RECORD OF DECISION and

Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

December 2007

BLM

Wyoming State Office - Casper Field Office
MISSION STATEMENT

It is the mission of the Bureau of Land Managment to sustain the health, diversity, 

and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and 

future generations.

BLM/WY/PL-08/005+1610
Table of Contents 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1.0 Record of Decision ......................................................................................................................1-1

1.1 Decision....................................................................................................................................1-1 

1.1.1 Continuity of Previous Decisions ....................................................................................1-3 

1.2 Overview of Alternatives Presented in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS......................................1-3 

1.2.1 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis....................................1-3 

1.2.2 Alternatives Considered in Detail....................................................................................1-4 

1.2.3 Environmentally Preferred Alternative............................................................................1-5 

1.3 Management Considerations ....................................................................................................1-5 

1.3.1 Mitigation Measures ........................................................................................................1-5 

1.3.2 Plan Monitoring ...............................................................................................................1-6 

1.4 Public Involvement, Consultation, and Coordination...............................................................1-6 

1.4.1 Public Involvement ..........................................................................................................1-6 

1.4.2 Consultation and Coordination ........................................................................................1-6 

1.4.2.1 Cooperating Agency Status........................................................................................1-6 

1.4.2.2 Governor’s Consistency Review................................................................................1-7 

1.4.2.3 Section 7 Consultation ...............................................................................................1-7 

1.4.2.4 Native American Consultation...................................................................................1-7 

1.4.2.5 Coordination with the Environmental Protection Agency .........................................1-7 

2.0 Approved Resource Management Plan.....................................................................................2-1

2.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................2-1 

2.1.1 Purpose and Need for the Plan.........................................................................................2-1

2.1.1.1 Purpose.......................................................................................................................2-1 

2.1.1.2 Need for Revising the Existing Plan ..........................................................................2-2 

2.1.2 Planning Area and Map ...................................................................................................2-4 

2.1.3 Scoping/Issues .................................................................................................................2-4 

2.1.3.1 Issues Addressed........................................................................................................2-4 

2.1.3.2 Issues Considered, But Not Further Analyzed...........................................................2-5 

2.1.3.3 Planning Criteria/Legislative Constraints ..................................................................2-5 

2.1.3.4 Planning Process Summary........................................................................................2-7 

2.1.3.5 Related Plans..............................................................................................................2-8 

2.1.4 Overall Vision..................................................................................................................2-8 

2.2 Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions..........................................................2-9 

2.2.1 Management Decisions....................................................................................................2-9 

2.2.1.1 Best Management Practices .....................................................................................2-53 

2.2.1.2 Guidelines for Yearling Conversion ........................................................................2-54 

2.2.1.3 Stock Driveway Management Standards .................................................................2-55 

2.2.1.4 Air Quality ...............................................................................................................2-57 

2.3 Plan Implementation Process..................................................................................................2-62 

2.3.1 Public Involvement ........................................................................................................2-62 

2.3.2 Operation and Maintenance Actions..............................................................................2-63 

2.3.3 Monitoring .....................................................................................................................2-63 

2.4 Plan Evaluation/Adaptive Management .................................................................................2-63 

2.5 Appendices .............................................................................................................................2-64 

2.6 Glossary..................................................................................................................................2-64 

2.7 Maps .......................................................................................................................................2-65 

2.8 References ..............................................................................................................................2-65 
Table of Contents

ii Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Management Actions ...................................................................2-10 

Table 1-2. Summary of Withdrawals, Classifications, and Other Segregations for the Approved 

RMP ..................................................................................................................................2-52 

Table 1-3. Acres of Federal Mineral Estate Administratively Unavailable for Oil and Gas 

Leasing for the Life of the Plan in the Casper Planning Area...........................................2-53 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1-1. Casper Field Office Planning Area .....................................................................................2-6 

The Appendices, Glossary, and Maps are included in electronic format only. For paper versions of the 

document, these items can be found on a CD attached to the inside back cover of the ROD-RMP. For CD 

versions of the document, these items are provided as separate files on the CD. 

APPENDICES 

Appendix F Exception, Modification, and Waiver Criteria 

Appendix G Land Disposal 

Appendix H Areas Not Available for Livestock Grazing 

Appendix I Wyoming Bureau of Land Management Mitigation Guidelines for SurfaceDisturbing and Disruptive Activities 

Appendix L Air Quality Mitigation Matrix 

Appendix M Surface Disturbance and Reasonable Foreseeable Actions 

Appendix O Recreation Management Matrices 

Appendix R Clarification of Off-Highway Vehicle Designations and Travel Management in the 

Bureau of Land Management Land Use Planning Process 

Appendix U Intensive Management 

Appendix W Parcel Numbers and Legal Descriptions by Resource Program 

Appendix X Invasive, Nonnative Plant Species Best Preventative Management Practices and 

Mitigation Options 

Appendix Z Biological Opinion of the Casper Resource Management Plan 

GLOSSARY 

MAPS 

Map 1 Physical Resources Water 

Map 2 Mineral Resources Leasable – Coal 

Map 3 Mineral Resources Leasable – Oil and Gas 

Map 4 Mineral Resources Locatable 

Map 5 Mineral Resources Salable 

Map 6 Biological Resources Fish and Wildlife Resources – Wildlife 

Map 7 Biological Resources Special Status Species – Plants 

Map 8 Biological Resources Special Status Species – Wildlife 

Map 9 Heritage and Visual Resources Cultural Resources 

Map 10 Heritage and Visual Resources Visual Resource Management 

Map 11 Land Resources Lands and Realty – Retention and Disposal 
Table of Contents 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan iii 

Map 12 Land Resources Rights-of-Way and Corridors Including Renewable Wind Energy 

Map 13 Land Resources Off-Highway Vehicles 

Map 14 Land Resources Recreation 

Map 15 Special Designations and Other Management Areas 

Map 16 Special Designations National Back Country Byways 

Map 17 Special Designations National Historic Trails and Other Historic Trails 

Map 18 Socioeconomic Resources Health and Safety
Table of Contents

iv Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AAQS ambient air quality standards 

ACEC Area of Critical Environmental Concern 

AMP Allotment Management Plan 

ANS artificial nesting structure 

APHIS Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 

AQD Air Quality Division 

AQRV Air Quality Related Value 

ATV all-terrain vehicle 

AUM animal unit month 

BLM Bureau of Land Management 

BMP Best Management Practice 

BR biological resources 

C&MU Classification & Multiple Use 

CBNG coalbed natural gas 

CDPA Coal Development Potential Area 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CO carbon monoxide 

CRMP Coordinated Resource Management Plan 

CSU controlled surface use 

DEQ Department of Environmental Quality 

DFC desired future condition 

DOE U.S. Department of Energy 

DPC desired plant community 

EA Environmental Assessment 

EEA Environmental Education Area 

EIS Environmental Impact Statement 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

ESA Endangered Species Act 

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act 

FM fire management and ecology 

GIS Geographic Information System 

H2S hydrogen sulfide 

HAP hazardous air pollutant 

HMP Habitat Management Plan 

HR heritage and visual resources 

IM Instruction Memorandum 

INPS Invasive, Nonnative Plant Species 

KGS known geologic structure 

LAC level of acceptable change 

LBA Lease by Application 

LOC level of concern 

LR land resources 

MA Management Area 

MBF thousand board feet 

MOU Memorandum of Understanding 

MR mineral resources 

NA Not Applicable 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NHT National Historic Trail 

No. Number 

NOx nitrogen oxide 

NPS National Park Service 

NRHP National Register of Historic Places 

NSO no surface occupancy 

NSS Native Species Status 

Obj. objective 

OHV off-highway vehicle 

ORV off-road vehicle 

PFC proper functioning condition 

PM10 particulate matter less than 10 microns in 

diameter 

PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in 

diameter 

PR physical resources 

R&PP Recreation and Public Purposes 

RAMP Recreation Area Management Plan 

RMP Resource Management Plan 

ROD Record of Decision 

ROW rights-of-way 

SD special designations 

SDW Stock Driveway 

SOx sulfur oxide 

SR socioeconomic resources 

SRMA Special Recreation Management Area 

TCP Traditional Cultural Property 

TLS timing limitation stipulation 

U.S.C. United States Code 

USBR U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 

USDI U.S. Department of the Interior 

USFS U.S. Forest Service 

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

VOC volatile organic compound 

VRM Visual Resource Management 

WGFD Wyoming Game and Fish Department 

WUI Wildland-Urban Interface 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 1-1 

1.0 Record of Decision 

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Casper Field Office administrative area is located in eastcentral Wyoming and includes approximately 8.5-million acres of land in most of Natrona County and all 

of Converse, Platte, and Goshen counties. This Record of Decision (ROD) approves the attached Casper 

Resource Management Plan (RMP). This ROD and RMP provides overall direction for management of 

all resources on BLM-administered land in the Casper Field Office planning area. 

1.1 Decision 

The decision is made to approve the attached RMP (hereafter referred to as the Approved RMP) for the 

Casper Field Office. The Approved RMP was prepared under the authority of the Federal Land Policy 

and Management Act (FLPMA) (43 United States Code [U.S.C.] §§ 1701, et seq.) and other applicable 

laws (43 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 1600) and includes broad land use plan decisions that 

provide overall direction for management of resources and resource uses within the Casper Field Office 

planning area. Land use plan decisions are expressed as goals and objectives (desired outcomes), 

allowable uses, and management actions anticipated to achieve desired outcomes. Although land use plan 

decisions identified in the Approved RMP are final and effective upon signing of this ROD, they may 

require additional implementation decision steps before on-the-ground activities can begin. The Approved 

RMP does not include new implementation level decisions. Subsequent National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA) analysis will be required as necessary for implementation decisions requiring on-the-ground 

activities. 

An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was prepared for the RMP in compliance with NEPA. 

Following publication of the Casper Proposed RMP/Final EIS in June 2007, the BLM carried forward 

text for the Proposed RMP to incorporate in the Approved RMP/ROD. During preparation of the 

Approved RMP, minor changes were made to the Proposed RMP to correct errors and to clarify 

decisions. Clarifications and corrections made since the Proposed RMP and hereby adopted by this ROD 

and Approved RMP include: 

• Decision 1022 (see Table 1-1): Surface disturbance or development on slopes greater than 25 

percent is prohibited, unless individual site plans are submitted to and approved by the authorized 

officer meeting the following requirements. Engineered drawings for construction, site drainage 

design, and final rehabilitation contours with a written rationale describing how the proposed 

controls will prevent slope failure and erosion, while maintaining viable site topsoil for final 

reclamation. This plan should also include a timeline identifying the actions that will be applied 

during the construction, production and rehabilitation phases of the plan so appropriate 

monitoring protocols can be developed by the BLM to ensure that the plan is meeting the 

objectives described in its rationale. 

• Decision 7041 (see Table 1-1): Rights-of-way (ROW) in the North Platte River Special 

Recreation Management Area (SRMA) will be allowed when management objectives for the area 

can still be achieved. Public lands within 1⁄4 mile of the high water mark downstream of the 

SRMA (east of the Natrona/Converse County line) are available for location of ROWs. 

• Decision 7051 (see Table 1-1): No new corridors will be established in the Sand Hills 

Management Area (MA); ROWs will be allowed when management objectives for the area can 

still be achieved. 

• For the analysis of environmental consequences of RMP alternatives in the Proposed RMP/Final 

EIS, those areas within the planning area identified as Visual Resource Management (VRM) 

Class II were considered exclusion areas for ROWs and other resource uses. However, upon 
Approved Resource Management Plan

1-2 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

implementation of the Approved RMP, the BLM Field Office Manager may allow ROWs and 

other resource uses in these areas as long as the VRM class objectives are met. 

• The methods and assumptions used to reach the conclusions relative to air quality emissions from 

off-highway vehicle (OHV) use in the PRMP/FEIS are believed to be accurate as they are based 

on the best available information. As such, there was no error or deliberate misrepresentation. 

Further,the estimated air emissions for OHV use did not and will not result in any decisions 

restricting OHV use in the planning area. Due to the programmatic and strategic nature of the 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS, the timing and specific location of project-specific actions are 

unknown. The relationship between cause (future actions) and effect (impact on resources) is not 

always quantifiable at this scale of analysis. For these reasons, the air quality analysis in the 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS is qualitative and based on a series of assumptions. The assumptions 

made tend to result in a conservatively high estimate of emissions. More detailed and 

quantitative analysis of potential impacts to air quality will occur as necessary during 

implementation of site-specific proposals when the location and proposed actions are identified.

The methods and assumptions used to reach the conclusions relative to air quality emissions from 

OHV use in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS are as follows. The BLM utilized the best available 

information to calculate potential OHV carbon monoxide (CO) emissions as a percentage of the 

national CO emissions based upon the land area of the Casper planning area relative to the land 

area of the entire United States. The Casper planning area was further divided into: (1) the area 

administered by the BLM and (2) the area not administered by the BLM. The former area was 

used to disclose the environmental consequences from OHV use on public lands while the latter 

area was used to disclose the cumulative environmental consequences from OHV use on private, 

state, and other federal lands (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, Page 2-99). The national CO emissions 

were obtained from an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publication titled: ‘Final 

Regulatory Support Document: Control of Emissions from Unregulated Nonroad Engines’ 

(EPA420-R-02-022; September 2002) and can be accessed via the internet at 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/2002/r02022.pdf. This information source is listed in the 

OHV table used to calculate the OHV emissions but is not cited in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. 

To clarify this, BLM will identify this information source in the ROD/Approved RMP. 

During review of the air emissions tables used to calculate OHV emissions, a typographical error 

was identified for the emissions from OHVs in the year 2001. The 2001 national CO emission 

was inadvertently entered as 43,700 tons of CO emissions rather than the correct value of 437,000 

tons. The corrected emissions tables appear in the Approved RMP. 

• The following definition change occurred to Appendix R, Page R-17. Trail: A linear route 

managed for human-powered, stock, 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. 

Categories of land use plan decisions made final and adopted by this ROD and Approved RMP include: 

• Physical Resources – Air Quality, Geologic, Soil, and Water Resources; 

• Mineral Resources – Locatable, Leasable – Coal, Geothermal, Oil and Gas, Other Solid 

Leasables, and Salables; 

• Fire Management and Ecology; 

• Biological Resources – Vegetation, Fish and Wildlife, and Special Status Species Resources; 

• Heritage and Visual Resources – Cultural, Paleontological, and Visual Resources; 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 1-3 

• Land Resources – Lands and Realty, Renewable Energy, Rights-of-Way and Corridors, 

Transportation, Off-Highway Vehicle and Travel Management Areas, Livestock Grazing, and 

Recreation; 

• Special Designations and Other Management Areas; and 

• Socioeconomic Resources – Social and Economic Conditions and Health and Safety. 

Specific management decisions for BLM-administered land within the Casper planning area are presented 

in the section titled “Approved Resource Management Plan” later in this document. 

1.1.1 Continuity of Previous Decisions 

The decisions included in this ROD and Approved RMP supersede the Platte River Resource Area RMP 

and subsequent amendments. The following activity-level plans are consistent with the Approved RMP 

and are therefore incorporated into the Approved RMP and remain in effect: 

• 33-Mile Reservoir Habitat Management Plan (HMP) 

• Bald Eagle HMP and Jackson Canyon Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), as 

amended by the Casper RMP 

• Bates Creek Reservoir HMP 

• Bates Creek Trout HMP 

• Bishop Waterfowl HMP 

• Bolton Creek Action Plan 

• Ferris-Seminoe HMP 

• Fire Management Plan for the Eastern Wyoming Zone 

• Goldeneye Wildlife and Recreation Area Management Plan (RAMP) 

• Laramie Peak Big Horn Sheep HMP 

• Middle Fork RAMP 

• Muddy Mountain Environmental Education Area (EEA) RAMP 

• Muddy Mountain EEA Forest Plan 

• Trapper’s Route RAMP 

• Oregon/Mormon Pioneer National Historic Trails Management Plan 

• Table Mountain, Springer/Bump-Sullivan, and Rawhide HMPs 

• Teal Marsh Reservoir HMP 

1.2 Overview of Alternatives Presented in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS 

1.2.1 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis 

The following alternatives were considered, but not carried forward for detailed analysis because (1) they 

would not fulfill requirements of FLPMA or other existing laws or regulations; (2) they did not meet the 

purpose and need of the land use plan; (3) they were already part of an existing plan, policy, or 

administrative function; or (4) they did not fall within the limits of the planning criteria. The FLPMA 

requires the BLM to manage public lands and resources according to the principles of multiple use and 

sustained yield, including recognizing the Nation’s needs for domestic sources of minerals, food, timber, 

and fiber. Moreover, the BLM is required by law to recognize existing valid rights on public lands and 

manage public lands according to existing laws, including, but not limited to, the General Mining Law of 

1872 and the Mining and Minerals Policy Act of 1970. Specific alternatives considered, but not carried 

forward for detailed analysis follow. 
Approved Resource Management Plan

1-4 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

• Suspend all future federal mineral leasing and development operations and cancel existing oil and 

gas leases. 

• Emphasize the protection of resources by removing most, if not all, human uses. 

• Establish the entire planning area as a MA to meet Class I VRM objectives. 

• Remove all stipulations from oil and gas leases. 

• Remove existing ACEC designations. 

• Open the entire planning area to unregulated public access, OHV use, and other resource uses. 

• Mandate directional and (or) horizontal drilling. 

• Prohibit surface water disposal of coalbed natural gas (CBNG) waste water. 

• Survey for, identify, and protect lands of wilderness quality. 

1.2.2 Alternatives Considered in Detail 

The Proposed RMP/Final EIS, Section 2.4 Alternatives Considered in Detail summarizes the five 

alternatives (A through E) considered in detail. Chapter 4 of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS analyzes the 

impacts associated with each of the alternatives considered. This analysis includes an estimate of the 

social and economic impacts that are anticipated as a result of the alternatives considered. It may also 

provide a suitable starting point for local governments to use in local planning efforts. General overviews 

of each alternative are provided below. 

Alternative A 

Resources on lands administered by the BLM within the planning area are currently managed under the 

existing plan (BLM 1985a), as amended (including currently authorized activity plans [e.g., allotment 

management plans, habitat management plans]). Management under Alternative A continues to balance 

the use and development of planning area resources. 

Alternative B 

Alternative B emphasizes conservation of physical, biological, and heritage resources with constraints on 

resource uses. Relative to all alternatives, Alternative B conserves the most land area for physical, 

biological, and heritage resources; designates the highest number of ACECs (7); and is the most 

restrictive to OHV use and leasing for coal, oil and gas, and other solid leasable minerals. 

Alternative C 

Alternative C provides physical, biological, and heritage resource conservation similar to current 

management, while allowing for more recreational experiences. Alternative C establishes the most MAs 

(6), including establishment of the most acreage for the proposed South Bighorns/Red Wall MA. 

Regarding the conservation of physical, biological, and heritage resources and restrictions on mineral 

leasing, Alternative C falls generally between alternatives B and D. 

Alternative D 

Alternative D emphasizes resource uses (e.g., energy and mineral development, recreation, and forest 

products). Relative to all alternatives, Alternative D conserves the least land area for physical, biological, 

and heritage resources; designates the lowest number of ACECs (1); and is the least restrictive to OHV 

use and leasing for oil and gas and other solid leasable minerals. 

Alternative E (Proposed RMP) 

Alternative E increases conservation of physical, biological, and heritage resources compared to current 

management, including restrictions against habitat fragmentation and establishment of five new MAs. 

Alternative E also emphasizes moderate constraints on leasing for oil and gas and other solid leasable 

minerals. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 1-5 

1.2.3 Environmentally Preferred Alternative 

Environmental preferability is judged using the criteria in NEPA and subsequent guidance by the Council 

on Environmental Quality (CEQ 1981). The CEQ has defined the environmentally preferable alternative 

as the alternative that will promote the national environmental policy as expressed in Section 101 of 

NEPA. This section lists six broad policy goals for all federal plans, program, and policies as follows: 

• Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding 

generations. 

• Assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing 

surroundings. 

• Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health 

or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences. 

• Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our National heritage, and maintain, 

whenever possible, an environment that supports diversity and variety of individual choice. 

• Achieve a balance between population and resource use that will permit high standards of living 

and a wide sharing of life’s amenities. 

• Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of 

depletable resources. 

Based on these criteria, identification of the most environmentally preferable alternative involves a 

balancing of current and potential resource uses with that of resource protection and Alternative E best 

fulfills that role. Therefore, BLM finds Alternative E best meets the definition of the environmentally 

preferred alternative. 

1.3 Management Considerations 

Based on input received during the planning process, there was both support and opposition to certain 

components of the proposed RMP. No formal comments were received from federal or Tribal 

governments indicating the proposed plan was inconsistent with other existing plans or policies. No 

inconsistencies with State or local plans, policies, or programs were identified during the Governor’s 

consistency review of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. 

BLM considered all protests and comments received on the Proposed RMP/Final EIS, and input from the 

Governor’s consistency review. For more information, see the Public Involvement, Consultation, and 

Coordination Section of this document. This ROD serves as the final decision for the land use plan 

decisions for the Casper RMP, and the RMP becomes effective on the date this ROD is signed. 

The BLM is tasked with the job of multiple-use management as mandated under the FLPMA and other 

laws and regulations governing management of public land. The Approved RMP provides a balance 

between those reasonable measures necessary to protect existing resource values and continued public 

need to make beneficial use of the planning area. Therefore, implementation of the Approved RMP is the 

alternative best able to comply with all applicable laws, regulations, policy, and agency direction. 

1.3.1 Mitigation Measures 

All practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental harm are encompassed in the alternatives as 

described in Table 2-3 and the appendices of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. 
Approved Resource Management Plan

1-6 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

1.3.2 Plan Monitoring 

The BLM planning regulations (43 CFR Part 1610.4-9) call for the monitoring of resource management 

plans on a continual basis with a formal evaluation done at periodic intervals. Implementation of the 

Approved RMP will be monitored over time and plan evaluations conducted periodically. Management 

actions arising from activity plan decisions will be evaluated to ensure consistency with RMP objectives. 

Monitoring and the evaluation process are described in more detail in the Plan Evaluation/Adaptive 

Management Section of the Approved RMP. 

1.4 Public Involvement, Consultation, and Coordination 

1.4.1 Public Involvement 

The BLM decisionmaking process is conducted in accordance with the requirements of the CEQ 

regulations implementing NEPA, and the U.S. Department of the Interior (USDI) and BLM policies and 

procedures implementing NEPA. NEPA and the associated regulatory and policy framework require 

federal agencies involve the interested public in their decisionmaking. The public involvement process, 

consultation, and coordination conducted for the Approved RMP are described in Appendix C of the 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS. 

In accordance with CEQ scoping guidance, the BLM provided avenues for public involvement as an 

integral part of revising the RMP and preparing the EIS. CEQ scoping guidance defines scoping as the 

“process by which lead agencies solicit input from the public and interested agencies on the nature and 

extent of issues and impacts to be addressed and the methods by which they will be evaluated” (CEQ 

1981). 

In addition to scoping, four public meetings/hearings were held during the 90-day comment period for the 

Draft RMP/EIS. The BLM provided a variety of avenues through which the public could submit 

comments during the scoping period and the 90-day comment period including mail, email, website, 

telephone, and in person. Four newsletters were distributed periodically throughout the planning process 

to keep the public informed of the Casper RMP revision process. In addition, the Casper RMP revision 

website (www.blm.gov/rmp/casper/) serves as a repository for documents related to the development of 

the RMP revision, including announcements, bulletins, and draft and final documents. 

A 30-day protest period was provided on the land use plan decisions contained in the Proposed 

RMP/Final EIS in accordance with 43 CFR Part 1610.5-2. Two protest letters were received and 

subsequently resolved by the BLM Director, whose decision constitutes final agency action for the USDI. 

The main protest issues pertained to special status species, wildlife, oil and gas leasing and development, 

special designations and other management areas, air quality, and cultural resources. 

An additional 60-day public review and comment period on supplemental information regarding proposed 

ACECs was also provided. No ACEC-related comments were received, but seven public response 

documents were received on the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. The majority of comments received on the 

proposed plan related to Rights-of-Way Use Areas or Communication Sites, establishing the Sand Hills 

Management Area, and air quality analysis. The Wyoming BLM State Director responded by letter to 

each comment on the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. 

1.4.2 Consultation and Coordination 

1.4.2.1 Cooperating Agency Status 

For the Casper RMP revision planning effort, cooperating agency status was extended to the EPA; the 

National Park Service – Fort Laramie National Historic Landmark; Converse, Natrona, and Platte 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 1-7 

counties; and five conservation districts. Cooperators’ representatives have been a part of the RMP 

interdisciplinary team throughout the planning process. 

1.4.2.2 Governor’s Consistency Review 

By letter of July 24, 2007, Wyoming Governor Freudenthal advised the BLM the Proposed RMP 

contained no inconsistencies with state or local plans, policies, or programs. The Governor did, however, 

express concerns with (1) the use of statutory categorical exclusions authorized under the Energy Policy 

Act and the qualitative analysis used in the Draft EIS/Final EIS to predict impacts and (2) the need for 

BLM to intensely focus on implementing and monitoring the plan so desired future conditions can be 

achieved. The Wyoming BLM State Director responded by letter to the Governor’s comments. 

1.4.2.3 Section 7 Consultation 

In accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, the BLM and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (USFWS) met between October 2001 and May 2007 to discuss potential impacts to listed species 

from activities potentially authorized during implementation of the Casper RMP. Copies of the BLM’s 

Draft and Final Biological Assessment were placed on the Casper RMP website for public review. No 

public comments were received on the documents. The USFWS submitted a programmatic Biological 

Opinion concurring with BLM’s effects determinations (ROD Appendix Z). 

1.4.2.4 Native American Consultation 

Coordination with Native American tribes occurred throughout the planning process. Several letters were 

sent to tribal councils as part of the consultation process with Native Americans asking them to identify 

sacred sites or other places of concern. BLM also met with interested tribes and toured areas of concern. 

1.4.2.5 Coordination with the Environmental Protection Agency 

The EPA was a cooperator in the RMP revision and participated in development of the RMP alternatives 

and provided information relative to their agency’s responsibilities, goals, policies, and expertise. The 

EPA provided a rating of EC-2 on the Draft RMP/EIS and provided comments on the Proposed 

RMP/Final EIS. They expressed concerns with (1) the use of statutory categorical exclusions authorized 

under the Energy Policy Act and the qualitative analysis used in the Draft EIS/Final EIS to predict 

impacts, (2) only 15 percent of the planning area being limited to designated roads and trails for OHV 

use, (3) the lack of maps identifying wetland locations, and (4) the need for monitoring OHV use and 

wetland protection as the plan is implemented. The Wyoming BLM State Director responded by letter to 

the EPA comments. 

Responses to all protests and comments are available on the Casper RMP revision website at 

www.blm.gov/rmp/casper/. 
Approved Resource Management Plan

1-8 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

This page intentionally left blank. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 2-1 

2.0 Approved Resource Management Plan 

2.1 Introduction 

The (BLM Casper Field Office administrative area is located in east-central Wyoming and includes 

approximately 8.5-million acres of land in most of Natrona County and all of Converse, Platte, and 

Goshen counties. This Approved RMP and resulting ROD for the Casper planning area are intended to 

provide land use planning and management direction at a broad scale and to guide future actions. The 

regulations for making and modifying land use plan decisions, which comprise an RMP, are found in 43 

CFR Part 1600. Land use plan decisions consist of (1) desired outcomes (goals and objectives) and (2) 

allowable uses and management actions. 

2.1.1 Purpose and Need for the Plan 

2.1.1.1 Purpose 

Section 102 of the FLPMA sets forth the policy for periodically projecting the present and future use of 

public lands and their resources using the land use planning process. Sections 201 and 202 of the 

FLPMA establish the BLM’s land use planning requirements. BLM Handbook H-1601-1, Land Use 

Planning Handbook, provides guidance for implementing the BLM land use planning requirements 

established by Sections 201 and 202 of the FLPMA and the regulations in 43 CFR Part 1600 (BLM 

2005a). 

The purpose, or goal, of the land use plan is to ensure BLM-administered lands are managed in 

accordance with the FLPMA and the principles of multiple use and sustained yield. The purpose of 

revising the existing plan is to address the growing needs of the planning area and to select a management 

strategy that best achieves a combination of the following: 

• Employ a community-based planning approach to collaborate with federal, state, and local 

cooperating agencies. 

• Establish goals and objectives (desired outcomes) for management of resources and resource uses 

within the approximately 1.4-million surface acres and 4.7-million acres of federal mineral estate 

administered by the BLM Casper Field Office in accordance with the principles of multiple use 

and sustained yield. 

• Identify land use plan decisions to guide future land-management actions and subsequent sitespecific implementation decisions. 

• Identify management actions and allowable uses anticipated to achieve the established goals and 

objectives and reach desired outcomes. 

• Provide comprehensive management direction by making land use decisions for all appropriate 

resources and resource uses administered by the BLM Casper Field Office. 

• Provide for compliance with applicable tribal, federal, and state laws, standards, implementation 

plans, and BLM policies and regulations. 

• Recognize the Nation’s needs for domestic sources of minerals, food, timber, and fiber, and 

incorporate requirements of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) Reauthorization of 

2000. 

• Retain flexibility to adapt to new and emerging issues and opportunities and to provide for 

adjustments to decisions over time based on new information and monitoring. 
Approved Resource Management Plan

2-2 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

• Strive to be compatible with existing plans and policies of adjacent local, state, tribal, and federal 

agencies and consistent with federal law, regulations, and BLM policy. 

2.1.1.2 Need for Revising the Existing Plan 

BLM identified the need, or requirement, to revise the existing plan through a formal evaluation of the 

existing plan (BLM 2000a), consideration of the Management Situation Analysis (MSA) (BLM 2005b), 

examination of issues identified during the public scoping process and through collaboration with 

cooperating local, state, and federal agencies. Since the ROD was signed (July 1985) for the existing 

plan, new data have become available, new policies have been established, and old policies have been 

revised. This, along with emerging issues and changing circumstances, resulted in the need to revise the 

existing plan. In addition, the existing plan’s decisions no longer served as a useful guide for resource 

management in the Casper planning area. For example, the EPCA Reauthorization of 2000, coupled with 

the Nation’s growing demand for domestic energy, resulted in different priorities than were foreseen 

when the existing plan was established in 1985. These and other select examples of new data, new and 

revised policies, and emerging issues and changing circumstances, demonstrated the need to revise the 

existing plan. 

New Data 

Monitoring, availability of new information, and advances in science and technology provided new data 

to consider in the revision of the existing plan. Select new data can be found in the following documents 

and sources: 

• BLM Assessing the Potential for Renewable Energy on Public Lands (BLM 2003a) 

• BLM Buffalo Field Office Resource Management Plan (BLM 2001a) 

• BLM Evaluation of the Platte River RMP (BLM 2000a) 

• BLM Mineral Occurrence and Development Potential Report (BLM 2004a) 

• BLM MSA (BLM 2005b) 

• BLM Wyoming Statewide Biological Assessments for Species Regulated by the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA) (published between 2004 and 2005) 

• Cultural Class I Regional Overview (BLM 2004b) 

• Designation of Critical Habitat for Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse and Colorado Butterfly 

Plant (USFWS 2003a) 

• EPCA Scientific Inventory of Onshore Federal Lands Oil and Gas Resources and Reserves and 

the Extent and Nature of Restrictions or Impediments to their Development (USDI 2003) 

• Preliminary Final Reasonable Foreseeable Development (RFD) Scenario for Oil and Gas, Casper 

Field Office (BLM 2005c) 

• Final Programmatic EIS on Wind Energy Development on BLM-Administered Lands in the 

Western United States (BLM 2005d) 

• U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) and USFWS Platte River Recovery Implementation 

Program and Final Environmental Impact Statement (USBR and USFWS 2005) 

• Visual Resource Inventory (BLM 2003b) 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 2-3 

• Wyoming Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Plan (Wyoming Sage Grouse Working Group 

2003) and Conservation Assessment of Greater Sage-Grouse and Sagebrush Habitats (Connelly et 

al. 2004) 

New and Revised Policies 

Numerous policies either have been revised or developed since the ROD for the existing plan was signed 

in 1985. Some of the more important and relevant policy changes since 1985 to consider when revising 

the existing plan included the following: 

• BLM National Management Strategy for Motorized Off-Highway Vehicle Use on Public Lands 

(BLM 2001b) 

• BLM Instruction Memoranda (IM), including, but not limited to 

− Washington Office IM-2002-034 – Fire Management Planning (BLM 2002a) 

− Washington Office IM-2002-196 – Additional Guidance on Right-of-Way Management in 

Land Use Planning (BLM 2002b) 

− Washington Office IM-2003-137 – Integration of the EPCA Inventory Results into Land Use 

Planning and Energy Use Authorizations (BLM 2003c) 

− Washington Office IM-2005-024 – National Sage-Grouse Habitat Conservation Strategy 

(BLM 2005e) 

− Washington Office IM-2006-073 – Weed-Free Seed Use on Lands Administered by the 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM 2006b) 

• Energy Policy Act of 2005 (USC 2005) 

• EPCA Reauthorization of 2000 (EPCA 2000) 

• Executive Orders 

− Executive Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites) 

− Executive Order 13112 (Invasive Species) 

− Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments) 

− Executive Order 13186 (Migratory Birds) 

• Handbook H-1601-1, Land Use Planning Handbook (BLM 2005a) 

• Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (USC 2003) 

• Manual H-8410-1, BLM Visual Resource Inventory, Section V. Visual Resource Classes and 

Objectives (BLM 2003d) 

• National Fire Plan (USFS 2000) 

• Standards for Healthy Rangelands and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management for the 

Public Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management in the State of Wyoming (BLM 

1998b) 

• Wyoming Weed and Pest Control Act Designated List – Designated Noxious Weeds and 

Declared List of Weeds and Pests (Wyoming Weed and Pest Council 2005a and 2005b) 

• Wyoming Weed Management Strategic Plan (Wyoming State Weed Team 2003)

Emerging Issues and Changing Circumstances 

Emerging issues and changes in local, regional, and national circumstances to consider when revising the 

existing plan included the following: 

• Increasing and conflicting demands on the planning area’s resources and resource uses 
Approved Resource Management Plan

2-4 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

• Increasing complexity of resource management issues 

• Increasing energy prices and interest in energy exploration and development 

• Changes in the legal status of plants and wildlife potentially occurring in the planning area 

• Growing Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) areas and fire management 

• Changes in the National Historic Trail (NHT) setting related to adjacent development 

• Urbanization of rural areas and the WUI 

• Addressing habitat fragmentation given BLM’s requirement for multiple use management and 

sustained yield 

• Trespass on private lands and public access to public lands 

• Spread of invasive, nonnative plant species on public lands 

• Increasing OHV use on public lands 

2.1.2 Planning Area and Map 

Within the Casper planning area, the BLM manages approximately 1.4-million acres of BLMadministered public land surface and 4.7-million acres of mineral estate (see Figure 1-1).

2.1.3 Scoping/Issues 

Issues identified during the scoping and RMP revision process for the RMP and EIS comprise two 

categories: 

• Issues within the scope of the EIS and used to develop alternatives or otherwise addressed in the 

EIS. 

• Issues outside the scope of the EIS or that could require policy, regulatory, or administrative 

actions. 

2.1.3.1 Issues Addressed 

As a result of the scoping process, the key planning issues identified for developing alternatives in the 

RMP and EIS were as follows. 

Energy and Mineral Resources 

• What areas are suitable or not suitable for energy and mineral resource development? 

• What level of development should be allowed in areas suitable for energy and mineral resource 

development? 

Vegetation and Habitat Management 

• How should soil, water, and vegetation be managed to reduce fuel loads and achieve forest health 

and healthy rangelands while providing for livestock grazing and fish and wildlife habitat? 

• How should special status species conservation strategies be applied given the BLM’s 

requirement for multiple use management and sustained yield? How will these strategies affect 

other public land resources? 

Land Ownership Adjustments, Access, and Transportation 

• What land adjustments are necessary to improve access and management of public lands? 

• How should travel be managed to provide access for recreation, commercial uses, and general 

enjoyment of the public lands while protecting cultural and natural resources? 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 2-5 

Special Designations 

• What areas, if any, contain unique or sensitive resources requiring special management? 

2.1.3.2 Issues Considered, But Not Further Analyzed 

In addition to key planning issues, other issues, themes, and positions were identified during the scoping 

process. Items that were considered but not carried forward for detailed study in the EIS because they 

were outside the scope of the RMP revision, could not be acted upon or did not require action, or because 

they required the BLM to exceed its authority, are summarized below: 

• The BLM should consult, work, and coordinate with or recognize specific organizations, 

agencies, and (or) authorities. 

• The BLM should analyze impacts from specific actions or activities that will occur or be 

addressed during subsequent RMP implementation decisions. 

• The BLM should conduct site-specific analyses, inventories, or surveys, or adopt specific 

measures or mandates. 

• The BLM should adopt or otherwise ensure the RMP revision is compatible with specific 

regulations, policies, mandates, guidance, or plans, or integrate one or more of these items into 

the planning process. 

• The BLM should adopt or require site-specific stipulations, resource protection measures, or 

technologies. 

2.1.3.3 Planning Criteria/Legislative Constraints 

Planning criteria used in the RMP revision are as follows: 

• The revised RMP will recognize valid existing rights. 

• Planning decisions will cover BLM-administered public lands, including split-estate lands where 

the subsurface minerals are severed from the surface right, and the BLM has legal jurisdiction 

over one or the other. 

• The RMP planning effort will be collaborative and multi-jurisdictional in nature. The BLM will 

strive to ensure that its management decisions are complementary to its planning jurisdictions and 

adjoining properties within the boundaries described by law and regulation. 

• The environmental analysis will consider a reasonable range of alternatives that focus on the 

relative values of resources and respond to the issues. Management prescriptions will reflect the 

principles of multiple use and sustained yield. 

• The BLM will consider current scientific information, research, new technologies, and the results 

of resource assessments, monitoring, and coordination to determine appropriate local and regional 

management strategies that will enhance or restore impaired ecosystems. 

• The Standards for Healthy Rangelands and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management for 

the Public Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management in the State of Wyoming

(BLM 1998b) will apply to all activities and uses . 

• The BLM will address socioeconomic conditions and environmental justice. 

• The BLM will provide for public safety and welfare relative to fire, hazardous materials, and 

abandoned mine lands. 
Approved Resource Management Plan

2-6 Record of Decision and Approved Casper R

Figure 1-1. Casper Field Office Planning Area 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 2-7 

• Visual resource management class designations will be analyzed and modified to reflect present 

conditions and future needs. 

• The BLM will consider current and potential future uses of the public lands through the 

development of reasonable foreseeable future development and activity scenarios based on 

historical, existing, and projected levels of use. 

• Planning decisions will include the preservation, conservation, and enhancement of cultural, 

historical, paleontological, and natural components of public land resources, while considering 

energy development and other surface-disturbing activities. 

• The BLM will coordinate with tribes to identify sites, areas, and objects important to their 

cultural and religious heritages. 

• Planning decisions will comply with the ESA and BLM interagency agreements with the 

USFWS. 

• Areas potentially suitable for ACEC or other special management designations will be identified 

and, where appropriate, brought forward for analysis in the EIS. 

• Waterway segments will be classified and determinations of eligibility and suitability will be 

made in accordance with Section 5(d) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Appropriate 

management prescriptions for maintaining or enhancing the outstanding remarkable values and 

classifications of waterway segments meeting suitability factors will be part of the RMP revision. 

• OHV use management decisions in the revised RMP will be consistent with the BLM’s National 

OHV Strategy (BLM 2001b). 

• Decisions in the revised RMP will comply, as appropriate, with all applicable laws, regulations, 

policy, and guidance. 

• Known areas in the planning area with coal development potential are located in northeastern 

Converse County. Coal-screening determinations were made on these areas during planning 

efforts for the Buffalo RMP (BLM 2001a) and Thunder Basin National Grasslands Land and 

Resource Management Plan (USFS 2001a). No additional coal-screening determinations or coalplanning decisions are anticipated for the Casper Field Office RMP, unless public submissions of 

coal resource information or surface resource issues indicate a need to update these 

determinations. 

2.1.3.4 Planning Process Summary 

The BLM uses a nine-step planning process when developing and revising RMPs as required by 43 CFR 

Part 1600 and planning program guidance in the BLM Handbook H-1601-1, Land Use Planning 

Handbook (BLM 2005a). The planning process is designed to help the BLM identify the uses of BLMadministered lands desired by the public and to consider these uses to the extent they are consistent with 

the laws established by Congress and the policies of the executive branch of the federal government. The 

planning process is issue-driven. The BLM utilized the public scoping process to identify planning issues 

to direct (drive) the revision of the existing plan. The scoping process also was used to introduce the 

public to preliminary planning criteria, which set limits to the scope of the RMP revision. 

Title II, Section 202, of FLPMA directs the BLM to coordinate planning efforts with Native American 

tribes, other federal departments, and agencies of the state and local governments as part of its land use 

planning process. The BLM is also directed to integrate NEPA requirements with other environmental 

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

accomplished coordination with Native American tribes, other agencies, and consistency with other plans 
Approved Resource Management Plan

2-8 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

through ongoing communications, meetings, and collaborative efforts with the Interdisciplinary Team, 

which includes BLM specialists and federal, state, and local agencies.

2.1.3.5 Related Plans 

BLM planning policies require that the BLM review approved or adopted land use plans of other federal, 

state, local, and tribal governments and, where practicable, be consistent with those plans. For example, 

during revision of the Lander RMP, the Casper and Lander BLM Field Offices will coordinate with the 

Wyoming Game and Fish Department. Specifically, coordination will address potential impacts to crucial 

wildlife and sage-grouse habitats from development in the Wind River Basin, including the Wind River 

Management Area. Plans that are related to the management of land and resources that apply to this RMP 

revision include: 

• Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest Revised Land and Resource Management Plan (USFS 

2003a) county land use plans, national forest land and resource management plans. 

• Thunder Basin National Grasslands Land and Resource Management Plan (USFS 2001a) 

• Converse County Land Use Plan (CCPC 2003) 

• Natrona County Land Use Plan (Natrona County Planning Commission 1998) 

• The Casper Mountain Land Use Plan (Worthington et al. 2004) 

• Goshen County Land Use Plan (Oblinger-Smith Corporation 1977) 

• Washakie Resource Management Plan (BLM 1988a) 

• General Management Plan, Development Concept Plan, Interpretive Prospectus for the Fort 

Laramie National Historic Site (BLM 1993) 

• Buffalo Field Office Resource Management Plan (BLM 2001a) 

• Lander Field Office Resource Management Plan (BLM 1987) 

• Newcastle Field Office Resource Management Plan (BLM 2000b) 

• Rawlins Field Office Resource Management Plan (BLM 2004d) 

• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pathfinder Interim Management Plan (USFWS 2004a) 

In addition, the following Programmatic EISs (in development) are related to the management of land and 

resources that apply to this RMP revision. Section 368 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (designation of 

West-wide energy corridors) is being implemented through the current development of an interagency 

Programmatic EIS. The Final Programmatic EIS will provide plan amendment decisions that will address 

numerous energy corridor related issues, including the utilization of existing corridors (enhancements and 

upgrades), identification of new corridors, supply and demand considerations, and compatibility with 

other corridor and project planning efforts. It is likely that the identification of corridors in the Final 

Programmatic EIS will affect the Casper planning area, and the approved Programmatic EIS would 

subsequently amend the Casper RMP. 

The Energy Policy Act of 2005, Section 369 (Oil Shale and Tar Sands commercial leasing) is being 

implemented through the development of a BLM Programmatic EIS. The identification of areas that are 

suitable for Oil Shale development will be included in the Oil and Tar Sands Leasing Programmatic EIS, 

and upon its completion and ROD, the approved Programmatic EIS would subsequently amend the 

Casper RMP. 

2.1.4 Overall Vision

The Approved RMP increases conservation of physical, biological, and heritage resources as compared to 

current management, including restrictions against habitat fragmentation and establishment of five new 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 2-9 

MAs. The Approved RMP also emphasizes moderate constraints on leasing for oil and gas and other 

solid leasable minerals.

2.2 Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions 

Table 1-1 identifies the goals, objectives, and decisions/management actions for eight resource topics 

comprising the Approved RMP: 

• Physical Resources (PR) 

• Mineral Resources (MR) 

• Fire Management and Ecology (FM) 

• Biological Resources (BR) 

• Heritage and Visual Resources (HR) 

• Land Resources (LR) 

• Special Designations and Other Management Areas (SD) 

• Socioeconomic Resources (SR) 

Goals and objectives describe the desired outcomes for each resource topic and decisions/management 

actions are anticipated to achieve these goals and objectives. 

2.2.1 Management Decisions 

Goals, objectives, and land use plan decisions/management actions made in the Approved RMP are 

included in Table 1-1. The decision number, related goals and objectives, and associated maps are also 

identified in Table 1-1. 

Table 1-1 is organized by the eight resource topics listed above; however, decisions/management actions 

for resources and resource uses are interconnected and a comprehensive review of all eight resource 

topics is required to ensure a full understanding of the Approved RMP. Resource topics may also 

overlap. For example, total mineral withdrawals are identified in the Mineral Resources section of Table 

1-1, but are also listed under the individual resource topic and processed by the Lands and Realty 

program. Following Table 1-1, supplemental information supporting decisions in this Approved RMP is 

provided and includes a complete list of withdrawals (Table 1-2), a list of areas administratively 

unavailable for oil and gas leasing (Table 1-3), information on best management practices (Section 

2.2.1.1), guidelines for yearling conversion (Section 2.2.1.2), stock driveway management standards 

(Section 2.2.1.3), and corrections to Air Quality (Section 2.2.1.4) calculations, tables, and text from the 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

2-10 Record of Decision and Approve

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions

1000 Physical Resources (PR) – Goals and Objectives 

GOAL PR:1 Minimize the impact of management actions in the planning area on air quality by complying with all applicable air quality laws, rules, and 

regulations.

OBJECTIVES - PR:1.1 Comply with applicable state and federal AAQS for criteria pollutant concentration levels associated with management actions. 

PR:1.2 Maintain concentrations of Prevention of Significant Deterioration pollutants associated with management actions in compliance 

with the applicable increment. 

GOAL PR:2 Implement management actions within the scope of the BLM’s land-management responsibilities to improve air quality as practicable. 

OBJECTIVES - PR:2.1 Reduce visibility-impairing pollutants in accordance with the reasonable progress goals and timeframes established within the State 

of Wyoming’s Regional Haze State Implementation Plan. 

PR:2.2 Reduce atmospheric deposition levels below generally accepted level of concern and level of acceptable change. 

GOAL PR:3 Manage geologic hazards and unique geologic features on BLM-administered lands. 

OBJECTIVES -PR:3.1 Reduce potential risks associated with known geologic hazards. PR:3.2 Maintain unique geologic features within the planning area for visual, scientific, historical, recreational, and topographic values. 

GOAL PR:4 Maintain or improve soil health (e.g., chemical, physical, and biotic properties) and prevent or minimize soil erosion and compaction.

OBJECTIVES - PR:4.1 Identify, develop, and interpret soil information to prevent or limit soil loss and to identify potential pollutant source areas. 

PR:4.2 Participate in a Wyoming BLM effort in coordination with the State of Wyoming to establish guidelines in a handbook to evaluate

BMPs for highly erosive soils in arid lands. 

PR:4.3 Monitor and evaluate reclamation in disturbed areas and modify BMPs as needed to achieve successful reclamation.

GOAL PR:5 Maintain or improve surface water and groundwater resources 

and regulations.OBJECTIVES - PR:5.1 Maintain watershed, wetland, and riparian functions 

PR:5.2 Minimize or control contributions of nonpoint source 

with particular attention being paid to special managestablished by the State of Wyoming. 

PR:5.3 Improve control of sources of pollutants on federal laPR:5.4 Develop, implement, and monitor restoration plans fo

other interested stakeholders. 

GOAL PR:6 Provide for physical and legal availability of water to facilitate 

provide conservation of those waters. OBJECTIVES - PR:6.1 Develop new water-supply sources (e.g., wells, sprin

authorized actions (e.g., grazing, wildlife, recreation, priority. 

PR:6.2 Improve opportunities for water conservation. Appl

where practical. 

PR:6.3 Design and construct all new reservoir projects consi

ultimate reservoir failure. 

PR:6.4 Develop and implement a procedure for conversion o

water supply use. 

PR:6.5 Rehabilitate nonfunctional reservoirs. 

GOAL PR:7 Bring all watersheds to their full potential conditions. 

OBJECTIVES - PR:7.1 Develop water resources to improve watershed condiPR:7.2 Improve protection for surface water and groundwate

1000 Physical Resources (PR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

1001 PR:1 

PR:2 

Work cooperatively to develop an Air Quality Assessment Protocol to estimate potential future air quality. 

1002 PR:1 Manage prescribed burns to comply with Wyoming DEQ AQD smoke-management rules and regulations. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

1000 Physical Resources (PR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

1003 PR:1 Establish within 1 year of approval of the RMP ROD, an air quality strategy to define the background air quality associated with federal actions approved under this RMP. 

1004 PR:1 Create and maintain within 1 year of establishing the air quality strategy, a monitoring system to establish the air quality change over time related to federal actions. 1005 PR:1 PR:2 Work cooperatively to encourage industry and other permittees to adopt measures to reduce emissions. 1006 PR:1 PR:2 Work cooperatively to estimate potential impacts from potential emission reduction. 1007 PR:1 PR:2 Ensure that the level of air quality analysis is proportional to the availability of emissions information and public concern for air quality. 1008 PR:1 

PR:2 

Perform dispersion-modeling analyses to determine the potential impacts of proposed air emission mitigations. 

1009 PR:3.1 Restrict development in hazardous areas such as fault zones and slide areas; evaluate development on a case-by-case basis. 1010 PR:3.1 Abide by the requirements of Onshore Oil and Gas Order #6, H2S Operations, in areas containing H2S. 

1011 PR:6.1 PR:6.3 

PR:6.5 PR:6.1 

PR:7.2 

Provide, where authorized uses are fenced out of water sources, an alternative or “off-source” water supply (e.g., piping water to troughs, tanks, or ponds). 

1012 PR:1 

PR:2 

The FLPMA and the Clean Air Act prohibit the BLM from conducting, supporting, approving, licensing, or permitting any activity under its jurisdiction that does not comply with all applicabair quality laws, statutes, regulations, and implementation plans. 

Air Quality 

1013 PR:1 

PR:2 

Enhance existing criteria pollutant and AQRV monitoring on a project-specific or as-needed basis. Locations of AQRV monitors will be determined through a cooperative process. Suggest Wadding new criteria pollutant monitors.

1014 PR:1 

PR:2 

Enhance the existing cooperative process that shares air quality information to agencies, stakeholders, and the public. 

1015 PR:1 

PR:2 

The BLM will consider implementing mitigations within its authority to reduce emissions from current levels in the planning area. The BLM will facilitate discussions with stakeholders to implement mitigations beyond the BLM’s authority to reduce emissions from current levels in the planning area, such as: 

• Consider a program to offset emissions proposed by the RMP. • Reduce emissions from existing sources (by techniques such as more stringent Best Available Control Technologies). 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-12 Record of Decision and Approve

1000 Physical Resources (PR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Geologic Resources

1016 PR:3.1 

PR:3.2 

On a case-by-case basis, BLM-administered lands within the planning area will be inventoried for unique geologic features, which will then be evaluated and prioritized for their unique value 

developed. 

Soil

1017 PR:4.1 On BLM-administered surface, conduct onsite soil investigations on highly controversial projects, or in areas of highly erosive soils, to evaluate the impacts of surface-disturbing activities. O

include mapping the soils to a series level, evaluating current erosion conditions, and prescribing mitigation and reclamation practices. 

1018 PR:4.1 Conduct assessment of soil limitations analysis using automated soil survey or field investigations on any surface-disturbing activity causing more than 20 acres of disturbance per year. Surfa

less than 20 acres of disturbance per year will be assessed as warranted. 

1019 PR:4.3 Inspect disturbed and reclaimed areas for signs of accelerated erosion on projects disturbing more than 20 acres per year. Surface-disturbing activities causing less than 20 acres of disturbance 

warranted. 

1020 PR:4.2 Minimize the disturbance to highly erosive soils (575,788 acres of BLM federal mineral estate of which 256,240 acres are BLM surface). Proposed surface-disturbing activities will be modif

highly erosive soils to the greatest extent practicable. 

1021 PR:4.2 The requirement to use temporary protective surface treatment on disturbed areas is applied on a case-by-case basis as project conditions warrant. 1022 PR:4.2 Surface disturbance or development on slopes greater than 25 percent is prohibited, unless individual site plans are submitted to and approved by the authorized officer meeting the following 

drawings for construction, site drainage design, and final rehabilitation contours with a written rationale describing how the proposed controls will prevent slope failure and erosion, while ma

final reclamation. This plan should also include a timeline identifying the actions that will be applied during the construction, production and rehabilitation phases of the plan so appropriate mdeveloped by the BLM to ensure that the plan is meeting the objectives described in its rationale.

1023 PR:4.2 Limit the use of prescribed fire on highly erosive soils to seasons and fire intensity that limit impacts. 1024 PR:4.3 Complete reclamation activities (final contouring, replacing topsoil, reseeding, and surface treatment) on all disturbed areas within three growing seasons. 1025 PR:4.3 Re-seed all disturbed areas with native species adapted to the site conditions and capable of providing protective soil cover. All seed must be certified weed-free. Nonnative species may be u

resource objectives will not be met through the use of native species and the nonnative plants have no invasive properties. When practical, reseeding of disturbed areas should include the use comparable areas in Wyoming and surrounding states. 

1026 PR:4.3 Re-treat reclaimed areas that do not have at least 30 percent of predisturbance vegetative cover three growing seasons after final reclamation. Re-treating will vary by site and initial reclamat

invasive species control, reseeding the site with other native species or the same native species under more favorable environmental conditions. Re-treatment also may involve additions of feprotective cover, such as mulch, matting, or netting. Livestock grazing also may be limited until reclamation success has been established. Grazing controls will vary by site, but might inclu

or supplemental feeding. Re-treat reclaimed areas that do not have at least 50 percent of predisturbance vegetative cover five growing seasons after final reclamation. 

1027 PR:4.2 Allow limited or no topsoil salvage when alternative soil-handling methods may be appropriate. Some examples include salvage of topsoil on the pipeline trench only, instead of full ROW sa

work areas leaving the soil in place, followed by soil ripping when the work is completed. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

1000 Physical Resources (PR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

1028 PR:4.2 Limit total long-term surface disturbance from all BLM-authorized activities to no more than 80 acres per square mile. Applies to BLM surface only. 1029 PR:4.2 Evaluate existing road and trail use in the planning area. Close and reclaim all roads and trails on BLM-administered surface that are in areas designated as highly erosive soils and that are no

demand. 

1030 PR:4.1 The requirement to measure cumulative annual short- and long-term disturbance is applied on a case-by-case basis as project conditions warrant. 

Water

1031 PR:5.1 On perennial and intermittent streams, control the number of on-channel reservoirs through project-level planning. This could involve removing existing structures or building new structures 1032 PR:5.1 

PR:5.2 PR:5.3 PR:6.1 PR:6.3 PR:6.5 

Analyze all management activities with the potential to impact Class 1 or 2 waters (Class 1 and 2 - Wyoming DEQ water quality standard) to prevent degradation of existing water quality. M

impacting all other waters will be addressed on a case-by-case basis. 

1033 PR:5.2 PR:5.3 

PR:6.1 PR:6.3 PR:7.1 PR:7.2 

As determined by the authorized officer, Storm Water Management Plans (WYPDES Storm Water Permit) will be required on all new BLM projects of more than 1 acre. 

1034 PR:5.3 

PR:6.1 

On BLM-authorized drilling activities, require use of pitless drilling technology where there is potential for adverse impact to surface water, groundwater, or soils. 

1035 PR:5.1 

PR:5.2 PR:5.3 PR:7.2 

Class 1 and Class 2 waters – (Wyoming DEQ water quality standard): NSO within 500 feet and CSU from 500 feet to 1⁄4-mile. Within the CSU area, use best available technology and (or) BWildlife and livestock watering facilities and recreation facilities will be allowed when no other alternatives exist and only when they meet management objectives. Waters other than Class 1 a case-by-case basis. 

1036 PR:7.2 CSU within 500 feet of water wells, springs, or artesian and flowing wells. 1037 PR:6.2 Install flow-control devices on all new wells and spring developments on BLM-administered lands within the planning area. 1038 PR:7.3 

PR:7.4 

Where resource damage is occurring due to ungulate use and where management and project plans have been developed, drill new water supply wells, develop new seeps and springs, and con

and state standards to disperse livestock and wildlife use on all BLM-administered lands in consultation with WGFD personnel and affected grazing lessees. Exceptions will be granted on a cauthorized officer. 

1039 PR:5.1 

PR:5.3 PR:6.1 PR:6.3 

To protect water sources and associated investments, fence all wells (new and existing) and developed springs. Fencing of reservoirs will be considered on a case-by-case basis. 

1040 PR:5.1 

PR:6.1 PR:7.2 

Rehabilitate and (or) re-develop (1) all BLM-authorized well and spring developments producing 10 gallons per minute or more and (2) on a case-by-case those water sources producing le

upgrade to new development practices. New development practices include, but are not limited to, protection of the well/spring and facilities (fencing), provision for off-source water distriwater conservation measures (timers, flow control devices, preferential use of tanks and troughs over unlined pits and ponds), and use of alternative energy, where possible. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-14 Record of Decision and Approve

1000 Physical Resources (PR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

1041 PR:5.3 

PR:6.1 PR:6.2 PR:7.1 PR:7.2 

Use alternative energy sources (e.g., solar and [or] wind power) on new water resource developments on all BLM-administered lands where existing traditional electric power is not present an

physically feasible. Convert existing water-well developments currently using generators to alternative energy sources (e.g., solar and [or] wind power) with propane generator power as a backup only, as neededwhere economically and physically feasible and where the current operator will maintain equipment. If gasoline- or diesel-powered generators are used in place of preferred propane powered will be made to detect fuel spills and the operator will be responsible for cleanup costs. 

1042 PR:5.1 

PR:6.1 PR:6.4 PR:7.1 

Convert suitable abandoned oil and gas development water-supply wells and suitable abandoned oil and gas wells where there is a need for additional water supplies to livestock and wildlife 

administered lands. 

1043 PR:5.1 

PR:5.2 PR:5.3 PR:5.4 PR:6.1 

Evaluate the impacts and mitigate the adverse impacts of all proposed and existing oil- and gas-produced water discharge on stream channel and streambank stability on all BLM-administered 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

2000 Mineral Resources (MR) – Goals and Objectives GOAL MR:1 Manage salable mineral permitting and development on BLM-administered lands within the planning area while minimizing 

impacts to other resource values. 

GOAL MR:2 Manage conservation of leasable mineral resources without compromising the long-term health and diversity of public lands. 

OBJECTIVES - MR:2.1 Maintain oil and gas leasing, exploration, and development, while minimizing impacts to other resource values. MR:2.2 Maintain coal leasing and exploration, while minimizing impacts to other resource values. MR:2.3 Maintain opportunities to lease other solid leasable minerals, while minimizing impacts to other resource values.

MR:2.4 Facilitate the evaluation of public lands for oil and gas potential. 

GOAL MR:3 Support the domestic need for energy resources. 

OBJECTIVES - MR:3.1 Maintain opportunities to explore and develop federal oil and g

MR:3.2 Maintain opportunities for the collection of subsurface geologic

gas resources. 

MR:3.3 Maintain opportunities to explore and develop coal resources wi

GOAL MR:4 Manage mining claim location, prospecting, and mining operations in a m

degradation of public lands. 

2000 Mineral Resources (MR) Note: All withdrawal actions (including mineral withdrawals) are processed in the lands and realty program. 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

2001 MR:2.1 

MR:2.2 MR:3.1 

Multiple mineral development conflicts are managed on a case-by-case basis as follows: Coal leasing will be deferred in producing oil and gas fields when coal development interferes with oil a

recovery of the oil and gas resource; conventional oil and gas drilling and production activities will not be authorized when there are conflicts with coal mining; BLM Washington Office IM-200mining conflicts; and all federal coal lands with mining claims will be acceptable for coal development and consideration for coal leasing, subject to valid existing rights. 

2002 MR:2.1 MR:3.1 Parcels nominated for potential oil and gas leasing will be reviewed. Any stipulations attached to these parcels will be the least restrictive needed to protect other resource values. 2003 MR:2.1 

MR:3.1 

Stipulations to protect important resource values will be based on interdisciplinary review in conformance with land use planning decisions. 

2004 MR:2.3 

MR:3.1 

The Casper Field Office is open to mineral leasing, including solid leasables and geothermal, unless specifically identified as administratively unavailable for the life of the plan for mineral leasi

managed on a case-by-case basis. 

2005 MR:2.3 

MR:3.1 

Acquired mineral estate administered by the BLM will be open to mineral leasing for other leasables, including phosphate, sodium, potassium, sulfur, gilsonite, bentonite, uranium, and hard roc

specifically closed to mineral leasing. 

2006 MR:2.3 MR:3.1 Those areas open to oil and gas leasing also are open to leasing of other leasable minerals. 2007 MR:1 Where possible, the routing of access roads will be made in conjunction with the surface owner. 2008 MR:1 Mineral material sales are discretionary actions; therefore, disposal will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Stipulations to protect important resource values will be based on interdisciplinar2009 MR:2.2 MR:3.3 Lands within the planning area boundaries are open to coal exploration through the coal exploration license process. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-16 Record of Decision and Approve

2000 Mineral Resources (MR) Note: All withdrawal actions (including mineral withdrawals) are processed in the lands and realty program. 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

2010 MR:2.2 MR:3.3 Where coal leases exist, stipulations to resolve oil and gas/coal development conflicts will be applied to new oil and gas leases. On current LBAs, oil and gas leasing will be deferred until the L

Locatable 

2011 MR:4 BLM-administered mineral estate, except areas identified as necessary for the protection of specific resource values or uses, is open for prospecting for and development of locatable minerals. U

withdrawn from locatable mineral entry. Of these 458,661 acres, 409,707 acres are BLM withdrawals and 48,954 acres are other federal agency withdrawals. 

Leasable: Coal

2012 MR:2.2 

MR:3.3 

If coal development potential is shown to exist, all BLM-administered lands outside the CDPA will be considered for coal leasing, unless specifically closed to mineral leasing. The coal-screeniall newly identified lands having coal development potential. 

2013 MR:2.2 

MR:3.3 

All BLM-administered lands within the CDPA identified in the 2001 Buffalo RMP maintenance action are acceptable for further consideration for coal leasing. The only exceptions are those lan

within the area. The coal unsuitability criteria are re-evaluated whenever new coal lease applications are received. 

Leasable: Oil and Gas a. Areas open to leasing, subject to the terms and conditions of the standard lease form. 

2014 MR:2.1 

MR:3.1 

1,080,935 acres of federal oil and gas lease mineral estate are open to leasing consideration and subject to the terms and conditions of the standard lease form only. 

b. Areas open to leasing, subject to moderate constraints, such as seasonal restrictions. 

2015 MR:2.1 

MR:3.1 

2,506,530 acres of federal oil and gas lease mineral estate are open to leasing consideration and subject to the terms and conditions of the standard lease form, as well as moderate constraints. 

c. Areas open to leasing, subject to major constraints, such as NSO stipulations, on an area more than 40 acres in size or more than 1⁄4 mile in width. These are areas where it has been determined that highly restrictive lease s

mitigate impacts to other lands or resource values. This category also includes areas where overlapping minor constraints would severely limit development of oil and gas resources. 

2016 MR:2.1 

MR:3.1 

843,139 acres of federal oil and gas lease mineral estate are open to leasing consideration and subject to the terms and conditions of the standard lease form, as well as major constraints. 

d. Areas administratively unavailable for leasing. These are areas where it has been determined that other land uses or resource values can not be adequately protected with even the most restrictive lease stipulations; appro

only by closing the lands to leasing. BLM would identify whether such closures are discretionary or nondiscretionary. 

2017 MR:2.1 

MR:3.1 

226,568 acres of federal oil and gas lease mineral estate are administratively unavailable for leasing for the life of the plan. 

Directional Drilling 

2018 MR:2.1 

MR:3.1 

Directional drilling will be required on a case-by-case basis to protect other resource values. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

2000 Mineral Resources (MR) Note: All withdrawal actions (including mineral withdrawals) are processed in the lands and realty program. 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Oil and Gas Geophysical Operations 

2019 MR:2.1 

MR:2.4 

Those lands currently open to oil and gas leasing will continue to be open to geophysical operations. Those lands open to oil and gas leasing, but subject to an NSO restriction, may be open to g

specific NEPA analysis disclose a finding of no significant impact. No geophysical operations are allowed in areas administratively unavailable for oil and gas leasing. 

Leasable: Other Solid Leasables 

2020 MR:2.3 

MR:3.1 

BLM-administered mineral estate, except areas identified as necessary for the protection of specific resource values or uses, is open to leasing of other solid leasable minerals. Under this plan, 2

unavailable for leasing of other solid leasable minerals. 

Salable 

2021 MR:1 BLM-administered mineral estate, except areas identified as necessary for the protection of specific resource values or uses, is open to the disposal of mineral materials. Under this plan, 257,017 

disposal of mineral materials. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-18 Record of Decision and Approve

3000 Fire Management and Ecology (FM) – Goals and Objectives GOAL FM:1 Manage wildland fire and fuels for the protection of public health, safety, property, and resource values. 

OBJECTIVES - FM:1.1 Manage hazardous fuels in areas of urban and industrial interface to reduce potential of loss due to catastrophic fire (10-year 

comprehensive strategy). 

FM:1.2 Maintain a desired mix of seral stages within the following vegetation communities: 

• Desert shrublands • Forest and woodlands • Grasslands • Mountain shrublands • Sagebrush (all subspecies) • Riparian/wetland areas • Aspen. 

FM:1.3 Manage vegetation communities to maintain areas in Condition Class 1. Those vegetation communities in Condition 

Classes 2 and 3 will be managed to restore such communities toward Condition Class 1. 

GOAL FM:2 Conduct appropriate emergency stabilization and rehabilitation wh

3000 Fire Management and Ecology (FM) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

3001 FM:1 

FM:2 

National Fire Suppression Guidelines and the current Fire Management Plan for the Eastern Wyoming Zone will guide fire suppression on public lands. 

3002 FM:1 During fire suppression, a resource advisor will be consulted or be assigned to all wildland fires that involve or threaten public lands. 3003 FM:1 Use of retardant or foam within 300 feet of surface water sources is prohibited. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

3000 Fire Management and Ecology (FM) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

3004 FM:1.1 

FM:1.2 

Appropriate management response will be used on all wildfires in the planning area. Full protection strategies and tactics will be used in the following areas: 

• WUI • Wildland industrial interface • Developed recreation sites • Developed electronics sites of all types

In all other areas appropriate management response strategies and tactics will be determined by (but not limited to) the following: 

• Firefighter and public safety • Resource values at risk • Proximity to private land • Firefighting resource availability

Tactical constraints follow: 

• The use of retardant within 300 feet of surface water (standing or running) is prohibited. • No trees are to be cut during suppression activities within 200 yards of an identified bald eagle roost. • No heavy equipment will be used within the following areas, except when human safety is at risk: 

 Areas of cultural resource sensitivity  Riparian/wetland habitats  Big game crucial winter range habitats  Greater sage-grouse leks  Areas of highly erosive soils 

In areas not identified as full protection, heavy equipment usage will be limited to existing roads and trails or immediately adjacent to them.

3005 FM:1.1 

FM:1.2 

Fire Use Guidelines Natural ignitions within an area with a wildland fire use plan for resource benefit will be allowed to proceed within a defined area under prescriptive guidelines to meet the desired management obje

Wildland fire use plans will be developed as opportunities arise for public lands within aspen, juniper, lodgepole pine, true mountain mahogany, ponderosa pine, and big sagebrush (all subspecies) c

public lands are greater than 1,280 acres. The BLM will pursue creating cooperative agreements with willing adjacent landowners, local governments, or land management agencies that wish to participate.

3006 FM:1.1 

FM:1.2 

Management Ignited Prescribed Fire Use prescribed burning to achieve measurable 5th order watershed objectives from (1) other resources, including, but not limited to, forestry, wildlife, range, vegetation, and watershed; (2) the reduc

the introduction of fire into fire-adapted ecosystems. 

3007 FM:2 Evaluate all fires and rehabilitate, as needed, for suppression and fire-severity impacts. Chemical treatment where INPS invade will be used to rehabilitate. 3008 FM:1.1 

FM:1.2 

Fuels Management Utilize an integrated management technique approach (defined as prescribed fire, mechanical, chemical, or biological, followed by desired reseeding) to reduce fuels to protect high priority areas or 

not limited to the following: 

• Urban and industrial interface areas • Developed recreation areas • Commercial timber areas • Wildlife habitats • Range-improvement facilities • Communication sites • Municipal watersheds. 

3009 FM:1.1 

FM:1.2 

Allow fuel management activities on R&PP leases/conveyances to reduce fuel loads so the threat or impacts from wildfires is minimized. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-20 Record of Decision and Approve

4000 Biological Resources (BR) – Goals and Objectives 

GOAL BR:1 Manage for the biological integrity of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems to sustain vegetation, fish, wildlife, and special status 

species, while providing for multiple uses of BLM-administered lands. OBJECTIVES - BR:1.1 Maintain a diversity and distribution of plant species, habitats, seral stages, and types (e.g., age, structure, cover 

classes, density), including forests and woodlands, grasslands, mountain shrublands, sagebrush (all subspecies), 

riparian/wetland areas, and desert shrublands. 

BR:1.2 Maintain forest stands at optimal stand health (considering density, basal area, canopy cover, age classes, and 

understory) by maintaining properly functioning communities. 

BR:1.3 Old growth stands or those to be managed for old growth will follow the HFRA (USC 2003) section 102 for 

maintaining and managing those stands. 

BR:1.4 Maintain sustainable forage levels for livestock and wildlife habitats. BR:1.5 Emphasize the use of mechanical, chemical, and biological methods, as well as fire and livestock grazing, to 

achieve DFC. 

BR:1.6 Maintain internal (BLM) and external support for managing INPS using an integrated approach for the detection, 

control, or eradication of new infestations. 

BR:1.7 Continue coordination of INPS detection and control activities across jurisdictional and political boundaries and 

include provisions for INPS management for all BLM-funded or authorized actions. 

BR:1.8 Maintain adequate baseline information regarding the extent and control of INPS to make informed decisions, 

evaluate effectiveness of management actions, and assess progress toward goals to improve INPS management. 

BR:1.9 Manage lotic and lentic wetland/riparian areas toward PFC. BR:1.10 Work with the WGFD to identify and improve fish and known special status fish passage and floodplain 

connectivity. 

BR:1.11 Maintain an estimated 3.7 miles of Blue Ribbon streams. BR:1.12 Maintain and improve an estimated 21.7 miles of Red and Yellow Ribbon streams. BR:1.13 Maintain or improve habitats for introduction or reintroduction of fish species to existing and new reservoirs. 

BR:1.14 Maintain or improve the continuity and productivity of wildlife habitats to support the WGFD wildlife population 

objectives. 

BR:1.15 Maintain and improve seasonal habitats (e.g., concentration areas, migration corridors, etc.) of fish, wildlife, and 

special status species on a landscape scale. 

BR:1.16 Identify and implement opportunities in coordination with the WGFD to introduce or reintroduce wildlife species 

to areas managed under activity plans. 

BR:1.17 Maintain special status species plant communities in natural patterns on a landscape scale and maintain special 

status plant species’ habitats in PFC, including natural diversity (i.e., composition and mosaics) and recognizing 

the impacts of natural processes (i.e., fire). 

BR:1.18 Maintain identified high priority habitat in Shirley Basin black-footed ferret re-introduction area. 

GOAL BR:2 Manage all BLM actions or authorized activities to sustain plant, fish, and wi

contributing to the listing of or jeopardizing the continued existence or recov

OBJECTIVES - BR:2.1 Minimize adverse impacts and mitigate unavoidable impacts to plan

habitats from BLM actions and authorized activities. 

BR:2.2 Maintain an estimated 4.7 miles of fishery containing federally listeBR:2.3 Maintain or improve an estimated 69.5 miles of fishery containing o

NSS2 and NSS3 species. 

BR:2.4 Identify and implement opportunities in coordination with the WGF

streams. 

GOAL BR:3 Manage environmental risks and associated impacts in a manner compatible 

species populations. Environmental risks include, but are not limited to, paracontamination, pesticides, rodenticides, herbicides, and other hazards. OBJECTIVES -BR:3.1 Minimize adverse impacts of environmental risks on plant, fish, wilBR:3.2 Manage pesticide, rodenticide, and herbicide application in a manne

species’ health. 

BR:3.3 Coordinate with other agencies to prevent or control diseases that th

vegetation. 

BR:3.4 Coordinate with other agencies to manage native and nonnative pred

productivity of natural ecosystems. 

GOAL BR:4 Manage terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems to provide sustainable recreationa

OBJECTIVES - BR:4.1 Improve public awareness and support, including partnerships, for t

vegetation, fish, wildlife, and special status species programs. 

BR:4.2 Provide wildlife and wildlife habitat outreach and educational mater
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

4000 Biological Resources (BR)

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

4001 BR:1.10 

BR:1.11 BR:1.12 

BR: 2.1 

Utilize current research, management and conservation plans, and other research and related directives (i.e., BLM IMs, MOUs, WGFD objectives), as appropriate, to guide habitat management for 

special status species (Appendix B). 

4002 BR:1.3 

BR:1.9 

BR:1.14 

BR:2.1 

Use produced water, where reasonable and practical, to develop and enhance waterfowl and special status species waterfowl habitats. 

4003 BR:1.2 

BR:1.5 BR:1.7 BR:2.1 

Apply, where surface development or disturbance occurs, appropriate mitigation measures to minimize impacts to vegetative resources. Emphasize the use of native plants appropriate to the site fNonnative species may be used on a case-by-case basis when resource objectives will not be met through the use of native species. 

4004 BR:1.11 BR:1.12 

BR:1.14 BR:1.15 

BR:1.17 BR:4.1 BR:4.2 BR:4.3 

Develop a drought contingency plan to maintain adequate habitat components for viable fish, wildlife, and special status species populations. 

4005 BR:1.14 BR:1.15 

BR:1.16 

Develop water sources for wildlife and special status species in coordination with the WGFD and the BLM Water Development Handbook (H-1741-2). 

4006 BR:1.1 

BR:1.2 BR:1.3 BR:1.4 BR:1.5 

BR:1.14 BR:1.15 

BR:2.1 BR:3.1 BR:3.3 

The NSO restriction to protect sage-grouse habitats will not apply to prescribed fire, which will be used as a tool to meet management objectives. Prescribed fire will be subject to CSU and TLS r

granted on a case-by-case basis after site-specific analysis and occasional adverse impacts. 

4007 BR:1.9 Manage lotic and lentic wetland/riparian areas toward PFC. 4008 BR:1.6 

BR:1.7 BR:1.8 

Manage actively, where INPS occurs, to contain or eradicate them using an integrated management approach and cooperative agreements with county weed and pest control districts, industry, and 

vegetative communities. 

4009 BR:1.1 

BR:1.2 BR:1.5 BR:1.7 BR:1.9 

BR:1.14 BR:1.15 

Utilize an integrated management approach (i.e., mechanical, chemical, biological, prescribed fire, or livestock grazing) to manipulate seral stages within vegetative communities to achieve object

forestry, wildlife, watershed, and INPS programs. 

4010 BR:1.6 

BR:1.7 BR:4.1 

Modify identified hazard fences and construct new fences in accordance with the BLM Fencing Handbook 1741-1. 

4011 BR:1.6 Work with APHIS to control outbreaks of grasshoppers and Mormon crickets on public lands in the planning area in accordance with the MOU between USDI and APHIS. 4012 BR:2.1 Carry existing HMPs forward. As specified in the Bald Eagle HMP, all roosts outside the Jackson Canyon ACEC are withdrawn from locatable mineral entry and closed to disposal of mineral ma

and consolidate HMPs to include management objectives and prescriptions for wildlife. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-22 Record of Decision and Approve

4000 Biological Resources (BR)

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

4013 BR:1.15 Prohibit surface development on public lands in an area from 1/2- to 1-mile of known or discovered bald eagle nests. The specific distance and dimensions of the area on which surface developme

determined on a case-by-case basis after consultation with the USFWS in accordance with the ESA. 

4014 BR:1.14 

BR:4.1 

Prohibit surface development on certain parcels of Muddy Mountain elk crucial winter range. 

4015 BR:1.17 

BR:2.1 

No surface occupancy or use (NSO) is allowed on designated critical habitat for threatened or endangered species. Areas known or suspected to contain essential habitat for special status species w

Surface Use restriction, requiring the proponent to conduct inventories or studies to verify the presence or absence of special status species. 

4016 BR:1.1 

BR:1.10 BR:1.11 BR:1.12 BR:1.13 BR:1.15 BR:1.16 BR:1.17 

BR:2.1 BR:2.2 BR:2.3 BR:2.4 BR:4.1 

Manage toward PFC and identified DPC on 350 miles of lotic and adjacent riparian habitat and 10,000 acres of lentic habitat to meet fish, wildlife, and special status species habitat requirements. 

4017 BR:1.10 

BR:1.12 BR:1.14 

BR:2.2 BR:2.3 BR:4.1 

Improve floodplain connectivity and function of 75 stream miles. 

4018 BR:1.10 

BR:1.14 

BR:2.1 BR:2.3 BR:4.1 

Restore 33 miles of incised streams and 43 acres of lentic habitat. 

4019 BR:1.10 

BR:1.11 BR:1.12 BR:1.13 BR:1.14 

BR:2.1 BR:2.2 BR:2.3 BR:2.4 BR:4.1 BR:4.2 

Water rights will be pursued for the benefit of fisheries, wildlife, and special status species habitats. No water rights can be obtained for in-stream flow, since that right is reserved for the State of 

4020 BR:1.10 

BR:1.11 BR:1.13 BR:1.14 

BR:2.1 BR:4.1 BR:4.2 

Water sources for fisheries, waterfowl, and special status species waterfowl are developed opportunistically. Approximately 1,500 acres currently exist. Focus on developing an additional 100 ac

waterfowl, and special status species waterfowl. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

4000 Biological Resources (BR)

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

4021 BR:1.14 

BR:2.1 BR:3.1 BR:3.2 BR:4.1 

Utilize a full range of mitigation options (including offsite mitigation) when developing mitigation for project-level activities in order to reduce impacts to wildlife and special status species habita

4022 BR:1.15 Table Mountain, Springer/Bump-Sullivan, and Rawhide 

On a short-term basis, continue existing management of the Table Mountain, Springer/Bump-Sullivan, and Rawhide HMP areas. Within 5 years, transfer management to the WGFD through dispo

WGFD within 5 years, make available for disposal to other agencies/organizations that will manage the lands for wildlife habitat and public recreation. 

In concert with the disposal action, revoke the C&MU classification and do not withdraw these areas. The BLM will not pursue acquisition of lands and interest in lands in the Table Mountain area. 

4023 BR:4.1 Negotiate easements, where needed, to meet program needs. These needs will be identified on a case-by-case basis. 

Vegetation 

4024 BR:1.14 

BR:4.1 

The blocks of public land identified as mapped in the Casper Field Office GIS database will be managed to retain intact blocks of native vegetation (192,545 acres, of which 131,879 acres are BLM

these areas, the following restrictions apply: a. These blocks are (1) administratively unavailable for oil and gas leasing and (2) a geophysical operation on public surface for the life of the plan. Activities for existing oil and gas leases are m

Appendix U). Existing leases will be allowed to expire and not be renewed. 

b. Within these blocks, a withdrawal from the operation of the public land laws, including the mining laws will be pursued. c. These blocks are closed to mineral material disposal. Existing permits will be allowed to expire without renewal or expansion.

d. These blocks are not open to wind/renewable energy development. e. These blocks remain open to livestock grazing. f. All allowed surface-disturbing activities within the designated blocks are subject to a CSU restriction, minimizing surface disturbance to meet management objectives. 

Forests, Woodlands, and Forest Products

4025 BR:1.1 

BR:1.2 

Management emphasis will be on restoring composition, structure and processes of forests and woodlands. Managing old growth for watershed stability, wildlife habitat, and recreation as primary 

Maximize opportunities to promote forest and woodland diversity, species vitality, and genetic diversity. Old growth stands will be identified and maintained or restored to pre-suppression conditbe emphasized. Manage forestlands to achieve a sustainable flow of wood products with forestlands being the primary resource, while also managing for multiple uses (i.e., watershed health and s

livestock grazing, etc.). Inventory and classify all forest and woodlands as (1) commercial forestland and (2) noncommercial woodland. 

4026 BR:1.1 

BR:1.2 BR:1.5 

Manage for desired forest composition structure and processes condition in identified old growth. Other commercial forestlands where all age classes are represented, insects are endemic rather th

are used to remove trees infected with mistletoe and blister rust. 

4027 BR:1.2 Manage ponderosa, mixed conifer and lodgepole stands not identified as old growth under HFRA to a sustainable flow of small diameter wood products. Utilize prescribed fire in these stands to t

desired overstory and understory. Selected snags will be left for wildlife nesting, perches, and sources of food and cover. Products will be removed and sold for market value. Manage ponderosa 

Esterbrook, and Jackson Canyon for old growth, whether they meet HRFA old growth standards or not. 

4028 BR:1.2 Silvicultural treatments will be used for insect and disease control and to promote a sustainable flow of small diameter wood products. In old growth stands and other stands where feasible, the s

emphasize the restoration of pre-suppression composition, structure and processes. Silvicultural treatments include: pre-commercial and commercial thinnings, prescribed fire with clear-cutting, s

release-cutting, improvement and salvage cuttings, chemical treatment, mechanical mastication and planting/seeding when required. Clear-cuts are limited to 20 acres or less and mimic natural di
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-24 Record of Decision and Approve

4000 Biological Resources (BR)

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

4029 BR:1.2 

BR:1.5 

Utilize wildland fire in all forest stands to reduce fuel loads and (or) satisfy stand prescriptions. Utilize Appropriate Management Response to wildland fire, where possible, in commercial forest s

desired condition for watershed stability and wildlife habitat. 

4030 BR:1.2 Concentrate forest management on commercial forestlands that have legal access. Ingresses/egresses will be addressed on a case-by-case basis. 4031 BR:1.2 

BR:1.5 

Manage forest stands within the 1,260-acre Muddy Mountain EEA in accordance with the Muddy Mountain EEA Forest Plan. Harvest at an annual rate of about 100 thousand board feet, where w

are met. Treat aspen to achieve desired stand health. Interpret forest management practices to benefit recreation and education. 

4032 BR:1.2 Utilize biomass where markets are available. If unavailable, chip and scatter, pile and burn woody debris, or broadcast burn. 4033 BR:1.1 

BR:1.14 BR:1.16 

BR:4.1 

Manage 2,822 acres of aspen toward DPC per the criteria defined in Aspen Ecosystems Objectives for Sustaining Biodiversity. 

Utilize aspen communities to the greatest extent possible as natural fuel breaks in urban interface areas and wildlife habitats. 

4034 BR:1.1 

BR:1.2 

BR:1.14 BR:1.15 

Create vegetation mosaics within woodlands that provide a preferred ratio of woodlands and adjacent habitats. 

4035 BR:1.1 

BR:1.2 BR:1.5 

Treat woodland encroachment in grassland, sagebrush, aspen, and other vegetative communities where it is determined to be detrimental to other resource values or uses. 

4036 BR:1.2 

BR:1.5 

Silvicultural treatments will be applied, as needed, to achieve objectives. 

Grassland and Shrubland Communities

4037 BR:1.1 

BR:1.14 

BR:4.1 

Manage 630,183 acres of sagebrush communities toward DPC. 

4038 BR:1.1 

BR:1.14 

BR:4.1 

Manage 46,779 acres of mountain shrub communities toward DPC. 

Riparian and Wetland Communities 

4039 BR:1.1 

BR:1.9 

BR:1.11 BR:1.12 

BR:2.2 BR:2.3 BR:4.1 

Protect and (or) enhance riparian, wetland, and streamside areas, as necessary, with special management, including, but not limited to, fencing, development of alternative water supplies, livestock 

supplements (feed and mineral), pasture boundary adjustments, and season of use. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

4000 Biological Resources (BR)

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Invasive, Nonnative Plant Species (INPS) and Pest Control

4040 BR:1.1 

BR:1.9 

BR:1.11 BR:1.12 

BR:2.2 BR:2.3 BR:4.1 

Inventory and develop a treatment plan to reduce or eliminate salt cedar stands over the life of the plan. 

4041 BR:1.6 

BR:1.7 BR:1.8 

Develop a comprehensive INPS management program consistent with “Partners Against Weeds” and include the following: 

1) Develop situational and site-specific mitigation measures 2) Designate Weed Management Areas 

• Level I Weed Management Area – Emphasis is on containment of heavily infested areas and stopping the spread of weeds to uninfested areas. • Level II Weed Management Area – Emphasis is on the eradication of small patches and isolated infestations, and stopping the spread of weeds to uninfested areas. 

4042 BR:1.1 

BR:1.6 BR:1.7 BR:1.8 BR:1.9 

Livestock Movement from INPS Infested Areas When the authorized officer determines that livestock are likely carrying ingested INPS seeds in a Level I Weed Management Area, the authorized officer may require that said livestock are flushe

allowing the livestock to move onto or within the public lands. 

Fish 

Management actions impacting fish are encompassed in other wildlife and biological resources management actions. No additional management actions were identified specifically for fish. 

WildlifeBig Game

4043 BR:1.14 

BR:4.1 

No surface-disturbing and wildlife disturbing activities are allowed from November 15 through April 30 (TLS) on all crucial big game winter ranges. The authorized officer can grant exceptions. the Salt Creek and Wind River MAs. 

Trophy Game

4044 BR:4.1 Baiting of trophy game animals is prohibited within 1 mile of any BLM recreation development (i.e., developed campgrounds, interpretive sites, trailheads, trails, and picnic areas). 

Furbearing Animals Management actions impacting furbearing animals are encompassed in other wildlife and biological resources management actions. No additional management actions were identified specifically for furbearing animals. Predatory Animals Management actions impacting predatory animals are encompassed in other wildlife and biological resources management actions. No additional management actions were identified specifically for predatory animals. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-26 Record of Decision and Approve

4000 Biological Resources (BR)

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Small Game Management actions impacting small game are encompassed in other wildlife and biological resources management actions. No additional management actions were identified specifically for small game animals. Game Birds 

4045 BR:1.14 

BR:4.1 

Surface occupancy or use within 1⁄4 mile of a sharp-tailed grouse strutting/dancing ground will be restricted or prohibited unless the operator/proponent and the authorized officer arrive at an accep

anticipated impacts (CSU). 

4046 BR:1.14 

BR:4.1 

No surface use is allowed within 1-3⁄4 miles from the 1⁄4 mile protection zone between March 1 and June 15 so that the nesting area around the sharp-tailed grouse strutting/dancing ground can be p

may authorize exceptions to the time and distance limitations (TLS) in any particular year. 

Migratory Game Birds (Waterfowl)Management actions impacting migratory game birds (waterfowl) are encompassed in other wildlife and biological resources management actions. No additional management actions were identified specifically for migratory game birdNongame (Raptors)

4047 BR:1.15 

BR:2.1 BR:4.1 

Avoid surface disturbance or occupancy within a 1⁄2-mile buffer of raptor nests, except for the species listed below, for which a 1⁄4-mile buffer will be required: Red-tailed hawk Swainson’s hawk American kestrel Osprey Great horned owl Long-eared owl Northern saw-whet owl Common barn owl Western screech owl The seasonal restriction will be February 1 to July 31, or until young birds have fledged (TLS). The authorized officer, on a case-by-case basis, may grant exceptions to seasonal stipulations. 

Nongame (Neotropical Migrants) Management actions impacting nongame neotropical migrants are encompassed in other wildlife and biological resources management actions. No additional management actions were identified specifically for nongame neotropical migrNongame (Mammals) Management actions impacting nongame mammals are encompassed in other wildlife and biological resources management actions. No additional management actions were identified specifically for nongame mammals. Nongame (Reptiles/Amphibians) Management actions impacting nongame reptiles/amphibians are encompassed in other wildlife and biological resources management actions. No additional management actions were identified specifically for nongame reptiles/amphibian
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

4000 Biological Resources (BR)

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Special Status Species - Plants 

4048 BR:1.17 

BR:2.1 

Design placement of water developments and placement of salt and mineral supplements for livestock at least 500 feet away from known locations of special status plants. Consider the concentrat

on the known locations of special status plants. On a case-by-case basis, exceptions could be granted when site-specific analysis determines that there will be no adverse impacts to special status p

Special Status Species - Fish

4049 BR:1.1 

BR:1.14 

Manage public access for federally listed species designated critical habitat areas. 

Special Status Species – Upland Game Birds (Greater Sage-grouse)Bates Hole and Fish Creek/Willow Creek

4050 BR:1.15 

BR:2.1 BR:4.1 

Occupied sage-grouse leks will have a 3⁄4-mile CSU buffer to protect breeding habitats. Human activity will be avoided between 8 p.m. and 8 a.m. from March 1 to May 15 (TLS) within this buffe

displayed as points, will be displayed as polygons. 

4051 BR:1.15 

BR:2.1 BR:4.1 

Occupied sage-grouse leks will have a 4-mile buffer. Within this buffer, surface development or wildlife-disturbing activities will be restricted March 15 through July 15 (TLS). Also, within this 

disturbing activities will avoid sagebrush stands of greater than 10 percent canopy cover. Within this 4-mile buffer, mitigate for power poles and other high profile structures that may provide raptthese structures if possible, or install devices to preclude raptor perching on the structures. 

4052 BR:1.15 

BR:2.1 BR:4.1 

As sage-grouse winter habitats are designated, a TLS will restrict activities from November 15 to March 14. Within the designated winter habitats, CSU for surface disturbing activities in sagebru

percent canopy cover. 

4053 BR:1.15 

BR:2.1 BR:4.1 

The areas will have priority for vegetative treatments to improve sage-grouse habitats and for vegetation monitoring to ensure residual herbaceous vegetation is maintained for nesting cover on pub

Areas Outside of Bates Hole and Fish Creek/Willow Creek

4054 BR:1.15 

BR:2.1 BR:4.1 

Avoid surface disturbance or occupancy within 1⁄4 mile of the perimeter of occupied sage-grouse leks. Avoid human activity between 8 p.m. and 8 a.m. from March 1 to May 15 (TLS) within 1⁄4 msage-grouse leks. 

4055 BR:1.15 

BR:2.1 BR:4.1 

Avoid surface-disturbing and disruptive activities in suitable sage-grouse nesting and early brood-rearing habitats within 2 miles of an occupied lek, or in identified sage-grouse nesting and early b

2-mile buffer from March 15 to July 15 (TLS). 

4056 BR:1.15 

BR:2.1 BR:4.1 

Avoid surface-disturbing and disruptive activities in sage-grouse winter habitats from November 15 to March 14 (TLS). 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-28 Record of Decision and Approve

4000 Biological Resources (BR)

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Special Status Species – Migratory Game Birds (Waterfowl)Management actions impacting special status species migratory game birds (waterfowl) are encompassed in other wildlife and biological resources management actions. No additional management actions were identified specifically for sp

game birds (waterfowl). 

Special Status Species – Nongame (Raptors)

4057 BR:2.1 

BR:3.1 BR:4.1 

To provide for long-term protection of ANS sites, a combination of NSO and TLS buffer zones will be applied around the nesting structures. The TLS restriction will be from February 1st through fledge. For ferruginous hawk ANS, apply a 1⁄2-mile NSO buffer with an additional 1⁄2-mile seasonal buffer (total of a 1-mile buffer). For golden eagle ANS, apply a 1⁄2-NSO buffer without an addimile buffer). This restriction is intended to preclude the placement of permanent facilities within the NSO buffers. Development and placement of ANS targeting ferruginous hawk should be managed intensively to maintain a majority of the population utilizing natural nesting substraights. Strive to maintain oexceed 25 percent of the total nesting population for ferruginous hawks. 

4058 BR:2.1 

BR:4.1 

To protect special status raptor nesting habitats, activities or surface use will not be allowed from February 1st through July 31st within certain areas (TLS). The BLM authorized officer, who will status raptor prey (excluding bald eagles) habitats surrounding the nest site will determine the size of a buffer zone on a case-by-case basis. Usually the buffer zone will be 1⁄4 to 1⁄2 mile. 

Special Status Species – Nongame (Neotropical Migrants)Management actions impacting special status neotropical migrants are encompassed in other special status species, wildlife, and biological resources management actions. No additional management actions were identified specifically for 

migrants. 

Special Status Species – Nongame (Mammals)

4059 BR:1.1 

BR:1.18 

BR:4.1 

Habitats managed for reintroductions of black-footed ferrets will be addressed on a case-by-case basis. 

4060 BR:2.1 

BR:3.2 BR:4.1 

1. Prairie dog control within the planning area may be initiated as follows: 

The APHIS or their authorized agent carry out prairie dog control actions. No prairie dog control measures will be carried out on prairie dog towns that are more than 1⁄2 mile from private land, unless a human health or safety concern is documented, or where resource 

documented by the BLM. 

Treatment of prairie dog towns will be considered only if a written request is received from the owner of adjacent property. The BLM will not conduct treatment unless adjacent private lands a

No treatment will occur in areas identified for black-footed ferret reintroduction, except when public health and safety risks warrant control. 

2. Surface-disturbing and disruptive activities should be designed in a manner that avoids prairie dog towns and complexes (CSU). Where this is impractical, the disturbance should be located in a 

least amount of impact to prairie dogs. 

Special Status Species – Nongame (Amphibians)Management actions impacting special status amphibians are encompassed in other special status species, wildlife, and biological resources management actions. No additional management actions were identified specifically for special s
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

5000 Heritage and Visual Resources (HR) – Goals and Objectives GOAL HR:1 Preserve and protect cultural and paleontological resources and ensure that they are available for appropriate use by present

and future generations. OBJECTIVES - HR:1.1 Develop project or site-specific treatment plans or other protective measures for special areas or cultural resources in 

areas of high risk for development or at high risk for adverse impacts. 

HR:1.2 Consult with Native American tribal governments at the leasing stage for proposed land uses having the potential to 

impact cultural resources identified as having tribal interests or concerns. 

HR:1.3 Develop activity plans for special areas or cultural resources identified as high risk for adverse impacts (e.g., Cedar 

Ridge). 

GOAL HR:2 Reduce imminent threats to cultural and paleontological resources from natural or human-caused deterioration, or potential 

conflict with other resource uses. OBJECTIVES - HR:2.1 Establish cultural resource inventory priority areas in the RMP implementation strategy document. 

GOAL HR:3 Promote stewardship, conservation, and appreciation of cultural and paleontological resources. 

OBJECTIVES - HR:3.1 Maintain and enhance programs that provide opportunities for scientific research of cultural and paleontological 

resources. 

HR:3.2 Improve educational opportunities and public outreach programs. HR:3.3 Develop and maintain interpretation of cultural and paleontological resources in areas of high public interest and 

access. 

GOAL HR:4 Establish a working relationship with Native American tribes. 

OBJECTIVES - HR:4.1 Maintain proactive consultation with Native Americans, as approp

impacted by BLM authorizations or actions. 

HR:4.2 Maximize opportunities for cooperation with tribal governments f

GOAL HR:5 Manage public lands in a manner that will maintain the overall scenic (visua

OBJECTIVES - HR:5.1 Class II: Retain the existing character of the landscape. The level 

be seen, but not attract attention of the casual observer. The basic 

predominant natural features of the characteristic landscape shoul

HR:5.2 Class III: Partially retain the existing character of the landscape. T

be moderate. Management activities may attract attention, but sho

Changes should repeat the basic elements found in the predominan

HR:5.3 Class IV: Provide for management activities that require major mo

level of change to the characteristic landscape can be high. These the focus of the viewer’s attention; however, every attempt should through careful location, minimizing disturbance, and repeating el

5000 Heritage and Visual Resources (HR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

5001 HR:1.1 Protect cultural sites within the 1,633-acre Notches Dome Archeological District (48NA368) that have been or may be nominated to the National Register so that surface development will not affec

development proposals within the Notches Dome Archeological District will require an onsite Class III inventory before implementation. This requirement will be voided if the BLM completes a Cwithin the archeological district. There is one KGS within the archeological district. Production and development of oil and gas will be the priority within the KGS unless a cultural site is of Natio

the cultural site will be protected. Proposals in the rest of the archeological district will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. 

5002 HR:4.1 Inventory potentially sensitive cultural places identified during Native American consultation independent of specific land-use actions. Apply tools (such as site avoidance, buffer area) to protect se5003 HR:1.1 NSO on the 534-acre Spanish Diggings prehistoric quarry (48PL48). 5004 HR:3.2 Develop public outreach and education efforts within the planning area to instill a conservation ethic within the public regarding cultural and paleontological resources. 5005 HR:5.1 

HR:5.2 HR:5.3 

Facilitate VRM mitigation in areas that do not meet class objectives as the need or opportunity arises. 

5006 HR:5.1 

HR:5.2 HR:5.3 

Review, periodically, the visual resources for the planning area. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-30 Record of Decision and Approve

5000 Heritage and Visual Resources (HR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

5007 HR:5.1 

HR:5.2 HR:5.3 

VRM classifications only apply to public surface and to federal mineral estate. 

Cultural 

5008 HR:1.1 Cultural resource inventories and site evaluations within the planning area are in direct response to specific land-use proposals in accordance with Section 106 of the NHPA. Additional inventory is 

permit, to comply with Section 110 of the NHPA. Block inventories will be applied when full field development occurs at a spacing of one well per 80-acres or less. 

5009 HR:1.3 NSO onsite and CSU within 300 feet of the following sites: 48NA227, 48NA940, and 48NA84. The restriction on the Rock Cairn Trail in the South Bighorn Mountains is not carried forward. Ad

will also be NSO.

5010 HR:1.1 Within Pine Ridge, the minimum cultural resource block inventory size is 40 acres and linear inventories will cover a minimum of 100 feet on either side of surface disturbance. 

Paleontological (see Special Designations: Alcova Fossil Area for additional information on paleontology) 

5011 HR:3.3 Develop interpretive facilities (e.g., signs, kiosks, and developed areas) at specific localities with high paleontological values on a case-by-case basis. 5012 HR:3.1 

HR:3.2 

Identify and designate hobby collection areas (i.e., areas pre-identified for containing concentrations of common invertebrate and plant fossils and where public fossil collection activities pose no sigor other resources) for collection of common invertebrate or plant fossils by the public. Manage these areas by restricting all surface, use as necessary, and restricting fossil collection, as necessary. 

5013 HR:3.1 Add additional stipulations to paleontological resource use permits to protect other resource values on a case-by-case basis. 5014 HR:3.1 Develop cooperative agreements and partnerships to encourage research. 5015 HR:1.1 

HR:2.1 

Identify areas that contain high paleontological values. Protect those areas from undue degradation by limiting surface-disturbing activities in number and scope as allowable. Designate lands for r

5016 HR:1.1 

HR:1.3 

Retain public lands with significant paleontological values. Identify non-BLM parcels that contain significant paleontological values. Include in acquisition efforts prompted by other resources, as a

will be pursued through exchange, purchase, or donation. 

5017 HR:1.1 

HR:1.3 

Identify areas with high paleontological values that are at risk for damage from illegal activities. Increase BLM law enforcement presence in these areas. 

5018 HR:2.1 Require an on-the-ground survey prior to approval of surface-disturbing activities or land-disposal actions for Class 4 and 5 formations. Monitor during surface-disturbing activities only as appropr

for Class 3 formations (see Probable Fossil Yield Classification in the glossary). 

Visual

5019 HR:5.1 

HR:5.2 HR:5.3

Visual resource values will be managed under the VRM classes defined as mapped in the Casper Field Office GIS database. Changes in the number of acres within each VRM class depict a balance 

and protection of visual resources. The foreground/middle ground of NHTs will be managed as Class II until inventories are completed. Trail segments contributing to the overall eligibility that have integrity of setting will be manag

integrity of setting is lacking, the foreground/middle ground of NHTs, will be managed as Class III. Manage 367,151 acres of BLM-managed surface and 816,310 acres of federal mineral estate as VRM Class II. Manage 433,799 acres of BLM-managed surface and 1,211,145 acres of federal mineral estate as VRM Class III. Manage 560,627 acres of BLM-managed surface and 2,629,717 acres of federal mineral estate as VRM Class IV. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

6000 Land Resources (LR) – Goals and Objectives GOAL LR:1 Manage the acquisition, disposal, withdrawal, and use of public lands to meet the needs of internal and external customers and 

to preserve important resource values. OBJECTIVES - LR:1.1 Develop and maintain a land-ownership pattern that will provide better access for managing and protecting public 

lands. 

LR:1.2 Maximize appropriate disposal actions to help solve problems related to intermixed land-ownership patterns. 

LR:1.3 Maintain availability of public lands to meet the habitation, cultivation, trade, mineral development, recreation, and 

manufacturing needs of external customers and the general public. 

LR:1.4 Identify lands for withdrawal to meet federal land-use needs. 

GOAL LR:2 Manage suitable public lands for developing renewable energy (e.g., wind and solar). GOAL LR:3 Manage public lands to meet transportation and ROW needs. 

OBJECTIVES - LR:3.1 Make public lands available to meet the needs of major ROW customers (e.g., an intrastate pipeline). 

LR:3.2 Make public lands available to meet the needs for smaller ROW (e.g., roads or pipelines for oil fields). 

LR:3.3 Maintain and acquire public access to meet resource management needs. LR:3.4 Maintain a transportation management system to meet resource management needs. 

GOAL LR:4 Manage the use of OHVs in partnership with other land-managing agencies, local governments, communities, and interest 

groups through a balanced approach, so as to protect public lands and resources while providing opportunities for the safe use 

and enjoyment of OHVs. OBJECTIVES - LR:4.1 Conduct an assessment of current and future OHV demand and plan for and balance the demand for OHV use with 

other multiple uses (or users) when developing the planning area transportation plan.

LR:4.2 Locate and manage OHV use to conserve soil functionality, vegetative cover, and watershed health. Manage OHV use 

to minimize the impact to the land while maintaining OHV access. 

LR:4.3 Engineer, locate, and relocate roads and trails to accommodate OHV activities while minimizing resource impacts. LR:4.4 Integrate concepts of habitat connectivity into OHV planning to minimize habitat fragmentation. LR:4.5 Manage OHV use by type, season, intensity, distribution, and (or) duration to minimize the impact on plant and 

wildlife habitats. If seasonal closures become appropriate to minimize adverse OHV impact(s) on public lands resources, strive to preserve public access by designating alternative routes. 

LR:4.6 Clearly identify route and area designations. LR:4.7 Maintain an inventory of existing road and trail systems.

GOAL LR:5 Protect public land resources, promote safety for all public land users, and 

uses of public lands. 

OBJECTIVES - 

LR:5.1 Utilize high-use areas and special events to maximize the dissem

concepts to the public. 

LR:5.2 Cooperatively develop and improve public outreach programs to 

responsible-use stewardship ethic (e.g., tread lightly, leave no tr

GOAL LR:6 Improve and (or) maintain rangeland health while providing opportunitie

communities. 

OBJECTIVES - 

LR:6.1 Whenever possible, maintain the opportunity to avoid net loss o

implement opportunities for vegetation improvements to increas

support and sustain local communities. 

LR:6.2 Maximize the most appropriate use of SDWs and other SDW wiLR:6.3 Maintain existing desirable rangeland conditions or improve ran

practices. 

GOAL LR:7 Manage recreation resources on public lands to provide a diverse array of 

environmental, personal, and social benefits. 

OBJECTIVES - LR:7.1 Strive to achieve the objectives as outlined in the matrices for idLR:7.2 Support and collaborate with local governments and service pro

opportunities for visitors and local residents to achieve health an

lands. 

GOAL LR:8 Develop and maintain appropriate recreational facilities, balancing public 

responsibility. OBJECTIVE - LR:8.1 Manage and maintain recreation sites and facilities to acceptable 

GOAL LR:9 Issue Special Recreation Permits in an equitable manner for specific recre

means to minimize user conflicts, control visitor use, protect recreation rerecreation use. OBJECTIVE - LR:9.1 Complete processing requirements for requested Special Recrea

GOAL LR:10 Develop and maintain cooperative relationships with national, state, and l

recreational groups. OBJECTIVES – LR:10.1 Emphasize and support collaborative public outreach, awarene

stewardship. 

LR:10.2 Encourage sustainable travel and tourism development with ga

conservation support for visitor services. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-32 Record of Decision and Approve

6000 Land Resources (LR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

6001 LR:1.1 

LR:1.2 

All public lands in Converse, Platte, and Goshen counties have been classified for disposal, disposal with restrictions, or for retention. In Natrona County, only those lands specifically identifie

disposal by sale, exchange, or other means have been classified. The remaining public lands in Natrona County are identified for retention. Lands identified for disposal under Sections 203, 20identified as such in this plan are hereby classified for disposal under Section 7 of the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, as amended (43 U.S.C. 315f). 

6002 LR:1.1 

LR:1.2 

Means for land disposal include sale, exchange, lease, or conveyance under the R&PP Act, desert land entries, Indian allotments, color of title actions, Carey Act patents, state grants, and airpor

6003 LR:1.1 

LR:1.2 

Parcels identified for restricted disposal may be disposed of under the R&PP Act by exchange, may limit the disposal to a particular type of entity capable of preserving the resource values, or mthe deed or land sale patent to ensure the resource values are protected. 

6004 LR:1.1 

LR:1.2 

Retention lands are intended to remain in public ownership. Public land tracts that are not critical to current management objectives will be disposed of to acquire land in high value areas as ex

However, retention lands may be disposed of under the R&PP Act or through land exchange to meet public needs or to enhance management of the public lands and resources in these areas. La

will be considered on a case-by-case basis to meet community expansion or other public needs, or to resolve resource management concerns. Criteria to consider when disposing of retention la

limited to, lands with trespass where disposal is the best tool to meet management objectives while serving the public interest best. Standard trespass resolution practices will be adhered to, incl

actual cost to resolve the trespass. 

6005 LR:1.1 

LR:1.2 

Exchanges are developed on a case-by-case basis. As such, no quantification of disposal and acquisition acreages can be made before the specific exchange proposal is developed. 

6006 LR:1 Acquisition of lands and interests in lands will be pursued in areas of high recreational or paleontological value, with sensitive cultural resources, areas with important fish and wildlife habitat, a6007 LR:1.4 Lands revoked from other agency withdrawals will be returned to BLM jurisdiction and will be managed in the same manner as the adjoining public lands. 6008 LR:1.1 Lands that are reconveyed or acquired will be managed in the same manner as the adjoining public lands. 6009 LR:2 Any future wind-energy development proposals will be subject to the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement on Wind Energy Development on BLM-Administered Lands in the W

2005d). Energy corridors located in the planning area and designated in the ROD and Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Designation of Energy Corridors on Federal Land in 

incorporated into the Casper RMP. 

6010 LR:2 Wind and solar energy development on public land is authorized by ROW. 6011 LR:3.3 Easements will be acquired only from a willing landowner. 6012 LR:3.3 

LR:3.4 

Access will be acquired by easements, reciprocal ROW, exchange, purchase, and donation. Cooperative agreements can be used in some instances to provide access to public lands. Where prafederal land will be utilized to avoid the cost of acquisition. 

6013 LR:3.3 

LR:3.4 

Routing and construction standards will be adjusted based on route analysis and engineering design. Construction of new roads on federal land will be utilized, where practical, to reduce acquis

acquired or a road is constructed on federal land, a ROW grant under Section 507 of the FLPMA will be executed to record the road and commit it to the road maintenance program. 

6014 LR:3.3 

LR:3.4 

Roads constructed under other initiatives (e.g., oil and gas exploration) will be evaluated for inclusion in the BLM transportation system. Those roads that meet BLM resource program needs w

development. When such roads are no longer needed for the original purposes, and prior to termination and obliteration of the road, BLM will assess its utility for addition to the BLM transpor

6015 LR:3.3 

LR:3.4 

All BLM road easements will be maintained to at least minimum BLM roads standards. Where a trail will be included in the transportation system, design and maintenance standards will be de

objectives for that trail. 

6016 LR:3.3 

LR:3.4 

Within the life of the plan, all roads on public land will be inventoried and a transportation plan will be developed to identify roads/trails for closure or maintenance. The plan will include goalsstandards for roads/trails to be retained for public use, as well as specific measures to accomplish road closure. Roads/trails that are eroding beyond a reasonable level will be fixed or closed. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

6000 Land Resources (LR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

6017 LR:6.1 

LR:6.3 

Rangeland monitoring will follow the guidelines laid out in the Casper Field Office Monitoring Plan. 

6018 LR:6.1 

LR:6.3 

BLM will keep existing management plans (i.e., AMPs, CRMPs, Activity Plans, etc.) current and will implement new management plans where and when needed. 

6019 LR:6.3 Approximately 10 percent of the allotments in the planning area are evaluated each year. 6020 LR:6.3 Maintenance feeding of forage will not be authorized on public lands. 6021 LR:6.3 Emergency feeding will be authorized to prevent livestock from declining in health or condition when unforeseen events limit forage available to them. Emergency feeding will be for short per

until the livestock can be moved. Require that feed supplement is “weed-free by process” or “certified weed-free,” and that instructions for placement and use are stipulated. 

6022 LR:6.1 Base property locations will be recertified only when transferring, consolidating, or dividing grazing preference. A base property requirement of 90 days will be established for the entire planni

made for existing allotments that historically have had less base property than that necessary to meet a 90-day requirement. 

6023 LR:6.1 Category C allotments will be leased year-round at 100 percent federal range unless information is available to indicate a change in authorized grazing use is needed. 6024 LR:6.1 

LR:6.3 

Actual use for all Category I and M allotments will be required. 

6025 LR:6.1 

LR:6.3 

Water developments will be constructed by BLM or constructed by the lessee to BLM standards. Funding and maintenance responsibilities of the water developments will be determined on a cthe Cooperative Agreement. 

6026 LR:6.1 

LR:6.3 

BLM funding of major reconstruction projects will be determined on a case-by-case basis. 

6027 LR:7.1 The entire planning area will remain open to dispersed recreation. The camping limit on public lands is set by BLM policy and is currently limited to 14 days. Emphasis will be placed on prov

signs and materials for public land visitors, maintaining existing facilities to a high standard consistent with the recreational setting, and limiting development of additional facilities to those are

surrounding public lands requires. Work with state, local groups, and adjacent landowners will be conducted to identify and develop recreational trails, both motorized and nonmotorized, when themselves. SRPs will be allowed for commercial, noncommercial, and competitive events on a case-by-case basis. Cooperation will be maintained with a variety of user groups, especially in recreational opportunities for enjoyment of public lands. BLM will pursue acquisition of lands and interest in lands in the Rattlesnake Range and Pine Ridge areas, as well as promote and supp

6028 LR:11.1 Selection of a given SRMA will enact specific management prescriptions. Prescriptions for each SRMA include management objectives, targeted outcomes, and implementation actions. Most 

are derived from existing management plans and are carried forward and updated for this RMP. Recreation Area Management Plans for the SRMAs will be developed or otherwise revised as pneeds dictate. 

6029 LR:7.1 Seminoe/Alcova National Back Country Byway Special Recreation Management Area Prescriptions: The Casper Field Office will manage the National Back Country Byway in cooperatio

Encourage and develop cooperative relationships with volunteer groups, landowners and other land management agencies to facilitate responsible recreational use of the area. Maintain the currthe byway. Currently existing facilities include directional signs. Improvements along the byway will be preceded by formal site plans and will adhere to guidelines developed for the area in thmanaged cooperatively with the Rawlins Field Office on a case-by-case basis. 

6030 LR:1.1 Goldeneye Wildlife and Special Recreation Management Area Prescriptions: The Casper Field Office will maintain and improve currently existing recreation facilities; wildlife improveme

opportunities arise. The Casper Field Office also will encourage the development of cooperative management strategies and partnerships. SRPs will be allowed for environmental education anqualified hunting guides only. Work will be conducted to obtain long-term water rights. 

6031 LR:7.1 

LR:7.2 

Muddy Mountain Environmental Education Special Recreation Management Area Prescriptions: The Casper Field Office will maintain existing facilities and evaluate new developments will be managed according to the 2000 Muddy Mountain Recreation Area Management Plan. Easements and exchanges will be negotiated to improve public access and recreation opportunities

continued. Campground and day-use fees will be charged. Cooperative management and agreements for the area will be encouraged. SRPs will be allowed for commercial, noncommercial, and 

case basis. 

6032 LR:7.1 

LR:7.2 

Middle Fork of the Powder River Special Recreation Management Area Prescriptions: The Casper Field Office will continue to cooperatively manage the area with BLM’s Buffalo and W

enhance the recreational opportunities; motorized travel will be limited to designated roads and trails and easements and acquisitions will be pursed. Interpretive and access signs will be mainta

educate the public. Seasonal closures will be carried forward and development activities evaluated with special attention to impacts related to visual and recreation resources. SRPs will be mana

Buffalo and Worland field offices on a case-by-case basis. (Note: The Middle Fork of the Powder River SRMA will incorporate decisions related to the South Bighorns MA.) 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-34 Record of Decision and Approve

6000 Land Resources (LR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

6033 LR:7.1 National Historic Trails Special Recreation Management Area Prescriptions: Cooperative partnerships with volunteer groups, landowners and other land-management agencies will be enc

facilitate management and recreational development. SRPs will be allowed for commercial, noncommercial and competitive events on a case-by-case basis. Travel, other than pedestrian, on ac

Current facilities, signs, and interpretations along trails will be maintained and enhanced as needed. Cooperative management agreement with the NPS will continue. Surface restrictions and otare further outlined in the Special Designations and Other MAs section of this document. 

6034 LR:8.1 North Platte River Special Recreation Management Area Prescriptions: Development, livestock grazing, and ROW will be limited. Emphasis will be placed on enhancing recreational bene

within the selected boundary. Acquisitions and easements will be pursued as opportunities arise to improve public access and recreation opportunities. Due to the ACEC evaluation of the North 

management alternatives are located under the Special Designations and Other MAs section of this document. Management of SRPs will be allowed on a case-by-case basis with current and fuanalyzed in the North Platte River SRMA. 

6035 LR:8.1 Poison Spider OHV Park (Special Recreation Management Area) Prescriptions: The area will be open to OHV use. The development of cooperative management strategies with volunteer 

land-management agencies will be encouraged and maintained. Allowances will be made for competitive and educational OHV SRPs. The area will be expanded by 98 acres for a total of 285 

maintained. No overnight camping, fires, and shooting of projectiles will be allowed within the park boundaries. A site plan that incorporates needed upgrades and landscape designs will be de

6036 LR:8.1 South Bighorns/Red Wall National Back Country Byway Prescriptions: Cooperative relationships with volunteer groups, landowners, and other land-management agencies will be encourag

responsible recreation use of the area. SRPs will be allowed for commercial, noncommercial, and competitive events on a case-by-case basis. The current facilities, signs, and interpretations al

Springs and Buffalo Creek campgrounds will be maintained. Improvements along the byway will be preceded by formal site plans and will adhere to other guidelines that may be developed in t

6037 LR:7.1 Those areas selected as SRMAs are managed as described in Appendix O, Recreation Management Matrices. Those areas not identified as SRMAs are managed as an ERMA as described in A6038 LR:9.1 OHV use will be managed in accordance with current guidelines that provide for off-road and off-trail travel up to 300 feet for recreational purposes. 6039 LR:4.1 

LR:4.6 LR:4.7 

TMAs are delineated for those areas with an OHV designation of Limited to Designated Roads and Trails, Open, and Closed. Travel management has been addressed at the site–specific plannin

office. These areas are identified in the OHV section of this table and are within the defined TMAs. Transportation and travel management in these areas will be reevaluated for compliance wituser and program needs are met. Existing transportation plans will remain in effect until the reevaluations are completed. CTTMP will be completed for each TMA within 5 years of signing of 

See Appendix R for interim management guidelines. 

6040 LR:7.2 Muscle-powered activities such as hiking, back-packing, and snowshoeing are allowed to occur off existing routes in all OHV use areas except those designated as open. 6041 LR:4.3 

LR:4.6 

In areas limited to existing or designated roads and trails, the following is allowed: (1) both motorized and non-motorized transportation on existing and designated roads and trails, unless indica

non-motorized cross-country or off-route travel as long as new routes are not created and resource damage does not occur; (3) cross-country or off-route travel by over-snow vehicles when snow 

resource damage; and (4) cross-country or off route travel during hunting season by individuals possessing a valid WGFD disabled hunter permit or disabled hunter companion permit. 

6042 LR:4.3 

LR:4.6 

In areas open to OHV use, non-motorized transportation is not allowed. 

6043 LR:4.3 

LR:4.6 

In areas closed to OHV use, the following applies: (1) both motorized and non-motorized transportation along National Historic Trails is not allowed; (2) non-motorized transportation is allowe

otherwise indicated at the site; and (3) new non-motorized trails will be considered on a case-by-case basis. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

6000 Land Resources (LR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Lands and Realty Retention of Public Lands 

6044 LR:1.1 Retention – approximately 1,131,290 acres of BLM surface. 

Disposal of Public Lands 

6045 LR:1.1 

LR:1.2 

224,834 acres of public lands are identified as potentially suitable for disposal. At the implementation stage, site-specific analysis with public participation will be conducted. Based on the anal

received, a determination will be made on whether disposal of the parcel is in the public’s best interest. If it is not in the public’s best interest, the parcel will be retained in public ownership. 

6046 LR:1.1 

LR:1.2 

Restricted Disposal – dispose of 5,453 acres on a restricted basis. 

6047 LR:1.1 

LR:1.2 

Dispose of lands within a 5-mile buffer of communities by sale, exchange, or other means to meet community expansion needs. Proposals will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to ensure co

other land uses. Communities include incorporated and unincorporated cities and towns, as well as other areas of residential development or subdivisions as they exist now or as they develop. Dconsideration to meet public-purpose-oriented community expansion needs. 

Acquisition of Land – Decisions/Management Actions related to acquisitions can be found under the individual resource headings.Land-Use Authorizations 

6048 LR:1.3 Allow land-use authorizations under FLPMA Section 302(b) leases and permits to meet public demand. 

Evaluate on a case-by-case basis as proposals are presented. Potential lease and permit areas may include, but are not limited to the following: 

• Areas where there are documented or existing trespass facilities that can be resolved by an authorization under this section • Areas along major highways where developments may facilitate public needs 

• Areas in or adjacent to residential, agricultural, commercial, or industrial developments 

BLM Withdrawals - Additional BLM withdrawals can be found under the individual resource headings. 

6049 LR:1.4 Fremont Canyon 

Terminate the existing C&MU classification and pursue a withdrawal on 1,261 acres. The withdrawal segregates from operation of the public land laws, including the mining laws, but not the m

6050 LR:1.4 Public Water Reserves 

Continue the existing withdrawal on 1,389 acres. The withdrawal segregates from operation of the public land laws, but not the mining or mineral leasing laws.

6051 LR:1.4 Recreation & Public Purposes 

Continue the existing segregation on 3,468 acres. These lands are segregated from operation of the public land laws, including the mining laws. Lands leased under the R&PP Act are segregate

laws. 

6052 LR:1.4 Exchange Land 

Terminate the existing segregation of 9,618 acres opening these lands to operation of the mining laws authorized November 21, 2000, 43 CFR Part 3809.2(a). 

6053 LR:1.4 Sale Land 

Terminate the existing segregation of 1,219 acres opening these lands to operation of the mining laws authorized November 21, 2000, 43 CFR Part 3809.2(a).
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-36 Record of Decision and Approve

6000 Land Resources (LR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

6054 LR:1.4 Coal Classification 

Revoke the existing classification on 417,000 acres, opening this land to disposal and nonmetalliferous mineral location. 

Other Agency Withdrawals 

6055 LR:1.4 Air Navigation Site 

Continue the existing withdrawal on 198 acres. These lands are segregated from operation of the public land laws, including the mining laws. 

6056 SD:1.5 The Fort Laramie National Historic Site 

Continue the existing withdrawal on 792 acres and enlarge the withdrawal by 148 acres to 940 acres. The withdrawal segregates from operation of the public land laws including the mining and enlargement. 

6057 LR:1.4 National Wildlife Refuge 

Continue the existing withdrawal on 7,458 acres. These lands are segregated from operation of the public land laws, including the mining laws. 

6058 LR:1.4 Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3 

Continue the existing withdrawal on 9,324 acres. These lands are segregated from operation of the public land laws, including the mining and mineral leasing laws. 

6059 LR:1.4 National Forest 

Continue the existing withdrawal on 81,768 acres. 

6060 LR:1.4 National Grasslands 

Continue the existing withdrawal on 163,238 acres. 

6061 LR:1.4 Camp Guernsey 

Continue the existing withdrawal on 5,620 acres and enlarge the withdrawal by 6,230 acres to 11,850 acres. The existing withdrawal segregates from operation of the public land laws, includin

laws, as will the enlargement. 

6062 LR:1.4 Reclamation 

Continue the existing withdrawals on 18,078 acres. The existing withdrawal segregates from operation of the public land laws, including the metalliferous mining laws. 

6063 LR:1.4 Spook Site Uranium Mill Tailings 

Continue the existing withdrawal on 90 acres. The withdrawal segregates from operation of the public land laws including the mining laws, and restricts mineral leasing. 

6064 LR:1.4 UMETCO Gas Hills Uranium Mill Tailings 

A withdrawal on 987 acres will be pursued. The withdrawal will segregate from operation of the public land laws including the mining laws, and will restrict mineral leasing. 

6065 LR:1.4 Power Site 

Continue the existing withdrawal on 29 acres. The withdrawal segregates from operation of the public land laws, but not the mining or mineral leasing laws. 

Renewable Energy 

6066 LR:2 Renewable wind-energy development is allowed in areas identified as having outstanding/superb (power classes 6 and 7) or fair/good/excellent (power classes 3, 4, and 5) Potential. Solar-energ

on a case-by-case basis. Outstanding/superb (power classes 6 and 7) and fair/good/excellent (power classes 3, 4 and 5) potential areas where wind development is allowed are estimated to contain 1,145,597 acres of pubAvoidance and exclusion areas to be implemented are the areas identified as necessary for the protection of specific resource values or uses (see Biological Resources and Special Designations a

for renewable wind energy development contain 363,578 acres of public surface. Renewable wind energy development avoidance areas comprise 458,006 acres of public surface. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

6000 Land Resources (LR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Rights-of-Way (ROW) and Corridors Corridors 

6067 LR:3.1 Existing Corridors 

Maintain all currently designated corridors as described in Appendix W, Table 1, Alternative E, but remove all special restrictions that apply to types of use/facilities on the corridors, except as n

ROW Corridor, Segment A. The corridors include 351,024 acres, of which 94,584 acres are federal surface. The widths/size of designated corridors will not change under this plan. Special rest

use/facilities on the corridors described in Appendix W, Table 1, Alternative E, will be removed on a case-by-case basis. Existing corridors include: 

• Oregon Trail Road Corridor, Segment A • Oregon Trail Road Corridor, Segment B • Oregon Trail Road Corridor, Segment C • Poison Spider/Gas Hills Road Corridor • Highway 20-26 Corridor • Wyoming Highway 259/U.S. 87 Corridor • Wyoming Highway 387 Corridor • Lost Cabin-Arminto Road Corridor 

6068 LR:3.1 Existing Oregon Trail Road ROW Corridor, Segment A 

Oregon Trail Road ROW Corridor, Segment A allows additional ROW facilities provided they are subsurface, surface, or low profile developments. ROW facilities that introduce visual intrusi

corridor are not allowed. Special restrictions applying to types of use/facilities on the corridors will be removed on a case-by-case basis, and a new corridor, to be called the Cabin Creek CorridW, Table 1, Alternative E, for details. 

6069 LR:3.1 Future Corridor Adjustments and New Corridor Designations 

Future corridor adjustments and new corridor designations will be made only when facility placement within an existing designated corridor is incompatible, unfeasible, or impractical and when 

can be adequately mitigated. Problems of technical compatibility between facilities and spacing of facilities in corridors will be solved on a case-by-case basis. Special restrictions applying to tcorridors will be removed on a case-by-case basis. 

Right-of-Way Use Areas 

6070 LR:3.1 Maintain the communication site window (ROW use area) designations as described in Appendix W, Table 1, Alternative E, as the preferred locations for adjacent placement of future communi

communication site facilities should be designed for compatibility with existing facilities at these three sites. Evaluate all future communication site ROW on a case-by-case basis. In addition to continuing the existing Alcova Area Communication Site window (which contains three sites described in Appendix W, Table 1, Alternative E), five new communication site winddesignated in accordance with 43 CFR Part 2806. These new communication site windows will designate the five sites on public land described in Appendix W, Table 1, and Alternative E. Th

are the preferred locations for adjacent placement of future communication site ROW. Proposed communication site facilities should be designed for compatibility with existing facilities locate

communication site windows will be called by these names: 

• Alcova Area Communication Site • Twenty-Mile Hill Communication Site • Arminto Communication Site • Maverick Butte Communication Site • Hell’s Half-Acre Communication Site • Dry Creek Road Communication Site. 

Avoidance and Exclusion Areas 

6071 LR:3.2 The existing restrictions on placement of ROW are not carried forward. 

Exclusion areas for ROW contain 442,040 acres of public land. ROW avoidance areas comprise 539,799 acres of public land. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-38 Record of Decision and Approve

6000 Land Resources (LR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Rights-of-Way 

6072 LR:3.2 When placement of a major facility within a designated corridor is not possible, and for smaller ROW facilities, placement will be adjacent to existing facilities or disturbances. Cross-country R

only when placement in a designated corridor or adjacent to an existing facility is not practical or feasible (from the ROD, resource management units14, March 8, 2004 version). 

Transportation

6073 LR:1.1 Negotiate and acquire easements to public lands where legal access is needed for resource management and public access purposes. This will be an ongoing effort for the life of the RMP. Acce

case-by-case basis. 

Off-highway Vehicles (OHVs) and Travel Management Areas (TMAs) 

6074 LR:4.2 

LR:4.3 LR:4.7 LR:5.2

OHVs are limited to existing roads and trails (approximately 1,162,244 acres). Transportation planning will be ongoing: 

• Off-road travel will be allowed up to 300 feet from roads for camping, recovering game animals, collecting fire wood, picnicking, or other uses that do not require specific authorizations or p

does not occur or new routes are not created. 

• Other necessary tasks that require ORV travel may be allowed, as long as resource damage does not occur or new routes are not created. These tasks include, but are not limited to, such acti

maintaining range improvements, animal husbandry activities by the grazing lessee and his or her agents, and surveying ROW or other work-related tasks authorized by, or which lead to the 

authorization. The authorized officer may allow necessary tasks without issuance of a formal permit. 

Limited to Designated Roads and Trails 

6075 LR:4.1 LR:4.2 

LR:4.3 LR:4.4 LR:4.5 LR:4.6 LR:4.7 LR:5.3 

LR:5.2

Motor vehicle travel in the following areas is limited to a designated network of roads and trails (196,824 acres): 

• Sand Hills MA • Jackson Canyon ACEC • Alcova Fossil Area ACEC • Portions of the South Bighorns/Red Wall area, as mapped in the Casper Field Office GIS database. 

• Portions of the Bates Hole area, as mapped in the Casper Field Office GIS database. 

To determine the authorized road network for the area, the Casper Field Office will complete a Transportation Plan within 5 years of completing this RMP. 

• Off-road travel will be allowed up to 300 feet from roads for camping, recovering game animals, collecting fire wood, picnicking, or other uses that do not require specific authorizations or p

does not occur. 

• Other necessary tasks that require ORV travel may be allowed, as long as resource damage does not occur or new routes are not created. These tasks include, but are not limited to, such acti

maintaining range improvements, animal husbandry activities by the grazing lessee and his or her agents, and surveying ROW or other work-related tasks authorized by, or which lead to, the 

authorization. The authorized officer may allow necessary tasks without issuance of a formal permit. 

• Designation is effective upon approval of this RMP/ROD and the associated Federal Register notice. 

• New roads and trails will be approved on a case-by-case basis until completion of the Casper Field Office Transportation Plan. 

6076 LR:4.3 

LR:4.6 LR:4.7 LR:5.2

Muddy Mountain EEA: Transportation plan completed. Current management allows for 41⁄2 miles of marked snowmobile trails and designation of cross-country skiing areas (snowmobile closur

Goldeneye Wildlife and Recreation Area: Transportation plan completed. OHV travel in the area is limited to the designated access road only. 

Temporary roads and trails may be developed for forest management and will be closed and reclaimed when no longer needed. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

6000 Land Resources (LR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Designated Open to OHV 

6077 LR:4.1 

LR:4.6 LR:5.1 LR:5.2

The Poison Spider OHV Park is open to OHV use. It will be expanded to include an additional 98 acres (for a total of 285 acres). An additional OHV park will be considered. The area will be open to all motor vehicles. 

Designated Closed to OHV 

6078 LR:4.3 

LR:5.3 LR:5.2

2,224 designated acres in the following areas are closed to OHV use: 

• Natural area of the Muddy Mountain EEA (including snowmobile use) • Historic trail sites along the Oregon Trail, except the Ryan Hill and Bessemer Bend sites which are designated as limited to designated roads and trails. • Historic trail sites along the Bozeman Trail • All historic trail ruts on BLM-administered public lands (historic trails will be inventoried and closed to OHV use as they are identified as having integrity of trail). 

Livestock Grazing 

6079 LR:6.1 

LR:6.3 

Grazing leases will be adjusted where an evaluation of monitoring, field observations, or other data indicate changes, and either increases or decreases, in forage allocation are needed or when n

applicable law or regulation.. 

6080 LR:6.1 

LR:6.3 

Conversions in kinds of livestock and changes in season of use will be considered on a case-by-case basis through an environmental analysis. Such changes will be consistent with rangeland he

Grazing leases will be adjusted to accurately reflect the kind of livestock use on public land in all allotments. 

6081 LR:6.3 Prevent downward trend in all grazing allotments. 6082 LR:6.1 Approximately 1,355,561 acres continue to be open to livestock grazing. 6,016 acres continue to be not available for livestock grazing (see Appendix H). Additional areas may be not available 

protection and management of specific resource values or uses; e.g., sensitive status species on the campgrounds and additional OHV parks. The areas not available for livestock grazing include

• Grave Springs Campground • Buffalo Creek Campground • Muddy Mountain Environmental Education Area • Trappers Route #1 • Bolton Creek Environmental Education Area/Wildlife Habitat Management Unit • Spring/Bump-Sullivan Wildlife Management Unit • Clarkson Hill (760 Ranch) Acquisition • Poison Spider Off-Highway Vehicle Park • Bessemer Bend Historic Site • Goldeneye Wildlife Habitat Management and Recreation Area • Aspen Highlands Urban Interface Area – Garfield Peak • Scattered Tracts – Grazing Use Cancelled or Grazing Applications Denied Primarily Due to Suitability 

6083 LR:6.3 Manage livestock grazing to maintain a protective cover of vegetation and litter with emphasis on the condition of allotments with acreages of highly erosive soils. Target forage utilization leve

erosive soils and grazing management objectives will be developed to meet those objectives. Management techniques may include herding, fencing, rotational grazing, or limiting season of use 

levels on highly erosive soils. 

6084 LR:6.2 Stock Driveways (SDWs) 

Review and recommend revocation of withdrawals for those trails that are no longer active and incorporate these lands into adjacent allotments (46,051 acres). Offer grazing leases to the respec

remaining SDW lands for trail use (55,680 acres). 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-40 Record of Decision and Approve

6000 Land Resources (LR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

6085 LR:6.2 Lease unfenced SDWs that are occasionally used for trailing to those grazing lessees whose allotments adjoin the SDWs. Reserve 30 percent of the AUMs for trail use and lease the remaining A

lessees. 

6086 LR:6.2 Trail use, after-trail use, and other trail use on SDWs will be managed in accordance with the standards outlined in Appendix T, Stock Driveway Management Standards – Trail Use. Current-gr

Appendix T for administering SDWs will be carried forward into new plan. Stock Driveway Management Standards – Trail Use will be modified to provide for using trails during periods outsi

6087 LR:6.1 Continue to authorize yearling conversions using existing Casper Field Office criteria. 

Yearling conversions will be consistent with management objectives and wildlife, watershed, riparian, vegetative values, and other resource values. 

6088 LR:6.3 Placement of salt, mineral, or forage supplements for livestock is not allowed within 1⁄4 mile of water, wetlands, and riparian areas, unless written analysis shows that watershed, riparian, wetlan

will not be adversely impacted. Forage supplements are required to be “certified weed-free.” 

Recreation 

6089 LR:7.1 

LR:7.2 

Manage the following six SRMAs as described in Appendix O: 1. Muddy Mountain EEA 2. Goldeneye Wildlife and Recreation Area 3. Middle Fork SRMA (cooperatively with Buffalo and Worland field offices) 4. North Platte River* between Pathfinder Dam and the Natrona/Converse county line 5. Poison Spider OHV Park expanded by 98 acres (for a total of 285 acres) 

6. NHTs *See Special Designations and Other MAs for detailed management actions for the North Platte River and NHTs. 

6090 LR:7.1 The 1977 Muddy Mountain Activity Plan is not carried forward. The SRMA for the Muddy Mountain EEA will continue to be managed in accordance with the 2000 RAMP, except the area is 

oil and gas leasing and geophysical operations. 

6091 LR:1.1 

LR:7.1 

Muddy Mountain EEA A protective withdrawal is established on the Muddy Mountain EEA on 1,027 acres. The withdrawal segregates from operation of the public land laws, including the mining laws, but not the m

C&MU classification is terminated. 

6092 LR:7.1 The SRMA for the Goldeneye Wildlife and Recreation Area continues. Only one of the NSOs identified in the 1978 RAMP is brought forward. 

NSO within the boundary, unless the development facilitates recreation use or enhances wildlife.

6093 LR:1-1 Negotiate easements, where needed, to meet program needs. These needs will be identified on a case-by-case basis. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

7000 Special Designations and Other Management Areas (SD) Goal GOAL SD:1 Maintain bald eagle winter roost habitat within the Jackson Canyon ACEC to facilitate meeting the objectives within the Pacific Bald Eagle Recovery Plan. 

OBJECTIVES – None identified.

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Jackson Canyon ACEC (Existing ACEC)

7001 SD:1 The existing boundary is enlarged by approximately 1⁄4 mile to the south, making use of topographic features to screen bald eagle roosts. 7002 SD:1 Development of existing oil and gas leases will be subject to NSO (which is a condition of the existing leases). All federal mineral estate in the ACEC is available for oil and gas leasing, with any l

stipulation.

7003 SD:1 The existing federal mineral estate in the ACEC, and any additional mineral estate that may be acquired in the ACEC, is withdrawn from location and appropriation under the mining laws. The AC

mineral materials. 

7004 SD:1 The Jackson Canyon ACEC is retained and the management prescriptions in the Jackson Canyon ACEC HMP will be implemented with the following adjustments. 7005 SD:1 Access. A 60-foot-wide road to the archery range on public land now under R&PP Act lease to the Girl Scouts, proposed for construction by the Natrona County Parks Department, may be authori

should meet requirements under state law for subdivision access; such ROW will allow year-round occupancy. 

7006 SD:1 Exchange will be pursued to acquire all State of Wyoming lands within or adjacent to the ACEC; public lands located outside the ACEC (to be identified by the State of Wyoming) will be disposed 

Wyoming. 

7007 SD:1 Forest harvesting will be allowed to reduce fuel loads and disease while meeting bald eagle management objectives. All constructed roads will be closed and reclaimed. 7008 SD:1 Fire Management: All federal lands within or adjacent to the ACEC are designated priority full suppression. Priority full suppression may include full suppression of wildfires with all available res

existing roads and trails, air support, construction of roads, and grading of firebreaks using heavy equipment. Any surface disturbance resulting from suppression efforts will be restored and reclaim

suppressed. To the extent possible, trees will not be cut down within 200 yards of the bald eagle roosts during fire suppression. 

7009 SD:1 Fire management plans will identify areas where grading of roads and (or) firebreaks are most needed for fire suppression, as well as will identify those areas where protection from wildfires is mos7010 SD:1 Prescribed fire will be used to meet bald eagle habitats, livestock grazing, fuels management, and forestry objectives. Exceptions to the existing seasonal restriction of November 1 through March 3

habitats will be granted on a case-by-case basis after consultation with the USFWS. 

7011 SD:1 ACEC Boundary Adjustments: Mineral materials located outside and adjacent to the revised ACEC boundary will be available for development to extract limestone or other salable minerals. Thos

and blasting limitations from November 1 through March 31. 

7012 SD:1 To meet the bald eagle habitat objective on split estate lands, the existing ACEC boundary in the eastern portion of the area will not be revised by reducing it (by approximately 1,400 acres) to the t

and 80 west. 

7013 SD:1 Allow forest treatments within bald eagle roost areas and manage stands in roost areas for old growth. Limit commercial harvest of wood products to a single contractor for each commercial harves

necessary amount of roads and trails to promote forest management and product removal. After completing activities, all roads and trails will be closed and reclaimed. 

7014 SD:1 Negotiate easements, where needed, to meet program needs. These needs will be identified on a case-by-case basis. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-42 Record of Decision and Approve

7000 Special Designations and Other Management Areas (SD) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Salt Creek Hazardous ACEC (Existing ACEC) Goal GOAL SD:2 Reduce environmental damage or associated impacts from mineral production in the Salt Creek drainage, which will improve air and water quality, promote public safety, increase resource utility, improve the visual resource

Negotiate with oil companies to develop preventative maintenance to eliminate environmental hazards from oil spills. Secure cooperative agreements with the Naval Petroleum Reserve and private and state mineral owners tin the ACEC area 

OBJECTIVES – None identified. 

7015 SD:2 The Salt Creek Hazardous ACEC designation is not retained. 

Address environmental hazards on a case-by-case basis and work with operators to clean up and reclaim environmental hazards. A weed-management plan will be implemented in accordance with 

alternatives. 

Alcova Fossil Area ACEC Goal GOAL SD:3 Manage BLM paleontological resources in the Alcova Fossil Area to enhance their informational, educational, scientific, and recreational uses. 

OBJECTIVES – None identified. 

7016 SD:3 The Alcova Fossil Area is designated as an ACEC. Proposed surface-disturbing activities will be analyzed to assess potential adverse impacts on paleontological resources. Mitigation may include 

monitoring, based on the assessment. OHV use in the area will be limited to designated roads and trails. Visitor interpretation and education facilities will be minimal, using offsite or nearby signs will be written for any development and to identify long-term goals for management. The area for designation includes BLM-administered lands only on the south side of Alcova Reservoir (5,963 total acres, of which 5,282 are BLM-administered surface). Refer to Appendix W for 

7017 SD:3 All public lands are retained. Parcels that are presently private or state land will be explored for acquisition of lands and interests in lands using the following priority levels. Refer to Appendix W 

High Priority (to maintain public access to USBR recreation area and acquire significant resources). Moderate Priority (to acquire significant resources and access routes). 

Low Priority (to enhance opportunities for research, interpretation, and management and/or reduce in holdings). 

7018 SD:3 A withdrawal on the Alcova Fossil Area will be pursued on 5,805 acres. The withdrawal segregates from operation of the public land laws, including the mining laws, but not mineral leasing laws. 

Bates Hole MA Goal GOAL SD:4 Manage the Bates Hole MA to protect highly erosive soils, fragile watersheds, and important and crucial wildlife habitat; conserve and (or) improve special status species habitat and maintain unfragmented vegetative commuOBJECTIVES – None identified. 

7019 SD:4 Those portions of the Bates Hole MA within the Jackson Canyon ACEC and Muddy Mountain EEA are managed under the decisions for those areas. 7020 SD:4 Those portions of the Bates Hole MA within the North Platte River ACEC/SRMA and Alcova Fossil ACEC (if selected) are managed under the decisions for those areas. 7021 SD:4 Management actions to conserve and (or) improve greater sage-grouse habitats are described in the Special Status Species section. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

7000 Special Designations and Other Management Areas (SD) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Note: Management actions needed to meet the goals for the Bates Hole MA are identified below; however, other resource values not identified in the goals will be managed in accordance with the individual RMP decisions for that resourc

7022 SD:4 The Bates Hole MA is established on approximately 375,221 acres, of which 158,023 are BLM surface. This MA is defined by two State of Wyoming 5th-level watersheds: Bates Creek (HUC1018

Bolton Creek (HUC 10180000701). Due to the mixed land ownership, the area will be managed in cooperation with adjacent landowners. 

7023 SD:4 The BLM will pursue acquisition of lands and interest in lands in the Bolton Creek Drainage and Bates Creek areas. 7024 SD:4 Surface-disturbing activities and disruptive activities are subject to a CSU stipulation, restricting or prohibiting surface occupancy unless the proponent and surface management agency arrive at an 

impacts. To meet watershed management goals, the Bates Hole MA is intensively managed as described in Appendix U – Intensive Management.

7025 SD:4 No new corridor designations will be made in Bates Hole. When placement of a major ROW facility within a designated corridor is not possible, and for smaller ROW and other linear facilities, pl

existing facilities or disturbances. Cross-country placement of ROW and other linear facilities will be allowed only when placement in a designated corridor or adjacent to an existing facility is not of all surface disturbances will be minimized. 

Black-tailed Prairie Dog (Proposed ACEC) Goal GOAL SD:5 Manage for the long term, self-sustaining persistence of the black-tailed prairie dog through the protection of prairie dog complexes and their habitats in the planning area. OBJECTIVES – None identified. 

7026 SD:5 The Black-tailed Prairie Dog area is not designated an ACEC. The area will be managed for multiple uses. 

Cedar Ridge Traditional Cultural Property (TCP) (Proposed ACEC or MA) Goal GOAL SD:6 Protect sensitive and significant values at Cedar Ridge. OBJECTIVES – None identified.

7027 SD:6 Cedar Ridge is not designated as an ACEC or established as an MA. Cultural resources on Cedar Ridge will be managed in accordance with decisions 7028 through 7033 listed below. 7028 SD:6 NSO or use is allowed in the TCP. Maintenance of existing range improvements will be allowed. No additional range improvements will be allowed. 7029 SD:6 The Cedar Ridge periphery area is defined as the viewshed as far south as the Arminto/Lost Cabin Road and as far north as Badwater Road. 

Surface-disturbing activities in this area are subject to a CSU stipulation, restricting or prohibiting surface occupancy unless the proponent and surface management agency arrive at an acceptable pSurface-disturbing activities will be minimized by using techniques such as directional drilling and well twinning wherever practicable in the periphery area. 

7030 SD:6 Development of mineral materials is not allowed within the TCP. 

Existing mineral material permits will be allowed to expire without renewal or expansion. Disturbed areas will be rehabilitated to achieve visual resource and vegetative standards. 

Development of mineral materials in the periphery area will be restricted to five acres or less, allowing expansion of sites or contiguous development of mineral materials only after rehabilitation of 

initiated. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-44 Record of Decision and Approve

7000 Special Designations and Other Management Areas (SD) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

7031 SD:6 BLM will pursue acquisition of lands and interest in lands in the Cedar Ridge area. 7032 SD:6 Manage levels of livestock use to meet TCP objectives. 7033 SD:6 A withdrawal on Cedar Ridge will be pursued for the TCP only (4,058 acres of federal mineral estate). The withdrawal will segregate from operation of the public land laws, including the mining l

North Platte River SRMA Goals and Objectives GOAL SD:7 Protect the natural resources, fisheries, wildlife habitats, and cultural values within the North Platte River corridor.

OBJECTIVES - SD:7.1 Manage the public lands and mineral estate in a manner that enhances the natural character and preserves wildlife and fisheries habits. 

SD:7.2 Manage activities on public lands and mineral estate in a manner that minimizes surface disturbance. SD:7.3 Manage riparian habitats on public lands and mineral estates for PFC and DPC. 

GOAL SD:8 Manage water-based recreation opportunities to provide an array of benefits to the public—including economic, environmental, personal, and social benefits—to protect the relevant values along this river. 

OBJECTIVES - 

 SD:8.1 Provide a diverse array of quality water-based recreation opportunities while minimizing user conflicts and promoting public safety. 

SD:8.2 Support and collaborate with local governments and service providers in adjoining communities to produce recreation opportunities for visitors and local residents to achieve health and fitness goals and quality of lif

SD:8.3 Emphasize and support collaborative public outreach, awareness events, and programs that promote public service and stewardship. 

7034 SD:7.1 The existing North Platte River protective withdrawal on 3,226 acres continues. The withdrawal segregates from operation of the public land laws, including the mining laws, but not the mineral le7035 SD:7.1 The BLM will pursue acquisition of lands and interest in lands in the North Platte River area. Lands acquired by purchase or donation are segregated from operation of the public land laws, includi7036 SD:7.1 Restoration projects will focus on improving wildlife and fisheries habitats and recreational opportunities. 7037 SD:7.1 A portion of the North Platte River is established as an SRMA. The SRMA includes public lands and mineral estates within 1⁄4 mile either side of the river from the high water mark between Pathfin

Natrona/Converse County line (25,842 acres of which 2,250 acres are BLM-administered surface, and 7,059 acres are federal mineral estate). 

7038 SD:7.1 The SRMA is closed to mineral material disposal. 

Public lands within 1⁄4 mile of the river and downstream of the SRMA (east of Natrona/Converse County Line) are open to disposal of mineral materials with the following exceptions: (a) public lan

Guernsey Reservoir, or (b) public lands within Glendo State Park or within 1⁄4 mile of the Glendo State Park boundary are closed to disposal of mineral materials. 

7039 SD:7.1 The North Platte River SRMA will continue to be open to oil and gas leasing and geophysical operations. 7040 SD:7.1 No surface occupancy (NSO) within the North Platte River SRMA, unless it is to benefit recreation, fisheries, wildlife habitats, and cultural values. 

Surface development is allowed on public lands within 1⁄4 mile of the high water mark downstream of the SRMA (east of the Natrona/Converse County line) subject to a CSU stipulation. However, 1⁄4-mile of Guernsey Reservoir, or within Glendo State Park or within 1⁄4 mile of the Glendo State Park boundary are subject to an NSO restriction, except for recreational facilities. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

7000 Special Designations and Other Management Areas (SD) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

7041 SD:7.1 ROWs in the North Platte River SRMA will be allowed when management objectives for the area can still be achieved. 

Public lands within 1⁄4 mile of the high water mark downstream of the SRMA (east of the Natrona/Converse County line) will be available for location of ROWs. 

7042 SD:7.1 Those lands used as recreational landing sites and lands acquired along the entire river to enhance public access by purchase, donation, or exchange are not available for livestock grazing. 7043 SD:7.1 Public surface along the river continues to be available for livestock grazing. Grazing leases may be adjusted for the protection of natural resources, wildlife habitats, and recreational values. 7044 SD:8.1 Negotiate easements where needed, to meet program needs. These needs will be identified on a case-by-case basis. 

Salt Creek MA Goal GOAL SD:9 Manage the Salt Creek MA to facilitate oil and gas exploration and development. OBJECTIVES – None identified.

7045 SD:9 The Salt Creek MA is established on areas determined to have a high development potential as defined in the Casper Field Office RFD Scenario for Oil and Gas Development (23,911 acres, of whi

Oil and gas development is a priority in the area with minimum restrictions. New oil and gas leases in this area will be issued with standard stipulations only. Development will comply with nondiNHPA, etc., but discretionary timing stipulations protecting sage-grouse nesting habitat, raptor nesting habitat, and crucial winter range will not be considered. 

Sand Hills MA Goal GOAL SD:10 Manage the Sand Hills MA to maintain the integrity of soils and vegetation and to protect highly erosive soils and watershed values. 

OBJECTIVES – None identified. 

Note: Management actions needed to meet the goal for the Sand Hills MA are identified below; however, other resource values not identified in the goal will be managed in accordance with the individual RMP decisions for that resource.

7046 SD:10 The Sand Hills MA is established on 17,633 acres, all of which is BLM surface. 7047 SD:10 The area is administratively unavailable for oil and gas leasing and geophysical exploration is not allowed. 7048 SD:10 The area is withdrawn. The withdrawal segregates from operation of the public lands laws, including the mining laws. 7049 SD:10 The area is closed to disposal of mineral materials. 7050 SD:10 Time will be allowed for land-tenure adjustments (consistent with management objectives for the area). 7051 SD:10 No new corridor corridors are established in the Sand Hills MA; ROWs will be allowed when management objectives for the area can still be achieved. 7052 SD:10 BLM will pursue acquisition of lands and interest in lands in the Sand Hills area. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-46 Record of Decision and Approve

7000 Special Designations and Other Management Areas (SD) 

7053 SD:10 A watershed plan will be developed for the area in coordination with wildlife and range resources. The plan will clarify any special mitigation required to reduce impacts associated with surface-di7054 SD:10 Pursue obtaining legal public access and limit use to nonmotorized. 7055 SD:10 Negotiate easements, where needed, to meet program needs. These needs will be identified on a case-by-case basis. 

South Bighorns/Red Wall MA Goal and Objectives GOAL SD:11 Manage the South Bighorns/Red Wall MA to protect and enhance crucial wildlife habitat; protect and enhance unique vegetative communities; maintain unfragmented habitats; preserve and protect cultural and scenic value

open character while providing for a semi-primitive recreational experience. 

OBJECTIVES - SD:11.1 Maintain intact crucial wildlife habitats, unique vegetative communities, unfragmented habitats, significant cultural sites, and open space. 

SD:11.2 Maintain current acres of curl-leaf mountain mahogany over a span of 15 years. 

7056 SD:11.1 Those portions of the South Bighorns/Red Wall ACEC/MA within the Cedar Ridge ACEC/MA are managed in accordance with the decisions for Cedar Ridge. 7057 SD:11.1 SD:11.2 The South Bighorns/Red Wall MA is established on approximately 93,352 acres, of which 55,945 acres are public surface and 75,913 acres are federal mineral estate. 7058 SD:11.1 SD:11.2 The area is withdrawn. The withdrawal segregates from the operation of the public land laws, including the mining laws. 7059 SD:11.1 The MA is administratively unavailable for new oil and gas leasing. No geophysical operations will be allowed on public surface. 

Activities on existing leases will be managed intensively to meet the objectives of the MA (see Appendix U – Intensive Management). To minimize surface-disturbing activities, oil and gas exploradirectional drilling techniques and well twinning whenever practicable. 

7060 SD:11.1 The MA is closed to disposal of mineral materials. Existing rights will be allowed to expire without renewal or expansion. Disturbed areas will be rehabilitated to achieve visual resource and veget7061 SD:11.1 The BLM will pursue acquisition of lands and interest in lands in the South Bighorns/Red Wall area. 7062 SD:11.1 No corridors will be designated; however, ROWs will be allowed on as case-by-case basis when management objectives for the area can still be achieved. 7063 SD:11.1 SD:11.2 The Red Wall/Gray Wall complex is located entirely within the South Bighorns/Red Wall MA and is administratively unavailable for new oil and gas leasing. No geophysical operations will be all

Activities on existing leases will be intensively managed to meet the objectives of the MA (see Appendix U – Intensive Management). To minimize surface-disturbing activities, oil and gas exploradirectional drilling techniques and well twinning whenever practicable. 

7064 SD:11.1 SD:11.2 Nonmineral-related surface-disturbing activities within 1⁄2 mile of the Red Wall/Gray Wall complex are subject to an NSO stipulation. 

To meet the objectives of the area, those areas outside the Red Wall/Gray Wall complex are subject to a CSU stipulation restricting or prohibiting surface occupancy, unless the proponent and surfa

an acceptable plan for mitigation of impacts. 

7065 SD:11.1 Cultural resources inventories are conducted in compliance with Section 106. 7066 SD:11.2 Negotiate easements, where needed, to meet program needs. These needs will be identified on a case-by-case basis. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

7000 Special Designations and Other Management Areas (SD) Wind River Basin MA Goal GOAL SD:12 Manage the Wind River Basin MA to facilitate oil and gas exploration and development. OBJECTIVES – None identified.

7067 SD:12 The Wind River Basin MA is established on a portion of the Wind River Basin with high and moderate oil and gas development potential (54,575 acres, of which 18,277 are federal surface). Oil an

the area with minimum restrictions (as mapped in the Casper Field Office GIS database). New oil and gas leases in this area will be issued with standard stipulations only. Development will compas the ESA, the NHPA, etc., but the discretionary timing stipulations protecting sage-grouse nesting habitats, raptor nesting habitats, mountain plover nests, and crucial winter range will not be appl

National Back Country Byways Goal and Objective GOAL SD:13 Manage National Back Country Byways to enhance opportunities for the American public to see and enjoy the unique scenic and historic opportunities on public lands. 

OBJECTIVE - SD:13.1 Showcase the BLM’s multiple-use management through effective interpretation. 

7068 SD:13.1 The existing South Bighorns/Red Wall National Back Country Byway designation continues. Since the Seminoe/Alcova National Back Country Byway designation will continue in the Rawlins pla

byway within the planning area will continue to be cooperatively managed with the Rawlins Field Office.

7069 SD:13.1 Develop and implement interpretive signs on the National Back Country Byways. In addition, develop and implement a general signing program for the Casper Field Office. 

National Historic Trails (NHTs) and Other Historic Trails Goals and Objectives GOAL SD:14 Manage historic trails for long-term heritage and educational values and to enhance the public experience. 

OBJECTIVES - 

SD:14.1 Sites associated with historic trails will be interpreted and developed as needed. SD:14.2 Maintain compatible recreational use with historic trail values. 

GOAL SD:15 Enhance public experience through interpretive facilities and support of heritage tourism. 

GOAL SD:16 Reduce imminent threats from natural or human-caused deterioration or potential conflicts with other resource uses. 

OBJECTIVES - SD:16.1 Maintain an inventory and evaluate trail segments for contributing or non-contributing status and include this information in a revised trails management plan. 

SD:16.2 Monitor the condition of contributing trail segments and associated sites every 2 years or as appropriate. SD:16.3 Maintain setting for those contributing trail segments where setting is an aspect of integrity by utilizing viewshed management tools. SD:16.4 Develop activity plans for contributing trails segments and associated sites identified as high risk for adverse impacts. SD:16.5 Maximize partnership and cooperative management opportunities (e.g., cooperate with private landowners to install trail markers, provide public access, etc). 

7070 SD:14.1 

SD:14.2 

Site TIR-8 Glade Draw Segment: The existing OHV closure will be maintained. Public access will be maintained to the site. Future management actions include placing an historic marker and int

will be nominated to the National Register of Historic Places.

7071 SD:14.1 

SD:16 

Specified trail segments included in the Oregon/Mormon Pioneer National Historic Trails Management Plan (1986 USDI-Bureau of Land Management) will continue to be managed in accordance w
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-48 Record of Decision and Approve

7000 Special Designations and Other Management Areas (SD) 

7072 SD:14.1 

SD:16 

A. NHTs and Other Historic Trails Where Setting Does Not Contribute to NRHP Eligibility.

1. Existing physical features and associated sites will be protected from physical impacts. There will be no surface disturbance on trail traces. As mapped in the Casper Field Office GIS database. 

2. CSU within 1⁄4 mile or the visual horizon, whichever is closer to ensure that surface-disturbing activities avoid trail remains and the lands immediately surrounding them. The protective zones ar

Office GIS database. 

3. ROW crossings at previously disturbed areas at right angles. 4. The setting associated with these historic trails will be managed in accordance with objectives for the VRM Class established for the areas (as mapped in the Casper Field Office GIS database). 

B. Where Historic Setting Contributes to NRHP Eligibility 

1. Existing physical features and associated sites will be managed so that the trail trace and associated sites will be protected from physical impacts. 2. CSU will extend to the viewshed foreground (out to a maximum of 3 miles) or the visual horizon, whichever is closer to ensure that surface-disturbing activities avoid trail remains and the lands 

The protective zones are as mapped in the Casper Field Office GIS database. Management guidelines are summarized below: 

• ROW crossings at previously disturbed areas at right angles • Mineral leasing will continue with a CSU stipulation • Fences and range improvements will be permitted if impacts mitigated. 

3. The historic setting associated with these trails will be managed to maintain the existing character of the landscape. Accordingly, the viewshed foreground (out to a maximum of 3 miles) will be 

• VRM Class II • Mineral leasing will continue with CSU stipulation. 

4. NHTs will be managed as VRM Class II until inventories are completed. Segments not contributing overall eligibility will be managed as Class III. 

7073 SD:14.1 

SD:16 

Locatable minerals within 1⁄4 mile of historic trails and prominent landforms within the 3-mile viewshed are withdrawn to locatable entry and operation, including disposal (80,285 acres) within 1⁄4 m

landforms is entirely within the 1⁄4-mile buffer for historic trails. 

Oregon Trail 

7074 SD:14.1 

SD:14.2 

SD:16 

No surface disturbance occupancy (NSO) on the listed trail segments in Appendix W is permitted unless it is to the benefit of the preservation or interpretation of the trail. The BLM will continue t

other sites, as identified.

7075 SD:14.2 

SD:16.1 

Cooperatively manage per Interagency Agreement No. K910-A3-0013 with the NPS trail segments included in the agreement (see Appendix W). 

Pursue transfers, land exchanges or sales exchanges, conservation easements, and other management agreements with other governmental entities with the intention of preserving the recreation and 

stretch between Fort Laramie and Guernsey (to be managed as a recreational corridor). Manage pristine segments as VRM Class II; non-pristine segments as Class III. 

7076 SD:16.3 Acquisition of lands and interests in lands along NHTs through exchange, purchase, or donation will be pursued on a case-by-case basis. 7077 SD:14.1 

SD:14.2 

Negotiate easements, where needed, to meet program needs. These needs will be identified on a case-by-case basis. 

Bozeman Trail 

7078 SD:14.1 No surface development will be permitted on selected parcels along the Bozeman Trail in Converse County . Refer to Appendix W for legal locations. Additional parcels or segments will be added 

disclose suitable trail segments. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

7000 Special Designations and Other Management Areas (SD) Wild and Scenic Rivers Goal GOAL SD:17 - Identify waterway segments suitable for inclusion in the National Wild & Scenic River System. 

OBJECTIVES - None identified.

7079 SD:17 None of the six eligible waterways are recommended as suitable for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic River system. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued)

2-50 Record of Decision and Approve

8000 Socioeconomic Resources (SR) – Goals and Objectives Goals GOAL SR:1 Provide opportunities to develop national energy resources on BLM-administered lands within the planning area. GOAL SR:2 Provide opportunities to develop resources other than those that are energy-related (e.g., grazing, recreation, wildlife, fisheries, 

tourism, and others) on BLM-administered lands within the planning area. 

OBJECTIVES - None identified. 

GOAL SR:3 Provide opportunities to sustain the cultural, social, and economic viab

decision-review processes that include considerations of various potenemployment, population, fiscal impacts, social services, cultural chara

GOAL SR:4 Protect public health and safety and environmental resources through 

laws and regulations; maintaining the health of ecosystems though assand integrating environmental protection and compliance into all BLM 

GOAL SR:5 Reduce potential risks associated with known hazards resulting from h

safety issues and other sensitive resource values. 

8000 Socioeconomic Resources (SR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

8001 SR:4 

SR:5 

Manage hazardous materials in the planning area to reduce risks to visitors and employees, to restore contaminated lands, and to carry out emergency response activities, as per appropriate laws, policie

8002 SR:4 

SR:5 

Coordinate with appropriate regulatory agencies to reduce hazards associated with abandoned mines. 

8003 SR:4 

SR:5 

Educate public of the hazards associated with abandoned mines using publications, signage, websites, and other educational materials and mediums. 

8004 SR:4 

SR:5 

Identify and prioritize potential hazards associated with abandoned mines. 

8005 SR:5 Surface occupancy or use within 50,000 feet of the Casper Airport is subject to CSU restriction to protect aircraft fly zones. Surface occupancy or use within 10,000 feet of all other airports within the 

restriction to protect aircraft fly zones. 

Social and Economic Conditions

8006 SR:1 

SR:2 SR:3 

Incorporate national energy needs into Casper Field Office land-use planning, while also considering the socioeconomic goals and objectives identified by the overlapping jurisdictions. 

Quantify the impacts associated with site-specific and programmatic actions and provide that information to the impacted parties and overlapping jurisdictions for the purpose of having a better commoBLM actions with the explicit goal of mitigating impacts through collaborative management, where possible. 

8007 SR:1 

SR:2 SR:3 

Quantify the impacts associated with site-specific and programmatic actions and provide that information to the impacted parties and overlapping jurisdictions for the purpose of having a better commo

management actions. Based on resource constraints, attempt to minimize the conflicts associated with mineral extraction while stressing a balanced approach to diversify and enhance the local economy by stressing, for exarecreational opportunities, (e.g., fishing, hunting, and wildlife viewing), and renewable energy (e.g., wind power, etc.). Share that information with impacted entities (local, state, and other federal agencies) and work with these agencies to ensure social and economic impacts are addressed and mitigated where possible. 

8008 SR:1 

SR:2 SR:3 

Quantify the impacts associated with site-specific and programmatic actions and provide that information to the impacted parties and overlapping jurisdictions for the purpose of having a better commo

BLM actions with the explicit goal of mitigating impacts through collaborative management where possible. 
Approved R

Table 1-1. Goals, Objectives, and Decisions/Management Actions (Continued) 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

8000 Socioeconomic Resources (SR) 

Decision # Goal/Obj. Decisions/Management Actions 

Health and Safety – Formerly Used Defense Sites

8009 SR:4 

SR:5 

With the exception of livestock grazing, commercial use will be allowed with notification of the risk and a requirement to submit a safety plan prior to use of the area. 

Note: Restrictions on resource uses (e.g., administratively unavailable for leasing) apply to the life of the RMP, but can be changed by amending the RMP. Administratively unavailable for leasing means deferred from lAAQS ambient air quality standards ACEC Area of Critical Environmental Concern AMP Allotment Management Plan ANS artificial nesting structure APHIS Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service AQD Air Quality Division AQRV Air Quality Related Value AUM animal unit month BLM Bureau of Land Management BMP Best Management Practice BR biological resources C&MU Classification and Multiple Use CBNG coalbed natural gas CDPA Coal Development Potential Area CFR Code of Federal Regulations CRMP Coordinated Resource Management Plan CSU controlled surface use DEQ Department of Environmental Quality DFC desired future condition DPC desired plant community EA Environmental Assessment EEA Environmental Education Area EIS Environmental Impact Statement EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

FM fire management and ecology ESA Endangered Species Act FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act GIS Geographic Information System H2S hydrogen sulfide HMP Habitat Management Plan HR heritage and visual resources IM Instruction Memorandum INPS invasive, nonnative plant species KGS known geologic structure LBA Lease by Application LR land resources MBF thousand board feet MOU Memorandum of Understanding MR mineral resources NA not applicable NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NHT National Historic Trail NPS National Park Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NSO no surface occupancy NSS Native Species Status Obj. objective 

PFC proper functioning condition OHV off-highway vehicle ORV off-road vehicle PR physical resources R&PP Recreation and Public Purposes RAMP Recreation Area Management Plan RMP Resource Management Plan ROD Record of Decision ROW rights-of-way SD special designations SDW stock driveway MA Management Area SR socioeconomic resources SRMA Special Recreation Management Area TCP Traditional Cultural Property TLS timing limitation stipulation U.S.C. United States Code USBR U.S. Bureau of Reclamation USDI U.S. Department of the Interior USFS U.S. Forest Service USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service VRM Visual Resource Management WGFD Wyoming Game and Fish Department WUI Wildland-Urban Interface 
Approved Resource Management Plan

2-52 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

Table 1-2. Summary of Withdrawals, Classifications, and 

Other Segregations for the Approved RMP 

Segregates/Withdraws from 

Resource Acreage Disposal Leasables Locatables Decision # 

OTHER MANAGEMENT AREAS 

Alcova Fossil Area 5,805 Yes No Yes 7018 

Cedar Ridge TCP 4,058 Yes No Yes 7033 

Jackson Canyon 11,387 Yes No Yes 7003 

North Platte River 3,226 Yes No Yes 7034 

Sand Hills Management Area 17,601 Yes No Yes 7048 

South Bighorns/Red Wall 75,913 Yes No Yes 7058 

RESOURCE PROTECTION 

Bald Eagle Roosts (excludes 

Jackson Canyon) 37,290 Yes No Yes 4012 

Fremont Canyon C&MU 1,261 Yes No Yes 6049 

Habitat Fragmentation 168,386 Yes No Yes 4024 

Muddy Mountain C&MU 1,027 Yes No Yes 6091 

NHTs and Other Historic 

Trails 80,285 Yes No Yes 7073 

Public Water Reserves 1,389 Yes No No 6050 

Stock Driveways 56,328 Yes No No 

Table Mountain, BumpSullivan and Springer C&MU 

and Rawhide 

0 Yes No Yes 4022 

CLASSIFICATIONS 

Coal Classifications 0 Yes No Yes 6054 

R&PP Classification 3,468 Yes No Yes 6051 

OTHER SEGREGATIONS 

Exchange Land 0 No No Yes 6052 

Sale Land 0 No No Yes 6053 

OTHER FEDERAL AGENCY WITHDRAWALS 

Air Navigation Site (FAA) 198 Yes No Yes 6055 

Camp Guernsey 11,850 Yes Yes Yes 6061 

Fort Laramie National Historic 

Site (NPS) 940 Yes Yes Yes 6056 

Grey Reef Power Site 

(FERC) 29 Yes No Yes 6065 

Mill Tailings Spook (DOE) 90 No Yes Yes 6063 

Mill Tailings UMETCO 987 Yes Yes Yes 6064 

National Forests (USFS) 81,768 Yes No No 6059 

Thunder Basin National 

Grasslands (USFS) 163,238 Yes No No 6060 

National Wildlife Refuge 

(USFWS) 7,458 Yes No Yes 6057 

Naval Petroleum Reserve 

Number 3 (DOE) 9,324 Yes Yes Yes 6058 

Reclamation (USBR) 18,078 Yes No Yes 6062 

C&MU Classification and Multiple Use Act of 1964 

DOE U.S. Department of Energy 

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

NHT National Historic Trails 

NPS National Park Service 

R&PP Recreation and Public Purposes 

TCP Traditional Cultural Property 

USBR U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 

USFS U.S. Forest Service 

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 2-53 

Table 1-3. Acres of Federal Mineral Estate 

Administratively Unavailable for Oil and Gas Leasing for 

the Life of the Plan in the Casper Planning Area 

Restriction Acreage Decision # 

Habitat Fragmentation 168,386 4024 

Sand Hills 17,633 7047 

South Bighorns 75,913 7059 

North Platte River 0 7039 

Muddy Mountain EEA 1,419 6090 

Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3 9,324 6058 

Fort Laramie 940 6056 

Camp Guernsey 11,850 6061 

Total 285,320 Not Applicable 

Source: BLM 2006a 

Note: Due to overlaps, acres in this table do not add to the total federal mineral estate 

administratively unavailable for oil and gas leasing. 

EEA Environmental Education Area 

No. Number

2.2.1.1 Best Management Practices 

Best management practices (BMPs) are environmental protection measures developed by governmental 

bodies, industry, and scientific or other working groups. These practices are not stipulations, but rather 

serve to improve design and reduce the environmental impact of proposed BLM decisions/management 

actions in the planning area. Public land users are encouraged to review these practices, incorporate them 

where appropriate, or develop better methods for achieving the same goal. 

The purpose of this section is not to attempt to select certain practices or designs and require that only 

those be used. It is not possible to evaluate all the known practices and make determinations as to which 

are best. What is best must be determined as a result of a site-specific investigation of the proposed 

management action. No one management practice is best suited to every site or situation. BMPs must be 

adaptive and monitored regularly to evaluate effectiveness. 

The following sources contain significant information regarding the development and implementation of 

BMPs. These references are not to be considered as exclusive sources of information; rather, they should 

be used as a starting point when evaluating specific BMPs during the project design and implementation. 

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality 

http://deq.state.wy.us/wqd/watershed/#Planning

Bureau of Land Management 

http://www.blm.gov/bmp/

http://www.blm.gov/nhp/efoia/wo/fy05/im2005-069.htm

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/

http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/menuofbmps/menu.cfm

U.S. Department of Agriculture – Natural Resources Conservation Service 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Technical/Standards/nhcp.html

http://www.glti.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/publications/nrph.html
Approved Resource Management Plan

2-54 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

2.2.1.2 Guidelines for Yearling Conversion 

Casper Field Office Policy Statement on Yearling Conversion 

The use of conversion factors may be authorized when resource conditions and range management 

considerations warrant their use. 

Yearling use and conversion within the Casper Field Office will function within the following framework. 

1. Yearling cattle may be run in same period of use and in the same numbers as customarily 

licensed for cow/calf pairs without special approval. 

2. Livestock management facilities (fences and water must be adequate as determined through 

the development of an environmental assessment and/or allotment management plan) for the 

proposed season of use and livestock numbers. 

3. Conversions of less than 1:1 may be denied if proposed yearling use would result in a greater 

than customary percentage of the use being licensed during the growing season. 

4. Conversion factors of less than 1:1 will be based on a pre agreed to factor of .75 or the midweight of the yearlings for the period of time they are controlled by the applicant. This midweight will be determined as shown on Attachment 1. If the management situation and 

conditions warrant the average daily gain in the second and subsequent years may be 

calculated using the previous year’s weight tickets. The calculation of the conversion factors 

will be the responsibility of the authorized officer and is not subject to negotiation by the 

lessee. It is the responsibility of the grazing operator to supply all weight tickets necessary to 

calculate the conversion factor or the conversion will be denied. 

5. All yearling applications must be supported by current proof of control of the livestock to be 

grazed such as bill of sale, cattle lease, or management agreement. This must be in 

conformance with 43 CFR Part 4130.7. 

6. The allotment must be operated under an Allotment Management Plan (AMP), Coordinated 

Resource Management Plan (CRMP), Management Agreement or similar document. A 

monitoring plan will be in place to determine if adjustments to either the AMP or the 

conversion factor are required. 

7. An environmental assessment (EA) will be done for all allotments where yearling 

conversions are requested. The EA will address any land use plan decisions for the allotment, 

the conversion from a cow/calf operation to a yearling operation, the impact to the vegetation, 

wildlife, watershed, or other resource values as a result of a change in foraging habits and 

numbers of animals. 

8. Other Policy Considerations: 

a. The term of the yearling conversion must be for more than a 3-year period. 

b. If a grazing lease or permit is transferred the yearling conversion will be allowed to 

remain in place under the same conditions. 

c. No yearling conversions will be allowed for replacement heifers if run in common with 

cow-calf pairs. 

d. No sheep yearling conversions will be allowed. 

e. The full fee shall be charged for each animal unit month of authorized grazing use in 

accordance with 43 CFR Part 4130.8-1(c). 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 2-55 

9. Required Terms and Conditions of Permit/Lease: 

a. The AMP, CRMP, Management Agreement or similar document guiding management 

of the grazing allotment will be made part of the lease/permit. 

b. Any future monitoring which indicates that yearling use is resulting in resource damage 

or over use of the vegetation will require that the yearling conversion be reviewed by the 

authorized officer. 

c. The yearling conversion may be terminated at any time at the discretion of the BLM 

after consultation with the grazing lessee. 

Determination of Yearling Conversion Factor 

1. The beginning weight for yearling cattle must be determined prior to turning the animals into 

the allotment. This must be supported by certified weight tickets. The date for the weight 

tickets may be for any date, 2 weeks prior to turning yearlings into the allotment. 

2. The mid-weight will be determined by using the following formula: 

In weight + (Days x 2 pounds) = Mid-weight 

 2 

* Days refers to the total number of days yearling cattle are in the allotment 

* 2 pounds is the assumed daily weight gain. This figure is administrative and is 

nonnegotiable, unless average daily gain can be calculated from actual certified 

weight tickets supplied by the lessee showing the turn in and take out weights of 

the yearling cattle. 

* Mid-weight will be rounded up to the nearest 50-pound increment. 

3. The conversion factors are shown below. 

Conversion Factors 

Mid-Weight Factor 

500 .60

600 .70

700 .75

800 .85

900 1.00

550 .65

650 .72

750 .80

850 .90

The conversion factors were established based on data and formula from Kearl (1978). 

2.2.1.3 Stock Driveway Management Standards 

Stock driveways (SDW) will be utilized to the fullest extent possible. Management Standards for 

livestock trailing and other uses are as follows: 

Trail Use

The following are standards for managing SDWs and authorizing livestock trailing in the SDWs or on 

other public lands of the Casper planning area. 
Approved Resource Management Plan

2-56 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

Crossing/trail use will be authorized to livestock owners that have a need to trail livestock across public 

lands. Trail use is trailing livestock across public lands not included in a lessee’s grazing lease or permit. 

An application must be filed by the person requesting crossing/trail use on public lands prior to making 

trail use. The application can be in person, in writing or by telephone. The call must be documented and 

date stamped. 

The crossing/trailing permit is authorized when the grazing bill is paid in accordance with Federal grazing 

regulations. The bill will be for the animal unit months (AUMs) used and the use will be charged at the 

annual AUM grazing fee rate. 

A service charge will be charged for the crossing/trail bill, unless the crossing/trail permit is applied for 

prior to the issuance of the annual grazing bill and can be included in the annual bill. 

A temporary use authorization for crossing/trailing livestock must contain necessary terms and conditions 

for the temporary grazing use that will occur. The authorization specifies the following. 

• The minimum distance livestock must travel per day; 5 miles/day for sheep, 10 miles/day for 

cattle. 

• The number of days allowed for the crossing/trailing. 

• The point of entry. 

• The route to be followed. 

• The holdover areas. 

• The point of exit. 

• Any additional terms and conditions needed; and if needed, a statement that the authorization 

pertains only to lands administered by the BLM. 

• If the trail use is different than the dates applied for, the lessee must notify the BLM of the change 

in dates prior to making the trail use. 

BLM will notify affected permittees and lessees of any trailing plans prior to the move, if the trailing is 

outside of the designated SDWs. 

After-Trail Management Standards

These standards will set the management for authorizing after-trail use on the SDWs within the Casper 

planning area. The SDWs are commonly known as the 33 Mile SDW and the Bates Hole SDW. 

• By definition after-trail use is grazing use that is authorized on the SDWs after fall trail use has 

been completed to allow utilization of additional forage that may be available. After-trail use 

normally ends prior to spring trail use. Adequate forage must be left to accommodate spring trail 

use. 

• After-trail use will be secondary to the primary use of livestock trailing. If someone needs to trail 

livestock, the lessee with after-trail use will cooperate with that person and not interfere with 

movement of their livestock. 

• Application for after-trail use must be applied for annually. The use will be authorized in 

accordance with the grazing regulations. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 2-57 

• The lessee will be billed at the annual grazing fee rate that is in effect for that period of use. 

• The BLM authorized officer may designate the kind of livestock that will be authorized to make 

after-trail use. 

• After-trail use will normally be authorized after October 1 or after the last trail permit has ended, 

whichever comes first. After-trail use will normally end on March 31 or with vegetation greenup, whichever comes first. The decision determining whether additional forage is available will 

be documented and filed in the appropriate SDW file. 

• After-trail use will be authorized for no more than two weeks at a time. Prior to the end of the 

two week period the authorized officer will determine if an extension of use can be granted. The 

decision determining if additional forage is available will be documented and filed in the 

appropriate SDW file. 

• Lessees with allotments that adjoin the portion of SDW available for after-trail use will be given 

priority for receiving after-trail use. Lessees that do not have adjoining allotments will only be 

authorized to make after-trail use when no other applications have been received and the 

authorized officer has determined forage is available for use. 

• Other management considerations for use of SDWs will include providing emergency use for 

relief from fire, drought or other natural causes or to meet management objectives in adjoining 

allotments that require rest. These other uses will be addressed on a case by case basis and may 

occur any time during the year provided the authorized officer has determined adequate forage is 

available and it does not interfere with regular trail use. The decision determining there is 

adequate forage will be documented and filed in the appropriate SDW file. Consultation and 

coordination with livestock owners who regularly use the respective SDW will be made prior to 

authorizing this type of use. This use will be authorized in accordance with Federal grazing 

regulations. 

2.2.1.4 Air Quality 

During review of the air emissions tables used to calculate OHV emissions, typographical errors were 

identified for the emissions from OHVs. Strikethrough is used to denote corrections in emissions tables 

and text in this section. Table, figure, and page numbers appearing below refer to the Proposed 

RMP/Final EIS. 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS, Page 3-7

Table 3-3. Year 2001 Annual Emissions for BLM Activities Within the Casper Planning Area

Emissions (Tons per Year) 

Project Scenario/Resource PM10 PM2.5 NOx SOx CO VOC HAPs 

Emission Sources 

Natural Gas Development/Production 85 34 431 6 394 2639 282 

Oil Development/Production 64 21 449 59 113 15 1 

Locatable Minerals 151 21 19 2 49 7 1 

Salable Minerals 295 38 19 0 9 2 0 

Coal Mine 480 112 373 14 0 0 0 

OHVs 7 7 3 0 427

659 

230 23 

Minor Emission Sources 

Resource Roads 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 

ROW and Corridors 20 5 16 2 22 5 1 
Approved Resource Management Plan

2-58 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

Table 3-3. Year 2001 Annual Emissions for BLM Activities Within the Casper Planning Area

Emissions (Tons per Year) 

Livestock Grazing Projects 11 2 1 0 1 0 0 

Vegetation Management 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Year 2001 Totals 1,116 241 1,311 84 1,016

1,247 

2898 308 

Source: BLM 2005c 

Note: Due to rounding, column entries may not sum to total. 

CO carbon monoxide 

HAP Hazardous air pollutant 

NOx nitrogen oxides 

OHV off-highway vehicle 

PM10 particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter 

PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in 

diameter 

ROW rights-of-way 

SOx sulfur oxides 

VOC volatile organic compounds 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS, Page 4-6

Table 4-2. Total Annual Emissions Summary for BLM 

Activities Within the Casper Planning Area 

Emissions (tons per year) 

Summary Year PM10 PM2.5 NOx SOx CO VOC HAP 

Base Year (2001) Totals 1,116 241 1,311 84 

1,016

1,247 2,898 308 

Alternative A

2011 Total 1,361 290 1,367 80 1,947 4,248 454 

2020 Total 1,381 306 1,498 83 2,354 4,915 526 

Alternative B

2011 Total 1,115 226 715 25 1,597 1,058 115 

2020 Total 1,197 248 773 27 1,886 1,108 120 

Alternative C

2011 Total 1,457 300 1,307 75 1,924 3,971 424 

2020 Total 1,475 315 1,429 78 2,320 4,558 488 

Alternative D

2011 Total 1,697 334 1,376 81 1,981 4,199 448 

2020 Total 1,718 350 1,500 83 2,385 4,867 520 

Alternative E (Proposed RMP)

2011 Total 1,486 306 1,369 80 1,958 4,249 454 

2020 Total 1,506 323 1,497 83 2,364 4,882 522 

Source: Appendix J 

CO carbon monoxide 

HAP hazardous air pollutant 

NOx nitrogen oxides 

PM10 particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter 

PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter 

SOx sulfur oxides 

VOC volatile organic compound 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS, Page 4-7

Alternative A 

Figure 4-2 also shows that Alternative A would result in increased emission levels for all pollutants 

except sulfur oxides (SOx) by 2020, compared to existing conditions in year 2001. The most substantial 

increases are projected to be carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOC), and hazardous 

air pollutants (HAPs) emissions, increasing by 1,338 1,106 tons per year (132% 89%), 2,017 tons per 

year (70%), and 217 tons per year (71%), respectively, from 2001 levels. The largest source of these 

increased emissions is the new development of oil and natural gas production in the planning area. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 2-59 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS, Page 4-8

Figure 4-1. Project Emissions from BLM Activities within the Casper Planning Area:

Year 2011

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

PM10 PM2.5 NOx SOx CO VOC HAPs

Emissions (Tons per Year)

Base Year

Alt A

Alt B

Alt C

Alt D

Alt E
Approved Resource Management Plan

2-60 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

Proposed RMP/Final EIS, Page 4-9

Figure 4-2. Project Emissions from BLM Activities within the Casper Planning Area:

Year 2020

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

PM10 PM2.5 NOx SOx CO VOC HAPs

Emissions (Tons per Year)

Base Year

Alt A

Alt B

Alt C

Alt D

Alt E

Proposed RMP/Final EIS, Page 4-10

Alternative B 

Figure 4-2 shows that compared to the 2001 base year emissions, in 2020, Alternative B would result in 

the lowest increase in emissions of any of the alternatives, with modest increases in PM10 emissions (81 

tons per year or 7%), PM2.5 (7 tons per year or 3%), and CO emissions (870 639 tons per year or 86%

51%). VOC emissions would drop by 1,791 tons per year or 62 percent due to the conservation measures 

incorporated into Alternative B, resulting in the lowest natural gas production of all alternatives, the 

primary source of VOC emissions. 

Alternative C 

Figure 4-2 shows that Alternative C would result in moderately increased emission levels for all 

pollutants by 2020 compared to existing conditions in year 2001. The most substantial increases are 

projected to be CO, VOC, and HAPs emissions, with an increase of 1,303 1,072 tons per year (128%

86%), 1,659 tons per year (57%), and 179 tons per year (58%), respectively, from 2001 levels. As shown 

in Figure 4-2, the emission increases under Alternative C over base year conditions are similar, but 

somewhat lower, for several pollutants than for Alternative A, but substantially higher than for 

Alternative B. The primary source of these increased emissions from base year conditions is the new 

development of oil and natural gas production in the planning area. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 2-61 

Alternative D 

Figure 4-2 shows that Alternative D would result in moderately increased emission levels for all 

pollutants by 2020 compared to existing conditions in year 2001. The most substantial increases are 

projected to be CO, VOC, and HAP emissions, with an increase of 1,369 1,137 tons per year (135%

91%), 1,968 tons per year (68%), and 212 tons per year (69%), respectively, from 2001 levels. 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS, Page 4-11

Alternative E (Proposed RMP) 

Figure 4-2 shows that Alternative E would result in moderately increased emission levels for all 

pollutants by 2020, compared to existing conditions in year 2001. The most substantial increases are 

projected to be CO, VOC, and HAP emissions, with an increase of 1,348 1,117 tons per year (133%

90%), 1,984 tons per year (68%), and 214 tons per year (69%), respectively, from 2001 levels. 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS, Page 4-312 and 313

The assumptions made tend to result in a conservatively high estimate of emissions. More detailed and 

quantitative analysis of potential impacts to air quality will occur as necessary during implementation of 

site-specific proposals when the location and proposed actions are identified. 

Please note, only that portion of Table 4-29 requiring correction is reproduced below. Please refer to the 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS for the entire Table 4-29. 

Table 4-29. Cumulative Annual Emissions for BLM Activities Within the Casper 

Planning Area – Baseline Year 2001 

 Emissions (Tons per Year) 

CO VOC HAP 

Project Scenario/Resource BLM 

NonBLM Cumulative BLM NonBLM Cumulative BLM NonBLM Cumulative 

CBNG 

Development/Production 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Natural Gas 

Development/Production 

394.17 161.00 555.17 2,639.21 1,077.99 3,717.20 282.27 115.29 397.56 

Oil Development/Production 112.78 46.07 158.85 14.65 5.98 20.63 1.47 0.60 2.06 

Locatable Minerals 49.34 40.37 89.72 7.18 5.88 13.06 0.72 0.59 1.31 

Salable Minerals 9.31 7.62 16.93 1.69 1.38 3.07 0.17 0.14 0.31 

Coal Mine 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Resource Roads 0.05 0.27 0.33 0.01 0.07 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.01 

ROW Corridors 22.27 116.91 139.18 5.40 28.38 33.78 0.54 2.84 3.38 

Livestock/Grazing 0.56 2.95 3.51 0.13 0.70 0.83 0.01 0.07 0.08 

Renewable Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Fire Management 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Forest and Woodlands 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Vegetation Management 0.14 0.73 0.87 0.03 0.15 0.18 0.00 0.02 0.02 

OHVs 427

658.78 

2,244

3,458.59 

2,671

4,117.37 

229.98 1,207.42 1,437.40 23.00 120.74 143.74 

Total 1,016

1,247 

2,619

3,835 

3,636

5,082 

2,898 2,328 5,226 308 240 548 

BLM Bureau of Land Management 

CBNG coalbed natural gas 

CO carbon monoxide 

HAP hazardous air pollutant 

NOx nitrogen oxides 

OHV off-highway vehicle 

ROW rights-of-way 

VOC volatile organic compound 
Approved Resource Management Plan

2-62 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

Proposed RMP/Final EIS, Appendix J, Page J-86

Table J-114. Total of All OHV Emissions 

Emissions (Tons/Year) 

Year

Hydrocarbons (HC) Carbon 

Monoxide (CO) 

Nitrogen 

Oxides (NOx) 

Particulate 

Matter (PM) HAPsa

2000 229.98 

427.44

658.78 2.94 7.00 23.00 

2005 348.80 956.41 4.47 11.18 34.88 

2010 449.97 1,201.68 6.29 14.76 45.00 

2020 543.49 1,482.84 8.35 17.76 54.35 a Hazardous air pollutants; assumed equal to HC * 0.10. 

2.3 Plan Implementation Process 

The Approved RMP will be implemented as funding and workforce allow. Most of the land use plan 

decisions are effective upon approval of this document. However, some decisions will take a number of 

years to implement on the ground. Implementation monitoring will track which decisions have been 

implemented and when. 

2.3.1 Public Involvement 

After issuing the Approved RMP and ROD, an Implementation Strategy will be developed. The 

Implementation Strategy will include an annual coordination meeting between BLM and Cooperating 

Agencies involved in revising the RMP. The annual coordination meeting will include an update on 

implementation of the plan, foreseeable activities for the upcoming year, and opportunities for continued 

collaboration with the RMP cooperators. Additional coordination meetings could be held as needed. 

Specific concerns identified to date include the use of categorical exclusions under Section 390(b)(3) of 

the Energy Policy Act and implementation of socioeconomic decisions during site-specific project 

analysis. 

BLM anticipates that site-specific implementation or project analysis will occur in accordance with 

governing law and regulations as the RMP allocation decisions are implemented. This analysis process 

will provide an opportunity for the BLM, State of Wyoming and the affected counties and communities to 

collaborate in disclosing the socio-economic impacts associated with the site-specific action being 

analyzed. 

BLM Casper Field Office acknowledges that state and local governments may collect or develop more 

refined social and economic data and that local plans may be developed by the impacted counties, 

municipalities or communities that attempt to address social and economic matters affecting them. This 

planning effort by local governments may address some or all of the social and governmental services 

within its purview, and may contain the detailed budgetary requirements necessary to carry the plan 

forward. 

Some of the decisions contained in this document will require preparation of detailed, project-level NEPA 

analyses prior to implementation. Tribal consultation and public involvement opportunities, including 

further protest or appeal opportunities, may be provided. Other decisions have been addressed to a 

sufficient level of detail to be implemented over time without further NEPA analysis or public 

involvement opportunities. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 2-63 

2.3.2 Operation and Maintenance Actions 

Projects and maintenance of existing and newly-constructed facilities will occur; however, the level of 

maintenance could vary based on annual funding. Normally, routine operation and maintenance actions 

are categorically excluded from NEPA analysis. Such activities could include, but are not limited to, 

routine maintenance of existing roads, ditches, culverts, water control structures, recreation facilities, 

reservoirs, wells, pipelines, waterholes, fences, cattleguards, seedings, fish and wildlife structures, and 

signs. These types of actions are part of implementation of the RMP and should not require further 

analysis to implement. 

2.3.3 Monitoring 

Monitoring the Approved RMP involves tracking the implementation and effectiveness of land use plan 

decisions (implementation monitoring) identified in Table 1-1. Implementation monitoring tracks the 

completion of land use plan decisions whereas effectiveness monitoring helps determine whether 

completion of land use plan decisions achieves anticipated desired outcomes. If implementation of land 

use plans does not achieve anticipated desired outcomes, adaptive management may be necessary. 

A specific monitoring plan has not been developed at the date of signing the ROD. A monitoring plan and 

implementation strategy will be developed in collaboration with a Casper Working Group. Membership 

will be restricted to employees or officers of a governmental agency or elected officers of state, local, or 

tribal governments. Pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1534(b)), the 

Casper Working Group will not be chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.). 

The Casper Working Group will meet periodically to identify what monitoring will be done for the next 

year and who will be responsible for the monitoring and include monitoring results in the group’s annual 

report. 

2.4 Plan Evaluation/Adaptive Management 

Evaluation is a process in which the plan and monitoring data are reviewed to determine if management 

goals and objectives are being met and if management direction is sound. Land use plan evaluations 

determine if decisions are being implemented, whether mitigation measures are satisfactory, whether 

there are significant changes in the related plans of other entities, whether there is new data of 

significance to the plan, and if decisions should be changed through amendment or revision. Monitoring 

data gathered over time is examined and used to draw conclusions on whether management actions are 

meeting stated objectives, and if not, why. Conclusions are then used to make recommendations on 

whether to continue current management or to identify what changes need to be made in management 

practices to meet RMP objectives. 

BLM will use land use plan evaluations to determine if the decisions in the RMP, supported by the 

accompanying NEPA analysis, are still valid in light of new information and monitoring data. Evaluation 

of the RMP will generally be conducted every five years, unless unexpected actions, new information, or 

significant changes in other plans, legislation, or litigation triggers an evaluation. 

Evaluations will follow the protocols established by the BLM Land Use Planning Handbook (H-1601-1) 

and 43 CFR Part 1610.4-9 or other appropriate guidance in effect at the time the evaluation is initiated. 

As defined by the Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance, adaptive management is a system of 

management practices based on clearly identified outcomes, monitoring to determine if management 

actions are meeting outcomes, and, if not, facilitating management changes that will best ensure that 

outcomes are met or re-evaluated. As described in the Draft RMP/EIS and the Proposed RMP/Final EIS, 

the Casper RMP fosters “adaptiveness” by the presentation of goals and objectives that focus on reaching 
Approved Resource Management Plan

2-64 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

outcomes rather than identifying inflexible standards and prescriptions that may not be applicable in 

certain situations. 

Adaptive management is a system of management practices based on clearly identified outcomes, 

monitoring to determine if management actions are meeting outcomes, and if not, facilitating 

management changes that will best ensure outcomes are met or to reevaluate the outcomes. This process 

builds on current knowledge, observation, experimentation, and learning from experience. A continuous 

feedback loop allows for midcourse corrections in management to meet planned goals and objectives. In 

addition, the process provides a model for adjusting goals and objectives as new information develops and 

when the public recommends management changes. 

When land use plan actions or best management practices are found to be ineffective, modifications may 

occur without amendment or revision of the plan as long as assumptions and impacts disclosed in the 

analysis remain valid and broad-scale goals and objectives are not changed. This approach uses on-theground monitoring, review of scientific information, and consideration of practical experience and 

common sense to adjust management and modify implementation of the plan to reach the desired 

outcome. 

2.5 Appendices 

Appendices F, G, H, I, L, M, O, R, U, W, and X are included in the Proposed RMP and Final EIS and are 

pertinent to and therefore incorporated in this Approved RMP. Appendix Z was developed subsequent to 

the Proposed RMP and Final EIS and is included in the Approved RMP/ROD. The following appendices 

are reproduced on CD as part of the Approved RMP/ROD. 

Appendix F Exceptions, Modifications, and Waiver Criteria 

Appendix G Land Tenure Adjustment Strategy 

Appendix H Areas Not Available for Livestock Grazing 

Appendix I Wyoming Bureau of Land Management Mitigation Guidelines for Surface-Disturbing 

and Disruptive Activities 

Appendix L Air Quality Mitigation Matrix 

Appendix M Surface Disturbance and Reasonable Foreseeable Actions 

Appendix O Recreation Management Matrices 

Appendix R Clarification of Off-Highway Vehicle Designations and Travel Management in the 

Bureau of Land Management Land Use Planning Process 

Appendix U Intensive Management 

Appendix W Parcel Numbers and Legal Descriptions by Resource Program 

Appendix X Invasive, Nonnative Plant Species Best Preventative Management Practices and 

Mitigation Options 

Appendix Z Biological Opinion for the Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 

2.6 Glossary 

The glossary included in the Proposed RMP and Final EIS is pertinent to and therefore included in this 

Approved RMP. The glossary is reproduced on CD as part of the Approved RMP/ROD. 
Approved Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan 2-65 

2.7 Maps 

The following maps, representing land use plan decisions made by this Approved RMP, are included on 

CD as part of the Approved RMP/ROD. 

Map 1 Physical Resources Water 

Map 2 Mineral Resources Leasable – Coal 

Map 3 Mineral Resources Leasable – Oil and Gas 

Map 4 Mineral Resources Locatable 

Map 5 Mineral Resources Salable 

Map 6 Biological Resources Fish and Wildlife Resources – Wildlife 

Map 7 Biological Resources Special Status Species – Plants 

Map 8 Biological Resources Special Status Species – Wildlife 

Map 9 Heritage and Visual Resources Cultural Resources 

Map 10 Heritage and Visual Resources Visual Resource Management 

Map 11 Land Resources Lands and Realty – Retention and Disposal 

Map 12 Land Resources Rights-of-Way and Corridors Including Renewable Wind Energy 

Map 13 Land Resources Off-Highway Vehicles 

Map 14 Land Resources Recreation 

Map 15 Special Designations and Other Management Areas 

Map 16 Special Designations National Back Country Byways 

Map 17 Special Designations National Historic Trails and Other Historic Trails 

Map 18 Socioeconomic Resources Health and Safety 

2.8 References 

Please refer to the Proposed RMP and Final EIS for the Casper Field Office Planning Area for all 

references applicable to this Approved RMP. 
Approved Resource Management Plan

2-66 Record of Decision and Approved Casper Resource Management Plan

This page intentionally left blank.