/issues_policy/pdfs/NVMA_2010_

Economic_Overview.pdf.

Chapter 7 References
50 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Naugle, D. E., K. E. Doherty, B. L. Walker, M. J. Holloran, and H. E. Copeland. 2011.

“Energy development and greater sage-grouse.” In: S. T. Knick and C. J. W. (editors), “Greater

sage-grouse: Ecology of a landscape species and its habitats.” Cooper Ornithological Union,

University of California Press, Berkeley. Pp. 489-504.

NCSL (National Conference of State Legislatures). 2013. Federal and state recognized tribes.

Internet website: http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/tribal/list-of-federal-and-state-recognizedtribes.aspx.

NDOW (Nevada Department of Wildlife). 1986. Desatoya Range Bighorn Sheep Habitat
 

Management Plan. Reno, NV.
 

_____. 1993. Big Game Habitat Management Plan. 1993.
 

_____. 1997. Elk Species Management Plan. February 8, 1997.
 

_____. 1999a. Lincoln County Elk Management Plan. July 1999.
 

_____. 1999b. Pahranagat Valley Native Fishes Management Plan.
 

_____. 1999c. White Pine County Elk Management Plan. March 1999.
 

_____. 2001. Bighorn Sheep Management Plan. Reno, Nevada. October 2001.
 

_____. 2002. Population Management Unit (PMU) boundaries.
 

_____. 2004a. Lahontan Cutthroat Trout Species Management Plan for the Upper Humboldt
 

River Drainage Basin. December 2004.
 

_____. 2004b. Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Plan for Nevada and Eastern California.
 

First edition: June 30, 2004.
 

_____. 2006a. Management Plan for Mule Deer.
 

_____. 2006b. Conservation Agreement and Conservation Strategy for Bonneville Cutthroat
 

Trout.
 

_____. 2012a. Nevada Sage-Grouse Conservation Project, Interim Performance Report.
 

December 2012.
 

_____. 2012b. Greater Sage-Grouse Habitat Categorization Executive Summary.
 

_____. 2013. Wildlife Action Plan. Wildlife Action Plan Team. January 2013.
 

NDOW and CDFW. 2012. Unpublished and internal lek site data from NDOW Chet Van Dillon
 

(CDFW) and Brian Ehler (CDFW), modified by California BLM to reflect most current data.
 

Neary, Daniel G., Kevin C. Ryan, Leonard F. DeBano (editors). 2005 (revised 2008). Wildland
 

Fire in Ecosystems: Effects of Fire on Soils and Water. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol.4.
 

US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah.
 

Nelle, P. J., K. P. Reese, and J. W. Connelly. 2000. “The long-term effect of fire on sage
 

grouse nesting and brood-rearing habitats on the Upper Snake River Plain.” Journal of Range
 

Management 53:586-591.
 

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 51

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

State of Nevada. 2001. Nevada Sage-Grouse Conservation Strategy. Carson City, NV. October

2001.

_____. 2004. State of Nevada Sage Grouse Conservation Team. Greater Sage-Grouse

Conservation Plan for Nevada and Eastern California. 1st ed. 2004. Carson City, NV.

_____. 2012. State of Nevada Strategic Plan for Conservation of Greater Sage-Grouse.

Governor’s Sage-Grouse Advisory Committee. Carson City, NV, July 31, 2012.

Nevada Bat Working Group. 2006. Revised Nevada Bat Conservation Plan. Reno, Nevada.

Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology. Undated. Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology Oil

and Gas Historical Summary (Modified from NBMG Bulletin 104, 1988). Internet website:

http://www.nbmg.unr.edu/Oil&Gas/HistoricalSummary.html. Accessed September 4, 2013.

_____. 2000. Geothermal Resources in Nevada. Map 126. Prepared in cooperation with

the Nevada Division of Minerals and the US Department of Energy. Internet website:

http://www.nbmg.unr.edu/dox/m126.pdf.

_____. 2010. The Nevada Mining Industry. Internet website: http://www.nbmg.unr.edu/dox/

mi/10.pdf.

Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. 1985. Nevada Summary Policy Plan

for Public Lands. Division of State Lands. Carson City, Nevada.

_____. 1993. State of Nevada Drought Plan. Department of Conservation and Natural Resources,

Division of Water Planning. Carson City, Nevada.

_____. 1999. Lands Identified for Public Acquisition. Division of State Lands. Carson City,

Nevada.

_____. 2003. Nevada’s 2003 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan—Assessment

and Policy Plan. Division of State Parks. Carson City, Nevada.

Nevada Department of Employment, Training, and Rehabilitation. 2013a. Reno Sparks

MSA—Long-Term Industrial Employment and Projections, 2010-2020. Research and Analysis

Bureau. Internet website: http://www.nevadaworkforce.com/?PAGEID=67&SUBID=197.

Accessed in June 2013.

_____. 2013b. Western Central Counties - Long Term Industrial Employment

and Projections, 2010-2020. Research and Analysis Bureau. Internet website:

http://www.nevadaworkforce.com/?PAGEID=67&SUBID=197. Accessed in June 2013.

_____. 2013c. Balance of State Long-Term Industrial Employment and Projections,

2008-2018. Research and Analysis Bureau. Internet website: http://www.nevadaworkforce.com/?PAGEID=67&SUBID=197. Accessed in June 2013.

Nevada Department of Taxation. 2012. Annual Report Fiscal 2010-2011. Internet website:

http://tax.state.nv.us/pubs.htm#annual report.

Nevada Division of Environmental Protection. 1999. Smoke Management Program Plan. Bureau

of Air Quality Planning. Carson City, Nevada.

Chapter 7 References
52 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 2007. Solid Waste Management Plan. Carson City, Nevada.

Nevada Governor’s Sage-Grouse Conservation Team. 2004. Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation

Plan for Nevada and Eastern California. Internet website: http://www.ndow.org/wild/

conservation/sg/plan.

_____. 2010. Nevada energy and infrastructure development standards to conserve greater

sage-grouse populations and their habitats. Carson City, NV, Pp. 9-11.

Nevada Indian Territory. 2012. Indian Territory Brochure. Internet website:

http://www.nevadaindianterritory.com/images/IndianTerritoryBrochure.pdf.

Nevada Mining Association. 2010. Issues and Policy: Taxation. Internet website:

http://www.nevadamining.org/issues_policy/taxation.php.

Nevada State Historic Preservation Office. 2003. Nevada Comprehensive Preservation Plan.

Carson City, Nevada.

Nevada Weed Action Committee. 2000. Nevada’s Coordinated Invasive Weed Strategy. Carson

City, Nevada.

Northeast California Sage-Grouse Working Group. 2006a. Conservation Strategy for

Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) and Sagebrush Ecosystems within the Massacre

Population Management Unit.

_____. 2006b. Conservation Strategy for Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) and

Sagebrush Ecosystems within the Vya Population Management Unit.

NPS (US Department of the Interior, National Park Service). 1997. National Register Bulletin

15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. US Department of Interior,

National Park Service. Washington, DC.

_____. 2012. California National Historic Trail. Internet website: http://www.nps.gov/cali/

planyourvisit/directions.htm. Accessed on November 26, 2012.

NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2000.

. 2011. Practice Documentation Guide 528-1: Prescribed Grazing. March 2011.

_____. 2012. Sage-Grouse Initiative Status Report Fiscal Year 2010-2011.

NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory). 2012. Classes of Wind Power Density at 10m

and 50m. Internet website: http: //rredc.nrel.gov/wind/pubs/atlas/tables/1-1T.html. Accessed

December 2012.

NTT (National Technical Team). 2011. A Report on National Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation

Measures. Produced by the Sage-Grouse National Technical Team. Washington D.C. December

21, 2011.

NV Energy. 2013. Geothermal Projects. Internet website: https://www.nvenergy.com/

renewablesenvironment/renewables/geothermal.cfm.

Nye County (Nevada). 1996. Tri-Party Framework for Interactions to Address Public Lands

Issues in Nye County. August 14, 1997.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 53

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 2009. Title 7 of the Nye County Code (Comprehensive Land Use and Management Plan

for Federal and State Lands within Nye County). August 24, 2009.

_____. 2011. Comprehensive Master Plan. June 7, 2011. Internet website:

http://www.nyecounty.net/DocumentCenter/Home/View/14049.

_____. 2012. Personal communication. Levi Kryder (Nye County) to Brian Amme (BLM),

September 2012.

Olmstead, David L., and Omer C. Stewart. 1978. “Achumawi.” In: R. F. Heizer (editor),

Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8: California. Smithsonian Institution Press,

Washington, DC. Pp. 225-235.

ONRR (US Department of Interior, Office of Natural Resources Revenue). 2012. Personal

communication. Nathan Brannberg, ONRR, to Josh Sidon, BLM, July 26, 2012.

Ormat. 2012. Ormat announces commercial operation of Mcginness Hills geothermal power

plant. July 2012. Internet website: http://www.ormat.com/news/latest-items/ormat-announcescommercial-operation-mcginness-hills-geothermal-power-plant.

Osborn, Stephen G., Avner Vengosh, Nathaniel R. Warner, and Robert B. Jackson. 2011.

“Methane Contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic

fracturing.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

Vol. 108 No. 20 (May 17, 2011): 8172-8176.

Paige, C., and S. A. Ritter. 1998. Birds in a Sagebrush Sea: Managing Sagebrush Habitats for

Bird Communities. Western Working Group of Partners in Flight, Boise, Idaho.

Painter, T. H., A. P. Barrett, C. C. Landry, J. C. Neff, M. P. Cassidy, C. R. Lawrence, K. E.

McBride, and G. L. Farmer. 2007. “Impact of disturbed desert soils on duration of mountain snow

cover.” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 34, L12502, doi:10.1029/2007GL030284.

Parmalee, Paul W. 1970. “Birds from Hogup Cave.” In: C. Melvin Aikens (editor), Hogup Cave.

Anthropological Papers No. 93. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. Pp. 263-266.

_____. 1988a. “Avian remains from Danger Cave.” In: Donald K. Grayson (editor), Danger

Cave, Last Supper Cave, and Hanging Rock Shelter: The Faunas. Anthropological Papers 66

(Part 1). American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York. Pp. 37-43.

_____. 1988b. “Mollusks and birds from Last Supper Cave.” In: Donald K. Grayson (editor),

Danger Cave, Last Supper Cave, and Hanging Rock Shelter: The Faunas. Anthropological

Papers 66 (Part 1). American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York. Pp. 75-80.

Patricelli, Gail L., J. L. Blicksley, S. Hooper. In review. Incorporating the Impacts of Noise

Pollution into Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Planning. Department of Evolution and

Ecology. University of California Davis.

Patterson, R. L. 1952. The Sage Grouse in Wyoming. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission,

Sage Books Inc., Denver, Colorado.

Payne, G. F., J. W. Foster, and W. C. Leininger. 1983. “Vehicle impacts on northern Great Plains

range vegetation.” Journal of Range Management 36:327-331.

Chapter 7 References
54 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Pellant, M. 1990. The cheatgrass-wildfire cycle—Are there any solutions? In: E.
 

Durant McArthur, Evan M. Romney, Stanley D. Smith, Paul T. Tueller (compilers),
 

Proceedings—Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die-Off, and Other Aspects of Shrub
 

Biology and Management, Las Vegas, Nevada. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-276. US Department of
 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah. April 5-7, 1989.
 

Pp. 11-17.
 

_____. 1996. “Use of indicators to qualitatively assess rangeland health.” In: N. E. West (editor),
 

Rangelands in a Sustainable Biosphere. Proc. 5th International Rangeland Congress. Society for
 

Range Management, Denver, Colorado. Pp. 434-435.
 

Pershing County. 2002. Master Plan. April 5, 2002. Internet website: http://pershingcounty.net/
 

images/stories/pc_files/planning/Pershing_County_Master_Plan_2002.pdf.
 

_____. 2010. Natural Resources Management Plan: Natural Resources and Federal or State
 

Land Use. October 22, 2010.
 

Petersen, K. L., and L. B. Best. 1985. “Nest-site selection by sage sparrows.” Condor 87:217-221.
 

Petersen, S. L., T. K. Stringham, and B. A. Roundy. 2009. “A process-based application
 

of state-and-transition models: A case study of western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis)
 

encroachment.” Rangeland Ecology & Management 62:186-192.
 

Platts, W. S. 1990. Fish, wildlife, and livestock: Protection of riparian areas. In: Western
 

Wildlands. Summer 1990. Pp. 16-19.
 

Prichard, D., H. Barrett, J. Cagney, R. Clark, J. Fogg, K. Gebhardt, P. Hansen, et al. 1993.
 

Riparian Area Management: Process for Assessing Proper Functioning Condition. TR 1737-9.
 

Bureau of Land Management, BLM/SC/ST-93/003+1737, Service Center, Lakewood, Colorado.
 

Prichard, D., D. Bridges, S. Leonard, R. Krapf, and W. Hagenbuck. 1994. Riparian Area
 

Management: Process for Assessing Proper Functioning Condition for Lentic Riparian-Wetland
 

Areas. TR 1737-11. Bureau of Land Management, BLM/SC/ST-94/008+1737, Service Center,
 

Lakewood, Colorado.
 

Prichard, Don, et al. 1998. Riparian Area Management. A User Guide to Assessing Proper
 

Function Condition and the Supporting Science for Lotic Areas. Technical Reference 1737-15,
 

Bureau of Land Management, Denver, Colorado.
 

Prichard, Don, et al. 1999. 2003. Riparian Area Management. A User Guide to Assessing Proper
 

Function Condition and the Supporting Science for Lentic Areas. Technical Reference 1737-16,
 

Bureau of Land Management, Denver, Colorado.
 

Pruett, C. L., M. A. Patten, and D. H. Wolfe. 2009. “Avoidance behavior by prairie grouse:
 

Implications for development of wind energy.” Conservation Biology 23:1253-1259.
 

Pyke, D. A. 2011. “Restoring and rehabilitating sagebrush habitats.” In: S. T. Knick and J. W.
 

Connelly (editors), “Greater sage-grouse: ecology and conservation of a landscape species and its
 

habitats.” Studies in Avian Biology 38. University of California Press, Berkeley. Pp. 531-548.
 

Pyne. 2004. “Pyromancy: Reading stories in the flames.” Conservation Biology 18: 874-877.
 

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 55

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe and USDA (US Department of Agriculture). 2005. Pyramid Lake

Indian Reservation Comprehensive Resource Management Plan. Washoe County, Nevada.

Redmond, Kelly T. “Great Basin weather and climate: Winter recap, current status, summer

prospects.” Great Basin Climate Forum (conference). Reno, Nevada. May 3, 2013.

Reichler, Thomas, and Kim Junsu. 2008. “How well do coupled models simulate today's

climate?” Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc. 89:303-311.

Reinkensmeyer, D. P. 2000. “Habitat associations of bird communities in shrub-steppe and

western juniper woodlands.” Master’s thesis. Oregon State University, Corvallis.

Reisner, Michael D., James B. Grace, David A. Pyke, and Paul Doescher. 2013. “Conditions

favouring Bromus tectorum dominance of endangered sagebrush steppe ecosystems.” Journal of

Applied Ecology 10.1111/1365-2664.12097.

Repasky, R. R., and D. Schluter. 1994. “Habitat distributions of wintering sparrows along an

elevational gradient: Tests of the food, predation and microhabitat structure hypotheses.” Journal

of Animal Ecology 63:569-582.

Reynolds, T. D. 1981. “Nesting of the sage thrasher, sage sparrow, and Brewer's sparrow in

southeastern Idaho.” Condor 83:61-64.

Rhodes, E. C., J. D. Bates, R. N. Sharp, and K. W. Davies. 2010. “Fire effects on cover and

dietary resources of sage-grouse habitat.” Journal of Wildlife Management 74:755-764.

Rich, T. D. 1980. “Nest placement in sage thrashers, sage sparrows and Brewer’s sparrows.” The

Wilson Bulletin 92:362-368.

Rich, T. D., C. J. Beardmore, H. Berlanga, P. J. Blancher, M. S. W. Bradstreet, G. S.

Butcher, D. W. Demarest, et al. 2004. Partners in Flight North American Landbird

Conservation Plan. Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Ithaca, New York. Internet Web site:

http://www.partnersinflight.org/cont_plan/ Accessed September 4, 2013.

Richards, R. T., J. C. Chambers, and C. Ross. 1998. “Use of native plants on federal lands: Policy

and practice.” Journal of Range Management 51:625-632.

Rimbey, Neil R., L. Allen Torell, and John A. Tanaka. 2007. “Why grazing permits have

economic value.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 32(1):20-40.

Rishel, G. B., J. A. Lynch, and E. S. Corbett. 1982. “Seasonal stream temperature changes

following forest harvesting.” Journal of Environmental Quality 11:112-116.

Rosgen, D. L. 1997. “A Geomorphological Approach to Restoration of Incised Rivers.”

Proceedings of the Conference on Management of Landscapes Disturbed by Channel Incision,

1997.

Rotenberry, J. T., and J. A. Wiens. 1980. “Habitat structure, patchiness, and avian communities in

North American steppe vegetation: a multivariate analysis.” Ecology 61:1228-1250.

Rowland, M. M., L. H. Suring, and M. J. Wisdom. 2010. “Assessment of Habitat Threats to

Shrublands in the Great Basin: A Case Study.” In: J. M. Pye, H. M. Rauscher, Y. Sands, D. C.

Lee, and J. S. Beatty (editors), Environmental Threat Assessment and Application to Forest

Chapter 7 References
56 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

and Rangeland Management. U S Forest Service, General Technical Report, PNW, Bozeman,

Montana. Pp. 673-685.

Sada, Don, et al. 2001. Riparian Area Management, A Guide to Managing, Restoring and

Conserving Springs in the Western United States. Technical Reference 1737-17, Bureau of

Land Management, Denver, Colorado.

Sather-Blair, S., P. Makela, T. Carrigan, and L. Anderson. 2000. A Framework to Assist

in Making Sensitive Species Habitat Assessments for BLM-Administered Public Land in

Idaho: Sage Grouse (Centorcercus urophasianus). US Department of Interior, Bureau of Land

Management, Idaho.

Sawyer, J. O., and T. Keeler-Wolf. 1995. A Manual of California Vegetation. California Native

Plant Society. Sacramento, California.

Schaefer, R. J., D. J. Thayer, and T. S. Burton. 2003. “Forty-one years of vegetation change

on permanent transects in northeastern California: Implications for wildlife.” California Fish

and Game 89(2):55-71.

Schoenberg, T. J. 1982. “Sage grouse movements and habitat selection in North Park, Colorado.”

Master’s thesis. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Schroeder, M. A. 1995. Productivity and Habitat Use of Sage Grouse in North-Central

Washington. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Job Progress Report Project W-96-R,

Olympia, Washington.

Schroeder, M. A., J. R. Young, and C. E. Braun. 1999. “Sage grouse (Centrocercus

urophasianus).” In: A. Poole and F. Gill (editors), The Birds of North America, No. 425. The

Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Schroeder, M. A., C. L. Aldridge, A. D. Apa, J. R. Bohne, C. E. Braun, S. D. Bunnell, J. W.

Connelly, P. A. Diebert, S. C. Gardner, M. A. Hilliard, G. D. Kobriger, C. W. McCarthy. 2004.

“Distribution of sage grouse in North America.” Condor 106:363-376.

Sevon, M., J. French, J. Curran, and R. Phoenix. 1999. Lahontan Cutthroat Trout Species

Management Plan for the Quinn River/Black Rock Basins and North Fork Little Humboldt River

Sub-Basin. Nevada Department of Wildlife, Federal Aid Project F-20-27 Job 113-P.Carson

City, NV.

Shasta County. 2004. General Plan. September 2004.

Sheley, Roger L., and Janet K. Petroff. 1999. Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland

Weeds. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis. Pp. 85-96.

Shlisky, A., J. Waugh, P. Gonzalez, M. Gonzalez, M. Manta, H. Santoso, E. Alvarado, et al. 2007.

Fire, Ecosystems and People: Threats and Strategies for Global Biodiversity Conservation. The

Nature Conservancy Global Fire Initiative Technical Report 2007-2.

Short, Karen C. 2013. A Spatial Database of Wildfires in the United States, 1992-2011

[FPA_FOD_20130422]. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain

Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 57

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Shultz, B., and K. McAdoo. 2002. Common Sagebrush in Nevada. University of Nevada, Reno.

SP-02-02.

Siskiyou County. 2010. Siskiyou County General Plan. Yreka, California.

Sousa, W. P. 1984. “The role of disturbance in natural communities.” Annual Review Ecological

Systems 15:353-391.

Stephens, S. L., J. J. Moghaddas, C. Edminster, C. E. Fiedler, S. Hasse, M. Harrington, J. E.

Keeley, et al. 2009. “Fire treatment effects on vegetation structure, fuels and potential fire severity

in western US forests.: Ecological Applications 19(2):305-320.

Stevens, B. S. 2011. “Impacts of fences on greater sage-grouse in Idaho: Collision, mitigation,

and spatial ecology.” Thesis. University of Idaho, Moscow.

Steward, Julian H. 1936. “Myths of the Owens Valley Paiute.” University of California

Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 34, No. 5:355-440.

_____. 1941. “Culture element distributions: XIII Nevada Shoshone.” Anthropological Records

Vol. 4, No. 2:209-360. University of California Press, Berkeley.

_____. 1943. “Culture element distributions: XXIII Northern and Gosiute Shoshoni.”

Anthropological Records Vol. 8, No. 3:263-392. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Stewart, Omer. 1941. “Culture element distributions: XIV Northern Paiute.” Anthropological

Records Vol. 4, No. 3:361-446. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Stiver, S. J., A. D. Apa, J. R. Bohne, S. D. Bunnell, P. A. Deibert, S. C. Gardner, M. A. Hilliard, et

al. 2006. Greater Sage-Grouse Comprehensive Conservation Strategy. Western Association of

Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Unpublished report. Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Stiver, S. J, E. T. Rinkes, and D. E. Naugle. 2010. Sage-Grouse Habitat Assessment Framework:

Multiscale Habitat Assessment Tool. US Bureau of Land Management Report, Idaho State

Office, Boise.

Storey County (Nevada). 1994. Master Plan. April 21, 1994.

Summit Lake Paiute Tribal Council, Summit Lake Land Use Committee, and Lumose and

Associates, Inc. 2000. Summit Lake Paiute Land Use Plan. Summit Lake Paiute Council of the

Summit Lake Paiute Tribe, Summit Lake Indian Reservation, Nevada

Sveum, C. M., J. A. Crawford, and W. D. Edge. 1998 “Use and selection of brood-rearing habitat

by sage grouse in south-central Washington.” Great Basin Naturalist 58:344-351.

Tang, Guoping, and John A. Arnone, III. 2013. “Trends in surface air temperature extremes in the

Great Basin during the 20th century from ground-based observations.” Journal of Geophysical

Research: Atmospheres, SN 2169-8996. Unpublished manuscript accepted March 27, 2013.

Tausch, R. J., and R. S. Nowak. 1999. Fifty Years of Ecotone Change Between Shrub and

Tree dominance in the Jack Springs Pinyon Research Natural Area. USDA, Forest Service

Proceedings RMRS-P-00.

Chapter 7 References
58 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Taylor, R. L., D. E. Naugle, and L. S. Mills. 2012. Viability Analyses for Conservation of

Sage-Grouse Populations: Buffalo Field Office, Wyoming Final Report. Prepared for Bureau of

Land Management Buffalo Field Office, Buffalo, Wyoming. Wildlife Biology Program University

of Montana BLM Contract 09-3225-0012 Number G09AC00013. February 27, 2012.

Terres, J. K. 1980. The Audubon Society Encyclopedia of North American Birds. Alfred A.

Knopf, New York, New York.

Thurow, T. L., and C. A. Taylor, Jr. 1999. “Viewpoint: The role of drought in range management.”

Journal of Range Management 52:413-419.

Tisdale, E. W. 1994. “Great Basin region sagebrush types.” In: T. N. Shiflet (editor), Rangeland

Cover Types. Soc. Range Manage., Denver, Colorado. Pp. 40-46.

Tisdale, E. W., and M. Hironaka. 1981. “The sagebrush-grass region: a review of the ecological

literature.” Idaho Forest, Wildlife, and Range Experiment Station, Bulletin 33, Moscow, Idaho.

TMRPA (Truckee [Nevada] Meadows Regional Planning Agency). 2007. Regional Plan. July

19, 2007. Reno, NV.

_____. 2010. Wider Region Stakeholders Profile Report: An Analysis of Neighboring Local

Governments, Regional Organizations, Native American Tribes and Economic Development

Organizations. Internet website: http://tmrpa.org/uploads/misc/568683765-Regional%20Stakeholder%20Profile%20Report%20-%20Final%20Report%20for%20Web%20Publishing.pdf.

TNC (The Nature Conservancy). 2001. Great Basin: An Ecoregion-Based Conservation

Blueprint. Reno, Nevada.

Torell, L. Allen, Neil R. Rimbey, Octavio A. Ramirez, and Daniel W. McCollum. 2005. “Income

earning potential versus consumptive amenities in determining ranchland values.” Journal of

Agricultural and Resource Economics 30(3):537-560.

Trimble, S. 1989. The Sagebrush Ocean. University of Nevada Press, Reno.

Trombulak, S. C., and C. A. Frissel. 2000. “Review of ecological effects of roads on terrestrial

and aquatic communities.” Conservation Biology 14:18-30.

USAF (United States Air Force). 2012. F-35A Training Basing Environmental Impact Statement.

Internet website: http://www.f-35atrainingeis.com/. pp. BO-78; Appendix B-41.

US Census Bureau. 1990. 1990 Census of Population. Internet website:

http://www.census.gov/popest/data/intercensal/st-co/index.html.

_____. 2000 Census of Population. Internet website: http://www.census.gov/popest/data/

intercensal/st-co/index.html.

_____. 2009. Table 4. Cumulative Estimates of the Components of Resident Population Change

for the United States, Regions, States, and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2000, to July 1, 2009. Internet

website: http://www.census.gov/popest/data/historical/2000s/vintage_2009/index.html.

_____. 2010a. 2010 Census of Population. Internet website: http://2010.census.gov/2010census/

data/.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 59

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 2010b. Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010.
 

_____. 2010c. State and Local Government Finances by Level of Government
 

and by State: 2009-10. State and Local Government Finances. Internet website:
 

http://www.census.gov/govs/estimate/.
 

_____. 2010d. American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2006-2010.
 

_____. 2011. Selected Housing Characteristics. 2007-20011 American Community Survey
 

5-year Estimates. American Factfinder. Internet website: http://factfinder2.census.gov.
 

_____. 2012a. Commuter patterns for counties in California and Nevada, generated from Census
 

Bureau database OnTheMap. Internet website: http://onthemap.ces.census.gov/.
 

_____. 2012b. How the Census Bureau Measures Poverty. Internet website:
 

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/overview/measure.html.
 

USDA (US Department of Agriculture). 2013. Water Supply Outlook for the Western United
 

States, October 18, 2012. Internet website: http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/wsf/westwide.html.
 

USDA and DOI (US Department of Agriculture and US Department of the Interior). 2001. A
 

Collaborative Approach for Reducing Wildland Fire Risks to Communities and the Environment:
 

10-Year Comprehensive Strategy. Washington, DC.
 

USDA ERS (US Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service). 2012. Commodity
 

Costs and Returns. Internet website: http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/commodity-costsand-returns.aspx. Accessed August 2012.
 

USDA NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). 1997. National Range and Pasture
 

Handbook. Government Printing Office, Washington DC.
 

USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service). 1982. Aquatic Habitat Management Plan;
 

North Fork, Little Humboldt River, Nevada.
 

_____. 1986a. Pacific States Bald Eagle Recovery Plan. August 25, 1986.
 

_____. 1986b. Ruby Lake National Wildlife Refuge Management Plan. 1986.
 

_____. 1988. Ruby Lake National Wildlife Refuge Water Management Plan. 1988.
 

_____. 1994a. Big Spring Spinedace Recovery Plan. Portland, Oregon. January 20, 1994.
 

_____. 1994b. Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan. Portland, Oregon. June 1994.
 

_____. 1995. Lahontan cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki henshawi) Recovery Plan. Portland,
 

Oregon.
 

_____. 1997a. Railroad Valley Springfish Recovery Plan. Portland, Oregon. March 15, 1997.
 

_____. 1997b. Recovery Plan for the Rare Species of Soldier Meadows. Portland, Oregon.
 

May 27, 1997.
 

_____. 1998a. Recovery Plan for the Aquatic and Riparian Species of Pahranagat Valley.
 

Portland, Oregon.
 

Chapter 7 References
60 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

_____. 1998b. Recovery Plan for the Native Fishes of the Warner Basin and Alkali Subbasin.

Portland, Oregon. April 27, 1998.

_____. 1999. Draft Big Spring Spinedace Recovery Implementation Plan.

_____. 2001a. Pahranagat National Wildlife Refuge Wildland Fire Management Plan. September

2001.

_____. 2001b. Ruby Lake National Wildlife Refuge Fire Management Plan. September 2001.

_____. 2002. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Recovery Plan. Albuquerque, New Mexico.

August 30, 2002.

_____. 2003. Conservation Agreement and Conservation Strategy for Columbia Spotted Frog

(Rana luteiventris) Toiyabe Great Basin Subpopulation. September 30, 2003.

_____. 2007. Recovery Plan for the Carson Wandering Skipper. Sacramento, California.

September 13, 2007.

_____. 2010a. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Findings for Petitions

to List the Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) as Threatened or Endangered.

75 Federal Register 13910. March 23, 2010.

_____. 2010b. 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Pygmy Rabbit as Endangered or

Threatened. 75 Federal Register 60516, September 30, 2010.

_____. 2012. Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan.

Lakeview, Oregon. September 27, 2012.

_____. 2013a. Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) Conservation Objectives:

Final Report. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Conservation Objectives Team, Denver, Colorado.

February 2013.

_____. 2013b. National Wetlands Inventory Database. Internet website:

http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/. Accessed May 2013.

USFWS and NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2003. Policy for

Evaluation of Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions. 68 Federal Register 15100.

March 28, 2003.

USGS (United States Geological Survey). 2006a. The National Map. LANDFIRE: LANDFIRE

Rapid Assessment Fire Regimes layer. (2006, September – last update). US Department of

Interior, Geological Survey. Internet website: http:gisdata.usgs.net/website/landfire/ [2013,

May 3].—PG 40.

_____. 2006b. LANDFIRE: LANDFIRE Rapid Assessment Vegetation Condition Class layer.

(2006, September – last update). US Department of Interior, Geological Survey. Internet website:

http:gisdata.usgs.net/website/landfire/ [2013, May 3].—PG 98.

_____. 2006c. Effects of Fire in the Northern Great Plains; Effects of Fire on Some Undesirable

Species. Internet website: http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/habitat/fire/undesire.htm.

Accessed January 29, 2013. – PG 143

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 61

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Vavra, M., W. A. Laycock, and R. Pieper (editors.) 1994. “Ecological implications of livestock

herbivory in the west.” Society of Range Management. Denver, Colorado.

Wakkinen, W. L., K. P. Reese, and J. W. Connelly. 1992. “Sage grouse nest locations in relation

to leks.” Journal of Wildlife Management 56:381-383.

Walker, Jr., and E. Deward. 2010. Ethnographic Assessment of the Ruby Pipeline Right-of Way

(RPROW). Report on file with the BLM Winnemucca District Office, Nevada.

Walker, R. H., and G. A. Buchanan. 1982. “Crop manipulation in integrated weed management

systems.” Weed Sci. 30:17-24.

Walker, B. L, D. E. Naugle, and K. E. Doherty. 2007. “Greater sage-grouse population response

to energy development and habitat loss.” Journal of Wildlife Management 71:2644-54.

Walker B. L, and D. E. Naugle. 2011. “West Nile virus ecology in sagebrush habitat and impacts

on greater sage-grouse populations.” In: S. T. Knick and J. W. Connelly (editors), “Greater

sage-grouse: ecology and conservation of a landscape species and its habitats,” Studies in Avian

Biology No. 38:127-144.

Washoe County (Nevada). 2005a. Comprehensive Plan. June 21, 2005.

_____. 2005b. Water Resources Management Plan, Nevada. January 18, 2005.

_____. 2008. Open Space & Natural Resource Management Plan. January 2008.

Weiss, N. T., and B. J. Verts. 1984. “Habitat and distribution of pygmy rabbits (Sylvilagus

idahoensis) in Oregon.” Great Basin Naturalist 44:563-571.

Welch, A. H., D. J. Bright, and L. A. Knochenmus (editors). 2007. Water Resources of the Basin

and Range Carbonate-Rock Aquifer System, White Pine County, Nevada, and the Adjacent Areas

in Nevada and Utah: US Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5261.

West, N. E. 1984. “Successional patterns and productivity potentials of pinyon-juniper

ecosystems.” In: “Developing strategies for rangeland management.” Nat. Res. Council/National

Acad. of Science. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado. BLM Library Request. Pp. 1301-1332.

_____. 1988. “Intermountain deserts, shrub steppes and woodlands.” In: M. G. Barbour and

W. D. Billings (editors), North American Terrestrial Vegetation. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, UK. Pp. 209-230.

_____. 1999. Managing for biodiversity of rangelands. In: W. W. Collins and C. O. Qualset

(editor). Biodiversity in Agro-Ecosystems. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida. Pp. 101-126.

Westerling, A. L., H. G. Hildalgo, D. R. Cayan, and T. W. Swetnam. 2006. “Warming and earlier

spring increase Western US forest wildfire activity.” Science, Vol. 313:940-943.

WGFD (Wyoming Game and Fish Department). 2011. Wyoming Game and Fish Department

Protocols for Treating Sagebrush to Benefit Sage-Grouse. Unpublished report.

Whisenant, Steven G. 1990. “Changing fire frequencies on Idaho's Snake River Plains: Ecological

and management implications.” In: E. Durant McArthur, Evan M. Romney, Stanley D. Smith,

and Paul T. Tueller (compilers). Proceedings—Symposium on cheatgrass invasion, shrub die-off,

Chapter 7 References
62 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

and other aspects of shrub biology and management, Las Vegas, Nevada. Gen. Tech. Rep.

INT-276. Ogden, Utah: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research

Station. 4-10. April 5-7, 1989.

White, Eric M., and Darren Gooding. 2012. Estimation of National Forest Visitor Spending

Averages from National Visitor Use Monitoring Round 2. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-XXX. US

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, Oregon.

White Pine County. 2006. Water Resources Plan. August 2006.

_____. 2007. Public Lands Policy Plan. May 2007.

_____. 2009. Comprehensive Master Plan. January 2009.

Wiens, J. A., and J. T. Rotenberry 1981. “Habitat associations and community structure of

birds in shrubsteppe environments.” Ecological Monographs 51:21–42. Internet website:

http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2937305.

Wilcox B. P., M. S. Seyfried, D. D. Breshears, and J. J. McDonnell. 2012. “Ecohydrologic

connections and complexities in drylands: new perspectives for understanding transformative

landscape change.” Ecohydrology 5:143-144. DOI: 10.1002/eco.1251.

Williams, J. E., C. W. Wood, and M. P. Dombeck (editors). 1997. “Watershed restoration:

principles and practices.” American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.

Williams, Colin F., Marshall J. Reed, Robert H. Mariner, Jacob DeAngelo, and Peter S. Galanis,

Jr. 2008. Assessment of moderate- and high-temperature geothermal resources of the United

States: US Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2008-3082.

Williams, M. I., G. B. Paige, T. L. Thurow, A. L. Hild, and K. G. Gerow. 2011. “Songbird

relationships to shrub-steppe ecological site characteristics.” Rangeland Ecology& Management

64:109-118.

Winward, A. H. 1991. Management in the Sagebrush Steppe. Agricultural Experiment Statistics.

Oregon State University Special Report 880, Corvallis.

Wisdom, M. J., C. W. Meinke, S. T. Knick, and M. A Schroeder. 2011. “Factors associated with

extirpation of sage-grouse.” In: S. T. Knick and J. W. Connelly (editors). “Greater sage-grouse:

ecology and conservation of a landscape species and its habitats.” Studies in Avian Biology

38:451-472. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Wolfe, M. L. 1980. “Feral horse demography: A preliminary report.” Journal of Range

Management 33 (5):354-360.

Wolfe, M. L., L. C. Ellis, and R. MacMullen. 1989. “Reproductive rates of feral horses and

burros.” Journal of Wildlife Management 53 (4):916-919.

Workman, J. P. 1986. Range Economics. Macmillan, New York, New York.

WRCC (Western Regional Climate Center). 2013. Climate of Nevada, Internet website:

http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/narratives/nevada/. Accessed April 27, 2013.

Chapter 7 References
Draft Resource Management 63

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Wyman, S., et al. 2006. Riparian area management: grazing management processes and strategies

for riparian-wetland areas. Technical Reference 1737-20. BLM/ST/ST-06/002+1737. US

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, National Science and Technology

Center, Denver, Colorado.

Yoder, J. M., D. A. Swanson, and E. A. Marschall. 2004. “The cost of dispersal: Predation as a

function of movement in ruffed grouse.” Behavioral Ecology 15:469-476.

Young, J. A., and R. Evans. 1989. “Dispersal and germination of sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata)

seeds.” Weed Science 37:201-206. Weed Science Society of America, Lawrence, Kansas.

Young, J. A., and B. A. Sparks. 2002. Cattle in the Cold Desert. Expanded edition. University of

Nevada Press, Reno.

Young, B. E., K. R. Hall, E. Byers, K. Gravuer, G. Hammerson, A. Redder, and K. Szabo. 2011.

“A natural history approach to rapid assessment of plant and animal vulnerability to climate

change.” In: J. Brodie, E. Post, and D. Doak (editors), Conserving Wildlife Populations in a

Changing Climate. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.

Zou, L., S. N. Miller, and E. T. Schmidtmann. 2006. “Mosquito larval habitat mapping using

remote sensing and GIS: implications of coalbed methane development and West Nile virus.”

Journal of Medical Entomology 43:1034-1041.

Chapter 7 References
This page intentionally

left blank
Chapter 8. Acronyms and Glossary
 
This page intentionally

left blank
Draft Resource Management 67

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

8.1. Acronyms

ADH all designated habitat

ACEC Area of Critical Environmental Concern

AML appropriate management level

AMP Allotment Management Plan

AMS analysis of the management situation

AOI Annual Operating Instructions

APD application for permit to drill

AQI air quality index

AQRV air quality related values

AUM animal unit month

BAPC Bureau of Air Pollution Control

BAQP Bureau of Air Quality Planning

BLM United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management

BLM S BLM Sensitive

BMP best management practice

°C degrees Celsius

C custodial management category

CA California

CAA Clean Air Act

CARB California Air Resources Board

CBR Central Basin and Range

CCDAQ Clark County, Health District, Air Pollution Control Division

CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife

CEC Commission for Environmental Cooperation

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

CFL cycle first listed

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Acronyms
68 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

cm Centimeter

CO carbon monoxide

CO2e carbon dioxide gross emissions

COA Conditions of Approval

COT Conservation Objectives Team

CSU controlled surface use

CTTM comprehensive travel and transportation management

CWA Clean Water Act

CWMA Cooperative Weed Management Area

DFC desired future condition

DOI United States Department of the Interior

EA environmental assessment

EDRR Early Detection, Rapid Response

EIS environmental impact statement

EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

ERMA Extensive Recreation Management Area

ERS United States Department of Agriculture Economic Resource Service

ESA Endangered Species Act

ESD Ecological Site Description

ESR emergency stabilization and rehabilitation

°F degrees Fahrenheit

FARD functional at risk with downward trend

FARN functional at risk with no trend

FARU functional at risk with upward trend

FC Federal listed as a candidate species

FC (w) Federal candidate species warranted for listing

FE Federally listed as endangered

FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Acronyms
Draft Resource Management 69

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

FMP Fire Management Plan

FMU Fire Management Unit

Forest Service United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

FRCC Fire Regime Condition Class

FSH Forest Service Handbook

FSM Forest Service Manual

FT Federally listed as threatened

FWFMP Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy

FY fiscal year

GBBO Great Basin Bird Observatory

GHG greenhouse gas

GIS Geographic Information Systems

GRSG Greater Sage-Grouse

H2S hydrogen sulfide

HA herd area

HGWP high global warming potential

HMA herd management area

I improve management category

IM Instructional Memorandum

IMP Interim Management Plan

IMPLAN Impact analysis for Planning

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IMTs Nevada Interagency Incident Management Team

JEDI National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s Jobs

and Economic Development Impact model

kWh/m2/day kilowatt hours per square meter per day

LANDFIRE Landscape Fire and Resource Management Planning Tools Project

LCAPCD Lassen County Air Pollution Control District

LRMP land and resource management plan

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Acronyms
70 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

LUP land use plan

LUPA land use plan amendment

LWCs Lands with Wilderness Characteristics

M maintain improvement category

MAFFS Modular Airborne Firefighting System

MIS Management Indicator Species

MCF thousand cubic feet

g/m3 micrograms per cubic meter

MCAPCD Modoc County Air Pollution Control District

MDEQ Montana Department of Environmental Quality

MDFWP Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks

MFP Monitoring Framework Plan

MOU memorandum of understanding

MTNHP Montana Natural Heritage Program

MW megawatt

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NBR Northern Basin and Range

NCA National Conservation Area

NDOW Nevada Department of Wildlife

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NFDRS National Fire Danger Rating System

NFMA National Forest Management Act

NHT national historic trail

NO2 nitrogen dioxide

NOx nitrogen oxides

NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service

NSO no surface occupancy

NTT Sage-Grouse National Technical Team

NV Nevada

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Acronyms
Draft Resource Management 71

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

NVUM National Visitor Use Monitoring

NWAP Nevada Wildlife Action Plan

O3 ozone

OHV off-highway vehicle

ONA outstanding natural area

ONRR Office of Natural Resource Revenue

ORV outstanding remarkable values

PACs priority areas for conservation

Pb lead

PEIS Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement

PFC proper functioning condition

PGH preliminary general habitat

PGMA preliminary general management area

PILT payment in lieu of taxes

PLO Public Land Order

PM2.5 particulate matter with a diameter less than or equal to 2.5 microns

PM10 particulate matter with a diameter less than or equal to 10 microns

PMA-3 Nevada Sagebrush Ecosystem Mitigation Bank Program

PMU Population Management Units

ppb parts per billion

PPH preliminary priority habitat

ppm parts per million

PPMA preliminary priority management area

RAC Resource Advisory Council

RDFs required design features

REA Rapid Ecoregional Assessment

RFDS Reasonable Foreseeable Development Scenario

RMIS Recreation Management Information System

RMP resource management plan

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Acronyms
72 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

RNA research natural area

ROD record of decision

ROS Recreation Opportunity Spectrum

ROW right-of-way

RSUA Recreation Special Use Authorization

S&G standards and guidelines

SC State listed as species of special concern (no legal status)

SE State listed as endangered

SGMA sage-grouse management area (Nevada State Alternative)

SO2 sulfur dioxide

SO4

2- sulfates

SOP standard operating procedure

SUP Special Use Permit

SRMA Special Recreation Management Area

SRP Special Recreation Permit

SRU special recreational use

ST state listed as threatened

SUA Special Use Authorization

TL timing limitation

TMA Travel Management Area

TNC The Nature Conservancy

TNR temporary nonrenewable

TTM Travel and Transportation Management

US United States

USAF US Air Force

USC United States Code

USDA United States Department of Agriculture

USDA-APHIS United States Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Acronyms
Draft Resource Management 73

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service

USG Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups

USGS US Geological Survey

VDDT Vegetation Dynamics Development Tool

VMS Visual Management System

VOC volatile organic compounds

VRI visual resource inventory

VRM visual resource management

WAFWA Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies

WCAQMD Washoe County Air Quality Management Division

WEG Wild Earth Guardians

WHBT wild horse and burro territories

WSA Wilderness Study Area

WSR Wild and Scenic River

WUI wildland urban interface

WWEC West-Wide Energy Corridor

WWP Western Watershed Project

8.2. Glossary

2008 WAFWA Sage-grouse MOU. A memorandum of understanding (MOU) among Western

Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA); US Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service; US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM); US Department

of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); US Department of the Interior, Geological

Survey (USGS); US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service

(NRCS); and the US Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency. The purpose of the MOU

is to provide for cooperation among the participating state and federal land, wildlife management

and science agencies in the conservation and management of sage-grouse (Centrocercus

urophasianus) sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) habitats and other sagebrush-dependent wildlife

throughout the western US and Canada and a commitment of all agencies to implement the

2006 WAFWA Conservation Strategy.

2011 Partnership MOU: A partnership agreement among the United States Department of

Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Forest Service, United States Department

of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, and USFWS in 2011. This MOU is for range

management – to implement Natural Resources Conservation Service practices on adjacent

federal properties.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
74 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Acquisition. Acquisition of lands can be pursued to facilitate various resource management

objectives. Acquisitions, including easements, can be completed through exchange, Land and

Water Conservation Fund purchases, donations, or receipts from the Federal Land Transaction

Facilitation Act sales or exchanges.

Activity plan. A type of implementation plan (see Implementation plan); an activity plan

usually describes multiple projects and applies best management practices to meet land use

plan objectives. Examples of activity plans include interdisciplinary management plans, habitat

management plans, recreation area management plans, and grazing plans.

Actual use. The amount of animal unit months consumed by livestock based on the numbers

of livestock and grazing dates submitted by the livestock operator and confirmed by periodic

field checks by the BLM.

Adaptive management. A type of natural resource management in which decisions are made as

part of an ongoing science-based process. Adaptive management involves testing, monitoring,

and evaluating applied strategies, and incorporating new knowledge into management approaches

that are based on scientific findings and the needs of society. Results are used to modify

management policy, strategies, and practices.

Administrative access. A term used to describe access for resource management and

administrative purposes such as fire suppression, cadastral surveys, permit compliance, law

enforcement and military in the performance of their official duty, or other access needed to

manage BLM- or Forest Service-administered lands or uses.

Air basin. A land area with generally similar meteorological and geographic conditions

throughout. To the extent possible, air basin boundaries are defined along political boundary lines

and include both the source and receptor areas.

Air pollution. Degradation of air quality resulting from unwanted chemicals or other materials

occurring in the air.

All designated habitat (ADH). Includes preliminary priority habitat (PPH), preliminary general

habitat (PGH), and linkage/connectivity habitat.

Allotment. An area of land in which one or more livestock operators graze their livestock.

Allotments generally consist of BLM lands but may include Forest Service-administered lands

or other federally managed, state-owned, or private lands. An allotment may include or more

separate pastures. Livestock numbers and periods of use are specified for each allotment.

Allotment management plan. A concisely written program of livestock grazing management,

including supportive measures if required, designed to attain specific, multiple-use management

goals in a grazing allotment. An AMP is prepared in consultation with the permittee(s), lessee(s),

and other affected interests. Livestock grazing is considered in relation to other uses of the range

and to renewable resources, such as watershed, vegetation, and wildlife. An AMP establishes

seasons of use, the number of livestock to be permitted, the range improvements needed, and

the grazing system.

Alluvial soil. A soil developing from recently deposited alluvium and exhibiting essentially no

horizon development or modification of the recently deposited materials.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
Draft Resource Management 75

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Alluvium. Clay, silt, sand, gravel, or other rock materials transported by moving water. Deposited

in comparatively recent geologic time as sorted or semi-sorted sediment in rivers, floodplains,

lakes, and shores, and in fans at the base of mountain slopes.

Ambient air quality. The state of the atmosphere at ground level as defined by the range of

measured and/or predicted ambient concentrations of all significant pollutants for all averaging

periods of interest.

Amendment. The process for considering or making changes in the terms, conditions, and

decisions of approved Resource Management Plans or management framework plans. Usually

only one or two issues are considered that involve only a portion of the planning area.

Animal unit month (AUM). The amount of forage necessary for the sustenance of one cow

or its equivalent for a period of one month.

Anthropogenic disturbances. Features include but are not limited to paved highways, graded

gravel roads, transmission lines, substations, wind turbines, oil and gas wells, geothermal wells

and associated facilities, pipelines, landfills, agricultural conversion, homes, and mines.

Aquatic. Living or growing in or on the water.

Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC). Special Area designation established

through the BLM’s land use planning process (43 CFR 1610.7-2) where special management

attention is required (when such areas are developed or used or where no development is required)

to protect and prevent irreparable damage to important historic, cultural, or scenic values, fish and

wildlife resources, or other natural systems or processes, or to protect life and safety from natural

hazards. The level of allowable use within an ACEC is established through the collaborative

planning process. Designation of an ACEC allows for resource use limitations in order to protect

identified resources or values.

Atmospheric deposition. Air pollution produced when acid chemicals are incorporated into rain,

snow, fog, or mist and fall to the earth. Sometimes referred to as “acid rain” and comes from

sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides, products of burning coal and other fuels and from certain

industrial processes. If the acid chemicals in the air are blown into the area where the weather is

wet, the acids can fall to earth in the rain, snow, fog, or mist. In areas where the weather is dry, the

acid chemicals may become incorporated into dust or smoke.

Attainment area. A geographic area in which levels of a criteria air pollutant meet the

health-based National Ambient Air Quality Standard for that specific pollutant.

Authorized /authorized use. This is an activity (i.e., resource use) occurring on the public

lands that is either explicitly or implicitly recognized and legalized by law or regulation. This

term may refer to those activities occurring on the public lands for which the BLM, Forest

Service, or other appropriate authority (e.g., Congress for RS 2477 rights-of-way, FERC for

major, interstate rights-of-way), has issued a formal authorization document (e.g., livestock

grazing lease/permit; right-of-way grant; coal lease; oil and gas permit to drill; etc.). Formally

authorized uses typically involve some type of commercial activity, facility placement, or event.

These formally authorized uses are often spatially or temporally limited. Unless constrained or

bounded by statute, regulation, or an approved land use plan decision, legal activities involving

public enjoyment and use of the public lands (e.g., hiking, camping, hunting, etc.) require no

formal BLM or Forest Service authorization.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
76 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Avoidance/avoidance area. These terms usually address mitigation of some activity (i.e.,

resource use). Paraphrasing the CEQ Regulations (40 CFR 1508.20), avoidance means to

circumvent, or bypass, an impact altogether by not taking a certain action, or parts of an action.

Therefore, the term "avoidance" does not necessarily prohibit a proposed activity, but it may

require the relocation of an action, or the total redesign of an action to eliminate any potential

impacts resulting from it. Also see “right-of-way avoidance area” definition.

Best Management Practices (BMPs): A suite of techniques that guide or may be applied to

management actions to aide in achieving desired outcomes. BMPs are often developed in

conjunction with land use plans, but they are not considered a planning decision unless the plans

specify that they are mandatory.

Big game. Indigenous, ungulate (hoofed) wildlife species that are hunted, such as elk, deer,

bison, bighorn sheep, and pronghorn antelope.

Biodiversity (biological diversity). The variety of life and its processes, and the interrelationships

within and among various levels of ecological organization. Conservation, protection, and

restoration of biological species and genetic diversity are needed to sustain the health of existing

biological systems. Federal resource management agencies must examine the implications of

management actions and development decisions on regional and local biodiversity.

Biological soil crust. A complex association between soil particles and cyanobacteria, algae,

microfungi, lichens, and bryophytes that live within or atop the uppermost millimeters of soil.

BLM Sensitive Species. Those species that are not federally listed as endangered, threatened, or

proposed under the Endangered Species Act, but that are designated by the BLM State Director

under 16 USC 1536(a)(2) for special management consideration. By national policy, federally

listed candidate species are automatically included as sensitive species. Sensitive species are

managed so they will not need to be listed as proposed, threatened, or endangered under the

Endangered Species Act.

Candidate species. Taxa for which the USFWS has sufficient information on their status and

threats to propose the species for listing as endangered or threatened under the Endangered

Species Act, but for which issuance of a proposed rule is currently precluded by higher priority

listing actions. Separate lists for plants, vertebrate animals, and invertebrate animals are published

periodically in the Federal Register (BLM Manual 6840, Special Status Species Manual).

Casual Use. Casual use means activities ordinarily resulting in no or negligible disturbance of the

public lands, resources, or improvements. For examples for rights of ways see 43 CFR 2801.5.

For examples for locatable minerals see 43 CFR 3809.5.

Categorical exclusion. A category of actions (identified in agency guidance) that do not

individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment, and for which

neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required (40 CFR

1508.4), but a limited form of NEPA analysis is performed.

Checkerboard. This term refers to a land ownership pattern of alternating sections of federally

owned lands with private- or state-owned lands for 20 miles on either side of a land grant railroad

(e.g., Union Pacific, Northern Pacific, etc.). On land status maps this alternating ownership is

either delineated by color coding or alphabetic code resulting in a "checkerboard" visual pattern.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
Draft Resource Management 77

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Chemical vegetation treatment. Application of herbicides to control invasive species/noxious

weeds and/or unwanted vegetation. To meet resource objectives the preponderance of chemical

treatments would be used in areas where cheatgrass or noxious weeds have invaded sagebrush

steppe.

Clean Air Act of 1963 (as amended). Federal legislation governing air pollution control.

Clean Water Act of 1972 (as amended). Federal legislation governing water pollution control.

Climate change. Any significant change in measures of climate (such as temperature,

precipitation, or wind) lasting for an extended period (decades or longer). Climate change may

result from:

● natural factors, such as changes in the sun's intensity or slow changes in the Earth's orbit
 

around the sun;
 

● natural processes within the climate system (e.g., changes in ocean circulation); and

● human activities that change the atmosphere's composition (e.g., driving automobiles) and the

land surface (e.g., deforestation, reforestation, urbanization, desertification, etc.).

Closed area. An area where one or more uses are prohibited either temporarily or over the long

term. Areas may be closed to uses such as, but not limited to, off-road vehicles, mineral leasing,

mineral or vegetative material collection, or target shooting. In off-road vehicle use closed areas,

motorized and mechanized off-road vehicle use is prohibited. Use of motorized and mechanized

off-road vehicles in closed areas may be allowed for certain reasons; however, such use shall be

made only with the approval of the authorized officer (43 CFR 8340.0-5).

Collaboration. A cooperative process in which interested parties, often with widely varied

interests, work together to seek solutions with broad support for managing public and other

lands. Collaboration may take place with any interested parties, whether or not they are a

cooperating agency.

Communications site corridor. A collection of communications sites or facilities along a route

that provides continuous radio coverage along the route and that is usually associated with cellular

wireless technology. (FSH 2709.11-Communication Site Management, 90.5-Definitions)

Comprehensive trails and travel management. The proactive interdisciplinary planning;

on-the-ground management and administration of travel networks (both motorized and

non-motorized) to ensure public access, natural resources, and regulatory needs are considered. It

consists of inventory, planning, designation, implementation, education, enforcement, monitoring,

easement acquisition, mapping and signing, and other measures necessary to provide access

to public lands for a wide variety of uses (including uses for recreational, traditional, casual,

agricultural, commercial, educational, landing strips, and other purposes).

Condition class (fire regimes). Fire regime condition classes are a measure describing the

degree of departure from historical fire regimes, possibly resulting in alterations of key ecosystem

components, such as species composition, structural stage, stand age, canopy closure, and

fuel loadings. One or more of the following activities may have caused this departure: fire

suppression, timber harvesting, livestock grazing, introduction and establishment of exotic plant

species, introduced insects or disease, or other management activities.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
78 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Conditions of Approval. Additional requirements associated with an approved Application for

Permit to Drill for a federal leasable mineral to ensure environmental protection, safety, and/or

conservation of the mineral resource.

Conformance. A proposed action shall be specifically provided for in the land use plan or, if

not specifically mentioned, shall be clearly consistent with the goals, objectives, or standards of

the approved land use plan.

Conservation measures. Measures to conserve, enhance, and/or restore Greater Sage-Grouse

habitat by reducing, eliminating, or minimizing threats to that habitat.

Conservation plan. The recorded decisions of a landowner or operator, cooperating with a

conservation district, on how the landowner or operator plans, within practical limits, to use

his/her land according to its capability and to treat it according to its needs for maintenance or

improvement of the soil, water, animal, plant, and air resources.

Conservation strategy. A strategy outlining current activities or threats that are contributing

to the decline of a species, along with the actions or strategies needed to reverse or eliminate

such a decline or threats. Conservation strategies are generally developed for species of plants

and animals that are designated as BLM sensitive species or that have been determined by the

USFWS or National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration-Fisheries to be federal

candidates under the ESA.

Controlled surface use (CSU). CSU is a category of moderate constraint stipulations that allows

some use and occupancy of public land while protecting identified resources or values and is

applicable to fluid mineral leasing and all activities associated with fluid mineral leasing (e.g.,

truck-mounted drilling and geophysical exploration equipment off designated routes, construction

of wells and/or pads). CSU areas are open to fluid mineral leasing but the stipulation allows the

BLM to require special operational constraints, or the activity can be shifted more than 200 meters

(656 feet) to protect the specified resource or value.

Cooperating agency. Assists the lead federal agency in developing an environmental assessment

or environmental impact statement. These can be any agency with jurisdiction by law or special

expertise for proposals covered by NEPA (40 CFR 1501.6). Any tribe or Federal, State, or local

government jurisdiction with such qualifications may become a cooperating agency by agreement

with the lead agency.

Council on Environmental Quality. An advisory council to the President of the US established

by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. It reviews federal programs to analyze and

interpret environmental trends and information.

Criteria pollutant. The US EPA uses six “criteria pollutants” as indicators of air quality, and

has established for each of them a maximum concentration above which adverse effects on

human health may occur. These threshold concentrations are called National Ambient Air Quality

Standards. The criteria pollutants are ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide,

particulate matter and lead.

Crucial wildlife habitat. The environment essential to plant or animal biodiversity and

conservation at the landscape level. Crucial habitats include, but are not limited to, biological

core areas, severe winter range, winter concentration areas, reproduction areas, and movement

corridors.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
Draft Resource Management 79

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Cultural resources. Locations of human activity, occupation, or use. Cultural resources include

archaeological, historic, or architectural sites, structures, or places with important public and

scientific uses, and locations of traditional cultural or religious importance to specified social

and/or cultural groups.

Cumulative effects. The direct and indirect effects of a proposed project alternative’s incremental

impacts when they are added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, regardless

of who carries out the action.

Decision area. Public lands and mineral estate within the planning area that are encompassed

by all designated habitat (ADH) (which includes preliminary priority habitat [PPH], preliminary

general habitat [PGH], and linkage/connectivity habitat).

Deferred/deferred use: To set-aside, or postpone, a particular resource use(s) or activity(ies)

on the public lands to a later time. Generally when this term is used the period of the deferral

is specified. Deferments sometimes follow the sequence timeframe of associated serial actions

(e.g., action B will be deferred until action A is completed, etc.).

Degraded vegetation. Areas where the plant community is not complete or is under threat.

Examples include missing components such as perennial forbs or cool season grasses, weed

infestations, or lack of regeneration of key species such as sagebrush or cottonwoods trees.

Designated roads and trails. Specific roads and trails identified by the BLM or Forest Service

where some type of motorized/nonmotorized use is appropriate and allowed, either seasonally

or year-long (H-1601-1, BLM Land Use Planning Handbook).

Desired future condition. For rangeland vegetation, the condition of rangeland resources on a

landscape scale that meet management objectives. It is based on ecological, social, and economic

considerations during the land planning process. It is usually expressed as ecological status or

management status of vegetation (species composition, habitat diversity, and age and size class of

species) and desired soil qualities (soil cover, erosion, and compaction). In a general context,

desired future condition is a portrayal of the land or resource conditions that are expected to

result if goals and objectives are fully achieved.

Desired outcomes. A type of land use plan decision expressed as a goal or objective.

Direct impacts. Direct impacts are caused by an action or implementation of an alternative and

occur at the same time and place.

Directional drilling. A drilling technique whereby a well is deliberately deviated from the

vertical in order to reach a particular part of the oil- or gas-bearing reservoir. Directional drilling

technology enables the driller to steer the drill stem and bit to a desired bottom hole location.

Directional wells initially are drilled straight down to a predetermined depth and then gradually

curved at one or more different points to penetrate one or more given target reservoirs. This

specialized drilling usually is accomplished with the use of a fluid-driven downhole motor, which

turns the drill bit. Directional drilling also allows multiple production and injection wells to

be drilled from a single surface location such as a gravel pad, thus minimizing cost and the

surface impact of oil and gas drilling, production, and transportation facilities. It can be used to

reach a target located beneath an environmentally sensitive area (Alaska Department of Natural

Resources, Division of Oil and Gas 2009).

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
80 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Disposal lands. Transfer of public land out of federal ownership to another party through

sale, exchange, Recreation and Public Purposes Act of 1926, Desert Land Entry or other land

law statutes.

Disruptive activities. Those public land resource uses/activities that are likely to alter the

behavior, displace, or cause excessive stress to existing animal or human populations occurring

at a specific location and/or time. In this context, disruptive activity(ies) refers to those actions

that alter behavior or cause the displacement of individuals such that reproductive success is

negatively affected, or an individual's physiological ability to cope with environmental stress is

compromised. This term does not apply to the physical disturbance of the land surface, vegetation,

or features. When administered as a land use restriction (e.g., No Disruptive Activities), this

term may prohibit or limit the physical presence of sound above ambient levels, light beyond

background levels, and/or the nearness of people and their activities. The term is commonly used

in conjunction with protecting wildlife during crucial life stages (e.g., breeding, nesting, birthing,

etc.), although it could apply to any resource value on the public lands. The use of this land use

restriction is not intended to prohibit all activity or authorized uses.

Diversity. The relative abundance of wildlife species, plant species, communities, habitats,

or habitat features per unit of area.

Easement. A right afforded a person or agency to make limited use of another’s real property for

access or other purposes.

Ecological Site. A distinctive kind of land with specific physical characteristics that differs from

other kinds of land in its ability to produce a distinctive kind and amount of vegetation.

Emergency stabilization. Planned actions to stabilize and prevent unacceptable degradation to

natural and cultural resources, to minimize threats to life or property resulting from the effects

of a fire, or to repair/replace/construct physical improvements necessary to prevent degradation

of land or resources. Emergency stabilization actions must be taken within one year following

containment of a wildfire.

Endangered species. Any species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant

portion of its range. Under the Endangered Species Act in the US, “endangered” is the

more-protected of the two categories. Designation as endangered (or threatened) is determined by

USFWS as directed by the Endangered Species Act (16 USC 1531-1544).

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (as amended). Designed to protect critically imperiled species

from extinction as a consequence of economic growth and development untempered by adequate

concern and conservation. The Act is administered by two federal agencies, USFWS and the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The purpose of the Act is to protect species

and also the ecosystems upon which they depend (16 US Code 1531-1544).

Enhance. The improvement of habitat by increasing missing or modifying unsatisfactory

components and/or attributes of the plant community to meet sage-grouse objectives.

Environmental assessment. A concise public document prepared to provide sufficient evidence

and analysis for determining whether to prepare an environmental impact statement or a finding

of no significant impact. It includes a brief discussion of the need for the proposal, alternatives

considered, environmental impact of the proposed action and alternatives, and a list of agencies

and individuals consulted.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
Draft Resource Management 81

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Environmental impact statement (EIS). A detailed statement prepared by the responsible

official in which a major federal action that significantly affects the quality of the human

environment is described, alternatives to the proposed action are provided, and effects are

analyzed (BLM National Management Strategy for OHV Use on Public Lands).

Evaluation (plan evaluation). The process of reviewing the land use plan and the periodic plan

monitoring reports to determine whether the land use plan decisions and National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969 analysis are still valid and whether the plan is being implemented.

Exchange. A transaction whereby the federal government receives land or interests in land in

exchange for other land or interests in land.

Exclusion Areas. An area on the public lands where a certain activity(ies) is prohibited to insure

protection of other resource values present on the site. The term is frequently used in reference

to lands/realty actions and proposals (e.g., rights-of-way, etc.), but is not unique to lands and

realty program activities. This restriction is functionally analogous to the phrase "no surface

occupancy" used by the oil and gas program, and is applied as an absolute condition to those

affected activities. The less restrictive analogous term is avoidance area. Also see “right-of-way

exclusion area” definition.

Exemplary (vegetation). An area of vegetation that does not show signs of degradation and

which may serve as a comparison to illustrate what the vegetation potential is for a given type

of environment. Exemplary vegetation meets A-ranked viability criteria as described by the

Colorado Natural Heritage Program.

Existing routes. The roads, trails, or ways that are used by motorized vehicles (jeeps, all-terrain

vehicles, motorized dirt bikes, etc.), mechanized uses (mountain bikes, wheelbarrows, game

carts), pedestrians (hikers), and/or equestrians (horseback riders) and are, to the best of BLM’s

knowledge, in existence at the time of RMP/EIS publication.

Exploration. Active drilling and geophysical operations to:

a. Determine the presence of the mineral resource; or

b. Determine the extent of the reservoir or mineral deposit.

Extensive recreation management area (ERMA). Administrative units that require specific

management consideration in order to address recreation use, demand, or Recreation and

Visitor Services program investments. ERMAs are managed to support and sustain the

principal recreation activities and the associated qualities and conditions of the ERMA. ERMA

management is commensurate and considered in context with the management of other resources

and resource uses.

Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA). Public Law 94-579, October 21,

1976, often referred to as the BLM’s “Organic Act,” which provides most of the BLM’s legislated

authority, direction policy, and basic management guidance.

Federal mineral estate. Subsurface mineral estate owned by the US and administered by the

BLM. Federal mineral estate under BLM jurisdiction is composed of mineral estate underlying

BLM lands, privately owned lands, and state-owned lands

Fire frequency. A general term referring to the recurrence of fire in a given area over time.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
82 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Fire management plan (FMP). A plan that identifies and integrates all wildland fire management

and related activities within the context of approved land/resource management plans. It defines

a program to manage wildland fires (wildfire, prescribed fire, and wildland fire use). The

plan is supplemented by operational plans including, but not limited to, preparedness plans,

preplanned dispatch plans, and prevention plans. Fire Management Plans assure that wildland fire

management goals and components are coordinated.

Fire Regime Condition Classification System (FRCCS). Measures the extent to which vegetation

departs from reference conditions, or how the current vegetation differs from a particular

reference condition.

Fire suppression. All work and activities connected with control and fire-extinguishing

operations, beginning with discovery and continuing until the fire is completely extinguished.

Fluid minerals. Oil, gas, coal bed natural gas, and geothermal resources.

Forage. All browse and herbaceous foods that are available to grazing animals.

Forage base. The amount of vegetation available for wildlife and livestock use.

Fragile soils. Soils having a shallow depth to bedrock, minimal surface layer of organic material,

textures that are more easily detached and eroded, or are on slopes over 35 percent.

Fugitive dust. Significant atmospheric dust arises from the mechanical disturbance of granular

material exposed to the air. Dust generated from these open sources is termed "fugitive" because

it is not discharged to the atmosphere in a confined flow stream. Common sources of fugitive

dust include unpaved roads, agricultural tilling operations, aggregate storage piles, and heavy

construction operations.

General sage-grouse habitat. Is occupied (seasonal or year-round) habitat outside of priority

habitat. These areas have been identified by the BLM and Forest Service in coordination with

respective state wildlife agencies.

Geographic Information System (GIS). A system of computer hardware, software, data,

people, and applications that capture, store, edit, analyze, and display a potentially wide array

of geospatial information.

Geophysical exploration. Efforts to locate deposits of oil and gas resources and to better define

the subsurface.

Geothermal energy. Natural heat from within the Earth captured for production of electric power,

space heating, or industrial steam.

Goal. A broad statement of a desired outcome; usually not quantifiable and may not have

established timeframes for achievement.

Grandfathered right. The right to use in a non-conforming manner due to existence prior to the

establishment of conforming terms and conditions.

Grazing preference. Grazing preference or preference means a superior or priority position

against others for the purpose of receiving a grazing permit or lease. This priority is attached to

base property owned or controlled by the permittee or lessee. (43 CFR 4100.0-5).

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
Draft Resource Management 83

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Grazing system. Scheduled grazing use and non-use of an allotment to reach identified goals

or objectives by improving the quality and quantity of vegetation. Include, but are not limited

to, developing pastures, utilization levels, grazing rotations, timing and duration of use periods,

and necessary range improvements.

Groundwater. Water held underground in soil or permeable rock, often feeding springs and wells.

Guidelines (BLM). Actions or management practices that may be used to achieve desired

outcomes, sometimes expressed as BMPs. Guidelines may be identified during the land use

planning process, but they are not considered a land use plan decision unless the plan specifies

that they are mandatory. Guidelines for grazing administration must conform to 43 CFR 4180.2.

Guidelines (Forest Service). A constraint on decision-making that allows for departure from its

terms, as long as the purpose of the guideline is met.

Habitat. An environment that meets a specific set of physical, biological, temporal, or spatial

characteristics that satisfy the requirements of a plant or animal species or group of species for

part or all of their life cycle.

Hazardous material. A substance, pollutant, or contaminant that, due to its quantity,

concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a potential hazard to human health

and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment.

Communication site. Sites that include broadcast types of uses (e.g., television, AM/FM radio,

cable television, broadcast translator) and non-broadcast uses (e.g., commercial or private mobile

radio service, cellular telephone, microwave, local exchange network, passive reflector).

Impact. The effect, influence, alteration, or imprint caused by an action.

Impairment. The degree to which a distance of clear visibility is degraded by man-made

pollutants.

Implementation decisions. Decisions that take action to implement land use planning; generally

appealable to Interior Board of Land Appeals under 43 CFR 4.410.

Implementation plan. An area or site-specific plan written to implement decisions made in a

land use plan. Implementation plans include both activity plans and project plans.

Indicators. Factors that describe resource condition and change and can help the BLM and Forest

Service determine trends over time.

Indirect impacts. Indirect impacts result from implementing an action or alternative but usually

occur later in time or are removed in distance and are reasonably certain to occur.

Intermittent stream. An intermittent stream is a stream that flows only at certain times of the

year when it receives water from springs or from some surface sources such as melting snow

in mountainous areas. During the dry season and throughout minor drought periods, these

streams will not exhibit flow. Geomorphological characteristics are not well defined and are

often inconspicuous. In the absence of external limiting factors, such as pollution and thermal

modifications, species are scarce and adapted to the wet and dry conditions of the fluctuating

water level.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
84 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Invertebrate. An animal lacking a backbone or spinal column, such as insects, snails, and

worms. The group includes 97 percent of all animal species.

Key wildlife ecosystems. Specific areas within the geographic area occupied by a species in

which are found those physical and biological features 1) essential to the conservation of the

species, and 2) which may require special management considerations or protection.

Land health condition. A classification for land health which includes these categories:

“Meeting Land Health Standard(s)” and “Not Meeting Land Health Standard(s)”.

● Meeting Land Health Standard(s): Lands for which health indicators are currently in

acceptable condition such that basic levels of ecological processes and functions are in place.

This rating includes the following subcategories:

○ Fully Meeting Standard(s): Lands for which there are no substantive concerns with health

indicators

○ Exceeding Standard(s): Lands for which health indicators are in substantially better

conditions than acceptable levels.

○ Meeting Standard(s) with Problems: Lands which have one or more concerns with health

indicators to the degree that they are categorized as meeting the Land Health Standards,

but have some issues which make them at risk of becoming “not meeting.”

● Not Meeting Land Health Standard(s): Lands for which one or more health indicators are
 

in unacceptable conditions such that basic levels of ecological processes and functions are
 

no longer in place.
 

Land health trend is used to describe these classes further. It includes these categories:

upward, static, and downward.

● Upward Trend: lands which have shown improving indicator conditions over time.

● Static Trend: lands which have shown no clear improvement or decline in indicator conditions

over time.

● Downward Trend: lands which have shown declining indicator conditions over time.

Land tenure adjustments. Land ownership or jurisdictional changes. To improve the

manageability of the BLM lands and their usefulness to the public, the BLM has numerous

authorities for repositioning lands into a more consolidated pattern, disposing of lands, and

entering into cooperative management agreements. These land pattern improvements are

completed primarily through the use of land exchanges but also through land sales, through

jurisdictional transfers to other agencies, and through the use of cooperative management

agreements and leases.

Land treatment. All methods of artificial range improvement arid soil stabilization such as

reseeding, brush control (chemical and mechanical), pitting, furrowing, water spreading, etc.

Land use allocation. The identification in a land use plan of the activities and foreseeable

development that are allowed, restricted, or excluded for all or part of the planning area, based on

desired future conditions (H-1601-1, BLM Land Use Planning Handbook).

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
Draft Resource Management 85

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Land use plan. A set of decisions that establish management direction for land within an

administrative area, as prescribed under the planning provisions of FLPMA; an assimilation of

land use plan level decisions developed through the planning process outlined in 43 CFR 1600,

regardless of the scale at which the decisions were developed. The term includes both RMPs and

management framework plans (from H-1601-1, BLM Land Use Planning Handbook).

Land use plan decision. Establishes desired outcomes and actions needed to achieve them.

Decisions are reached using the planning process in 43 CFR 1600. When they are presented to the

public as proposed decisions, they can be protested to the BLM Director. They are not appealable

to Interior Board of Land Appeals.

Late brood-rearing area. Habitat includes mesic sagebrush and mixed shrub communities, wet

meadows, and riparian habitats as well as some agricultural lands (e.g. alfalfa fields, etc.).

Leasable minerals. Those minerals or materials designated as leasable under the Mineral Leasing

Act of 1920. These include energy-related mineral resources such as oil, natural gas, coal, and

geothermal, and some non-energy minerals, such as phosphate, sodium, potassium, and sulfur.

Geothermal resources are also leasable under the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970.

Lease. Section 302 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 provides the

BLM’s authority to issue leases for the use, occupancy, and development of public lands. Leases

are issued for purposes such as a commercial filming, advertising displays, commercial or

noncommercial croplands, apiaries, livestock holding or feeding areas not related to grazing

permits and leases, native or introduced species harvesting, temporary or permanent facilities

for commercial purposes (does not include mining claims), residential occupancy, ski resorts,

construction equipment storage sites, assembly yards, oil rig stacking sites, mining claim

occupancy if the residential structures are not incidental to the mining operation, and water

pipelines and well pumps related to irrigation and nonirrigation facilities. The regulations

establishing procedures for processing these leases and permits are found in 43 CFR 2920.

Lease stipulation. A modification of the terms and conditions on a standard lease form at the

time of the lease sale.

Lek. A traditional courtship display area attended by male sage-grouse in or adjacent to sagebrush

dominated habitat. A lek is designated based on observations of two or more male sage-grouse

engaged in courtship displays. Sub-dominant males may display on itinerant strutting areas

during population peaks. Such areas usually fail to become established leks. Therefore, a site

where less than five males are observed strutting should be confirmed active for two years before

meeting the definition of a lek (Connelly et al 2000, Connelly et al. 2003, 2004). Each state may

have a slightly different definition of lek, active lek, inactive lek, occupied lek, and unoccupied

leks. Regional planning will use the appropriate definition provided by the state of interest.

Lek Complex. A lek or group of leks within 2.5 km (1.5 mi) of each other between which male

sage-grouse may interchange from one day to the next. Fidelity to leks has been well documented.

Visits to multiple leks are most common among yearlings and less frequent for adult males,

suggesting an age-related period of establishment (Connelly et al. 2004).

Active Lek. Any lek that has been attended by male sage-grouse during the strutting season.

Inactive Lek. Any lek where sufficient data suggests that there was no strutting activity

throughout a strutting season. Absence of strutting grouse during a single visit is insufficient

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
86 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

documentation to establish that a lek is inactive. This designation requires documentation of

either: 1) an absence of sage-grouses on the lek during at least 2 ground surveys separated by at

least seven days. These surveys must be conducted under ideal conditions (April 1-May 7 (or

other appropriate date based on local conditions), no precipitation, light or no wind, half-hour

before sunrise to one hour after sunrise) or 2) a ground check of the exact known lek site late

in the strutting season (after April 15) that fails to find any sign (tracks, droppings, feathers) of

strutting activity. Data collected by aerial surveys should not be used to designate inactive status

as the aerial survey may actually disrupt activities.

Occupied Lek. A lek that has been active during at least one strutting season within the prior

10 years.

Unoccupied Lek. A lek that has either been “destroyed” or “abandoned.”

Destroyed Lek. A formerly active lek site and surrounding sagebrush habitat that has been

destroyed and is no longer suitable for sage-grouse breeding.

Abandoned Lek. A lek in otherwise suitable habitat that has not been active during a period

of 10 consecutive years. To be designated abandoned, a lek must be “inactive” (see above

criteria) in at least four non-consecutive strutting seasons spanning the 10 years. The site of an

“abandoned” lek should be surveyed at least once every 10 years to determine whether it has

been re-occupied by sage-grouse.

Lentic. Pertaining to standing water, such as lakes and ponds.

Linkage Habitat (connectivity/linkage areas, linkages). Areas that have been identified as broader

regions of connectivity important to facilitate the movement of Greater Sage-Grouse and to

maintain ecological processes.

Locatable minerals. Minerals subject to exploration, development, and disposal by staking

mining claims as authorized by the Mining Law of 1872, as amended. This includes deposits of

gold, silver, and other uncommon minerals not subject to lease or sale.

Long-term effect. The effect could occur for an extended period after implementation of the

alternative. The effect could last several years or more.

Lotic. Pertaining to moving water, such as streams or rivers.

Management decision. A decision made by the BLM to manage public lands. Management

decisions include both land use plan decisions and implementation decisions.

Management zone. Two types of management zones are addressed:

● Colorado Management Zones – 21 Greater Sage-Grouse management zones
 

comprised of preliminary priority habitat (PPH), preliminary general habitat (PGH), and
 

linkage/connectivity habitat in order to manage disturbance caps and be able to identify
 

specific habitat areas.
 

● Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA) Management Zones – 7
 

Greater Sage-Grouse management zones established based on populations across the entire
 

range of the Greater Sage-Grouse. Northwest Colorado falls into WAFWA Management
 

Zones II and VII. WAFWA management zones are used in the cumulative effects analysis.
 

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
Draft Resource Management 87

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Master Development Plans. A set of information common to multiple planned wells, including

drilling plans, Surface Use Plans of Operations, and plans for future production.

Mechanized transport. Any vehicle, device, or contrivance for moving people or material in or

over land, water, snow, or air that has moving parts.

Mineral. Any naturally formed inorganic material, solid or fluid inorganic substance that can be

extracted from the earth, any of various naturally occurring homogeneous substances (as stone,

coal, salt, sulfur, sand, petroleum, water, or natural gas) obtained usually from the ground. Under

federal laws, considered as locatable (subject to the general mining laws), leasable (subject to the

Mineral Leasing Act of 1920), and salable (subject to the Materials Act of 1947).

Mineral entry. The filing of a claim on public land to obtain the right to any locatable minerals

it may contain.

Mineral estate. The ownership of minerals, including rights necessary for access, exploration,

development, mining, ore dressing, and transportation operations.

Mineralize. The process where a substance is converted from an organic substance to an

inorganic substance.

Mineral materials. Common varieties of mineral materials such as soil, sand and gravel, stone,

pumice, pumicite, and clay that are not obtainable under the mining or leasing laws but that can

be acquired under the Materials Act of 1947, as amended.

Mining claim. A parcel of land that a miner takes and holds for mining purposes, having acquired

the right of possession by complying with the Mining Law and local laws and rules. A mining

claim may contain as many adjoining locations as the locator may make or buy. There are four

categories of mining claims: lode, placer, millsite, and tunnel site.

Mining Law of 1872. Provides for claiming and gaining title to locatable minerals on public

lands. Also referred to as the “General Mining Laws” or “Mining Laws.”

Mitigation. Includes specific means, measures or practices that could reduce, avoid, or eliminate

adverse impacts. Mitigation can include avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain

action or parts of an action, minimizing the impact by limiting the degree of magnitude of the

action and its implementation, rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitation, or restoring

the affected environment, reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and

maintenance operations during the life of the action, and compensating for the impact by replacing

or providing substitute resources or environments.

Modification. A change to the provisions of a lease stipulation, either temporarily or for the term

of the lease. Depending on the specific modification, the stipulation may or may not apply to all

sites within the leasehold to which the restrictive criteria are applied.

Monitoring (plan monitoring). The process of tracking the implementation of land use plan

decisions and collecting and assessing data necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of land use

planning decisions.

Motorized vehicles or uses. Vehicles that are motorized, including but not limited to jeeps,

all-terrain vehicles (all-terrain vehicles, such as four-wheelers and three-wheelers), trail

motorcycles or dirt bikes, and aircrafts.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
88 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Multiple-use. The management of the public lands and their various resource values so that they

are used in the combination that will best meet the present and future needs of the American

people; making the most judicious use of the land for some or all of these resources or related

services over areas large enough to provide sufficient latitude for periodic adjustments in use

to changing needs and conditions; the use of some land for less than all of the resources; a

combination of balanced and diverse resource uses that takes into account the long-term needs of

future generations for renewable and nonrenewable resources, including recreation, range, timber,

minerals, watershed, wildlife and fish, and natural scenic, scientific and historical values; and

harmonious and coordinated management of the various resources without permanent impairment

of the productivity of the land and the quality of the environment with consideration being given

to the relative values of the resources and not necessarily to the combination of uses that will

give the greatest economic return or the greatest unit output (FLPMA) (BLM Manual 6840,

Special Status Species Manual).

Municipal watershed. A watershed area that provides water for use by a municipality as defined

by the community and accepted by the State.

National Conservation Area. Area designated by Congress, generally, to conserve, protect,

enhance, and properly manage the resources and values for which it was designated for the benefit

and enjoyment of present and future generations (BLM Manual 6220).

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Public Law 91-190. Establishes

environmental policy for the nation. Among other items, NEPA requires federal agencies to

consider environmental values in decision-making processes.

National Historic Trail. A congressionally designated trail that is an extended, long-distance trail,

not necessarily managed as continuous, that follows as closely as possible and practicable the

original trails or routes of travel of national historic significance. The purpose of a National

Historic Trail is the identification and protection of the historic route and the historic remnants

and artifacts for public use and enjoyment. A National Historic Trail is managed in a manner

to protect the nationally significant resources, qualities, values, and associated settings of the

areas through which such trails may pass, including the primary use or uses of the trail (BLM

Manual 6250, NHT Administration).

National Register of Historic Places. A listing of architectural, historical, archaeological, and

cultural sites of local, state, or national significance established by the Historic Preservation Act

of, 1966 and maintained by the National Park Service.

Native vegetation. Plant species which were found here prior to European settlement, and

consequently are in balance with these ecosystems because they have well developed parasites,

predators, and pollinators.

Natural processes. Fire, drought, insect and disease outbreaks, flooding, and other events which

existed prior to European settlement, and shaped vegetation composition and structure.

Non-energy leasable minerals. Those minerals or materials designated as leasable under the

Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. Non-energy minerals include resources such as phosphate, sodium,

potassium, and sulfur.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
Draft Resource Management 89

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Nonfunctional condition. Riparian-wetland areas that clearly are not providing adequate

vegetation, landform, or woody debris to dissipate energies associated with flow events, and thus

are not reducing erosion, improving water quality, etc.

No surface occupancy (NSO). A major constraint where use or occupancy of the land surface

for fluid mineral exploration or development and all activities associated with fluid mineral

leasing (e.g., truck-mounted drilling and geophysical exploration equipment off designated routes,

construction of wells and/or pads) are prohibited to protect identified resource values. Areas

identified as NSO are open to fluid mineral leasing, but surface occupancy or surface-disturbing

activities associated with fluid mineral leasing cannot be conducted on the surface of the land.

Access to fluid mineral deposits would require horizontal drilling from outside the boundaries of

the NSO area.

Noxious weeds. A plant species designated by federal or state law as generally possessing one or

more of the following characteristics: aggressive and difficult to manage; parasitic; a carrier or

host of serious insects or disease; or nonnative, new, or not common to the US.

Objective. A description of a desired outcome for a resource. Objectives can be quantified and

measured and, where possible, have established timeframes for achievement.

Off-highway vehicle (OHV) (off-road vehicle). Any motorized vehicle capable of, or

designated for travel on or immediately over land, water or other natural terrain, excluding: (1)

any non-amphibious registered motorboat; (2) any military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement

vehicle while being used for emergency purposes; (3) any vehicle whose use is expressly

authorized by the authorized officer, or otherwise officially approved; (4) vehicles in official use;

and (5) any combat or combat support vehicle when used for national defense emergencies

(43 CFR 8340.0-5).

Open. Generally denotes that an area is available for a particular use or uses. Refer to specific

program definitions found in law, regulations, or policy guidance for application to individual

programs. For example, 43 CFR 8340.0-5 defines the specific meaning of “open” as it relates to

OHV use.

Ozone. A faint blue gas produced in the atmosphere from chemical reactions of burning coal,

gasoline, and other fuels and chemicals found in products such as solvents, paints, and hairsprays.

Paleontological resources. The physical remains or other physical evidence of plants and animals

preserved in soils and sedimentary rock formations. Paleontological resources are important

for correlating and dating rock strata and for understanding past environments, environmental

change, and the evolution of life.

Particulate matter (PM). One of the six “criteria” pollutants for which the US EPA established

National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Particulate matter is defined as two categories,

fine particulates, with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers (PM10) or less, and fine

particulates with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5).

Perennial stream. A stream that flows continuously. Perennial streams are generally associated

with a water table in the localities through which they flow.

Permitted use. The forage allocated by, or under the guidance of, an applicable land use plan

for livestock grazing in an allotment under a permit or lease and expressed in AUMs (43 CFR

4100.0-5) (from H-4180-1, BLM Rangeland Health Standards Manual).

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
90 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Permittee. A person or company permitted to graze livestock on public land.

Physiography. The study and classification of the surface features of the earth.

Plan of Operations. A Plan of Operations is required for all mining activity exploration

greater than 5 acres or surface disturbance greater than casual use on certain special category

lands. Special category lands are described under 43 CFR 3809.11(c) and include such lands

as designated Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, lands within the National Wilderness

Preservation System, and areas closed to off-road vehicles, among others. In addition, a plan of

operations is required for activity greater than casual use on lands patented under the Stock

Raising Homestead Act with Federal minerals where the operator does not have the written

consent of the surface owner (43 CFR 3814). The Plan of operations needs to be filed in the

BLM field office with jurisdiction over the land involved. The Plan of Operations does not need

to be on a particular form but must address the information required by 43 CFR 3809.401(b).

Planning area. The geographical area for which resource management plans are developed and

maintained. The Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-Grouse RMPA/EIS planning

area boundary includes public lands managed by the United States Department of the Interior,

Bureau of Land Management, within five BLM Districts in Nevada (Battle Mountain, Carson

City, Elko, Ely, and Winnemucca) and three BLM Field Offices in California (Alturas, Eagle

Lake, and Surprise), as well as public lands managed by the US Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest. The planning area boundary includes all lands

regardless of jurisdiction.

Planning criteria. The standards, rules, and other factors developed by managers and

interdisciplinary teams for their use in forming judgments about decision making, analysis,

and data collection during planning. Planning criteria streamlines and simplifies the resource

management planning actions.

Planning issues. Concerns, conflicts, and problems with the existing management of public

lands. Frequently, issues are based on how land uses affect resources. Some issues are concerned

with how land uses can affect other land uses, or how the protection of resources affects land uses.

Policy. This is a statement of guiding principles, or procedures, designed and intended to

influence planning decisions, operating actions, or other affairs of the BLM or Forest Service.

Policies are established interpretations of legislation, executive orders, regulations, or other

presidential, secretarial, or management directives.

Preliminary General Habitat (PGH). Areas of seasonal or year-round Greater Sage-Grouse

habitat outside of preliminary priority habitat (PPH).

Preliminary General Management Area (PGMA). BLM and FS lands identified requiring special

management to sustain sage-grouse populations, but that are not as important as PPMAs. The

PGMAs are derived from and generally follow the PGH boundaries (see in Chapter 3) but may be

modified in extent based on the objectives of each alternative. Likewise, management strategies

applied to the PGMAs may vary by alternative.

Preliminary Priority Habitat (PPH). Areas that have been identified as having the highest

conservation value to maintaining sustainable Greater Sage-Grouse populations; include breeding,

late brood-rearing, and winter concentration areas.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
Draft Resource Management 91

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Preliminary Priority Management Area (PPMA). BLM and FS lands identified to be managed as

having the highest value to maintaining sustainable sage-grouse populations. The PPMAs are

derived from and generally follow the PPH boundaries (see in Chapter 3) but may be modified in

extent based on the objectives of each alternative. Likewise, management strategies applied to

the PPMAs may vary by alternative.

Prescribed fire. A wildland fire originating from a planned ignition to meet specific objectives

identified in a written, approved, prescribed fire plan for which NEPA requirements (where

applicable) have been met prior to ignition.

Primitive route. Any transportation linear feature located within areas that have been identified

as having wilderness characteristics and not meeting the wilderness inventory road definition

(BLM Manual 6310 – Conducting Wilderness Characteristics Inventory on BLM Lands).

Priority sage-grouse habitat. Areas that have been identified as having the highest conservation

value to maintaining sustainable sage-grouse populations. These areas would include breeding,

late brood-rearing, and winter concentration areas. These areas have been identified by the BLM

and Forest Service in coordination with respective state wildlife agencies.

Project area. The Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-Grouse RMPA/EIS planning

area boundary includes public lands managed by the BLM, within the five BLM Districts in

Nevada (Battle Mountain, Carson City, Elko, Ely, and Winnemucca) and three BLM Field Offices

in California (Alturas, Eagle Lake, and Surprise), as well as public lands managed by the Forest

Service, Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest.

Proper functioning condition. A term describing stream health that is based on the presence

of adequate vegetation, landform and debris to dissipate energy, reduce erosion and improve

water quality.

Public domain. The term applied to any or all of those areas of land ceded to the Federal

Government by the Original States and to such other lands as were later acquired by treaty,

purchase or cession, and are disposed of only under the authority of Congress.

Public land. Land or interest in land owned by the US and administered by the Secretary of

the Interior through the BLM without regard to how the US acquired ownership, except lands

located on the Outer Continental Shelf and land held for the benefit of Indians, Aleuts, and

Eskimos (H-1601-1, BLM Land Use Planning Handbook). Also includes lands owned by the

US and administered by the Forest Service.

Range Improvement. The term range improvement means any activity, structure or program on

or relating to rangelands which is designed to improve production of forage; change vegetative

composition; control patterns of use; provide water; stabilize soil and water conditions; and

provide habitat for livestock and wildlife. The term includes, but is not limited to, structures,

treatment projects, and use of mechanical means to accomplish the desired results.

Range improvement project. An authorized physical modification or treatment which is

designed to improve production of forage; change vegetation composition; control patterns of

use; provide water; stabilize soil and water conditions; restore, protect and improve the condition

of rangeland ecosystems to benefit livestock, wild horses and burros, and fish and wildlife. This

definition includes, but is not limited to: structures, treatment projects and use of mechanical

devices, or modifications achieved through mechanical means.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
92 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Raptor. Bird of prey with sharp talons and strongly curved beaks, such as hawks, owls, falcons,

and eagles.

Reasonable foreseeable development scenario. The prediction of the type and amount of oil

and gas activity that would occur in a given area. The prediction is based on geologic factors, past

history of drilling, projected demand for oil and gas, and industry interest.

Reclamation. The suite of actions taken within an area affected by human disturbance, the

outcome of which is intended to change the condition of the disturbed area to meet pre-determined

objectives and/or make it acceptable for certain defined resources (e.g., wildlife habitat, grazing,

ecosystem function, etc.).

Recreation management area. Includes special recreation management areas (SRMAs) and

extensive recreation management areas (ERMAs); see SRMA and ERMA definitions.

Recreation experiences. Psychological outcomes realized either by recreation-tourism

participants as a direct result of their on-site leisure engagements and recreation-tourism activity

participation or by nonparticipating community residents as a result of their interaction with

visitors and guests within their community or interaction with the BLM or Forest Service and

other public and private recreation-tourism providers and their actions.

Recreation opportunities. Favorable circumstances enabling visitors’ engagement in a leisure

activity to realize immediate psychological experiences and attain more lasting, value-added

beneficial outcomes.

Recreation settings. The collective distinguishing attributes of landscapes that influence and

sometimes actually determine what kinds of recreation opportunities are produced.

Reference State. The reference state is the state where the functional capacities represented by

soil/site stability, hydrologic function, and biotic integrity are performing at an optimum level

under the natural disturbance regime. This state usually includes, but is not limited to, what is

often referred to as the potential natural plant community.

Rehabilitate. Returning disturbed lands as near to its predisturbed condition as is reasonably

practical or as specified in approved permits.

Renewable Energy. Energy resources that constantly renew themselves or that are regarded as

practically inexhaustible. These include solar, wind, geothermal, hydro, and biomass. Although

particular geothermal formations can be depleted, the natural heat in the Earth is a virtually

inexhaustible reserve of potential energy.

Required Design Features. Means, measures, or practices intended to reduce or avoid adverse

environmental impacts. A suite of features that would establish the minimum specifications for

certain activities (i.e., water developments, mineral development, and fire and fuels management)

and mitigate adverse impacts. These design features would be required to provide a greater level

of regulatory certainty than through implementation of Best Management Practices. In general,

the design features are accepted practices that are known to be effective when implemented

properly at the project level. However, their applicability and overall effectiveness cannot be

fully assessed except at the project-specific level when the project location and design are

known. Because of site-specific circumstances, some features may not apply to some projects

(e.g., a resource is not present on a given site) and/or may require slight variations from what is

described in the EIS/RMP amendment (e.g., a larger or smaller protective area). All variations

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
Draft Resource Management 93

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

in design features would require appropriate analysis and disclosure as part of future project

authorizations. Additional mitigation measures may be identified and required during individual

project development and environmental review.

Resource management plan (RMP). A land use plan as prescribed by the Federal Land Policy

and Management Act that establishes, for a given area of land, land-use allocations, coordination

guidelines for multiple-use, objectives, and actions to be achieved.

Restore/restoration. Implementation of a set of actions that promotes plant community diversity

and structure that allows plant communities to be more resilient to disturbance and invasive

species over the long term. The long-term goal is to create functional, high quality habitat that is

occupied by sage-grouse. Short-term goal may be to restore the landform, soils and hydrology

and increase the percentage of preferred vegetation, seeding of desired species, or treatment

of undesired species.

Restriction/restricted use. A limitation or constraint on public land uses and operations.

Restrictions can be of any kind, but most commonly apply to certain types of vehicle use,

temporal and/or spatial constraints, or certain authorizations.

Revegetate/revegetation. The process of putting vegetation back in an area where vegetation

previously existed, which may or may not simulate natural conditions.

Revision. The process of completely rewriting the land use plan due to changes in the planning

area affecting major portions of the plan or the entire plan.

Right-of-way (ROW). An easement, lease, permit, or license to occupy, use, or traverse public

lands granted for pipes, pipelines, tunnels, and other facilities and systems for the impoundment,

storage, transportation, or distribution of water; pipelines and other systems for the transportation

or distribution of liquids and gases, other than water and other than oil, natural gas, synthetic

liquid or gaseous fuels, or any refined product produced therefrom, and for storage and terminal

facilities in connection therewith; pipelines, slurry and emulsion systems, and conveyor belts for

transportation and distribution of solid materials, and facilities for the storage of such materials in

connection therewith; systems for generation, transmission, and distribution of electric energy,

except that the applicant shall also comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission under the Federal Power Act, including part I thereof (41 Stat. 1063, 16

USC 791a-825r; PL 102-486, 1992); systems for transmission or reception of radio, television,

telephone, telegraph, and other electronic signals, and other means of communication; roads,

trails, highways, railroads, canals, tunnels, tramways, airways, livestock driveways, or other

means of transportation except where such facilities are constructed and maintained in connection

with commercial recreation facilities on lands in the National Forest System; or such other

necessary transportation or other systems or facilities which are in the public interest and which

require rights-of-way over, upon, under, or through such lands.

Right-of-way avoidance area. An area identified through resource management planning to be

avoided but may be available for ROW location with special stipulations.

Right-of-way exclusion area. An area identified through resource management planning that is

not available for ROW location under any conditions.

Riparian area. A form of wetland transition between permanently saturated wetlands and upland

areas. Riparian areas exhibit vegetation or physical characteristics that reflect the influence of

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
94 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

permanent surface or subsurface water. Typical riparian areas include lands along, adjacent to, or

contiguous with perennially and intermittently flowing rivers and streams, glacial potholes, and

the shores of lakes and reservoirs with stable water levels. Excluded are ephemeral streams or

washes that lack vegetation and depend on free water in the soil.

Riparian zone. An area one-quarter mile wide encompassing riparian and adjacent vegetation.

Road. A linear route declared a road by the owner, managed for use by low-clearance vehicles

having four or more wheels, and maintained for regular and continuous use.

Rotation. Grazing rotation between pastures in the allotment for the permitted time.

Routes. Multiple roads, trails and primitive roads; a group or set of roads, trails, and primitive

roads that represents less than 100 percent of the BLM transportation system. Generically,

components of the transportation system are described as “routes.”

Sale (public land). A method of land disposal pursuant to Section 203 of FLPMA, whereby

the US receives a fair-market payment for the transfer of land from federal ownership. Public

lands determined suitable for sale are offered on the initiative of the BLM. Lands suitable for

sale must be identified in the RMP. Any lands to be disposed of by sale that are not identified

in the current RMP, or that meet the disposal criteria identified in the RMP, require a plan

amendment before a sale can occur.

Saturated soils. Occur when the infiltration capacity of the soil is exceeded from above due to

rainfall or snowmelt runoff. Soils can also become saturated from groundwater inputs.

Scenic byways. Highway routes that have roadsides or corridors of special aesthetic, cultural, or

historical value. An essential part of the highway is its scenic corridor. The corridor may contain

outstanding scenic vistas, unusual geologic features, or other natural elements.

Scoping process. An early and open public participation process for determining the scope of

issues to be addressed and for identifying the significant issues related to a proposed action.

Season of use. The time during which livestock grazing is permitted on a given range area, as

specified in the grazing lease.

Seeding. Seeding is a vegetation treatment that includes the application of grass, forb, or shrub

seed, either aerially or from the ground. In areas of gentle terrain, ground applications of seed are

often accomplished with a rangeland drill. Seeding allows the establishment of native species

or placeholder species and restoration of disturbed areas to a perennial-dominated cover type,

thereby decreasing the risk of subsequent invasion by exotic plant species. Seeding would be

used primarily as a follow-up treatment in areas where disturbance or the previously described

treatments have removed exotic plant species and their residue.

Short-term effect. The effect occurs only during or immediately after implementation of the

alternative.

Special recreation management area (SRMA). An administrative public lands unit identified

in land use plans where the existing or proposed recreation opportunities and recreation setting

characteristics are recognized for their unique value, importance, and/or distinctiveness, especially

as compared to other areas used for recreation.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
Draft Resource Management 95

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Special recreation permit (SRP). Authorization that allows for recreational uses of public lands

and related waters. Issued as a means to control visitor use, protect recreational and natural

resources, and provide for the health and safety of visitors. Commercial SRPs are also issued as a

mechanism to provide a fair return for the commercial use of public lands.

Special status species. BLM special status species are: (1) species listed, candidate, or proposed

for listing under the Endangered Species Act; and (2) species requiring special management

consideration to promote their conservation and reduce the likelihood and need for future listing

under the Endangered Species Act that are designated as BLM sensitive by the BLM State

Director(s). All federally listed candidate species, proposed species, and delisted species in the

five years following delisting are conserved as BLM sensitive species. Forest Service special

status species are: federally listed threatened and endangered species, designated by the USFWS

under the ESA; sensitive species, designated by the Regional Forester with each Forest Service

region; and management indicator species, designated for each forest unit within the individual

LUPs during the planning process.

Split estate. This is the circumstance where the surface of a particular parcel of land is owned

by a different party than the minerals underlying the surface. Split estates may have any

combination of surface/subsurface owners: federal/state; federal/private; state/private; or

percentage ownerships. When referring to the split estate ownership on a particular parcel of land,

it is generally necessary to describe the surface/subsurface ownership pattern of the parcel.

Stabilize. The process of stopping further damage from occurring.

Standard (BLM). A description of the physical and biological conditions or degree of function

required for healthy, sustainable lands (e.g., land health standards). To be expressed as a desired

outcome (goal).

Standard (Forest Service). A mandatory constraint on decision-making. Not meeting a standard

would require a site-specific forest plan amendment.

Standard lease terms and conditions. Areas may be open to leasing with no specific

management decisions defined in a Resource Management Plan; however, these areas are subject

to lease terms and conditions as defined on the lease form (Form 3100-11, Offer to Lease and

Lease for Oil and Gas; and Form 3200-24, Offer to Lease and Lease for Geothermal Resources).

State. A state is comprised of an integrated soil and vegetation unit having one or more biological

communities that occur on a particular ecological site and that are functionally similar with

respect to the three attributes (soil/site stability, hydrologic function, and biotic integrity) under

natural disturbance regimes.

Strongholds. Large areas of intact habitat where habitats and populations appear stable (Wisdom

et al. 2011).

Stipulation (general). A term or condition in an agreement or contract.

Stipulation (oil and gas). A provision that modifies standard oil and gas lease terms and

conditions in order to protect other resource values or land uses and is attached to and made a part

of the lease. Typical lease stipulations include No Surface Occupancy (NSO), Timing Limitations

(TL), and Controlled Surface Use (CSU). Lease stipulations are developed through the land use

planning (RMP) process.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
96 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Suitable River. An eligible river segment found through administrative study to meet the criteria

for designation as a component of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, as specified in

Section 4(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (BLM Manual 6400, Wild and Scenic Rivers).

Surface disturbance. Suitable habitat is considered disturbed when it is removed and unavailable

for immediate sage-grouse use.

a. Long-term removal occurs when habitat is physically removed through activities that replace

suitable habitat with long term occupancy of unsuitable habitat such as a road, power line, well

pad or active mine. Long-term removal may also result from any activities that cause soil mixing,

soil removal, and exposure of the soil to erosive processes.

b. Short–term removal occurs when vegetation is removed in small areas, but restored to suitable

habitat within a few years (< 5) of disturbance, such as a successfully reclaimed pipeline, or

successfully reclaimed drill hole or pit.

c. Suitable habitat rendered unusable due to numerous anthropogenic disturbances

d. Anthropogenic surface disturbance are surface disturbances meeting the above definitions

which result from human activities.

Surface-disturbing activities. An action that alters the vegetation, surface/near surface soil

resources, and/or surface geologic features, beyond natural site conditions and on a scale that

affects other public land values. Examples of surface disturbing activities may include: operation

of heavy equipment to construct well pads, roads, pits and reservoirs; installation of pipelines and

power lines; and the conduct of several types of vegetation treatments (e.g., prescribed fire, etc.).

Surface disturbing activities may be either authorized or prohibited.

Surface use(s). These are all the various activities that may be present on the surface or

near-surface (e.g., pipelines), of the public lands. It does not refer to those subterranean activities

(e.g., underground mining, etc.) occurring on the public lands or federal mineral estate. When

administered as a use restriction (e.g., No Surface Use [NSU]), this phrase prohibits all but

specified resource uses and activities in a certain area to protect particular sensitive resource

values and property. This designation typically applies to small acreage sensitive resource sites

(e.g., plant community study exclosure, etc.), and/or administrative sites (e.g., government

ware-yard, etc.) where only authorized, agency personnel are admitted.

Sustained yield. The achievement and maintenance in perpetuity of a high-level annual or

regular periodic output of the various renewable resources of the public lands consistent with

multiple uses.

Temporary/temporary use. This term is used as the opposite of the term permanent/ permanent

use. It is a relative term and has to be considered in the context of the resource values affected

and the nature of the resource use(s)/activity(ies) taking place. Generally, a temporary activity is

considered to be one that is not fixed in place and is of short duration.

Terrestrial. Living or growing in or on the land.

Threatened species. Any species that is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable

future throughout all or a significant portion of its range Under the Endangered Species Act in

the US, “threatened” is the lesser-protected of the two categories. Designation as threatened

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
Draft Resource Management 97

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

(or endangered) is determined by USFWS as directed by the Endangered Species Act (16 US

Code 1531-1544).

Timber. Standing trees, downed trees, or logs which are capable of being measured in board feet.

Timing Limitation (TL). The TL stipulation, a moderate constraint, is applicable to fluid mineral

leasing, all activities associated with fluid mineral leasing (e.g., truck-mounted drilling and

geophysical exploration equipment off designated routes, construction of wells and/or pads), and

other surface-disturbing activities (i.e., those not related to fluid mineral leasing). Areas identified

for TL are closed to fluid mineral exploration and development, surface-disturbing activities,

and intensive human activity during identified time frames. This stipulation does not apply to

operation and basic maintenance activities, including associated vehicle travel, unless otherwise

specified. Construction, drilling, completions, and other operations considered to be intensive in

nature are not allowed. Intensive maintenance, such as workovers on wells, is not permitted. TLs

can overlap spatially with NSO and CSU, as well as with areas that have no other restrictions.

Administrative activities are allowed at the discretion of the Authorized Officer.

Total dissolved solids. Salt, or an aggregate of carbonates, bicarbonates, chlorides, sulfates,

phosphates, and nitrates of calcium, magnesium, manganese, sodium, potassium, and other

cations that form salts.

Total maximum daily load. An estimate of the total quantity of pollutants (from all sources:

point, nonpoint, and natural) that may be allowed into waters without exceeding applicable

water quality criteria.

Trail. A linear route managed for human-power (e.g., hiking or bicycling), stock (e.g.,

equestrian), or off-highway vehicle forms of transportation or for historical or heritage values.

Trails are not generally managed for use by four-wheel drive or high-clearance vehicles.

Transition. A shift between two states. Transitions are not reversible by simply altering the

intensity or direction of factors that produced the change. Instead, they require new inputs such

as revegetation or shrub removal. Practices, such as these, that accelerate succession are often

expensive to apply.

Transmission. The movement or transfer of electric energy over an interconnected group of lines

and associated equipment between points of supply and points at which it is transformed for

delivery to consumers, or is delivered to other electric systems. Transmission is considered to end

when the energy is transformed for distribution to the consumer.

Transportation system. The sum of the BLM’s recognized inventory of linear features (roads,

primitive roads, and trails) formally recognized, designated, and approved as part of the BLM’s

transportation system.

Travel management areas. Polygons or delineated areas where a rational approach has been

taken to classify areas open, closed or limited, and have identified and/or designated a network of

roads, trails, ways, landing strips, and other routes that provide for public access and travel across

the planning area. All designated travel routes within travel management areas should have a

clearly identified need and purpose as well as clearly defined activity types, modes of travel, and

seasons or timeframes for allowable access or other limitations (BLM Handbook H-1601-1, Land

Use Planning Handbook).

Trespass. Any unauthorized use of public land.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
98 Draft Resource Management

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Tribal interests. Native American or Native Alaskan economic rights such as Indian trust assets,

resource uses and access guaranteed by treaty rights, and subsistence uses.

Understory. That portion of a plant community growing underneath the taller plants on the site.

Unitization. Operation of multiple leases as a single lease under a single operator.

Utility corridor. A designated parcel of land that is either linear or areal in character. Utility

corridors are not usually wider than five miles; are limited by technological, environmental, and

topographical factors; and are set in width as identified by the special use permit or right-of-way

issued. Designation criteria are set forth in Section 503 of FLPMA for special use permits and

rights-of-way; and 43 CFR 2802.11 for rights-of-way.

Valid existing rights. Documented, legal rights or interests in the land that allow a person or

entity to use said land for a specific purpose and that are still in effect. Such rights include but

are not limited to fee title ownership, mineral rights, rights-of-way, easements, permits, and

licenses. Such rights may have been reserved, acquired, leased, granted, permitted, or otherwise

authorized over time.

Vegetation manipulation. Planned alteration of vegetation communities through use of

mechanical, chemical, seeding, and/or prescribed fire or managed fire to achieve desired resource

objectives.

Vegetation treatments. Management practices which change the vegetation structure to a

different stage of development. Vegetation treatment methods include managed fire, prescribed

fire, chemical, mechanical, and seeding.

Vegetation type. A plant community with immediately distinguishable characteristics based upon

and named after the apparent dominant plant species.

Visibility (air quality). A measure of the ability to see and identify objects at different distances.

Visitor day. Twelve visitor hours that may be aggregated by one or more persons in single or

multiple visits.

Visual resources. The visible physical features on a landscape, (topography, water, vegetation,

animals, structures, and other features) that comprise die scenery of the area.

Warranted but precluded. When the public files a petition with USFWS to have a species

listed under the Endangered Species Act, the USFWS can make one of three findings: listing

is warranted; listing is not warranted; or listing is warranted but precluded. The warranted by

precluded listing indicates that a species should be listed based on the available science, but listing

other species takes priority because they are more in need of protection.

Watershed. Topographical region or area delineated by water draining to a particular watercourse

or body of water.

West Nile virus. A virus that is found in temperate and tropical regions of the world and most

commonly transmitted by mosquitoes. West Nile virus can cause flu-like symptoms in humans

and can be lethal to birds, including sage-grouse.

Wildcat well. An exploratory oil well drilled in land not known to be an oil field.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary

Glossary
Draft Resource Management 99

PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement

Wilderness. A congressionally designated area of undeveloped federal land retaining its

primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, that is

protected and managed to preserve its natural conditions and that (1) generally appears to have

been affected mainly by the forces of nature, with human imprints substantially unnoticeable;

(2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation;

(3) has at least 5,000 acres or is large enough to make practical its preservation and use in

an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of

scientific, educational, scenic, or historic value. The definition is contained in Section 2(c) of

the Wilderness Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 891).

Wilderness characteristics. Wilderness characteristics attributes include the area’s size, its

apparent naturalness, and outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type

of recreation. They may also include supplemental values. Lands with wilderness characteristics

are those lands that have been inventoried and determined by the BLM to contain wilderness

characteristics as defined in section 2(c) of the Wilderness Act.

Wilderness Study Area (WSA). A designation made through the land use planning process

of a roadless area found to have wilderness characteristics, as described in Section 2(c) of the

Wilderness Act of 1964.

Wildland fire. Wildland fire is a general term describing any non-structure fire that occurs in the

wildland. Wildland fires are categorized into two distinct types:

● Wildfires: Unplanned ignitions or prescribed fires that are declared wildfires.

● Prescribed fires: Planned ignitions.

Wildland fire use. A term no longer used; the new terminology is “managed fire” (see “managed

fire” definition). A vegetation treatment that involves taking advantage of a naturally-ignited

wildland fire in an area where fire would benefit resources. Wildland fire use would be conducted

in specific areas needing treatment after a site-specific plan and NEPA analysis are completed

and only if predetermined prescriptive parameters (e.g., weather/fire behavior) can be met. Until

this planning and NEPA analysis are accomplished, wildland fires would be suppressed using an

appropriate management response.

Wildland-urban interface (WUI). The line, area or zone where structures and other human

development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuels.

Withdrawal. An action that restricts the use of public land and segregates the land from the

operation of some or all of the public land and mineral laws. Withdrawals are also used to transfer

jurisdiction of management of public lands to other federal agencies.

Winter concentration areas. Sage-grouse winter habitats which are occupied annually by

sage-grouse and provide sufficient sagebrush cover and food to support birds throughout the entire

winter (especially periods with above average snow cover). Many of these areas support several

different breeding populations of sage-grouse. Sage-grouse typically show high fidelity for these

areas, and loss or fragmentation can result in significant population impacts.

Chapter 8 Acronyms and Glossary