CHAPTER 2: 

ALTERNATIVES

Including 

Alternative VI 

(Proposed RMP) 
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Table of Contents

TOC-i 

........................................................................................................................................

............................................................................................................

.................................................................................................

.................................................................................

.............................................................................................................

............................................................................................................................

...........................................................................................................................

........................................................................................................................

........................................................................................................................

.........................................................................................................................

............................................................................................

.....................................................

.........................................................................................................

.....................................................................

...................................

.......................................................................................................................

..........................................................................................................

...................................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................

................................................................................................................

.....................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................

...................................................................................................................

........................................................................................................

...................................................................................

.............................................................................

........................................................................................................................

................................................................................................

............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

..............................................................................

Chapter 2

Alternatives including 

Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) 

Table of Contents

2.1 Introduction 2-1

2.1.1 How to Read This Chapter 2-1

2.1.2 Alternative Development Process 2-4

2.1.3 Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail 2-5

2.1.3.1 No Action Alternative 2-5

2.1.3.2 Alternative I 2-6

2.1.3.3 Alternative II 2-8

2.1.3.4 Alternative III 2-10

2.1.3.5 Alternative IV 2-11

2.1.3.6 Alternative V 2-13

2.1.3.7 Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) 2-15

2.1.4 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study 2-17

2.1.4.1 No Grazing Alternative 2-17

2.1.4.2 Alternatives Submitted during Public Scoping 2-17

2.1.4.3 Alternatives Submitted during the Draft RMP/EIS Comment Period 2-20

2.2 No Action Alternative 2-22

2.2.1 Tribal Rights and Interests 2-22

2.2.2 Resources 2-22

2.2.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 2-22

2.2.2.2 Geologic Features 2-22

2.2.2.3 Soil Resources 2-23

2.2.2.4 Water Resources 2-23

2.2.2.5 Vegetation Communities 2-24

2.2.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 2-26

2.2.2.7 Special Status Species 2-29

2.2.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 2-30

2.2.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 2-31

2.2.2.10 Wild Horses 2-33

2.2.2.11 Paleontological Resources 2-33

2.2.2.12 Cultural Resources 2-33

2.2.2.13 Visual Resources 2-34

2.2.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 2-35
Chapter 2: Table of Contents Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

TOC-ii

............................................................................................................................

................................................................................................................

............................................................................................................................

....................................................................................................

......................................................................................................

.........................................................................................................................

................................................................................................................................

...................................................................................................................

..............................................................

............................................................................................

...........................................................................................................................

..........................................................................................

.........................................................................................

...................................................................................................

.........................................................................................

............................................................................................................

......................................................

.......................................................................................................................................

..........................................................................................................

...................................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................

................................................................................................................

.....................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................

...................................................................................................................

........................................................................................................

...................................................................................

.............................................................................

........................................................................................................................

................................................................................................

............................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

..............................................................................

............................................................................................................................

................................................................................................................

............................................................................................................................

....................................................................................................

......................................................................................................

2.2.3 Resource Uses 2-36

2.2.3.1 Livestock Grazing 2-36

2.2.3.2 Recreation 2-39

2.2.3.3 Transportation and Travel 2-40

2.2.3.4 Land Use Authorizations 2-40

2.2.3.5 Land Tenure 2-42

2.2.3.6 Minerals 2-45

2.2.4 Special Designations 2-48

2.2.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 2-48

2.2.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 2-51

2.2.4.3 Wilderness 2-51

2.2.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 2-52

2.2.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) 2-53

2.2.5 Social and Economic Features 2-53

2.2.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 2-53

2.2.5.2 Hazardous Materials 2-54

2.2.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 2-54

2.3 Alternative I 2-55

2.3.1 Tribal Rights and Interests 2-55

2.3.2 Resources 2-55

2.3.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 2-55

2.3.2.2 Geologic Features 2-56

2.3.2.3 Soil Resources 2-56

2.3.2.4 Water Resources 2-57

2.3.2.5 Vegetation Communities 2-58

2.3.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 2-65

2.3.2.7 Special Status Species 2-68

2.3.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 2-71

2.3.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 2-72

2.3.2.10 Wild Horses 2-77

2.3.2.11 Paleontological Resources 2-78

2.3.2.12 Cultural Resources 2-78

2.3.2.13 Visual Resources 2-80

2.3.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 2-81

2.3.3 Resource Uses 2-82

2.3.3.1 Livestock Grazing 2-82

2.3.3.2 Recreation 2-87

2.3.3.3 Transportation and Travel 2-89

2.3.3.4 Land Use Authorizations 2-92
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Table of Contents

TOC-iii

.........................................................................................................................

................................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................

............................................................

..........................................................................................

.........................................................................................................................

........................................................................................

.......................................................................................

.................................................................................................

.......................................................................................

..........................................................................................................

....................................................

....................................................................................................................................

........................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................

...............................................................................................

..............................................................................................................

...................................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

....................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................

.................................................................................

...........................................................................

......................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................

..........................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................

............................................................................

..........................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................

..........................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................

....................................................................................................

.......................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................

............................................................

..........................................................................................

2.3.3.5 Land Tenure 2-95

2.3.3.6 Minerals 2-97

2.3.4 Special Designations 2-103

2.3.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 2-103

2.3.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 2-107

2.3.4.3 Wilderness 2-109

2.3.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 2-109

2.3.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) 2-110

2.3.5 Social and Economic Features 2-111

2.3.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 2-111

2.3.5.2 Hazardous Materials 2-111

2.3.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 2-112

2.4 Alternative II 2-113

2.4.1 Tribal Rights and Interests 2-113

2.4.2 Resources 2-113

2.4.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 2-113

2.4.2.2 Geologic Features 2-114

2.4.2.3 Soil Resources 2-114

2.4.2.4 Water Resources 2-115

2.4.2.5 Vegetation Communities 2-116

2.4.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 2-123

2.4.2.7 Special Status Species 2-125

2.4.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 2-128

2.4.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 2-129

2.4.2.10 Wild Horses 2-134

2.4.2.11 Paleontological Resources 2-134

2.4.2.12 Cultural Resources 2-135

2.4.2.13 Visual Resources 2-136

2.4.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 2-138

2.4.3 Resource Uses 2-138

2.4.3.1 Livestock Grazing 2-138

2.4.3.2 Recreation 2-142

2.4.3.3 Transportation and Travel 2-144

2.4.3.4 Land Use Authorizations 2-147

2.4.3.5 Land Tenure 2-150

2.4.3.6 Minerals 2-152

2.4.4 Special Designations 2-157

2.4.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 2-157

2.4.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 2-157
Chapter 2: Table of Contents Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

TOC-iv

.........................................................................................................................

........................................................................................

.......................................................................................

.................................................................................................

.......................................................................................

..........................................................................................................

....................................................

...................................................................................................................................

........................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................

...............................................................................................

..............................................................................................................

...................................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

....................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................

.................................................................................

...........................................................................

......................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................

..........................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................

............................................................................

..........................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................

..........................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................

....................................................................................................

.......................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................

............................................................

..........................................................................................

.........................................................................................................................

........................................................................................

.......................................................................................

.................................................................................................

.......................................................................................

2.4.4.3 Wilderness 2-158

2.4.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 2-158

2.4.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) 2-160

2.4.5 Social and Economic Features 2-160

2.4.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 2-160

2.4.5.2 Hazardous Materials 2-161

2.4.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 2-161

2.5 Alternative III 2-163

2.5.1 Tribal Rights and Interests 2-163

2.5.2 Resources 2-163

2.5.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 2-163

2.5.2.2 Geologic Features 2-164

2.5.2.3 Soil Resources 2-164

2.5.2.4 Water Resources 2-165

2.5.2.5 Vegetation Communities 2-166

2.5.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 2-173

2.5.2.7 Special Status Species 2-175

2.5.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 2-178

2.5.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 2-180

2.5.2.10 Wild Horses 2-184

2.5.2.11 Paleontological Resources 2-185

2.5.2.12 Cultural Resources 2-186

2.5.2.13 Visual Resources 2-187

2.5.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 2-189

2.5.3 Resource Uses 2-189

2.5.3.1 Livestock Grazing 2-189

2.5.3.2 Recreation 2-194

2.5.3.3 Transportation and Travel 2-196

2.5.3.4 Land Use Authorizations 2-199

2.5.3.5 Land Tenure 2-202

2.5.3.6 Minerals 2-205

2.5.4 Special Designations 2-209

2.5.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 2-209

2.5.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 2-212

2.5.4.3 Wilderness 2-213

2.5.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 2-214

2.5.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) 2-215

2.5.5 Social and Economic Features 2-216

2.5.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 2-216
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Table of Contents

TOC-v 

..........................................................................................................

....................................................

..................................................................................................................................

........................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................

...............................................................................................

..............................................................................................................

...................................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

....................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................

.................................................................................

...........................................................................

......................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................

..........................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................

............................................................................

..........................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................

..........................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................

....................................................................................................

.......................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................

............................................................

..........................................................................................

.........................................................................................................................

........................................................................................

.......................................................................................

.................................................................................................

.......................................................................................

..........................................................................................................

....................................................

...................................................................................................................................

........................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................

2.5.5.2 Hazardous Materials 2-216

2.5.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 2-217

2.6 Alternative IV 2-218

2.6.1 Tribal Rights and Interests 2-218

2.6.2 Resources 2-218

2.6.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 2-218

2.6.2.2 Geologic Features 2-219

2.6.2.3 Soil Resources 2-219

2.6.2.4 Water Resources 2-220

2.6.2.5 Vegetation Communities 2-221

2.6.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 2-228

2.6.2.7 Special Status Species 2-231

2.6.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 2-234

2.6.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 2-235

2.6.2.10 Wild Horses 2-240

2.3.2.11 Paleontological Resources 2-241

2.6.2.12 Cultural Resources 2-242

2.6.2.13 Visual Resources 2-243

2.6.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 2-245

2.6.3 Resource Uses 2-246

2.6.3.1 Livestock Grazing 2-246

2.6.3.2 Recreation 2-251

2.6.3.3 Transportation and Travel 2-253

2.6.3.4 Land Use Authorizations 2-256

2.6.3.5 Land Tenure 2-259

2.6.3.6 Minerals 2-261

2.6.4 Special Designations 2-266

2.6.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 2-266

2.6.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 2-272

2.6.4.3 Wilderness 2-274

2.6.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 2-274

2.6.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) 2-275

2.6.5 Social and Economic Features 2-276

2.6.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 2-276

2.6.5.2 Hazardous Materials 2-276

2.6.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 2-277

2.7 Alternative V 2-278

2.7.1 Tribal Rights and Interests 2-278

2.7.2 Resources 2-278
Chapter 2: Table of Contents Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

TOC-vi

...............................................................................................

..............................................................................................................

...................................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

....................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................

.................................................................................

...........................................................................

......................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................

..........................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................

............................................................................

..........................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................

..........................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................

....................................................................................................

.......................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................

............................................................

..........................................................................................

.........................................................................................................................

........................................................................................

.......................................................................................

.................................................................................................

.......................................................................................

..........................................................................................................

....................................................

.....................................................................................................

........................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................................

...............................................................................................

..............................................................................................................

...................................................................................................................

...............................................................................................................

....................................................................................................

2.7.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 2-278

2.7.2.2 Geologic Features 2-279

2.7.2.3 Soil Resources 2-279

2.7.2.4 Water Resources 2-280

2.7.2.5 Vegetation Communities 2-281

2.7.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 2-288

2.7.2.7 Special Status Species 2-291

2.7.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 2-294

2.7.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 2-295

2.7.2.10 Wild Horses 2-300

2.7.2.11 Paleontological Resources 2-301

2.7.2.12 Cultural Resources 2-301

2.7.2.13 Visual Resources 2-303

2.7.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 2-305

2.7.3 Resource Uses 2-305

2.7.3.1 Livestock Grazing 2-305

2.7.3.2 Recreation 2-310

2.7.3.3 Transportation and Travel 2-311

2.7.3.4 Land Use Authorizations 2-314

2.7.3.5 Land Tenure 2-317

2.7.3.6 Minerals 2-319

2.7.4 Special Designations 2-324

2.7.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 2-324

2.7.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 2-328

2.7.4.3 Wilderness 2-329

2.7.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 2-330

2.7.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) 2-331

2.7.5 Social and Economic Features 2-332

2.7.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 2-332

2.7.5.2 Hazardous Materials 2-332

2.7.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 2-333

2.8 Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) 2-334

2.8.1 Tribal Rights and Interests 2-334

2.8.2 Resources 2-334

2.8.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 2-334

2.8.2.2 Geologic Features 2-335

2.8.2.3 Soil Resources 2-335

2.8.2.4 Water Resources 2-336

2.8.2.5 Vegetation Communities 2-337
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Table of Contents

TOC-vii

.................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................

.................................................................................

...........................................................................

......................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................

..........................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................

............................................................................

..........................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................

..........................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................

....................................................................................................

.......................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................

............................................................

..........................................................................................

.........................................................................................................................

........................................................................................

.......................................................................................

.................................................................................................

.......................................................................................

..........................................................................................................

....................................................

...........................................

........................................................................................................

...........................................................................................................

..........................................................................................................................

.....................................................................................................

........................................................................

2.8.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 2-345

2.8.2.7 Special Status Species 2-347

2.8.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 2-350

2.8.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 2-351

2.8.2.10 Wild Horses 2-356

2.8.2.11 Paleontological Resources 2-358

2.8.2.12 Cultural Resources 2-358

2.8.2.13 Visual Resources 2-360

2.8.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 2-362

2.8.3 Resource Uses 2-362

2.8.3.1 Livestock Grazing 2-362

2.8.3.2 Recreation 2-366

2.8.3.3 Transportation and Travel 2-369

2.8.3.4 Land Use Authorizations 2-372

2.8.3.5 Land Tenure 2-375

2.8.3.6 Minerals 2-378

2.8.4 Special Designations 2-383

2.8.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 2-383

2.8.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 2-386

2.8.4.3 Wilderness 2-388

2.8.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 2-388

2.8.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) 2-389

2.8.5 Social and Economic Features 2-390

2.8.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 2-390

2.8.5.2 Hazardous Materials 2-390

2.8.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 2-391

2.9 Monitoring Implementation and Effectiveness of RMP Decisions 2-392

2.9.1 Implementation Monitoring 2-392

2.9.2 Effectiveness Monitoring 2-392

2.10 Summary Tables 2-396

2.10.1 Comparison of Alternatives 2-396

2.10.2 Comparison of Environmental Consequences 2-444
Chapter 2: Table of Contents Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

TOC-viii

...........................................................................................................................

.....................................................................................................................

................................................................................................................

.................................................................

....................................

..................................................................................

.....................................................

List of Tables

Table 2-1. Section Codes 2-2

Table 2-2. Alternative Codes 2-3

Table 2-3. Decision Type Codes 2-3

Table 2-4. Examples of Codes Used in Chapter 2 Alternatives 2-3

Table 2-5. Monitoring Strategy for Assessing Effectiveness of RMP Decisions 2-393

Table 2-6. Summary Comparison of Alternatives 2-396

Table 2-7. Summary Comparison of Environmental Consequences 2-444
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Introduction

How to Read This Chapter

2-1 

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2.1 INTRODUCTION

Chapter 2 discusses the alternatives described and presented in the Draft Resource Management Plan 

(RMP)/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and the Proposed RMP (Alternative VI). Alternative VI 

(Proposed RMP) was derived from elements of other alternatives and incorporates management and 

resource concerns identified during public review of the Draft RMP/EIS, changes in Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) policy and guidance, and recommended clarifications in resource goals, objectives 

and management actions.

Alternatives presented in this chapter provide a complete, reasonable, and different approach to manage 

public land resources and uses. Each alternative includes guidance for achieving desired future 

conditions based on the following components: 

Resource management goals and objectives,

Management actions to meet goals and objectives, and

 Allocations of land and resources to facilitate multiple resource management. 

These components of each alternative are integral in guiding future management of the public land 

resources and resource uses in the planning area.

Seven management alternatives (the No Action Alternative, five “action” alternatives, and Alternative VI

[Proposed RMP]) are presented in detail in this chapter. These alternatives represent reasonable 

approaches to managing resources and uses consistent with law, regulation, and policy. They provide a 

range of management options for achieving the purpose and need, meeting the multiple-use mandate of 

the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, and resolving the planning issues identified in 

Chapter 1:

The No Action Alternative continues to implement management direction contained in the 1987 

Jarbidge RMP and its amendments.

Alternative I focuses on enhancing and sustaining existing and historic uses of the planning area.

Alternative II focuses on increasing commercial uses in the planning area.

Alternative III focuses on restoring the resiliency of ecosystem structure and function through 

intensive management of fuels and enhanced fire suppression capabilities.

Alternative IV focuses on actively restoring the resiliency of ecosystem structure and function through 

restoration projects and managing uses.

Alternative V focuses on the restoration of habitats toward historic vegetation communities using lessintensive methods and more restrictions on uses than Alternative IV.

Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) focuses on actively restoring the resiliency of sagebrush steppe 

ecosystem structure and function through restoration projects and enhanced fire management while 

balancing uses within the planning area.

The Proposed RMP reflects changes or adjustments to the Preferred Alternative based on comments 

received on the Draft RMP/EIS, new information, and changes in BLM policies or priorities. It includes 

aspects of the various alternatives presented in the Draft RMP/EIS.

2.1.1 How to Read This Chapter

Chapter 2 presents alternative management direction for the planning area. The chapter begins with 

introductory materials regarding the development of the alternatives for the Jarbidge RMP/EIS, followed 

by a general narrative description of the alternatives, and a discussion of the alternatives considered but 

eliminated from further detailed analysis. 

The rest of the chapter contains the detailed goals, objectives, allocations, and management actions for 

each alternative. Alternatives are presented in narrative form, separately from the other alternatives in 

order to understand the complete suite of goals, objectives, allocations, and actions specific to an 

alternative. 
Chapter 2: Introduction Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

How to Read This Chapter

2-2 

Each alternative has the same structure. Topics presented fall under five major categories: Tribal Rights 

and Interests, Resources, Resource Uses, Special Designations, and Social and Economic Features. 

Sections under these categories identify the specific topics being addressed (e.g., cultural resources, 

livestock grazing, National Historic Trails). Each alternative includes the goals, objectives, allocations, 

and management actions that are common to all alternatives, common to the action alternatives, and 

specific to that alternative. 

Guidance for a specific resource, use, or designation is generally provided in the corresponding section; 

however, additional plan direction may also be included under another section. For this reason, any 

management direction contained within an alternative would apply to any future proposed action or 

activity, regardless of the organizational heading under which it appears in this document. For example, a 

special designation may contain restrictions related to livestock grazing. These restrictions may not 

necessarily be represented in the livestock grazing section, but would still apply to any future livestock 

grazing actions in that designation. 

The intent of any reference in the alternatives to regulations or policy is that BLM would follow regulations 

or policies in place at the time implementation actions are taken.

Each goal, objective, allocation, and management action in Chapter 2 of the Final EIS was assigned a 

reference code. Codes are broken into four components for easy identification of the section, alternative, 

decision type, and order of appearance in the document. 

The first component of the reference code is used to identify the section. The codes and their 

corresponding sections are identified in Table 2-1. The information is presented in the same order for 

each alternative.

Table 2-1. Section Codes

CodeA Section

TI Tribal Rights and Interests

AAV Air and Atmospheric Values

GE Geologic Features

SR Soil Resources

WR Water Resources

UV Upland Vegetation

RI Riparian Areas and Wetlands

FI Fish

WI Wildlife

SS Special Status Species

NW Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants

WFM Wildland Fire Management

FE Fuels and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation (ES&BAR)

WH Wild Horses

PR Paleontological Resources

CR Cultural Resources

VR Visual Resources

WC Lands with Wilderness Characteristics

LG Livestock Grazing

REC Recreation

TR Transportation and Travel

LA Land Use Authorizations

LT Land Tenure

LE Leasable Minerals

SA Salable Minerals

LO Locatable Minerals

ACEC Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs)
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Introduction

How to Read This Chapter

2-3 

CodeA Section

NHT National Historic Trails (NHTs)

WSR Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs)

WSA Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) 

WD Wilderness

SE Social and Economic Features

HM Hazardous Materials

IOE Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education A The codes are presented in the order in which they appear in this chapter.

The second component of the reference code identifies whether the item is common to all alternatives, 

common to the action alternatives, or specific to an alternative. The codes and their corresponding 

alternatives are identified in Table 2-2.

Table 2-2. Alternative Codes

Code Alternative

NA Management Specific to the No Action Alternative

C Management Common to the No Action Alternative and All Action Alternatives

CA Management Common to All Action Alternatives

I Management Specific to Alternative I

II Management Specific to Alternative II

III Management Specific to Alternative III

IV Management Specific to Alternative IV 

V Management Specific to Alternative V

VI Management Specific to Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) 

The third component of the code identifies the decision type. The codes and their corresponding decision 

type are identified in Table 2.3. In some cases, a goal and objective are combined and coded as “G”.

Table 2-3. Decision Type Codes 

Code Decision Type

G Goal

O Objective

A Allocation

MA Management Action

The fourth component of the code identifies the order in which the item appears within a section, 

alternative, and decision type. Sequential numbering is used for this section. Examples illustrating the 

coding system are provided in Table 2-4. 

Table 2-4. Examples of Codes Used in Chapter 2 Alternatives.

Code Section Alternative Decision Type Order of Appearance

UV-I-MA-6 Upland Vegetation Alternative I Management 

Action

6th Management Action 

for Upland Vegetation 

specific to Alternative I

SS-IV-O-1 Special Status 

Species Alternative IV Objective

1st Objective for 

Special Status Species 

in Alternative IV

LG-CA-MA-4 Livestock Grazing

Management 

Common to 

All Action 

Alternatives

Management 

Action

4th Management Action 

in Livestock Grazing 

that is Common to All 

Action Alternatives
Chapter 2: Introduction Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Alternative Development Process

2-4 

Code Section Alternative Decision Type Order of Appearance

WSA-NA-G-1 Wilderness Study 

Areas

No Action 

Alternative Goal

1st Goal for Wilderness 

Study Areas in the No 

Action Alternative 

Some management actions reference the use of toolboxes. A “toolbox” is a set of allowable uses or 

management actions (e.g., treatment options) that can be used to achieve objectives without being too 

prescriptive. Components of toolboxes vary by alternative because some “tools” may be inconsistent with 

the ultimate management goals set out in a particular alternative. 

Chapter 2 ends with tables summarizing the general differences between alternatives. Table 2-5 provides

a side-by-side comparison of the goals, objectives, and allocations of the alternatives by topic. Table 2-6 

summarizes the impacts resulting from implementation of each alternative. The effects of the various 

management actions in each alternative are discussed in detail in the environmental consequences 

section presented in Chapter 4.

Acreages used in the alternatives are approximate and serve for comparison and analytic purposes only. 

Data from a geographic information system have been used in developing acreage calculations and are 

rounded to the nearest 1,000 acres, except in the Upland Vegetation sections which are rounded to the 

nearest 2,500 acres. Readers should not infer that they reflect exact measurements or precise 

calculations.

2.1.2 Alternative Development Process

BLM complied with the National Environmental Protection Act of 1969 (NEPA) requirements in developing 

alternatives for this Proposed RMP/Final EIS, by seeking public input and analyzing an adequate range of 

alternatives, including the No Action Alternative. Alternative formulation took into consideration existing 

decisions in the 1987 Jarbidge RMP and its amendments, the 2001 Jarbidge RMP evaluation, the 

Stipulated Settlement Agreement (SSA) in the case of Western Watersheds Project v. Ellis et al., (Case 

No. CV-04-181-S-BLW) (D. Idaho), and issues and concerns developed internally and solicited from the 

public during scoping. 

Some decisions from the 1987 Jarbidge RMP that are still relevant, acceptable, and reasonable were 

included into one or more of the action alternatives. However, in most cases, the alternatives included 

management options for the planning area that would modify or revise decisions made in the 1987 

Jarbidge RMP, in order to meet the planning criteria, to address issues and comments from tribes, 

cooperating agencies, and the public, to meet the purpose and need, or to provide a range of alternatives. 

Some management prescriptions are the same across all alternatives or reflect only a decision to 

implement or not implement an action. Each action alternative represents a complete multi-resource land 

use plan to achieve the purpose and need and guide future management of the public land resources and 

uses in the planning area.

Public input received during the scoping process was considered to ensure that all issues and concerns 

would be addressed, as appropriate, in developing the alternatives. The scoping process and its results, 

as well as other opportunities for public involvement, are summarized in Chapters 1 and 5.The 

development of alternatives began with compiling the No Action Alternative. To begin developing action 

alternatives, the BLM and cooperating agency representatives met in a series of workshops to share their 

respective knowledge and expertise and to collaborate to identify goals and objectives for the resources 

and uses in the planning area. Common themes emerged from the lists of goals and objectives 

developed; these themes formed the basis of eight conceptual alternatives. In a second series of 

workshops, the BLM and cooperating agency representatives expanded on the goals and objectives to 

develop more detailed management direction for each conceptual alternative. Following this process, 

BLM determined three of the conceptual alternatives could be eliminated from detailed study as standalone alternatives because they either lacked focus, did not address the planning issues or purpose and 

need, or were too similar to other conceptual alternatives. The reasonable components of these 

alternatives were incorporated into at least one of the other five conceptual alternatives.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Introduction

Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

2-5 

•

•

•

Alternatives I through V were finalized and reviewed as preliminary alternatives by the tribes, cooperating 

agencies, counties, the Twin Falls District Resource Advisory Council (RAC), the parties to the SSA, and 

the public through workshops hosted by the RAC. The preliminary alternatives were then refined based 

on the feedback received as well as changes in the planning area resulting from the 2007 Murphy 

Complex Fires, which occurred during the review process and burned 31% of BLM-managed lands in the 

planning area. As a result of the review process, the similarity between two alternatives became 

apparent, so the components of each were merged into one alternative; this alternative was later split into 

two sub-alternatives differing in Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) acreage and associated 

management (Alternative IV). A new alternative was added to respond to the array of concerns expressed 

following the Murphy Complex Fires (Alternative III). The focus and content of the remaining alternatives 

were refined based on the comments received. These comments included four additional alternatives 

submitted by the public. Many components of these four alternatives were already included in a 

preliminary alternative; some components were beyond the range BLM considered reasonable. As a 

result, these alternatives were not analyzed as stand-alone alternatives. These four alternatives are 

described in more detail in the section Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Detailed 

Analysis. This alternative development process resulted in five action alternatives, one with two 

variations, as well as the No Action Alternative for the Draft RMP/EIS. 

Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) was developed after the Draft RMP/EIS was published and comments 

were received and reviewed by the BLM. The Proposed RMP was developed to provide a practical and 

workable alternative to actively restore sagebrush steppe ecosystem structure, function, and resiliency 

through restoration treatments and enhanced fire management. Although Alternative IV-B (Preferred 

Alternative) from the Draft RMP/EIS was used as the baseline, the BLM selected goals, objectives, and 

management actions from the other alternatives that integrated ecological, economic, and social 

principles in a manner that safeguards the long-term sustainability, diversity, and productivity of the land.

Management actions were then refined based on analysis of the alternatives in the Draft RMP and 

feedback received through comments from the tribes; Federal, State, and county agencies; the public; 

and organizations. The BLM also incorporated into the Proposed RMP changes in laws, regulations, 

policy, and species status species that occurred between the Draft RMP/EIS and the Proposed 

RMP/Final EIS. 

2.1.3 Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

The major features of the No Action Alternative, the five action alternatives, and Alternative VI (Proposed 

RMP) are summarized below. These alternative summaries focus on how the alternatives address the 

planning issues described in Chapter 1.

2.1.3.1 No Action Alternative

The No Action Alternative continues to implement the objectives and management actions provided in the 

1987 Jarbidge RMP and its amendments, but includes measures to comply with new legislation and 

policies, where appropriate. Lands in poor ecological condition would be improved, while lands in good 

and excellent ecological condition would be maintained. Vegetation treatments could use native or nonnative species. The majority of the planning area would remain available for resource uses, including 

livestock grazing, and land use authorizations. Cross-country motorized vehicle use would remain open in 

the majority of Elmore and Twin Falls Counties but would be limited to existing routes in Owyhee County.

Fuels and Fire

Fuels treatments would include restoration, fuel breaks, and noxious weed treatments within and 

outside the Wildland Urban Interface.

Prescribed fires may be reduced, postponed, or cancelled in areas where they, in combination with 

recent burns, would cause significant cumulative impacts to wildlife or watershed conditions.

The entire planning area would remain a full suppression area (1,371,000 acres).
Chapter 2: Introduction Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

2-6 

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Habitat

 A limited number of upland vegetation treatments would focus on maintaining or improving wildlife 

habitat, especially habitat for big game, greater sage-grouse (sage-grouse), and upland game birds. 

Riparian areas would be managed to improve riparian condition and fish habitat in Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area (WSA), Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, Inside Desert , 

Devil Creek, and the Jarbidge Foothills.

Strategies to address noxious weeds and invasive plants would focus on control.

Livestock Grazing

Most upland vegetation treatments would focus on maintaining or improving vegetation for livestock 

grazing.

The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing. Areas not contained within 

grazing allotments would not be available for livestock grazing (51,000 acres). 

Two hundred thousand (200,000) animal unit months would be allocated for livestock use at initial

implementation. 

Between 160,000 and 260,000 AUMs would be allocated for livestock use at full implementation.

Livestock grazing systems and practices that recognize the physiological requirements of forbs and 

shrubs and that meet fisheries, riparian, and water quality needs would be designed and established. 

Recreation

Bruneau-Jarbidge, Hagerman-Owsley Bridge, Jarbidge Forks, Oregon Trail, and Salmon Falls Creek 

would be managed as Special Recreation Management Areas (86,000 acres total). 

The majority of Elmore and Twin Falls Counties in the planning area would remain open to crosscountry motorized vehicle use; however, motorized vehicle use would be limited to existing routes in 

Owyhee County. Transportation and travel would be limited to designated routes on 751,000 acres. A

seasonal limitation on travel within big game winter range could be invoked if the Idaho Department of 

Fish and Game determines harassment of wintering big game is occurring. Lower Salmon Falls 

Creek WSA, Salmon Falls Creek Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), and some cultural 

resource sites would be closed to motorized vehicle use (3,000 acres). The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers 

Wilderness would be closed to motorized and mechanized use (60,000 acres).

Energy Development

Right-of-way (ROW) avoidance/restricted areas would include US Air Force Military Operating Areas; 

Sand Point ACEC, portions of Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC; Dove Springs; the Oregon Trail; the eligible, 

suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; Salmon Falls Creek Canyon; 

paleontological sites; and cultural resource complexes (935,000 acres). 

ROW exclusion areas would include Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and Lower Salmon Falls 

Creek WSA (62,000 acres).

Wind farms and other energy developments would be considered throughout the planning area, 

consistent with ROW avoidance/restricted areas and outside ROW exclusion areas. 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern

The Bruneau-Jarbidge, Salmon Falls Creek, and Sand Point areas would be managed as ACECs 

(89,000 acres total).

2.1.3.2 Alternative I

Alternative I focuses on enhancing and sustaining existing and historic uses of the planning area. This 

alternative would have the largest component of active recreation management, including Special 

Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) for motorized recreation, hunting and fishing, hiking, and waterbased recreation. Livestock grazing would be maintained near current forage allocation levels. This 

alternative would focus on implementing management to benefit mule deer more than the other 

alternatives. Restoration projects would focus on providing habitat for mule deer and special status 

species, including treatments in some non-native perennial communities. Annual communities would also 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Introduction

Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

2-7 

•

•

o

o

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

o

o

o

o

o

•

•

•

be a focus for vegetation treatments. Vegetation treatments could use native or non-native species 

depending on vegetation objectives. Reducing the amount of wildland fire in the planning area would be 

addressed through treatments to move vegetation toward Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) 1, 

treatments for noxious weeds and invasive plants, and construction of fuel breaks.

Fuels and Fire

Fuels treatments within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) would focus on areas with high and 

high/moderate relative risk ratings in the northern portion of the planning area.

Fuels treatments outside the WUI would include restoration, fuel breaks, and noxious weed 

treatments.

Restoration would focus on moving plant communities toward FRCC 1. 

Outside SRMAs, fuel breaks would follow disturbance corridors; fuel breaks for SRMAs could be 

used to protect surrounding areas, facilities, and high-use areas.

Noxious weed treatments would focus on special designations, access points, riparian areas, 

special status species habitat, mule deer winter range, roadsides, and native plant communities.

The toolbox for reducing fuels, treating noxious weeds and invasive plants, or otherwise restoring or 

treating upland vegetation communities would include: chemical, mechanical, and biological 

treatments; seeding and planting; and targeted grazing. Prescribed fire would not be allowed. 

Temporary fences could be considered when there are at least 2,000 unburned acres in a pasture; 

they would be removed once Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation objectives 

have been met.

Critical suppression areas would include WUI; the Bruneau-Jarbidge, Lower Bruneau Canyon, Middle 

Snake, and Salmon Falls Creek Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs); and key sagegrouse habitat (491,000 acres).

Habitat

Upland vegetation treatments would include actively restoring native and non-native perennial 

communities in big game and sage-grouse habitat, as well as converting annual communities to 

perennial communities. 

Riparian areas would be managed to maintain proper functioning condition (PFC) on 85 miles of 

streams, achieve PFC on an additional 60 miles of streams, and be moving toward PFC on the 

remaining streams; within the priorities identified in the Aquatic and Riparian Management Strategy 

(Appendix D), streams with habitat suitable for game fish would have priority for restoration.

Strategies to address noxious weeds and invasive plants would include measures for both prevention 

and control. 

Livestock Grazing

A limited number of treatments to actively maintain non-native perennial communities for livestock 

would be implemented.

The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing. The following areas would 

not be available for livestock grazing (85,000 acres): 

 Canyons associated with the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers and Salmon Falls Creek (below the 

dam), 

 Portions of the Middle Snake ACEC, 

 Reference areas,

Wildlife tracts,

 Areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use, and

 Areas not contained within grazing allotments. 

Between 189,000 and 259,000 animal unit months (AUMs) would be allocated for livestock use at 

initial implementation. 

Between 179,000 and 245,000 AUMs would be allocated for livestock use at full implementation.

Twenty five to thirty five percent of native perennial grass production, 30% to 40% of non-native 

perennial grass production, 20% to 30% of annual grass production, and 8% to 11% of shrub and forb 

production would be allocated for livestock use.
Chapter 2: Introduction Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

2-8 

• 1

•

1

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

In native plant communities, except the Sandberg/non-native areas , livestock grazing would be 

managed to maintain and improve native plant species diversity and abundance.

Communities where native Sandberg bluegrass is the dominant cover but non-native perennials dominate

production are referred to as Sandberg/non-native perennial areas. 

In non-native plant communities, including Sandberg/non-native areas, livestock grazing would be 

managed to maintain and improve perennial plant species diversity and abundance, taking into 

account big game habitat needs.

Recreation

The Balanced Rock, Canyonlands, Deadman/Yahoo, Jarbidge Forks, Jarbidge Foothills, Little 

Pilgrim, and Salmon Falls Reservoir SRMAs would be designated (326,000 acres total).

Transportation and travel within the majority of the planning area would be limited to designated 

routes. Areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use would include designated play areas in the 

Deadman/Yahoo SRMA (4,000 acres). Salmon Falls Creek ACEC, and Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics would be closed to motorized vehicle use 

(54,000 acres). The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized and 

mechanized use (60,000 acres).

Energy Development

Right-of-way (ROW) avoidance areas would include US Air Force Military Operating Areas; the 

Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone; eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic 

River (WSR) corridors; Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness 

characteristics; and the Bruneau-Jarbidge and Salmon Falls Creek ACECs (1,001,000 acres).

ROW exclusion areas would include the Sand Point ACEC, Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness 

Study Area, and Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness (63,000 acres).

Wind farms and other energy developments would be considered in areas that have already been 

converted from native communities to annual, non-native perennial or non-native understory 

communities, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and outside ROW exclusion 

areas.

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs)

The Sand Point, Middle Snake, Bruneau-Jarbidge, Salmon Falls Creek, and Lower Bruneau Canyon 

ACECs would be designated (97,000 acres total).

2.1.3.3 Alternative II

Alternative II focuses on increasing commercial uses throughout most of the planning area. Livestock 

grazing would be increased substantially. Non-native perennial communities would be actively maintained 

for livestock, and treatments in non-native annual communities would focus on converting these areas to 

a non-native, more fire tolerant, forage-producing perennial community. Native plant communities would 

be maintained. Other commercial uses, including energy development, would be allowed throughout most

areas and have the fewest restrictions compared to the other alternatives. Vegetation treatments could 

use native or non-native species depending on vegetation and resource use objectives. Reducing the 

amount of wildland fire in the planning area would be addressed through treatments to move native 

vegetation toward Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) 1, treatments for noxious weeds and invasive 

plants, construction of fuel breaks, and fuels reduction through increased permitted livestock grazing.

Fuels and Fire

Fuels treatments within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) would focus on areas with high, 

high/moderate, and moderate relative risk ratings in the northern portion of the planning area and 

near Roseworth.

Fuels treatments outside the WUI would include restoration, fuel breaks, landscape-scale fuels 

reduction, and noxious weed treatments.

Restoration would focus on moving native plant communities toward FRCC 1. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Introduction

Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

2-9 

o

o

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

o

o

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Fuel breaks would focus on protecting commercial facilities; fuel breaks would also be placed in 

non-native communities to protect native communities. 

Landscape-scale fuels reduction would occur primarily through increased allocation of vegetation 

for permitted livestock grazing and through increased livestock grazing utilization.

Noxious weed treatments would focus on riparian areas, special status species habitat, and 

native plant communities.

The toolbox for reducing fuels, treating noxious weeds and invasive plants, or otherwise restoring or 

treating upland vegetation communities would include: chemical, mechanical, and biological 

treatments; seeding and planting; targeted grazing; and prescribed fire. Prescribed fire would not be 

allowed in native grassland or native shrubland communities. 

Temporary fences could be considered on a case-by-case basis; they could become permanent if 

they enhance management of the burned area.

Critical suppression areas would only include the WUI (170,000 acres).

Habitat

A limited amount of restoration in native plant communities would be implemented, focusing on 

special status species habitat. 

Riparian areas would be managed to maintain 85 miles at properly functioning condition (PFC) and 

be moving toward PFC on the remaining streams; within the priorities identified within the Aquatic and 

Riparian Management Strategy (Appendix D), fish-bearing streams would have priority for restoration.

Strategies to address noxious weeds and invasive plants include measures for both prevention and 

control. 

Livestock Grazing

Upland vegetation treatments would focus on increasing non-native perennial communities for 

livestock and converting annual communities to non-native perennial.

The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing. The following areas would 

not be available for livestock grazing (59,000 acres): 

 Canyons associated with the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers and Salmon Falls Creek (below the 

dam), 

 Reference areas, 

Wildlife tracts, and

 Areas not contained within grazing allotments.

Between 350,000 and 423,000 animal unit months (AUMs) would be allocated for livestock use at 

initial implementation. 

Between 362,000 and 440,000 AUMs would be allocated for livestock use at full implementation.

Forty to fifty percent of native perennial grass production, 50% to 60% of non-native perennial grass 

production, 70% to 80% of annual grass production, and 12% to 16% of shrub and forb production 

would be allocated for livestock use.

In native plant communities, except the Sandberg/non-native areas, livestock grazing would be 

managed to maintain and improve native plant species diversity and abundance.

In non-native plant communities, livestock grazing would be managed to sustain the forage base and 

allow for other commercial uses.

Recreation

The Jarbidge Forks, Little Pilgrim, and Salmon Falls Reservoir Special Recreation Management 

Areas would be designated (7,000 acres total).

Transportation and travel in the majority of the planning area would be limited to designated routes. 

No areas would be open to cross-country motorized vehicle use. The Lower Salmon Falls Creek 

Wilderness Study Area (WSA) would be closed to motorized vehicle use (2,000 acres). The BruneauJarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized and mechanized use (60,000 acres).
Chapter 2: Introduction Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

2-10

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

o

o

o

•

•

•

•

Energy Development

Right-of-way (ROW) avoidance areas would include US Air Force Military Operating Areas; the 

Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone; and eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic

River corridors (1,001,000 acres).

ROW exclusion areas would include Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA and Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers 

Wilderness (62,000 acres).

Wind farms and other energy developments would be considered throughout the planning area, 

consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and outside ROW exclusion areas. 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs)

No ACECs would be designated.

2.1.3.4 Alternative III

Alternative III focuses on restoring the resiliency of ecosystem structure and function through intensive 

management of fuels and enhanced fire suppression capabilities throughout the planning area. This 

alternative would provide for the highest amount of fuels treatments. Non-native perennial plant 

communities would be actively managed to contribute to wildland fire prevention and suppression efforts; 

this management would include increased levels of permitted livestock grazing. Treatments of annual 

communities would focus on converting these areas to non-native perennial fire-tolerant communities. 

Native plant communities would be restored to move toward their historic fire regime; extensive fuels 

reduction measures may be taken to manage native plant communities. Vegetation treatments may use 

both native and non-native species, with fire-tolerant and fire-resistant species having a high priority. 

Other uses would be allowed to the extent they do not contribute to an increase in wildland fire size and 

intensity. The quality and quantity of infrastructure such as roads and water would be increased to 

support fire suppression activities more in this alternative than in other alternatives.

Fuels and Fire

Fuels treatments within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) would focus on areas with high, 

high/moderate, and moderate relative risk ratings in the northern portion of the planning area and 

near Roseworth and Three Creek.

Fuels treatments outside the WUI would include restoration, fuel breaks, landscape-scale fuels 

reduction, and noxious weed treatments.

Restoration would focus on moving native plant communities toward Fire Regime Condition Class

1. 

Fuel breaks would focus on strategic locations to disrupt the continuity of fuels and to protect 

important resources and structures. 

Landscape-scale fuels reduction would occur primarily in annual and non-native perennial 

communities through increased allocation of vegetation for permitted livestock grazing and 

through increased livestock grazing utilization.

Noxious weed treatments would focus on special designations, fuel breaks, areas with high 

wildland fire occurrence, areas around historic structures, roadsides, and special status species 

habitat.

The toolbox for reducing fuels, treating noxious weeds and invasive plants, or otherwise restoring or 

treating upland vegetation communities would include: chemical, mechanical, and biological 

treatments; seeding and planting; targeted grazing; and prescribed fire.

Temporary fences could be considered on a case-by-case basis; they would be removed once 

Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation objectives have been met.

Critical suppression areas would include the WUI; the Bruneau-Jarbidge and Salmon Falls Creek 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs); and key sage-grouse habitat (476,000 acres).

Habitat

Upland vegetation treatments would focus on treatments that would reduce fuels, convert annual 

communities to perennial, and restore native grassland communities to native shrubland, focusing on 

special status species habitat. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Introduction

Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

2-11

•

•

•

•

o

o

o

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Riparian areas would be managed to maintain 85 miles of streams at properly functioning condition 

(PFC), achieve PFC on an additional 98 miles of streams, and be moving toward PFC on the 

remaining streams; within the priorities identified in the Aquatic and Riparian Management Strategy 

(Appendix D), streams with the potential to serve as fire breaks would have priority for restoration.

Strategies to address noxious weeds and invasive plants include measures for both prevention and 

control.

Livestock Grazing

Non-native perennial communities would not be actively maintained for livestock. 

The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing. The following areas would 

not be available for livestock grazing (62,000 acres): 

 Canyons associated with the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers and Salmon Falls Creek (below the 

dam), 

 Reference areas, 

Wildlife tracts, and

 Areas not contained within grazing allotments.

Between 273,000 and 344,000 animal unit months (AUMs) would be allocated for livestock use at 

initial implementation. 

Between 276,000 and 348,000 AUMs would be allocated for livestock use at full implementation.

Thirty five to forty five percent of native perennial grass production, 40% to 50% of non-native 

perennial grass production, 40% to 50% of annual grass production, and 11% to 14% of shrub and 

forb production would be allocated for livestock use.

In native plant communities, including the Sandberg/non-native areas, livestock grazing would be 

managed to maintain and improve native plant species diversity and abundance.

In non-native plant communities, livestock grazing would be managed to reduce fuels.

Recreation

The Balanced Rock, Deadman/Yahoo, Jarbidge Forks, Little Pilgrim, and Salmon Falls Reservoir 

Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) would be designated (42,000 acres total).

Transportation and travel in the majority of the planning area would be limited to designated routes. 

Areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use would include designated play areas in the 

Deadman/Yahoo SRMA (4,000 acres). Salmon Falls Creek ACEC would be closed to motorized 

vehicle use (3,000 acres). The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized 

and mechanized use (60,000 acres).

Energy Development

Right-of-way (ROW) avoidance areas would include US Air Force Military Operating Areas; the 

Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone; eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic 

River corridors; and the Bruneau-Jarbidge and Salmon Falls Creek ACECs (1,001,000 acres).

ROW exclusion areas would include the Sand Point ACEC and Lower Salmon Falls Creek 

Wilderness Study Area and Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness (63,000 acres).

Wind farms and other energy developments would be considered in areas that have already been 

converted from native communities to annual, non-native perennial, or non-native understory 

communities, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and outside ROW exclusion 

areas.

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs)

The Bruneau-Jarbidge, Salmon Falls Creek, and Sand Point ACECs would be designated (61,000 

acres total).

2.1.3.5 Alternative IV 

Alternative IV focuses on actively restoring the resiliency of ecosystem structure and function through 

restoration projects and managing uses. Priorities would be to treat at-risk or fragmented habitats and 
Chapter 2: Introduction Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

2-12

•

•

o

o

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

o

o

o

o

•

non-native perennial and annual communities. This alternative would provide for active restoration using 

more tools and more intensive approaches in more areas than in Alternative V. Vegetation treatments 

could use native or non-native species depending on vegetation objectives. Reducing the amount of 

wildland fire in the planning area would be addressed through treatments to move vegetation toward Fire 

Regime Condition Class (FRCC) 1, treatments for noxious weeds and invasive plants, and construction of 

fuel breaks.

Alternative IV has been split into two sub-alternatives. The only difference between the sub-alternatives is 

the size of the Inside Desert and Jarbidge Foothills Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs); 

these ACECs would have larger boundaries in Alternative IV-A than in Alternative IV-B. Differences 

between Alternatives IV-A and IV-B also appear in sections in which ACEC management is a factor. 

Fuels and Fire

Fuels treatments within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) would focus on areas with high and 

high/moderate relative risk ratings in the northern portion of the planning area.

Fuels treatments outside the WUI would include restoration, fuel breaks, and noxious weed 

treatments.

Restoration would focus on moving plant communities toward FRCC 1. 

Fuel breaks would follow disturbance corridors. 

Noxious weed treatments would focus on special designations, riparian areas, special status 

species habitat, and native plant communities.

The toolbox for reducing fuels, treating noxious weeds and invasive plants, or otherwise restoring or 

treating upland vegetation communities would include: chemical, mechanical, and biological 

treatments; seeding and planting; targeted grazing; and prescribed fire. 

Temporary fences could be considered when there are at least 2,000 unburned acres in a pasture; 

they would be removed once Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation objectives 

have been met.

Critical suppression areas would include the WUI; the Bruneau-Jarbidge, Inside Desert, Jarbidge 

Foothills, and Lower Bruneau Canyon ACECs; and key sage-grouse habitat (594,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 552,000 acres in Alternative IV-B).

Habitat

Upland vegetation treatments would focus on restoring non-native perennial and native grassland 

communities to native shrubland and converting annual communities, focusing on special status 

species, mule deer, and pronghorn habitat. 

Riparian areas would be managed to maintain 85 miles of streams at properly functioning condition 

(PFC), achieve PFC on an additional 98 miles of streams, and be moving toward PFC on the 

remaining streams; within the priorities identified in the Aquatic and Riparian Management Strategy 

(Appendix D), streams containing special status species habitat would have priority for restoration.

Strategies to address noxious weeds and invasive plants include measures for both prevention and 

control.

Livestock Grazing

Non-native perennial communities would not be actively maintained for livestock. 

The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing. The following areas would 

not be available for livestock grazing (145,000 acres in Alternative IV-A and 114,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B): 

Canyons or riparian corridors associated with the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers and the following 

creeks: Deer (NV), Dave, Rocky Canyon, and Salmon Falls;

Inside Desert ACEC;

Wildlife tracts;

Reference areas; and

Areas not contained within grazing allotments. 

Between 94,000 and 147,000 animal unit months (AUMs) would be allocated for livestock use in 

Alternative IV-A and between 97,000 and 151,000 AUMs in Alternative IV-B at initial implementation. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Introduction

Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

2-13

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

o

Between 78,000 and 123,000 AUMs would be allocated for livestock use in Alternative IV-A and 

between 81,000 and 127,000 AUMs in Alternative IV-B at full implementation.

Fifteen to twenty five percent of native perennial grass production and 20% to 30% of non-native 

perennial grass production would be allocated for livestock use.

In native plant communities, including the Sandberg/non-native areas, livestock grazing would be 

managed to maintain and improve native plant species diversity and abundance.

In non-native plant communities, livestock grazing would be managed to achieve restoration 

objectives.

Recreation

The Canyonlands, Deadman/Yahoo, Jarbidge Forks, and Salmon Falls Reservoir Special Recreation 

Management Areas (SRMAs) would be designated (190,000 acres total).

Transportation and travel in the majority of the planning area would be limited to designated routes. 

Areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use would include designated play areas in the 

Deadman/Yahoo SRMA (4,000 acres). Salmon Falls Creek ACEC and Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics would be closed to motorized vehicle use 

(38,000 acres). The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized and 

mechanized use (60,000 acres).

Energy Development

 Right-of-way (ROW) avoidance areas would include US Air Force Military Operating Areas; the 

Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone; eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic 

River corridors; and the Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC (1,001,000 acres).

ROW exclusion areas would include the Sand Point ACEC, Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness 

Study Area, Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, and Lands with Wilderness Characteristics

managed for their wilderness characteristics (100,000 acres).

Wind farms and other energy developments would be considered in areas that have already been 

converted from native communities to annual, non-native perennial, or non-native understory 

communities, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and outside ROW exclusion 

areas.

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs)

The Bruneau-Jarbidge, Inside Desert, Jarbidge Foothills, Lower Bruneau Canyon, and Sand Point

ACECs would be designated (330,000 acres total in Alternative IV-A; 230,000 acres total in 

Alternative IV-B).

2.1.3.6 Alternative V 

Alternative V focuses on the restoration of habitats toward historic vegetation communities. In native plant 

communities, passive restoration approaches would be preferred. Active restoration would take place in 

non-native perennial and annual communities; treatments in non-native perennial communities would 

minimize soil disturbance. Restoration projects would focus on habitat for sage-grouse and other special 

status species as well as special designations. Vegetation treatments would use only native species. 

Reducing the amount of wildland fire in the planning area would be addressed through treatments to 

move vegetation toward Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) 1, treatments for noxious weeds and 

invasive plants, and construction of fuel breaks.

Fuels and Fire

Fuels treatments within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) would focus on areas with high relative 

risk ratings in the northern portion of the planning area.

Fuels treatments outside the WUI would include restoration, fuel breaks, and noxious weed 

treatments.

Restoration would focus on moving plant communities toward FRCC 1. 

Fuel breaks would follow designated roads and designated primitive roads. 
Chapter 2: Introduction Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

2-14

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

o

o

o

o

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Noxious weed treatments would focus on special designations, riparian areas, special status 

species habitat, and native plant communities.

The toolbox for reducing fuels, treating noxious weeds and invasive plants, or otherwise restoring or 

treating upland vegetation communities would include: chemical, mechanical, and biological 

treatments; seeding and planting; removal of grazing; and prescribed fire. Chemical treatments could 

only be used after all other methods have been exhausted. Targeted grazing would not be allowed.

Temporary fences would not be allowed.

Critical suppression areas would include the WUI; the Lower Bruneau Canyon, Middle Snake, and 

Sagebrush Sea Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs); and key sage-grouse habitat 

(1,041,000 acres).

Habitat

Upland vegetation treatments would focus on restoring annual communities to native shrubland and 

restoring a shrub component to non-native perennial and native grassland communities, focusing on 

special status species habitat. 

Riparian areas would be managed to maintain properly functioning condition (PFC) on 85 miles of 

streams, achieve PFC on an additional 98 miles of streams, and be moving toward PFC on the 

remaining streams; within the priorities identified in the Aquatic and Riparian Management Strategy

(Appendix D), streams containing special status species habitat would have priority for restoration.

Strategies to address noxious weeds and invasive plants include measures for both prevention and 

control.

Livestock Grazing

Vegetation treatments would not include active maintenance of non-native perennial communities for 

livestock.

The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing. The following areas would 

not be available for livestock grazing (310,000 acres): 

Canyons or riparian corridors associated with the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers and the following 

creeks: Upper Cedar, Deer (ID), Deer (NV), Clover, Rocky Canyon, Flat, Shack, Dave, China, 

and Salmon Falls; 

Middle Snake, Sand Point, and Lower Bruneau Canyon ACECs; 

The Brown's Bench/China Mountain area; 

Wildlife tracts; 

Reference areas; and

Areas not contained within grazing allotments.

Between 46,000 and 93,000 animal unit months (AUMs) would be allocated for livestock use at initial 

implementation. 

Between 42,000 and 85,000 AUMs would be allocated for livestock use at full implementation.

Ten to twenty percent of native and 10 to 20% of non-native perennial grass production would be 

allocated to livestock.

In native plant communities, including the Sandberg/non-native areas, livestock grazing would be 

managed to maintain and improve native plant species diversity and abundance.

In non-native plant communities, livestock grazing would be managed to maintain and improve shrub 

cover for sage-grouse.

Recreation

The Jarbidge Forks and Yahoo Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) would be 

designated (5,000 acres total).

Transportation and travel in the majority of the planning area would be limited to designated routes. 

Areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use would include designated play areas in the Yahoo 

SRMA (1,000 acres). Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area (WSA) and Lands with 

Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics would be closed to motorized 

vehicle use (106,000 acres). The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized 

and mechanized use (60,000 acres).
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Introduction

Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

2-15

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

o

o

o

•

•

•

Energy Development

Right-of-way (ROW) avoidance areas would include US Air Force Military Operating Areas; the 

Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone; eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic 

River corridors; and the Sagebrush Sea ACEC (1,227,000 acres).

ROW exclusion areas would include the Sand Point ACEC, Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA, 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, and Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their 

wilderness characteristics (167,000 acres).

Wind farms and other energy developments would be considered in areas that have already been 

converted from native communities to annual, non-native perennial, or non-native understory 

communities, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and outside ROW exclusion 

areas.

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs)

The Lower Bruneau Canyon, Middle Snake, Sagebrush Sea, and Sand Point ACECs would be 

designated (966,000 acres total).

2.1.3.7 Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) focuses on actively restoring the resiliency of sagebrush steppe 

ecosystem structure and function through restoration projects and enhanced fire management while 

balancing resource protection and uses within the planning area. Vegetation treatments could use native 

or non-native species, depending on vegetation objectives. Upland vegetation treatments would focus on 

restoring non-native perennial and native grassland communities to native shrubland, focusing on 

restoring and connecting habitat for sage-grouse, slickspot peppergrass, other special status species, 

and big game. Alternative VI emphasizes reducing the extent and number of wildland fires through 

treatments to move vegetation toward Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) 1, treatments for noxious 

weeds and invasive plants, and construction of fuel breaks. Commercial uses, including energy 

development, would be allowed, but would be subject to the greatest restrictions within sage-grouse 

habitat as compared to the other alternatives. More public land would be retained in Alternative VI than 

the other alternatives. Transportation and travel in the majority of the planning area would be limited to 

designated routes except for designated play areas in the Deadman and Yahoo Special Recreation 

Management Areas (SRMAs). The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized 

and mechanized uses.

Fuels and Fire

Fuels treatments within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) would focus on areas with high, 

high/moderate, and moderate relative risk ratings in the northern portion of the planning area and 

near Roseworth and Three Creek.

Fuels treatments outside the WUI would include restoration; fuel breaks; landscape-scale fuels 

reduction; and noxious weed and invasive plant treatments.

Restoration would focus on moving native grassland communities toward FRCC 1.

Fuel breaks would focus on strategic locations to disrupt the continuity of fuels and to protect 

structures and important resources.

Landscape-scale fuels reduction would occur through treatments identified in the toolbox.

Noxious weed and invasive plant treatments would focus on special designations, motorized and 

recreational access points, riparian areas, special status species habitat, road sides, recreation 

areas, and native plant communities.

The toolbox for reducing fuels, treating noxious weeds and invasive plants, or otherwise restoring or 

treating upland vegetation communities would include: chemical, mechanical, and biological 

treatments; seeding and planting; targeted grazing; and prescribed fire.

Temporary fences would be considered for Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation 

to protect plant communities.

Critical suppression areas would include the WUI; Areas of Critical environmental Concern (ACECs); 

Saylor Creek Horse Management Area; occupied habitat and designated critical habitat for slickspot 

peppergrass; designated critical habitat for bull trout; and key sage-grouse habitat (597,000 acres). 
Chapter 2: Introduction Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Summary of Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

2-16

•

•

•

•

o

o

o

o

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Habitat

Upland vegetation treatments would focus on restoring non-native perennial and native grassland 

communities to native shrubland, focusing on restoring and connecting habitat for sage-grouse, 

slickspot peppergrass, other special status species, and big game. 

Riparian areas would be managed to maintain 85 miles of Priority 3 streams at properly functioning 

condition (PFC); improve 77 miles of Priority 1 streams and 21 miles of Priority 2 streams to achieve 

PFC; and improve the remaining 42 miles of Priority 2 streams to move towards PFC over the life of 

the plan; within the priorities identified in the Aquatic and Riparian Management Strategy (Appendix 

D). Streams containing special status species habitat would have priority for restoration.

Strategies to address noxious weeds and invasive plants include measures for both prevention and 

control.

Livestock Grazing

The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing (1,403,000 acres). The 

following areas would not be available for livestock grazing (62,000 acres): 

Canyons associated with the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers and Salmon Falls Creek (below the 

dam), 

Reference areas, 

Salmon Falls Creek ACEC, 

Wildlife tracts, and 

Areas not contained within grazing allotments. 

Between 216,000 and 326,000 animal unit months (AUMs) would be allocated for livestock use at 

initial implementation. 

Between 186,000 and 279,000 AUMs would be allocated for livestock use at full implementation. 

Up to 40% of native perennial grass production, up to 45% of non-native perennial grass production, 

up to 50% of annual grass production, and up to 14% of shrub and forb production would be allocated 

for livestock use.

In native plant communities livestock grazing would be managed to maintain and improve native plant 

species diversity and abundance.

Non-native perennial communities would be maintained for livestock grazing in Vegetation 

Management Area A only.

In non-native plant communities livestock grazing would be managed to maintain and improve 

perennial plant species diversity and abundance.

Recreation

The Balanced Rock, Deadman, Jarbidge Forks, Little Pilgrim, Salmon Falls Reservoir, and Yahoo 

SRMAs would be designated (20,000 acres total).

The Canyonlands, Jarbidge Foothills, Luds Point, and Rosevear Extensive Recreation Management 

Areas would be designated (304,000 acres).

Transportation and travel in the majority of the planning area would be limited to designated routes. 

Areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use would include designated play areas in the 

Deadman and Yahoo SRMAs (4,000 acres). Salmon Falls Creek ACEC north and south of Lilly

Grade crossing and Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area (WSA) would be closed to 

motorized vehicle use (3,000 acres). The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to 

motorized and mechanized vehicle use (60,000 acres).

Energy Development

Right-of-way (ROW) avoidance areas would include US Air Force Military Operating Areas; the 

Oregon National Historic Trail, Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors; eligible, suitable, 

and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; Salmon Falls Creek and Upper Bruneau Canyon

ACECs; and sage-grouse habitat (1,232,000 acres).

ROW exclusion areas would include the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, Lower Salmon Falls 

Creek WSA, and the Sand Point ACEC (63,000 acres).Renewable energy developments would be 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Introduction

Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study

2-17

•

•

considered in areas outside of sage-grouse habitat, outside of exclusion areas, and consistent with 

stipulations with ROW avoidance areas.

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs)

The Lower Bruneau Canyon, Salmon Falls Creek, Sand Point, and Upper Bruneau Canyon ACECs 

would be designated (22,000 acres total).

2.1.4 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study

The following alternative was eliminated from detailed study because it did not meet the purpose and 

need for this RMP.

2.1.4.1 No Grazing Alternative

Elimination of one of the multiple uses of public lands is appropriate when that use so alters conditions 

that elimination (as opposed to restrictions or management prescriptions) are necessary for improvement 

to occur. As provided for in the Stipulated Settlement Agreement, the BLM considered whether a fully 

developed “No Grazing Alternative” was necessary to address resources that were affected by livestock 

use. However, an alternative that proposes to close the entire planning area to livestock grazing would 

not meet the purpose and need of this RMP which states: “In general, the purpose of this RMP is to 

provide a comprehensive framework for the BLM’s management of public lands within the planning area 

and its allocation of resources pursuant to the multiple-use and sustained yield mandate of FLPMA.” 

NEPA requires that agencies study, develop, and describe appropriate alternatives to recommended 

courses of action in any proposal that involves unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of 

available resources. Inventorying and monitoring of resources and uses during this land use planning 

effort did not identify issues or conflicts that would require the complete elimination of any uses, including 

grazing, within the planning area for its resolution. Therefore, an alternative eliminating livestock grazing 

where resource conditions do not justify such measures is not reasonable. Because Alternatives I through 

VI would allow for partial or full closures to livestock grazing and adjustments of stocking levels, seasons 

of use, and grazing management activities, the analysis of an alternative to entirely eliminate grazing at 

the planning area level is not reasonable. A no grazing alternative may be analyzed in detail during 

livestock grazing permit renewals.

2.1.4.2 Alternatives Submitted during Public Scoping 

The BLM developed preliminary alternatives in late 2006 and early 2007. In April 2007, these alternatives 

were presented to the public in a series of public workshops. Four alternatives were submitted to BLM 

following these workshops. After careful review, the BLM determined many components of these four 

alternatives were already included in a preliminary alternative and were carried forward into the 

alternatives analyzed in detail. The BLM incorporated other concepts from the submitted alternatives into 

the analyzed alternatives as appropriate, preventing any submitted alternative from being entirely 

eliminated. The BLM eliminated these alternatives from detailed analysis as stand-alone alternatives 

because they did not meet the purpose and need; did not adequately address the planning issues; 

contained internal inconsistencies; were inconsistent with the planning criteria; or were inconsistent with 

BLM’s multiple use mandate. 

The submitted alternatives are summarized below; the summary indicates the alternatives in which 

concepts from each submitted alternative were analyzed. The alternatives were titled by the submitters 

and are presented in alphabetical order.

Community and Environmental Stabilization and Improvement Alternative

The following list briefly summarizes how the Community and Environmental Stabilization and 

Improvement Alternative addressed the planning issues:

Fuels and Fire – Fuels treatments would protect public safety, life, and property, including the 

Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) and valued resources, and would aggressively limit the spread, size, 

and intensity of wildland fire. Livestock grazing management would be used to help reduce fine fuels 
Chapter 2: Introduction Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study

2-18

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

and the risk of landscape-scale fires. Following wildland fires, soils would be stabilized, annualdominated vegetation communities would be replaced with self-sustaining perennial vegetation, and 

burned areas would be rehabilitated or converted to establish a mosaic of vegetation types and seral 

stages. Fuels and fire components of this alternative were incorporated into Alternatives II and III.

Habitat – Existing wildlife habitat, including crucial winter big game habitat and upland game nesting 

and cover habitat, would be maintained or improved. Early seral vegetation communities would be 

converted to mid-seral or desired plant communities to improve perennial watershed cover. Livestock 

management would be used to achieve a mixture of the number of acres of native vegetation 

communities in mid-seral, late-seral, or potential natural community. Native cultivar and non-native 

perennial seedings would be maintained. Many habitat components of this alternative were

incorporated into all action alternatives. However, habitat components were most incorporated into 

Alternative II. 

Livestock Grazing – Livestock grazing would be managed to create a mosaic of patterns and levels 

of utilization at different periods of the year. Forage would be allocated and authorized for use by 

livestock through monitoring of actual use and utilization over time by allocating 0% of the native 

shrub and native forb forage base, 50% of the native grass forage base, and 60% of non-native 

forage base. 

Recreation - Outdoor recreation opportunities would be provided with an emphasis towards 

destination and community recreation activities. Salmon Falls Creek Canyon and the Jarbidge 

Canyon would be managed as Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs). 

Energy Development – Renewable energy development was not addressed.

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) - The Sand Point and Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACECs (boundary complying with the Owyhee Initiative) would be designated. ACEC components of 

this alternative were incorporated into Alternatives I, III, IV, V, and VI. 

Friends of the Jarbidge Alternative

The following list briefly summarizes how the Friends of the Jarbidge Alternative addressed the planning 

issues:

Fuels and Fire – Fuels treatments would include targeted livestock grazing and greenstrips. Some 

fuels and fire components of this alternative were present in the No Action Alternative and many were 

common to all the action alternatives. However, fuels and fire components were most incorporated 

into Alternatives IV and V. 

Habitat – Big game winter range would be expanded. Increasing water developments should be used 

to expand wildlife habitat. Many habitat components of this alternative were in the No Action 

Alternative and common to all the action alternatives. However, habitat components were most 

incorporated into Alternatives I, IV, and VI.

Livestock Grazing – Seedings would be maintained for livestock forage. Grazing permits would 

allocate 50% of native grasses and 60% of non-native forage. Temporary Non-Renewable Permits

would be allowed where excess forage is available. Many livestock grazing components of this 

alternative were in the No Action Alternative and common to all the action alternatives. However, 

livestock grazing components were most incorporated into Alternatives I and II.

Recreation – SRMAs would include the Oregon Trail, Balanced Rock, Little Pilgrim, reduced 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, and Salmon Falls Reservoir. Some SRMAs were incorporated into Alternatives I, 

V, and VI. 

Energy Development – Renewable energy development, transportation routes, utility corridors, 

transmission lines, communication sites, and other uses would be allowed. Wind development would 

be allowed where the wind is strong enough to generate power. Facilities would maintain minimum 

distances from special status species habitat and should avoid special status species and other fish 

and wildlife during critical time periods. Wind development would be restricted where adverse impacts 

to wildlife and cultural resources cannot be mitigated. Some energy development components of this 

alternative were incorporated into Alternatives I, II, IV, and V. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Introduction

Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study

2-19

• 2

2

3

4

•

•

•

•

•

• 3 4

•

•

•

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs)– The Sand Point, Middle Snake, Purple Sage ,

This is the same area referred to as the Lower Bruneau Canyon ACEC.

and Bruneau-Jarbidge (reduced boundary) ACECs would be designated. ACEC components of this 

alternative were incorporated into Alternatives I, III, IV, V, and VI.

Habitat Restoration Alternative

The following list briefly summarizes how the Habitat Restoration Alternative addressed the planning 

issues:

Fuels and Fire – Wildland fire management would limit 90% of fires to less than 50 acres and all 

remaining fires to less than 1,000 acres. Areas would be rehabilitated and stabilized to help promote 

natural recovery, establish pre-fire or historic vegetation and stabilize soils. Some fuels and fire 

components of this alternative were incorporated into Alternatives I, II, IV, V, and VI. 

Habitat – The primary management focus would be to promote diverse, structured, resilient, and 

connected habitats for fish and wildlife species. Native plant communities would be restored to 

eliminate fragmentation. Some habitat components of this alternative were present in the No Action 

Alternative and some were common to all the action alternatives. However, habitat components were 

most incorporated into Alternative V.

Livestock Grazing – Livestock grazing would be excluded in most of the southern two-thirds of the 

planning area to increase native species plant diversity and abundance. In allotments with livestock 

grazing, 25% of available forage would be allocated for livestock, and utilization would be 10% to 

15%. Extended rest would be provided to restore vigor and production of native plant species. 

Recreation – Recreation would be managed to minimize disturbance to wildlife and the impact to 

watershed and special status species, limit the introduction and spread of invasive species, and 

prevent wildland fire. Undeveloped and non-motorized recreation would be emphasized.

Energy Development – Renewable energy development, transportation routes, utility corridors, 

transmission lines, and communication sites would be allowed where other goals are not 

compromised; these uses would not be allowed in native plant communities or areas targeted for 

restoration to native plant communities. Some energy development components of this alternative 

were incorporated into Alternatives I, II, IV, V, and VI. 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs)– The Sand Point, Bruneau-Jarbidge, Jarbidge 

Forks ,

This area is included within the expanded boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC.

 Inside Desert, Inside Lakes ,

This area is included within the expanded boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC.

 Purple Sage, Jarbidge Foothills, Salmon Falls Creek, Middle 

Snake, and Sagebrush Sea ACECs would be designated. ACEC components of this alternative were 

incorporated into Alternatives I, III, IV, V, and VI; but mostly in Alternatives I, IV, and V.

Maximize Commodity Use Alternative

The following list briefly summarizes how the Maximize Commodity Use Alternative addressed the 

planning issues:

Fuels and Fire – Public safety, life, and property would be protected from wildland fires. Fuels 

treatments would include greenstrips and would protect the WUI and aggressively limit the spread, 

size, and intensity of wildland fire. Some fuels and fire components of this alternative were

incorporated into Alternatives II and III.

Habitat – A mosaic of native vegetation communities would be maintained in mid-seral, late-seral, or 

potential natural community ecological condition. Access and use in wildlife breeding and wintering 

areas would be managed to benefit commodity uses. Many habitat components of this alternative 

were common to all the action alternatives. However, habitat components were most incorporated 

into Alternative II.

Livestock Grazing – Livestock grazing would be managed to optimize the utilization of perennial and 

annual forage species. 50% of the native shrub forage base, 50% of the native forb forage base, 60% 

of the native grass forage base, 70% of non-native perennial forage base, and 90% of non-native 

annual forage base would be allocated for use by livestock. 
Chapter 2: Introduction Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study

2-20

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Recreation – Outdoor recreation opportunities that provide revenue enhancement to communities 

within the planning area would be provided. SRMAs would include the Jarbidge River North Forks 

and Jarbidge Forks. The Jarbidge Forks SRMA is in the No Action Alternative, and was incorporated 

into all the action alternatives.

Energy Development – Renewable energy development, transportation routes, utility corridors, 

transmission lines, and communication sites would be allowed. Wind development would be allowed 

anywhere not identified for right-of-way avoidance or exclusion. Some energy development 

components of this alternative were incorporated into Alternatives I, II, IV, V, and VI.

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs)– No new ACECs would be designated, and 

ACEC designation would be removed from existing ACECs. ACEC components of this alternative 

were incorporated into Alternative II.

2.1.4.3 Alternatives Submitted during the Draft RMP/EIS Comment Period 

Two alternatives were submitted during the comment period for the Draft RMP/EIS. One was a resubmission of the Habitat Restoration Alternative, which is summarized above in Section 2.1.4.2. The 

other alternative, the Jarbidge Coalition Alternative, had many components incorporated into the 

Proposed RMP. However, the BLM eliminated this alternative from detailed analysis as a stand-alone 

alternative because some components were inconsistent with BLM policy and planning criteria.

Jarbidge Coalition Alternative

The following list briefly summarizes how the Jarbidge Coalition Alternative addressed the planning 

issues:

Fuels and Fire – Public safety, life, and property would be protected from wildland fires. The WUI 

would represent the highest suppression priority. Landscape-scale fuels reduction would occur 

primarily through increased allocation of vegetation for permitted livestock grazing and through 

increased livestock grazing utilization in all plant communities. Many fuels and fire components of this 

alternative were common to all the action alternatives. However, fuels and fire components were most 

incorporated into Alternatives II and III.

Habitat – The primary goal would be to eliminate cheatgrass grasslands, and replace them with 

perennial grasses and shrubs; allow perennial grasses and shrubs to naturally regenerate within 

crested wheatgrass seedings and native grasslands; and introduce perennial grasses, forbs, and 

shrubs into areas dominated by bluegrass. Many habitat components of this alternative were in the 

No Action Alternative and common to all the action alternatives. However, habitat components were 

most incorporated into Alternatives IV and VI.

Livestock Grazing – Livestock grazing would be managed to ensure achievement of or movement 

towards meeting Idaho Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing 

Management through the application of Proper Grazing Management. 50% of the native perennial 

grass forage base, 60% of the non-native perennial grass forage base, 80% of the annual grass 

forage base, and 16% of the shrub and forb would be allocated for use by livestock. Many livestock 

grazing components of this alternative were common to all the action alternatives. However, livestock 

grazing components were most incorporated into Alternative II. 

Recreation – Outdoor recreation opportunities that provide a variety of dispersed and developed 

recreational opportunities and experiences for visitors and residents while sustaining the recreation 

resource base and avoiding, minimizing, or compensating for resource impacts within the planning 

area would be provided. SRMAs would include Deadman/Yahoo, Balanced Rock, Little Pilgrim, 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, Jarbidge Forks, and Salmon Falls Reservoir. One SRMA was already in the No 

Action Alternative. Some SRMAs were incorporated into all the action alternatives, however 

recreation components were most incorporated into Alternatives I, III, and VI.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Introduction

Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study

2-21

•

•

Energy Development – Renewable energy development, transportation routes, utility corridors, 

transmission lines, and communication sites would be allowed. Wind development would not be 

allowed within wilderness or within one mile of an active sage-grouse lek. Some energy development 

components of this alternative were incorporated into all action alternatives, however energy 

components were most incorporated into Alternative II.

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) – No new ACECs would be designated. ACEC

components of this alternative were incorporated into Alternative II.
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Tribal Rights and Interests

2-22

2.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

2.2.1 Tribal Rights and Interests

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

No objective stated.

Management Action

TI-NA-MA-1. Coordinate review of detailed management plans and individual projects prepared in 

conjunction with the RMP to ensure consistency with officially adopted and approved plans, policies, and 

programs of Native American Tribes, Federal agencies, and State and local governments.

2.2.2 Resources

2.2.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

No objective stated.

Management Actions

AAV-NA-MA-1. Manage all public lands in the planning area as Class II Airsheds unless they are 

reclassified by the State as a result of the procedures prescribed in the Clean Air Act. 

AAV-NA-MA-2. Administrative actions on the public lands would comply with the air quality classification 

for that specific area. 

AAV-NA-MA-3. Consider the sensitivity of air resources in the affected area on a site-specific basis

during project-level planning. 

AAV-NA-MA-4. Design construction of management facilities and land treatments to minimize adverse 

impacts to the air resources. Stipulations would ensure project compatibility with air resource 

management. 

2.2.2.2 Geologic Features 

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

No objective stated.

Management Actions

GE-NA-MA-1. Manage geologic resources so significant scientific, recreational, and educational values 

would be maintained or enhanced. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Resources

2-23

GE-NA-MA-2. Unique geological resources of the planning area would be protected and interpreted for 

the public.

2.2.2.3 Soil Resources 

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

SR-NA-O-1. Manage soils to maintain productivity and to minimize erosion.

Management Actions

SR-NA-MA-1. Minimize soil erosion by maintaining adequate perennial cover based on site potential.

SR-NA-MA-2. During project-level planning, consider the sensitivity of soil resources in the affected area 

on a site-specific basis.

SR-NA-MA-3. Design the construction of management facilities and land treatments to minimize adverse 

impacts to the soil resources. Stipulations would ensure project compatibility with soil resource 

management.

SR-NA-MA-4. Manage native perennial range to attain good ecological condition.

SR-NA-MA-5. Mitigate erosion from irrigated agricultural lands onto adjacent public lands that could 

erode Sand Point paleontological deposits.

2.2.2.4 Water Resources

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

WR-NA-O-1. Maintain or improve water quality in accordance with Federal and State standards.

Management Actions

WR-NA-MA-1. During project-level planning, consider the sensitivity of water resources in the affected 

area on a site-specific basis. 

WR-NA-MA-2. Design the construction of management facilities and land treatments to minimize adverse 

impacts to the water resources. Stipulations would ensure project compatibility with water resource 

management. 

WR-NA-MA-3. Facilities and structures designed to maintain or improve water sources, provide new 

water sources, control water level or flow characteristics, or maintain or improve water quality may be 

developed. Proposals that include dewatering of the streambed would not be allowed.

WR-NA-MA-4. Work closely with the Idaho Department of Water Resources, Idaho Department of Health 

and Welfare, US Army Corps of Engineers, and other Federal, State, and local agencies to determine 

appropriate location and designs for such projects.

WR-NA-MA-5. Maintain recommended instream flows for the maintenance and preservation of aquatic 

and riparian ecosystems.
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-24

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

WR-NA-MA-6. A variety of methods may be employed to maintain, improve, protect, and restore 

watershed conditions.

WR-NA-MA-7. Give priority to meeting emergency watershed needs due to flooding, severe drought, or 

fire.

2.2.2.5 Vegetation Communities

Upland Vegetation

Goal

No goal stated.

Objectives

UV-NA-O-1. Improve lands in poor ecological condition across all Multiple Use Areas (MUAs; Map 3).

Improve lands in MUA 14 through natural plant succession and removal of livestock. Maintain lands that 

are in good and excellent ecological condition in MUA 10.

UV-NA-O-2. Maintain non-native perennial communities. 

Management Actions

UV-NA-MA-1. Develop Multiple Use Activity Plans for MUAs 11, 12, and 15. The plan for MUA 11 would 

include grazing, wildlife, and fire management coordination, and an ad-hoc group of technical, user, and 

conservation interests would be set up to provide input into the plan.

UV-NA-MA-2. Maintain non-native perennial communities for livestock as follows:

499 acres in MUA 4,

75,107 acres in MUA 6,

155,612 acres in MUA 7,

1,866 acres in MUA 10,

21,177 acres in MUA 11,

23,518 acres in MUA 12,

47,510 acres in MUA 13, and

24,159 acres in MUA 15.

UV-NA-MA-3. Implement seeding treatments for livestock as follows:

4,254 acres in MUA 15 and

6,300 acres in MUA 16.

UV-NA-MA-4. Implement brush control and seeding treatments for livestock as follows:

9,245 acres in MUA 11,

2,000 acres in MUA 12, and

1,787 acres in MUA 13.

UV-NA-MA-5. Implement brush control treatments for livestock as follows:

5,000 acres in MUA 11,

4,100 acres in MUA 12,

7,500 acres in MUA 15, and

15,000 acres in MUA 16.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Resources

2-25

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

UV-NA-MA-6. Most of the sites to be treated are in poor or fair vegetative conditions and have a low 

potential to improve under other management practices. Most of the vegetation would be eliminated 

during seedbed preparation, and the site would be seeded with species adapted to the site. The final 

selection of the species to be seeded would depend on the planned use of the site and the management 

objectives for the allotment. Seed would be drilled wherever possible. The application of mulch or fertilizer 

would be prescribed based on site characteristics.

UV-NA-MA-7. Implement interseeding or reseeding treatments for wildlife as follows:

250 acres in MUA 10,

500 acres in MUA 11,

500 acres in MUA 12,

4,400 acres in MUA 13, and

3,750 acres in MUA 15.

UV-NA-MA-8. Desirable plant species would be interseeded with vegetation. A seed dribbler used with a 

crawler tractor, a small scalper/seeder, or range drill would be used to interseed strips. Broadcast 

seedings could possibly be used as well. Species to be seeded would be selected to meet management 

objectives developed for the allotment.

UV-NA-MA-9. Interseeding and reseeding projects in MUAs with objectives to improve ecological 

condition to benefit wildlife or livestock will use shrub, forb, and grass seed mixtures that are normally 

found in that type of ecological zone or type.

UV-NA-MA-10. The order of priority for vegetation treatment would be:

Areas where unacceptable soil loss is occurring,

Areas where the livestock operator is grazing at levels below preference,

Areas where excessive annual vegetation is causing management problems or economic burdens

(i.e., season of use restriction or high fire management costs),

Areas where unacceptable wildlife habitat condition exists (appropriate seed mixtures for wildlife will 

be used), and

Areas for overall multiple use improvement using seed mixtures for both wildlife and livestock.

UV-NA-MA-11. Burning is proposed to reduce the amount of big sagebrush and/or other brush on a site. 

Burning would normally be done during July to October, depending on the specific prescription written for 

each area, desired results, weather, and moisture conditions. Burn plans would be developed for each 

burn.

UV-NA-MA-12. Reseed all areas disturbed during project construction with a mixture of grasses, forbs, 

and shrubs.

UV-NA-MA-13. Rehabilitated or manipulated sites are considered to be in good condition from a 

watershed standpoint when at least 75% (by weight) of the sites potential for production is composed of 

perennial vegetation.

UV-NA-MA-14. Chemical control of sagebrush would not be allowed.

UV-NA-MA-15. No reference areas would be identified. 

Riparian Areas and Wetlands

Goal

No goal stated.
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-26

•

•

•

•

•

•

Objective

RI-NA-O-1. Maintain 1987 condition of riparian habitat in Multiple Use Areas (MUAs) 4, 6, 7, 12, 13, and 

16; improve 44.4 miles of riparian habitat in MUAs 10, 11, 14, and 15 (Map 3). 

Management Actions

RI-NA-MA-1. Management activities in riparian zones would be designed to maintain or improve riparian 

habitat condition.

RI-NA-MA-2. Riparian and wetland habitat would have a high priority for protection and improvement in 

accordance with national policy. Manage watersheds to maintain or improve stream channel stability and 

overall watershed conditions.

RI-NA-MA-3. In those areas where fish/riparian values are identified as high priority, all other 

management practices would be designed to accommodate those priority needs.

RI-NA-MA-4. Follow the guidelines outlined in the best management practices (BMPs) manual of 

management and protection of western stream ecosystems (American Fisheries Society, 1982) in all 

activities including maintenance of roads, and other facilities.

RI-NA-MA-5. Install gap fencing in MUAs 10, 11, 12, 14, 15. 

RI-NA-MA-6. In those instances where management systems alone cannot meet objectives for fisheries, 

riparian areas, or water availability, provisions for fencing or other means of exclusion would be utilized. 

RI-NA-MA-7. Monitor and implement periodic rest or nonuse when these stream systems do not show 

signs of adequate recovery.

RI-NA-MA-8. Avoid construction activities that remove or destroy riparian vegetation and instream fish 

cover.

RI-NA-MA-9. Provide a riparian buffer zone of sufficient width (100 to 300 feet minimum) to protect 

riparian vegetation, fisheries, and water quality as determined by an interdisciplinary team of resource 

specialists, which includes fisheries and wildlife specialists. Utilize this zone for the general exclusion of 

the following activities: 

Limit new road construction that parallels streams (use BMPs when construction cannot be avoided),

Fire (maintain full suppression), 

 Spraying of herbicides and pesticides, and

 Gravel extraction. 

RI-NA-MA-10. Utilize a 1,000 foot (500 feet for each side) riparian buffer zone for the total exclusion of 

the following activities:

Oil and gas occupancy and/or surface disturbance and

Introduction of chemical toxicants as a result of construction, mining, or agriculture. 

RI-NA-MA-11. Management actions within floodplains and wetlands would include measures to preserve, 

protect, and, if necessary, restore their natural functions.

2.2.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 

Fish

Goal

No goal stated.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Resources

2-27

•

•

•

•

•

Objective

FI-NA-O-1. Maintain 1987 condition of fish habitat in Multiple Use Areas (MUAs) 7 and 13; improve 39.4 

miles of fisheries habitat in MUAs 10, 11, 12, and 15 (Map 3). 

Management Action

No management action stated.

Wildlife

Goal

No goal stated.

Objectives

WI-NA-O-1. Maintain present levels of upland game nesting and cover habitat in Multiple Use Areas 

(MUAs) 6, 7, and 10 (Map 3). 

WI-NA-O-2. Manage 3,990 acres of the cheatgrass study area for curlews (MUA 7; Map 3). 

WI-NA-O-3. Manage all wildlife habitat within the planning area to provide a diversity of vegetation and 

habitats. 

WI-NA-O-4. Manage big game habitat to support 7,360 winter mule deer and 2,565 mule deer year-round 

across all MUAs; 1,932 pronghorn in MUAs 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, and 16; and 364 bighorn sheep in 

MUAs 10, 15, and 16 (Map 3). 

WI-NA-O-5. Protect crucial winter big game habitat and bighorn sheep habitat in MUAs 10 and 15, and 

improve 8,750 acres of bighorn sheep and big game habitat in MUAs 11, 15, and 16 (Map 3). 

Management Actions

WI-NA-MA-1. Priority for habitat management would be given to habitat for Endangered, Threatened, 

Proposed, Candidate, and other BLM Sensitive species.

WI-NA-MA-2. Manage all ecological sites on mule deer, pronghorn, elk, bighorn sheep, and sage-grouse

habitat in fair or poor ecological condition in 1987 for good ecological condition.

WI-NA-MA-3. Follow "Mule Deer Habitat Guidelines" contained in Technical Note 336 (Kerr, 1979) where 

applicable. Guidelines include: 

 Maintain a 60/40 ratio of forage area to cover area in range rehabilitation or manipulation projects,

 Try to achieve a mosaic or mottled pattern of cover in prescribed burning and manipulation projects, 

and

 Improve forage condition by establishing seedings or plantings of bitterbrush, four-wing saltbush or 

other palatable shrub species on crucial mule deer winter range that presently has less than 30% 

palatable shrub composition by weight of the shrub component. 

WI-NA-MA-4. On crucial mule deer and elk winter ranges that do not have an adequate composition of 

early maturing grass, develop small seedings of Siberian wheatgrass and Russian wildrye and other 

appropriate early maturing grasses to improve deer and elk nutrition in the early spring period.

WI-NA-MA-5. Follow "Habitat Management Guides for the American Pronghorn Antelope" contained in 

Technical Note 347 (Yoakum, 1980) where applicable. Guidelines include: 

 Grazing systems designed with the concept of key plant species (preferred pronghorn forage species 

for forbs and shrubs would be included as key species) and 

 Vegetative manipulation projects would include mixtures of grasses, forbs, and shrubs.
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-28

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

WI-NA-MA-6. Monitoring and coordination needs for elk are as follows:

Identify elk use patterns as they occur on BLM lands; 

Identify areas of cumulative use due to elk and livestock; 

Monitor forage use to determine if overuse of plant communities is occurring; and

Coordinate elk management and the exchange of information with the livestock users in the area and 

other agencies including the Forest Service, Soil Conservation Service, and Idaho Department of Fish 

and Game (IDFG). 

WI-NA-MA-7. Areas managed as winter range are shown on Map 17. 

WI-NA-MA-8. Design vegetative manipulation projects to minimize impacts and improve wildlife habitat by 

including a variety of palatable shrubs, forbs and grass.

WI-NA-MA-9. Improve raptor habitat by requiring all new power lines in raptor areas to be constructed to 

electrocution-proof specification and that any problem lines be modified to be electrocution proof.

WI-NA-MA-10. Maintain the short-grass habitats occupied by long-billed curlew.

WI-NA-MA-11. Transfer of land within the curlew habitat area would not be allowed prior to the 

development of an agreement between IDFG and Idaho Department of Water Resources which identifies 

satisfactory mitigation measures to protect curlew habitat.

WI-NA-MA-12. Maintain size and configuration of wildlife tracts. Manage wildlife tracts according to Snake 

River Wildlife Tracts Habitat Management Plan (13,000 acres; Map 18).

WI-NA-MA-13. Install wildlife escape devices on all troughs and tanks.

WI-NA-MA-14. Provide water in allotments during seasonal periods of need for wildlife.

WI-NA-MA-15. Incorporate wildlife provisions into all future fence proposals.

WI-NA-MA-16. Schedule major construction and maintenance work in crucial wildlife habitats to avoid or 

minimize disturbance to wildlife.

WI-NA-MA-17. Restrict occupancy for oil and gas activities in crucial wildlife habitats as shown below: 

December through April in mule deer winter range; 

December through April in pronghorn winter range; 

May through June in pronghorn fawning range; 

Year-round within 500 feet of riparian areas occupied by river otter; 

Year-round within essential nesting habitat for birds of prey; 

Year-round within 0.5 mile of heron rookeries; 

February through June within 0.75 mile of golden eagle nests; 

Mid-March through June within 0.75 mile of long-billed curlew nests; 

Mid-March through June within 0.25 mile of Western burrowing owl nests; 

Mid-April through August within 0.75 mile of osprey nests; and

Year-round within 500 feet of reservoirs, ponds, lakes, streams, wetland, marshes, and riparian areas 

for riparian-dependent species.

Additional activities would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine the need for compliance 

with these recommendations.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Resources

2-29

•

•

•

•

•

•

2.2.2.7 Special Status Species 

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

SS-NA-O-1. Protect and enhance Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive species’ habitats in order to 

maintain or enhance populations within the planning area. Enhance, restore and/or maintain habitat 

conditions and availability for special status species and prevent all avoidable loss of habitat.

Management Actions

Management for All Special Status Species 

SS-C-MA-1. Follow conservation measures in relevant biological opinions and letters of concurrence, as 

appropriate. Conservation measures in place as of 2012 can be found in Appendix E; conservation 

measures can be updated, revised, or replaced through future consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife 

Service.

SS-NA-MA-1. Work with Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) to determine if Salmon Falls Creek 

Canyon contains possible bighorn sheep habitat.

Management Related to Resource Uses

SS-NA-MA-2. Projects proposed in areas with known Endangered, Threatened, or Sensitive plants would 

give full consideration to protecting these species, including fencing if necessary. 

SS-NA-MA-3. If a proposed action is predicted, through the environmental assessment, to have an 

adverse effect on Endangered, Threatened, or Sensitive plants, the action would be foregone or 

redesigned to eliminate such adverse effects.

SS-NA-MA-4. Use adjustments to livestock use levels, grazing seasons, season of use, or other 

management techniques to protect plants.

SS-NA-MA-5. Allow no action to occur that would adversely affect the habitat of Endangered, Candidate, 

or Sensitive species in Multiple Use Area (MUA) 4 (Map 3). 

Management for Special Status Species in Upland Areas

SS-NA-MA-6. Maintain present areas for sage-grouse nesting habitat in MUA 13, and improve sagegrouse nesting through seeding and rehabilitation in MUA 10 (Map 3). Where applicable, Guidelines for 

Habitat Protection in Sage Grouse Range (Allen, 1973) and Sage Grouse Management Practices 

(Western States Sage Grouse Committee, 1982) would be followed. Habitat Requirements and 

Management Recommendations for Sage Grouse (Call, 1979) would be followed where applicable, 

including:

 Control work would not be allowed where live sagebrush cover is less than 20%.

 Treatment measures should be applied in irregular patterns using topography and other ecological 

considerations to minimize adverse effects to the sage-grouse resource. 

 Where fire is used as a habitat management tool, it should be used in such manner as to result in a 

mosaic pattern of shrubs and open areas, with openings, optimally from one to 10 acres in size. 

 Maintain the density of sagebrush canopy coverage at 20% to 30% within nesting habitats and at 

least 20% in wintering habitats.

 Control of sagebrush would not be considered in any area known to have supported important 

wintering populations of sage-grouse in the past 10 years. 

 Seed mixtures for range improvement projects and fire rehabilitation projects would include a mixture 

of grasses, forbs and shrubs that benefit sage-grouse.
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-30

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

SS-NA-MA-7. Improve sage-grouse brood rearing habitat where sagebrush canopy cover is greater than 

20% by removing sagebrush in small irregular areas and then reseeding.

SS-NA-MA-8. Maintain a separation of use between cattle and bighorn sheep by not developing livestock 

water sources within one mile of bighorn sheep habitat unless adverse impacts can be mitigated.

SS-NA-MA-9. No conversion from cattle to sheep would be allowed in allotments containing bighorn 

sheep habitat, unless a satisfactory separation can be maintained by fences or topographic features. This 

separation would be agreed upon through consultation and coordination with IDFG or Nevada 

Department of Wildlife. 

SS-NA-MA-10. Manage human use within bighorn sheep habitat at levels that are not detrimental to the 

bighorn sheep population.

SS-NA-MA-11. Adverse habitat alteration would not be allowed within 0.25 mile of any burrowing owl 

nest, 0.75 mile of any ferruginous hawk, golden eagle or prairie falcon nest, or one mile of bighorn sheep 

habitat.

SS-NA-MA-12. Permit no adverse habitat alteration of potential bighorn sheep habitat.

SS-NA-MA-13. Restrict occupancy for oil and gas activities in crucial wildlife habitats as follows: 

Year-round in bighorn sheep habitat,

December through mid-February in sage-grouse and Columbian sharp-tailed grouse (sharp-tailed 

grouse) winter range,

Mid-February through June in sage-grouse and sharp-tailed grouse breeding grounds, 

April through June in within two miles of leks in sage-grouse and sharp-tailed grouse nesting and 

brood rearing habitat,

Year-round within 500 feet of occupied riparian areas for mountain quail,

December through March in bald eagle and peregrine falcon winter habitat, 

Year-round within one mile of bald eagle and peregrine falcon nests,

Mid-March through June within 0.75 mile of ferruginous hawk and prairie falcon nests, and

Mid-March through June within 0.25 mile of white-faced ibis nests.

Additional activities would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine the need for compliance 

with these recommendations. 

Management for Special Status Species in Riparian Areas, Wetlands, and Streams

SS-NA-MA-14. Protect the aquatic habitat of Sensitive and Candidate species in the Snake River below 

Lower Salmon Falls Dam.

SS-NA-MA-15. Restrict occupancy for oil and gas activities year-round within 500 feet of streams 

occupied by Interior Columbia River redband trout (redband trout), white sturgeon, and Shoshone sculpin. 

Additional activities would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine the need for compliance 

with these recommendations.

2.2.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

No objective stated.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Resources

2-31

Management Actions

NW-NA-MA-1. Control the spread of noxious weeds on public lands where possible, where economically 

feasible, and to the extent that funds are prioritized for that purpose. Poisonous or noxious plants would 

be controlled where spot infestations occur or where BLM would cooperate with other affected 

landowners in controlling infestations on relatively large areas.

NW-NA-MA-2. Consider alternatives including herbicide applications, plow and seed, burn and seed, 

livestock grazing strategies, and biological controls where weed control is warranted. Pursue coordination 

with adjoining landowners if appropriate.

NW-NA-MA-3. If herbicide application is selected as the preferred method of control through the 

environmental analysis process, application would be made through the Idaho State Director to the BLM 

Director in Washington DC. This application would indicate all pertinent data including chemicals, rate, 

and method of application and target plant species. Herbicide applications would be applied under the 

directions of a licensed pesticide applicator and every effort would be taken to assure public safety.

NW-NA-MA-4. Work with County governments to monitor the location and spread of noxious weeds and 

to maintain up-to-date inventory records. 

2.2.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Wildland Fire Management

Goal

No goal stated. 

Objective

No objective stated.

Allocation

WFM-NA-A-1. Manage 1,371,000 acres for full suppression. Aggressively suppress all fires on or 

threatening public lands.

Management Actions

WFM-C-MA-1. Fire management within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness is addressed in the 

Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan.

WFM-NA-MA-1. Less than full suppression may occur when multiple fires ignite simultaneously. Priority 

would be given to fires threatening areas of highest value.

WFM-NA-MA-2. Revise and implement a Fire Management Plan.

WFM-NA-MA-3. Mechanical equipment would not be used on paleontological sites in Multiple Use Area 

(MUA) 4 and 6; in the canyon in MUA 14; wilderness, river canyons, or Areas of Critical Environmental 

Concern with special attention to bighorn sheep needs in MUA 10; and the Oregon National Historic Trail

(NHT) in MUA 4 and 7 (Map 3).

WFM-NA-MA-4. Fire lines would not be allowed across the three paleontological sites found in MUA 4 or 

the Oregon NHT in MUAs 4 and 7 (Map 3).

WFM-NA-MA-5. Extinguish fires with the least amount of surface disturbance possible. When direct 

attack is not feasible, the suppression strategy is to burn out from natural barriers and establish control 

points, such as roads.
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-32

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

WFM-NA-MA-6. Utilize surface disturbing equipment, such as bulldozers, only with management 

approval. The first priority is clearing of roads and second priority, when all other methods are exhausted, 

is construction of new control lines. 

WFM-NA-MA-7. Use minimum impact suppression tactics in:

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and

Lower Salmon Creek Falls Wilderness Study Area. 

Fuels and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation (ES&BAR)

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

Fuels

No objective stated.

ES&BAR

FE-NA-O-1. Rehabilitate public lands affected by wildland fires to accomplish multiple use objectives and 

designed to reduce fire size.

Management Actions

Fuels

FE-NA-MA-1. Cooperate with adjacent landowners on a case-by-case basis to reduce fire hazard where 

efforts are cost effective and the results will benefit BLM’s fire management program. Cooperative efforts 

may range from consulting with private landowners on hazard reduction plans, to development of 

cooperative agreements and performance of hazard reduction.

FE-NA-MA-2. The following fuels reduction actions and procedures would be applied in all Multiple Use 

Areas (MUAs): 

Prescribed burns may be reduced, postponed, or cancelled in areas where they, in combination with 

recent burns, would cause significant cumulative impacts to wildlife or watershed conditions. 

A fire fuels break plan would be developed as part of a fire activity plan.

ES&BAR

FE-NA-MA-3. The following rehabilitation actions would be applied across all MUAs:

Rehabilitation of areas, particularly large areas, that have a high potential for fires or have a high 

frequency of fires, will utilize irregular buffer strips with seed mixtures that are fire resistant and/or 

meet watershed protection, wildlife, and riparian objectives. These buffer strips will receive first 

priority for seeding prior to reseeding the rest of the burned area.

In areas where the RMP goal/objective is to return the area to an improved ecological condition, 10% 

to 25% of the wildland fire burn area would use seed mixtures to allow this objective to be met.

All grazing licenses issued that included areas recently burned and/or seeded would include a 

statement concerning the amount of rest needed in the seedings or burn area. Normally, two years of 

rest would be necessary to protect these areas. This rested area may include remnant stands of 

desirable species that survived the fire. 

Seedings would include appropriate seed mixtures to replace wildlife habitat that is burned.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Resources

2-33

2.2.2.10 Wild Horses 

Goal

WH-NA-G-1. A viable, healthy population of wild horses will be maintained in accordance with Federal 

law. 

Objective

WH-NA-O-1. Provide forage to support a herd of 50 wild horses in the Saylor Creek Wild Horse Herd 

Management Area (HMA). 

Allocations

WH-NA-A-1. Manage the entire Saylor Creek Wild Horse Herd Area as an HMA (95,000 acres). 

WH-NA-A-2. No wild horse ranges are identified.

WH-NA-A-3. Allocate 600 animal unit months for wild horses in Multiple Use Area (MUA) 7 (Map 3). 

Management Actions

WH-NA-MA-1. Develop a Wild Horse Management Plan. 

WH-NA-MA-2. Where levels are to be adjusted, sufficient forage would be provided.

WH-NA-MA-3. Design fences to minimize wild horse movement conflicts in MUA 7 (Map 3). 

WH-NA-MA-4. Animals being collected for adoption or removed by other appropriate means would

receive care and attention. Adopted animals would be monitored in accordance with BLM policy until title 

for the animal(s) is/are issued.

2.2.2.11 Paleontological Resources 

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

PR-NA-O-1. Protect and manage paleontological sites in major paleontological areas in Multiple Use 

Areas (MUAs) 4, 6, and 7 (Map 3), including Sand Point, Pasadena Valley, Rosevear Creek and Gulch, 

Dove Springs, Deer Gulch, Pilgrim Spring and Stage, and Glenns Ferry.

Management Action

PR-NA-MA-1. Manage paleontological resources to protect, maintain, or enhance sites or areas for their 

scientific and educational values.

2.2.2.12 Cultural Resources 

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

CR-NA-O-1. Protect the cultural values of the Dry Lake/Bruneau River Complex, Arch Canyon, the Dove 

Spring complex, and additional significant cultural resource complexes through special designation and 

management. 
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-34

•

•

•

Management Actions

CR-NA-MA-1. Develop a Cultural Plan for Oregon Trail, Pot Hole Complex, Dove Springs, Dry Lake 

Beds/Bruneau River Complex, Post Office, Dry Lakes Complex, Juniper Ranch, Clover Creek, and Devil 

Creek.

CR-NA-MA-2. All significant cultural sites, as determined by the State Historic Preservation Officer 

(SHPO) and Advisory Council, would be retained in Federal ownership.

CR-NA-MA-3. The ruts of the main route and south alternate route of the Oregon National Historic Trail

and Kelton Freight Road would be protected by not allowing incompatible uses to occur within a 0.5-mile 

corridor through which these routes pass.

CR-NA-MA-4. Place interpretive signs along the Oregon Trail and at Dove Spring. 

CR-NA-MA-5. Conduct a Class III inventory as specified in BLM Manual Section 8110.21B4(C) prior to 

commencement of any BLM-initiated or authorized action involving surface-disturbing activities or sale or 

transfer from Federal management. If properties that may be eligible for the National Register are 

discovered, consult with SHPO and forward the documentation to the Keeper of the National Register to 

obtain a determination of eligibility in accordance with 36 CFR Part 63.

CR-NA-MA-6. Recommend the Oregon Trail, Dry Lake Beds/Bruneau River Complex, and Devil Creek 

Complex for listing on the National Register.

CR-NA-MA-7. Protect all cultural sites known to be eligible for National Register nomination or listed on 

the National Register from deterioration.

CR-NA-MA-8. Cultural resource values discovered in a proposed work area would be protected by 

adhering to the following methods:

Redesigning or relocating the project;

Salvaging, through scientific methods, the cultural resource values pursuant to the SHPO agreement;

and

Should the site be determined to be of significant value, and/or the above-mentioned methods are not 

considered adequate, the project would be abandoned.

2.2.2.13 Visual Resources 

Visual Resource Management (VRM) classes identify the degree of acceptable visual change within a 

characteristic landscape. A classification is assigned to public lands based on the guidelines established 

for scenic quality, visual sensitivity, and visibility.

Class I - Provides primarily for natural ecological changes only. It is applied to wilderness areas, some 

natural areas, and similar situations where management activities are to be restricted.

Class II - Changes in the basic elements caused by a management activity may be evident in the 

characteristic landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate to the visual strength of the existing 

character. 

Class III - Contrasts to the basic elements caused by management activity may be evident and begin to 

attract attention in the landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate in the existing landscape.

Class IV - Contrasts may attract attention and be a dominant feature in the landscape in terms of scale, 

but the change should repeat the basic element of the characteristic landscape.

Class V - Applies to areas where the characteristic landscape has been so disturbed that rehabilitation is 

needed. Generally considered an interim short-term classification until rehabilitation or enhancement is 

completed.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Resources

2-35

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

No objective stated.

Allocations

VR-NA-A-1. Areas managed as VRM Class I (129,000 acres) would include:

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, 

Designated Wild and Scenic River corridors, 

The Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone, and

Bruneau-Jarbidge Area of Critical Environmental Concern. 

VR-NA-A-2. Areas managed as VRM Class II (111,000 acres) would include:

Corridors along the Snake River, Salmon Falls Creek, Devil Creek, and Lower Cedar Creek; 

Portions of Browns Bench and China Mountain; and 

 Portions of the Jarbidge Foothills and Diamond A Desert.

VR-NA-A-3. Areas managed as VRM Class III (284,000 acres) would include:

Corridors along Clover Creek, Clover-Three Creek Road, and 17-Mile Road; 

 An area between Lower Cedar Creek and Salmon Falls Creek; and 

 Portions of the Jarbidge Foothills and Diamond A Desert. 

VR-NA-A-4. The remainder of the planning area would be managed as VRM Class IV (847,000 acres). 

See Map 41 for locations of areas allocated to VRM Class I, II, III, and IV. 

Management Action

VR-NA-MA-1. Consider the visual and scenic values of the public lands whenever any physical actions 

are proposed on BLM lands. The degree of alterations to the natural landscape would be guided by the 

criteria established for the four VRM Classes as outlined in BLM Manual 8400: Visual Resource 

Management.

2.2.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

No objective stated.

Management Action

No management action stated.
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-36

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2.2.3 Resource Uses

2.2.3.1 Livestock Grazing

Goal

No goal stated.

Objectives

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-NA-O-1. Design and establish grazing management practices to meet fisheries, riparian, and water 

quality needs.

LG-NA-O-2. Establish livestock grazing systems and practices that recognize the physiological 

requirements of forbs and shrubs.

Range Infrastructure

LG-NA-O-3. Design range infrastructure to achieve objectives in the Vegetation Communities, Fish and 

Wildlife, and Livestock Grazing sections. 

Allocations

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-NA-A-1. The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing (1,412,000 acres). 

Salmon Falls Creek Canyon would not be available for livestock grazing (3,000 acres). An additional 

48,000 acres are not contained within grazing allotments and therefore are not grazed, even though the 

1987 RMP does not specifically make these areas unavailable for livestock grazing; these areas would 

continue to be unavailable for livestock grazing. See Map 52 for locations.

LG-NA-A-2. Continue allocating approximately 200,000 animal unit months (AUMs) for livestock. As the 

plan is implemented, between 160,000 and 260,000 AUMs could be issued for livestock depending on 

implementation of treatments described in the Upland Vegetation section.

LG-NA-A-3. Allocate the following forage:

Bighorn sheep – 598 AUMS in Multiple Use Areas (MUAs) 10, 15, and 16;

Mule deer – 1,600 AUMs in MUAs 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16;

Pronghorn – 261 AUMs in MUAs 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, and 16; and

Wild horses – 600 AUMs in MUA 7.

See Map 3 for MUA boundaries. 

Management Actions

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-NA-MA-1. Develop grazing systems to maintain condition in MUA 4. Develop grazing management 

systems on fair condition range in MUA 11 to improve to good or better condition. Additional grazing 

systems would be implemented elsewhere. The type of system to be implemented would be based on the 

consideration of the following factors:

MUA and allotment-specific management objectives; 

Resource characteristics, including vegetation potential and water availability;

Operator needs; and 

Implementation costs.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Resource Uses

2-37

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Grazing systems that will be considered include:

Rest-rotation grazing,

Deferred rotation grazing,

Deferred grazing,

Alternative grazing, 

Short-duration high intensity grazing, or 

Seasonal grazing. 

LG-NA-MA-2. Livestock management measures would be implemented where necessary to prevent 

livestock access to canyons. 

LG-NA-MA-3. Incorporate forage/cover requirements specific to areas of primary wildlife use into

allotment management plans. 

LG-NA-MA-4. Livestock season of use would be adjusted in MUAs 10, 15, and 16, if necessary, to 

resolve any conflicts on mule deer, pronghorn and bighorn sheep ranges. These adjustments would entail 

the reduction in spring or fall livestock grazing use from a specific period(s) of a grazing year. Season of

use changes would be made after monitoring is completed along with other needed grazing use 

adjustments, or when activity plans are completed. Priority would be given to resolving conflicts on crucial 

wildlife habitat areas in poor ecological condition.

LG-NA-MA-5. Prioritize grazing allotments in the planning area for processing and issuing grazing 

authorizations and for monitoring effectiveness of grazing management according to their assigned 

Selective Management Category. The “M” allotments generally would be managed to maintain 

satisfactory resource conditions; “I” allotments generally would be managed to improve resource 

conditions; and “C” allotments would receive custodial management to prevent resource deterioration.

Range Infrastructure

LG-C-MA-1. Management actions for range infrastructure apply to watering sites, fences, and corrals 

within wilderness, consistent with the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Management Plan. 

LG-NA-MA-6. A variety of range infrastructure, grazing systems, and other range management practices 

may be considered in conjunction with livestock management on individual allotments. Such practices 

would be based on the range management category in which the allotment has been placed and would

be formulated in consultation, coordination, and cooperation with livestock operators, and other interested 

parties.

LG-NA-MA-7. The extent, location, and timing of infrastructure would be based on the allotment-specific 

management objectives adopted through the resource management planning process, interdisciplinary 

development and review of proposed actions, operator contributions, and BLM funding capability.

LG-NA-MA-8. Use the following typical design features and construction practices for range 

infrastructure:

Fences would be constructed to provide exterior allotment boundaries, divide allotments into 

pastures, protect streams, and control livestock. 

Most fences would be three or four wire with steel post spaced 16.5 feet apart with intermediate wire 

stays. 

Jack legs would be used where driving steel posts are not practical. 

Where fences may impair the movement of wildlife, they would be no more than 40 inches in height, 

three strand, with the bottom wire smooth and at least 16 inches above the ground. 

Where needed on key big game areas, the top wire would also be smooth. 

Fences that create wildlife movement problems would be modified. 

Proposed fence lines would not be bladed or scraped. 
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-38

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Gates or cattle guards would be installed where fences cross roads. 

 For any fences in wildlife migration areas, the need for let-down fences to allow passage of wildlife 

would be analyzed. These fences would be let down when livestock are not present. The BLM would 

be responsible for management of these special purpose fences.

Springs would be developed or redeveloped using a backhoe to install a buried collection system, 

usually consisting of drain tile and a collection box. The collection box is normally made from a 

section of 24 to 42 inch metal culvert with a cover and a fitting to which a delivery pipe is connected. 

A short pipeline would be installed to deliver water to a trough for use by livestock and wildlife. 

Normally the spring area is fenced to exclude livestock following development.

Wherever possible, water pipelines would be buried. The trench may be excavated by a backhoe, 

Ditch Witch, or similar equipment. Rigid plastic pipe would be placed in the trench and the excavated 

material would be used to backfill. While some flexible pipe may be installed using a ripper tooth, this 

is not a preferred technique.

Most pipelines would have water tanks spaced one to two miles apart.

Well sites would be selected based on geologic reports that predict the depth to reliable aquifers.

All applicable State laws and regulations that apply to the development of groundwater would be 

observed.

LG-NA-MA-9. Maintain range infrastructure in working condition as long as they are deemed necessary

to management. 

LG-NA-MA-10. Develop pipelines as follows:

24.5 miles of pipeline in MUA 6, 

4 miles in MUA 7, 

2 miles in MUA 9,

53.5 miles in MUA 11, 

57.8 miles in MUA 12, 

 16.1 miles in MUA 13, and

3.5 miles in MUA 16.

See Map 3 for MUA boundaries.

LG-NA-MA-11. Develop reservoirs, wells, or springs as follows:

2 reservoirs or wells in MUA 7,

1 springs and 2 reservoirs in MUA 10, and 

1 reservoir, well, or spring in MUA 12.

See Map 3 for MUA boundaries.

LG-NA-MA-12. Develop fences as follows:

6.3 miles in MUA 10, 

2.7 miles in MUA 12, 

9.4 miles in MUA 13, and

7.6 miles in MUA 16. 

See Map 3 for MUA boundaries.

LG-NA-MA-13. Fence reservoirs and provide water for livestock away from the reservoirs where possible

and if needed by wildlife. Consider wildlife habitat needs when reservoir size determinations are made.

LG-NA-MA-14. Design new spring developments and modify selected existing spring developments to 

protect wetted areas.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Resource Uses

2-39

•

•

•

•

•

LG-NA-MA-15. Livestock-related activities such as salting, feeding, construction of holding facilities, and 

stock driveways would not be allowed to occur within the riparian zone of a stream drainage system.

LG-NA-MA-16. Modify fences to allow for pronghorn and mule deer passage in areas where their needs 

are not being met in MUA 7, 11, 12, 13, and 16. Modify other fences where specific wildlife needs are not 

being met. Build new fences to allow for wildlife passage.

LG-NA-MA-17. Cattle guards would be considered a part of the fence and would be installed as 

necessary.

LG-NA-MA-18. All allotments in which range improvement funds are to be spent will be subjected to an 

economic analysis. The analysis will be used to develop a final priority ranking of allotments for the 

commitment of the range improvement funds that are needed to implement activity plans. The highest 

priority for implementation generally will be assigned to those improvements for which total anticipated 

benefits exceed costs.

LG-NA-MA-19. New pipelines would not be authorized within Wilderness and eligible, suitable, and 

designated Wild and Scenic River corridors. 

2.2.3.2 Recreation

Goal

No goal stated.

Objectives

REC-NA-O-1. Protect the Salmon Falls Creek Canyon (rim-to-rim) for its natural and scenic values 

through special designation and management as a Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA). 

Allocations

REC-NA-A-1. Continue managing the following SRMAs:

Hagerman-Owsley Bridge SRMA (3,000 acres), 

Oregon Trail SRMA (16,000 acres), 

Bruneau-Jarbidge SRMA (57,000 acres), 

Jarbidge Forks SRMA (4,000 acres), and 

Salmon Falls Creek SRMA (6,000 acres). 

Note: These SRMAs were never mapped in the 1987 RMP.

Management Actions

REC-NA-MA-1. Develop Recreation Activity Management Plans for the Hagerman-Owsley Bridge,

Oregon Trail, Bruneau-Jarbidge, Jarbidge Forks, and Salmon Falls Creek SRMAs. 

REC-NA-MA-2. Consider a variety of means to maintain or improve recreation opportunities.

REC-NA-MA-3. Some areas may be subject to special restrictions to protect resources or eliminate or 

reduce conflicts among uses.

REC-NA-MA-4. Provide and maintain recreation opportunities and facilities to meet existing or anticipated 

demand, for public safety, and to protect recreation resources.
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-40

•

•

•

•

•

2.2.3.3 Transportation and Travel 

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

No objective stated. 

Allocations

TR-C-A-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized and mechanized 

vehicle use (60,000 acres). The Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area would be closed to 

motorized vehicle use (2,000 acres).

TR-NA-A-1. Three hundred and forty two thousand acres would be open to cross-country motorized 

vehicle use in Multiple Use Areas (MUAs) 4, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, and 15. 

TR-NA-A-2. With the MUAs located in Owyhee County (10, 11, and 16, and portions of 4, 6, 7, 12, 13, 

and 15), all recreational motorized and mechanized off-highway vehicle use would be limited to existing 

roads and trails lawfully in existence as described in the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009. 

TR-NA-A-3. Salmon Falls Creek Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) and cultural sites 

identified as special MUAs in the RMP would be closed to motorized vehicle use (3,000 acres). 

TR-NA-A-4. Seven hundred and fifty one thousand acres would be limited to designated routes, 

including: 

Sand Point ACEC and surrounding paleontological deposits; 

Oregon National Historic Trail; 

Devil Creek, Juniper Ranch, and Clover Creek cultural areas in MUA 12; 

Devil Creek Complex in MUA 13; and

Devil Creek and bighorn sheep habitat in MUAs 15 and 16.

See Map 3 for MUA boundaries and Map 72 for the location of transportation and travel allocations. 

TR-NA-A-5. Crucial mule deer and pronghorn winter range within MUAs 15 and 16 would be limited 

seasonally for snow vehicles if Idaho Department of Fish and Game determines harassment is occurring.

Management Actions

TR-NA-MA-1. Avoid constructing any roads within or closely adjacent to crucial wildlife habitat.

TR-NA-MA-2. Roads would avoid riparian zones to the extent practicable. 

TR-NA-MA-3. Roads would not be built within one mile of bighorn sheep habitat.

2.2.3.4 Land Use Authorizations

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

No objective stated.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Resource Uses

2-41

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Allocations

LA-NA-A-1. The following areas would be exclusion areas for rights-of-way (ROWs) (62,000 acres); they 

would not be available for ROWs under any conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and

 Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area. 

See Map 89 for locations of ROW exclusion areas.

LA-NA-A-2. The following areas would be utility avoidance/restricted areas (935,000 acres):

Areas within US Air Force Military Operating Areas; 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors;

Paleontological sites at Glenns Ferry and Pasadena Valley (surface, underground); 

Sand Point Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) (surface, underground);

Dove Springs;

96 paleontological sites; 

 All rutted segments of Oregon Trail (overhead, surface, underground); 

Bruneau-Jarbidge River ACEC (overhead, surface, underground);

 Portions of 24,080 acres of the Dry Lakes/Bruneau River Complex and Post Office Cultural areas 

(surface, underground); 

Portions of 4,480 acres of three cultural resource complexes at Juniper Ranch, Clover Creek, and 

Devil Creek (surface, underground); and

Salmon Falls Creek Canyon (overhead, surface, underground). 

See Map 86 for locations of utility avoidance areas.

LA-NA-A-3. Designate the following Section 368 (of the Energy Policy Act of 2005) energy ROW 

corridors, all of which are 3,500 feet wide and are compatible for multimodal uses (e.g., oil, gas, electrical 

transmission, hydrogen pipeline): 

Pilgrim Gulch, 

Shoestring, 

Balanced Rock, and

Saylor Creek.

See Map 97 for locations of ROW corridors.

Management Actions

LA-C-MA-1. Implement the Programmatic Policies and Design Features in the Record of Decision on 

Wind Energy Development on BLM-Administered Lands in the Western United States (2005) (Appendix 

B).

LA-C-MA-2. Interagency Operating Procedures, located in Appendix B, would be implemented for 

projects proposed within the Section 368 corridors.

LA-C-MA-3. The BLM would review all withdrawals on and classifications of public lands to eliminate all 

unnecessary withdrawals and classifications. Reviews would consider:

For what purposes were the lands withdrawn? 

Are these purposes still being served?

Are the lands suitable for return to the public domain?
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-42

•

•

•

•

•

LA-NA-MA-1. Generally, public lands may be considered for the installation of public utilities, except 

where expressly closed by law or regulation. ROWs would be considered except where specifically 

identified in the RMP for avoidance.

LA-NA-MA-2. Restrict future communication site needs to existing sites as much as possible. 

LA-NA-MA-3. Consider new communication sites if there is a demonstrated need and the resource 

conflicts are low or can be mitigated.

LA-NA-MA-4. Restrict wind energy development from wildlife habitat where adverse effects could not be 

mitigated.

LA-NA-MA-5. Consider alternative methods such as ROWs and cooperative agreements for meeting the 

withdrawal/classification objectives.

LA-NA-MA-6. Withdrawal/classification modifications and extensions must provide for maximum possible

multiple uses, with particular emphasis upon mineral exploration and development. When withdrawals are 

revoked, the lands continue to be in the retention category.

LA-NA-MA-7. New withdrawals proposed will be handled on a case-by-case basis in accordance with 

Section 204 of Federal Land and Policy Management Act, with full public participation.

LA-NA-MA-8. Land use permits for irrigated agricultural use of public land would be used sparingly and 

be restricted to resolve situations where other alternatives prove to be impractical, such as: 

 Small areas of public land isolated between a farmed field and a canal, ditch, or road;

 Renewal for a circular pivot already authorized by a land use permit until the land is removed from 

agricultural production and rehabilitated or until the land is transferred from public ownership; and 

In cases where a pivot must cross public land, the lands are to remain unfarmed and a land use 

permit would be issued only for the crossing pivot.

LA-NA-MA-9. Treat soil erosion that occurs on public lands as a result of excess irrigation flows from 

private agricultural lands a trespass in order to stop the erosion and to rehabilitate the damage to public 

land.

LA-NA-MA-10. Prevent agricultural trespass, including irrigation lines in the Sand Point ACEC.

LA-NA-MA-11. Consider airport leases only when a definite need has been shown, supported by a 

specific development and management plan, and a showing of financial capability to carry out the project.

2.2.3.5 Land Tenure 

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

LT-NA-O-1. Retain public lands in Federal ownership to be managed by BLM according to the principles 

of multiple use and sustained yield, except those lands specifically identified in the plan or amendment as 

transfer areas.

Allocations

LT-NA-A-1. Lands that are not available for disposal (62,000 acres) include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and 

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area (WSA). 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Resource Uses

2-43

•

•

•

•

•

•

LT-NA-A-2. Consider for transfer from Federal ownership:

600 acres of public land through sale (T1; Multiple Use Areas [MUAs] 4, 6, 7, 12, and 13); 

2,000 acres through sale or exchange (T2; MUAs 4, 6, 7, 15, and 16); and 

 3,000 acres through exchange (T3; MUAs 7, 11, and 12).

See Map 3 for MUA boundaries.

LT-NA-A-3. Retain 1,299,000 acres of public lands across all MUAs, including all lands in the Bruneau 

Known Geothermal Resource Area and all subsurface ownership in MUA 15 (Map 3). 

LT-NA-A-4. Make available 67,000 acres of land for potential Desert Land Act and Carey Act 

development (T4; MUAs 4, 6, and 7).

See Map 106 for locations of Land Tenure Zones T1, T2, T3, and T4.

LT-NA-A-5. Close 1,275,000 acres to agricultural entry in MUAs 4, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 15, and 16. 

LT-NA-A-6. Public lands that are to be retained in Federal ownership may be considered for Recreation

and Public Purposes Act of 1954 leases, private exchanges and State exchanges following amendment 

procedures. 

Management Actions

LT-NA-MA-1. Sales of public lands can be made upon consideration of the following criteria:

The parcel, because of its location or other characteristics, is difficult and uneconomic to manage as 

part of the public lands, and is not suitable for management by another Federal department or 

agency; 

The parcel was acquired for a specific purpose and is no longer required for that or any other Federal 

purpose; or

Disposal of the parcel will serve important public objectives, including but not limited to, expansion of 

communities and economic development which cannot be achieved prudently or feasibly on land 

other than public land and which outweigh other public objectives and values. These include, but are 

not limited to, wildlife, grazing, recreation, and scenic values which would be served by maintaining 

such parcel in Federal ownership.

Acquisition

LT-NA-MA-2. Lands may be acquired by BLM as authorized by law, but only within retention areas. 

Lands to be acquired through exchange or purchase would be done to benefit one or more of the 

resource programs including, but not limited to cultural, paleontological, recreation, wildlife, and soils.

LT-NA-MA-3. Continue an ongoing program of identifying and obtaining BLM access across non-bureau 

lands where needed to accomplish BLM objectives.

Transfer

LT-NA-MA-4. Transfer of public land within a transfer area may be accomplished by any means 

authorized by law.

LT-NA-MA-5. Lands that are mineral in character, WSAs, or designated wilderness areas would not be 

identified as transfer areas.

LT-NA-MA-6. In agricultural development areas, maintain control of all lands necessary to prevent 

erosion resulting from irrigation and farming practices. These might include, but would not be limited to 

vegetation strips, slopes, drainage ways, and flood plains. 
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-44

•

•

o

o

o

o

o

o

LT-NA-MA-7. Manage transfer areas until transfer of title occurs. Management actions would be taken as 

necessary to meet resource or user needs. Public investments in transfer areas would be kept to a 

minimum.

LT-NA-MA-8. When withdrawals are revoked, the lands continue to be in a retention category. 

LT-NA-MA-9. All disposals of public lands must be consistent with the planning requirements of Federal 

Land and Policy Management Act and must also be evaluated through the environmental assessment 

process as required by NEPA. 

LT-NA-MA-10. Consider the need to provide protection for existing rights, access, and future anticipated 

needs in all disposal actions. This protection would be provided for through the issuance of rights-of-way 

to existing users or reservations to the Federal government in areas of anticipated needs.

LT-NA-MA-11. Design special water runoff stipulations on transferred lands in MUA 6 to protect public 

lands adjacent to and down slope of transfer lands.

Exchange

LT-NA-MA-12. Before an exchange can be completed, the BLM must determine that the public interest 

would be well served by making the exchange. 

LT-NA-MA-13. Full consideration for exchange would be given to improve Federal land management and 

the needs of State and local publics through an evaluation of the needs for lands for economic 

development, community expansion, recreation areas or opportunities, food, fiber, minerals, and wildlife.

LT-NA-MA-14. Any lands delineated for transfer in the exchange only category (T3) but not needed for

the exchange would be retained in Federal ownership.

LT-NA-MA-15. Exchanges would be allowed within crucial wildlife habitat only if the wildlife value of the 

offered lands meets or exceeds the wildlife value of the selected lands. Crucial wildlife habitat will not be 

sold.

Desert Land Act and Carey Act (DLE/CA)

LT-NA-MA-16. Consideration for allowing the use of public lands for agricultural development under 

DLE/CA generally fall into the following four steps:

Lands must be identified for disposal through the land use planning process.

Lands must be desert in character and physically suited for agricultural development by irrigation. The 

following criteria are used to determine the suitability classification of potential agricultural lands:

If there is 60% or more Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Class I, II, or III soils in a 40-acre parcel, 

the parcel may be classified suitable for agriculture development. If there is more than 40% SCS 

Class IV or poorer soils in each 40-acre parcel, the entire parcel is unsuitable for classification.

Cropland in Capability Classes II through V (particularly subclass "e") that has an average annual 

erosion rate of more than three times that at which soil forms (4 to 5 tons per acre per year on the 

average for deep soils, lower for shallower soils) would be found unsuitable for agricultural 

development.

Any public lands containing known archaeological, paleontological, or historical values 

determined to be unique or possibly significant would be found unsuitable for disposal for 

agricultural development pending further analysis.

Any public lands where rare, Endangered, Threatened, or Sensitive species of plants or animals 

are known to live (or nest) would be found unsuitable for disposal for agricultural development, 

unless mitigation is possible. 

Certain tracts of land identified for community needs such as landfills, gravel pits, sewage plants, 

schools, etc., would be found unsuitable for disposal for agriculture. 

Certain tracts of land identified as valuable for wildlife habitat would be found unsuitable for 

disposal for agricultural development.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Resource Uses

2-45

o

o

•

•

•

Public land that does not qualify for agricultural use or disposal under DLE/CA because of other 

public purpose would be found unsuitable for disposal under these laws. Those lands that 

became fragmented as a result of a DLE/CA action and not needed for other public purposes 

may be considered for disposal through sale or exchange.

Certain tracts of land identified as having agricultural limitations based on slope and/or flood plain 

management would be found unsuitable for agricultural development.

An economic analysis of lands considered for agricultural development must show a high likelihood 

that the lands can be farmed at a profit over a long term.

Applicants for agricultural development must show a legal right to appropriate water including a 

permit to drill a well if part of the operation. Applications for agricultural development that would 

contribute to the mining of groundwater would not be allowed. The Idaho Supreme Court Decision 

#13794 regarding use of Snake River water above Swan Falls Dam for agricultural development 

would be resolved before proceeding with the allowance to enter the land.

The entryman for agricultural development must show compliance with cultivation, fund expenditure, 

irrigation system development, and publication requirements, and payment of required fees to obtain 

patent to the land.

LT-NA-MA-17. Under Carey Act development, the Bureau's primary concerns are retention vs. disposal 

determination and physical suitability of the land. Application processing and feasibility study evaluations 

are the responsibility of the State of Idaho.

LT-NA-MA-18. Continue to work closely with Idaho Department of Water Resources under terms of a 

cooperative agreement to process DLE/CA applications.

LT-NA-MA-19. Public lands under DLE/CA applications that are relinquished would generally revert to a 

retention category and would not be made available for further application for agricultural purposes. Some 

relinquished lands may be identified for possible transfer via exchange only.

2.2.3.6 Minerals 

Leasable Minerals

Leasable minerals include oil shale, oil and gas, phosphate, potash, sodium, geothermal resources, and 

other minerals that may be developed under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended.

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

LE-NA-O-1. Make 1,259,000 acres of the area available for leasable mineral exploration and 

development across all Multiple Use Areas (MUAs). 

Allocations

LE-NA-A-1. Generally, the public lands may be considered for energy and minerals leasing and sale.

LE-NA-A-2. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, the Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study 

Area, designated Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridors, and areas in MUAs 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 15, and 

16 (112,000 acres) would be closed to mineral leasing.

LE-NA-A-3. Five hundred thirty nine thousand acres would be open with standard leasing terms in MUAs 

4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 (Map 3).

LE-NA-A-4. Crucial wildlife habitats shown below would be open to mineral leasing with no surface 

occupancy (NSO) during the following time periods: 
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-46

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

December through April in mule deer winter range; 

December through April in pronghorn winter range; 

May through June in pronghorn fawning range; 

December through mid-February in sage-grouse and sharp-tailed grouse winter range; 

Mid-February through June in sage-grouse and sharp-tailed grouse breeding grounds; 

April through June in within two miles of leks in sage-grouse and sharp-tailed grouse nesting and 

brood rearing habitat; 

December through March in bald eagle and peregrine falcon winter habitat; 

February through June within 0.75 mile of golden eagle nests; 

Mid-March through June within 0.75 mile of ferruginous hawk, prairie falcon, and long-billed curlew 

nests; 

Mid-March through June within 0.25 mile of white-faced ibis and Western burrowing owl nests; and

 Mid-April through August within 0.75 mile of osprey nests. 

LE-NA-A-5. The following 139,000 acres in MUAs 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 would be open 

to mineral leasing (excluding geothermal leasing) with NSO year-round: 

Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone; 

 Paleontological sites and cultural resource complexes;

Sand Point Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC); 

 Power site in MUA 9; 

Portions of the Bruneau, Jarbidge, Arch, and Salmon Falls Canyons outside of wilderness; 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA); 

Bighorn sheep habitat; and

 Within 500 feet of reservoirs, ponds, lakes, streams, wetlands, marshes, and riparian areas.

LE-NA-A-6. In addition, cultural sites identified as special MUAs in the RMP and areas within one mile of 

bald eagle and peregrine falcon nests, within essential nesting habitat for other birds of prey, and within 

0.5 mile of heron rookeries would also be open to mineral leasing with NSO year-round. 

LE-NA-A-7. The Oregon Trail would be closed to geothermal leasing.

LE-NA-A-8. The following areas would be open to geothermal leasing with NSO:

Bruneau-Jarbidge and Salmon Falls Creek ACECs;

Designated or proposed critical habitat for listed species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 if 

geothermal leasing would adversely modify the habitat; for listed or proposed species without 

designated habitat, NSO would be implemented to the extent necessary to avoid jeopardy;

Within the boundary of properties designated or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, 

including National Landmarks and National Register Districts and Sites, and additional lands outside 

the designated boundaries to the extent necessary to protect values where the setting and integrity is 

critical to their designation or eligibility;

Areas with important cultural and archaeological resources, such as traditional cultural properties and 

Native American sacred sites, as identified through consultation;

Water bodies, riparian areas, wetlands, playas, and 100-year floodplains;

Developed recreational facilities; 

Eligible and suitable WSR corridors; 

Areas managed as Visual Resource Management Class I; and

Slopes in excess of 40% and/or soils with high erosion potential.

Management Actions

LE-C-MA-1. Geothermal exploration, drilling, utilization, and reclamation projects would incorporate 

stipulations, best management practices, and management procedures from the Record of Decision and 

Resource Management Plan Amendments for Geothermal Leasing in the Western United States 

(December 2008) found in Appendix B. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Resource Uses

2-47

•

•

•

•

•

•

LE-NA-MA-1. Approval of an application for lease or sale of energy and minerals is subject to an 

environmental analysis and may include stipulations to protect other resources.

Salable Minerals

Salable minerals include minerals and building materials such as sand, stone, gravel, pumice, pumicite, 

cinders, and clay.

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

SA-NA-O-1. Manage 700 acres in Multiple Use Areas (MUAs) 4, 6, 7, and 12 for material use sites.

Allocations

SA-NA-A-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, the Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study 

Area, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors (62,000 acres) would be closed to salable mineral 

exploration and development.

SA-NA-A-2. Manage areas for material use sites as follows:

65 acres in MUA 4, 

28 acres in MUA 6, 

24 sites containing 524 acres in MUA 7, and 

80 acres in MUA 12.

Management Actions

SA-C-MA-1. Promote the use of existing sites for mineral disposals.

SA-C-MA-2. Exploration would be allowed where appropriate under a letter of authorization from the BLM 

authorized officer. Exploration for new sites would be the responsibility of the applicant.

SA-NA-MA-1. New sites may be developed if the BLM authorized officer determined that an existing site 

will not meet the applicant’s needs and site impacts can be sufficiently mitigated.

Locatable Minerals

Minerals or materials subject to claim and development under the Mining Law of 1872, as amended. 

Generally includes metallic minerals such as gold and silver, and other materials not subject to lease or 

sale (some bentonites, limestone, talc, some xeolites, etc.).

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

LO-NA-O-1. Make 1,153,000 acres of the area available for locatable minerals across all Multiple Use 

Areas (MUAs). 

Allocations

LO-C-A-1. The planning area, excluding the following withdrawn areas (60,000 acres), would be available 

for location of mining claims: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and

 Designated Wild and Scenic River corridors.
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-48

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LO-NA-A-1. Generally, the public lands would be available for mineral exploration and development, 

subject to applicable regulations and Federal and State laws. Areas within the planning area would be 

available for exploration and development of locatable minerals except where specifically restricted or 

excluded. The public lands would be available for location of mining claims unless withdrawn.

LO-NA-A-2. Recommend 158,000 acres for withdrawal from locatable entry in MUAs 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 

13, 15, and 16. Areas include:

Sand Point and Bruneau-Jarbidge Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs); 

Oregon Trail;

Paleontological sites and cultural resource complexes;

Dove Springs;

Dean Site;

Bruneau, Jarbidge, and Salmon Falls Canyons; and 

Bighorn sheep habitat.

Recommendations by BLM for withdrawal are subject to final consideration by the Secretary of the 

Interior.

Management Action

LO-NA-MA-1. Give special consideration for the mitigation of mining-related activities in riparian areas 

(i.e., tailing deposits, holding ponds, chemical dumps).

2.2.4 Special Designations

This section describes management specific to areas with special designations. Unless otherwise 

specified in the following sections, management described elsewhere in Chapter 2 applies to these areas 

as well.

2.2.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 

Goal

No goal stated.

Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC

Objectives

ACEC-NA-O-1. Protect the cultural values of the Dry Lake/Bruneau River Complex and Arch Canyon and 

the scenic and recreation values of the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers through special designation and 

management. 

ACEC-NA-O-2. Protect and enhance the Arch Canyon area and bighorn sheep habitat in the West Fork 

of the Bruneau River and the Jarbidge River system to a good ecological condition class and protect and 

maintain the cultural, geologic, scenic, and natural values present in the area.

Allocation

ACEC-NA-A-1. Manage 85,000 acres of public land as the Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC (Map 136). 

Management Actions

ACEC-NA-MA-1. The management priority for the canyons is for bighorn sheep and other wildlife. Where 

necessary to prevent livestock access to canyons, livestock management measures (i.e., salting or 

fencing) will be implemented.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Special Designations

2-49

ACEC-NA-MA-2. Activities or developments that would impair the scenic quality would not be allowed. 

The area would be managed as Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class I or II with the canyon 

system as the Key Observation Point.

ACEC-NA-MA-3. Livestock water sources would not be developed within one mile of bighorn sheep 

habitat within the ACEC unless adverse effects can be mitigated.

ACEC-NA-MA-4. No conversions from cattle to sheep will be allowed in allotments containing bighorn 

sheep habitat, unless a satisfactory separation can be maintained by fences or topographic features.

ACEC-NA-MA-5. The area would be recommended for withdrawal from the 1872 mining laws.

ACEC-NA-MA-6. No surface occupancy would be allowed for oil and gas and geothermal exploration or 

development within the habitat area. 

ACEC-NA-MA-7. Retain public lands within bighorn sheep habitat within the ACEC, unless a proposed 

exchange would result in the acquisition of higher quality habitat.

ACEC-NA-MA-8. The ACEC would be a utility avoidance area for overhead, surface, and underground 

developments. Retain the utility corridor near Murphy Hot Springs in the ACEC.

ACEC-NA-MA-9. Maintain a low level of human disturbance in bighorn sheep habitat by not constructing 

or upgrading any roads that would lead to or encourage human disturbance in bighorn sheep habitat. 

ACEC-NA-MA-10. Motorized vehicle use within the ACEC would be allowed only on designated roads 

and trails.

ACEC-NA-MA-11. The protection of Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive plant species would be 

given priority over livestock and recreation use.

ACEC-NA-MA-12. Existing primitive recreation uses of the river canyon complex are compatible uses.

ACEC-NA-MA-13. Off-highway vehicle use, livestock use, utility corridor use, mineral development, and 

hydro development are uses that need to be analyzed on a case-by-case basis to determine 

compatibility.

ACEC-NA-MA-14. Permit no adverse habitat alteration of bighorn sheep or potential bighorn sheep

habitats.

ACEC-NA-MA-15. Develop a Multiple Use Management Plan for the ACEC.

Salmon Falls Creek ACEC

Objective

ACEC-NA-O-3. Protect the Salmon Falls Creek Canyon (rim-to-rim) for its natural and scenic values 

through special designation and management.

Allocation

ACEC-NA-A-2. Manage 3,000 acres of public land as the Salmon Falls Creek ACEC (Map 136). 

Management Actions

ACEC-NA-MA-16. No surface occupancy would be allowed for leasable minerals within the Salmon Falls 

Creek ACEC.

ACEC-NA-MA-17. The ACEC would be closed to salable minerals.

ACEC-NA-MA-18. Manage the ACEC as VRM Class II.
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-50

ACEC-NA-MA-19. The ACEC would be a right-of-way avoidance area (overhead, surface, and 

underground).

ACEC-NA-MA-20. Close the ACEC to agricultural entry.

ACEC-NA-MA-21. Close the ACEC to all motorized vehicles.

ACEC-NA-MA-22. The ACEC would be closed to livestock grazing.

ACEC-NA-MA-23. Restrict any mechanized fire suppression equipment from the canyon within the 

Salmon Falls Creek ACEC.

ACEC-NA-MA-24. Develop a Recreation Activity Management Plan for the ACEC.

ACEC-NA-MA-25. All actions within the portion of the ACEC that is also a Wilderness Study Area must 

be consistent with Management of Wilderness Study Areas (BLM Manual 6330). 

Sand Point ACEC

Objective

ACEC-NA-O-4. Protect and manage the Sand Point Paleontologic Area. Protect its paleontological and 

cultural resources from destruction and loss, protect the geologic features present, and ensure that its 

scenic and wildlife values are maintained.

Allocation

ACEC-NA-A-3. Manage 800 acres of public land as the Sand Point ACEC (Map 136).

Management Actions

ACEC-NA-MA-26. Manage the paleontological resources within the ACEC in accordance with the 1988 

Sand Point Natural History Management Plan.

ACEC-NA-MA-27. Prevent agricultural trespass, including irrigation lines. Prevent water erosion on the 

site and ensure that vegetative cover is maintained to minimize wind erosion. Prevent sediment discharge 

from entering the Snake River.

ACEC-NA-MA-28. Mitigate erosion from irrigated agricultural lands onto adjacent public lands that could 

erode Sand Point paleontological deposits.

ACEC-NA-MA-29. No surface-disturbing activities on the site would be allowed unless they are directly 

related to studies or research on the cultural, paleontological, or geological resources present or, unless 

they can be mitigated in such a way as to maximize the information gained on the cultural, paleontological

and/or geological resource impacted in the Sand Point ACEC.

ACEC-NA-MA-30. Any surface disturbance allowed in the Sand Point ACEC would be mitigated to blend 

with the topography and visual aspects of the site so as to be substantially unnoticeable. If this is not 

economically or practically feasible, the surface disturbance would not be allowed.

ACEC-NA-MA-31. Recommend lands within the ACEC for withdrawal from locatable mineral location 

exploration and development and all types of land disposals.

ACEC-NA-MA-32. The ACEC would be open to mineral leasing with no surface occupancy. 

ACEC-NA-MA-33. The ACEC would be a utility avoidance area for surface and underground 

development.

ACEC-NA-MA-34. Obtain an easement, through the private lands that the access road traverses, to 

ensure access to the Sand Point ACEC.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Special Designations

2-51

ACEC-NA-MA-35. Motorized vehicle use within the Sand Point ACEC would be limited to designated 

routes.

ACEC-NA-MA-36. No new buildings would be allowed unless the structure is directly related to the 

preservation or interpretation of the site.

ACEC-NA-MA-37. Any development on the tableland above the rim that would cause erosion on the site 

would be incompatible with the purposes of this ACEC. The lands involved with this ACEC and already 

declared as suitable for Carey Act development will be considered as unsuitable and lands involved 

would be retained in public ownership.

ACEC-NA-MA-38. Existing uses of the site for hunting and fishing are compatible uses. The use of the 

site for paleontological materials collection by professionals is also compatible.

ACEC-NA-MA-39. Motorized vehicle use off existing roads is incompatible.

2.2.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

NHT-NA-O-1. Protect and manage the Oregon NHT to preserve all remaining ruts and trail features; 

develop an interpretive marker program, signing, and facilities to serve trail users; and nominate to the 

National Register.

Allocation

NHT-NA-A-1. Manage 0.25 mile on either side of the Oregon NHT as the National Trail Management 

Corridor and the Oregon NHT protective zone (11,000 acres).

Management Actions

NHT-NA-MA-1. Manage the Oregon NHT in accordance with guidelines established in the National Park 

Service Plan and in accordance with provisions of Public Law (PL) 90-543 and PL 95-625. 

NHT-NA-MA-2. Develop a cultural plan for the Oregon Trail. 

NHT-NA-MA-3. Develop a Recreation Activity Management Plan for the Oregon Trail.

NHT-NA-MA-4. Manage the Oregon Trail protective zone as Visual Resource Management Class I.

2.2.4.3 Wilderness 

Goal and Objective

WD-C-G-1. Manage the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to protect wilderness values.

Management Action

WD-C-MA-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness was designated by Congress in 2009 with the 

Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009, Section G, P.L. 111-11. The 90,000 acre BruneauJarbidge Rivers Wilderness Area (63,000 acres within the planning area) would be managed according to 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan. 

See Map 145 for the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness location.
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-52

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2.2.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 

Goal and Objective

WSR-C-G-1. Maintain or enhance the outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs), free-flowing condition, 

and water quality of designated, suitable, and eligible WSR segments.

Allocations

WSR-C-A-1. River segments designated as Wild and Scenic include: 

A 38.1-mile segment of the Bruneau River from the downstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness to the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau River, except for a 0.5-mile 

segment at the Indian Hot Springs public road access, to be administered as a wild river; 

A 0.5-mile segment of the Bruneau River at the Indian Hot Springs public road access to be 

administered as a recreational river; 

A 0.3-mile segment of the West Fork of the Bruneau River from the confluence with the Jarbidge 

River to the downstream boundary of the Bruneau Canyon Grazing Allotment to be administered as a 

wild river; and

A 27.9-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau 

River to the upstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to be administered as a 

wild river.

WSR-C-A-2. Segments recommended suitable for inclusion in the WSR system include: 

A 23.0-mile segment of the Bruneau River from Blackrock Crossing to 0.3 mile above the confluence 

of the West Fork of the Bruneau River and the Jarbidge River.

WSR-C-A-3. Segments eligible for inclusion in the WSR system include: 

A 39.0-mile segment of Salmon Falls Creek from the Nevada border to Salmon Falls Reservoir and 

from Salmon Falls Dam to Balanced Rock Park; 

 A 25.0-mile segment of the Three Island, King Hill, and Hagerman reaches of the Snake River; 

A 10.2-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the planning area boundary to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 9.6-mile segment of the Jarbidge River, East Fork from the planning area boundary to Murphy Hot 

Springs and from Murphy Hot Springs to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 2.7-mile segment of Dave Creek from private land boundary to Jarbidge River, East Fork 

confluence;

A 1.0-mile segment of Cougar Point Creek from the planning area boundary to Jarbidge River, East 

Fork confluence; and 

A 1.5-mile segment of Rocky Canyon Creek from its headwaters to Salmon Falls Creek, North Fork 

confluence.

See Map 146 for locations of designated, suitable, and eligible river segments.

WSR-C-A-4. Wild and Scenic River corridors are designated to extend either the average distance of 

0.25 mile from the high water mark on each side of the river segment; or the distance to the nearest 

confined canyon rim, whichever is shorter.

WSR-C-A-5. Wild and Scenic River corridors that are suitable or eligible extend outward from the ordinary 

high water mark 0.25 mile on both sides of the river.

Management Actions

WSR-C-MA-1. Manage the designated segments of the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers in accordance with 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan to maintain or 

enhance their ORVs, free-flowing condition, water quality, and classification.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: No Action Alternative

Social and Economic Features

2-53

WSR-C-MA-2. Manage the suitable segment of the Bruneau River to maintain or enhance its ORVs, freeflowing condition, water quality, and tentative classification until Congress acts.

WSR-C-MA-3. Protect or enhance the qualifying values of eligible river segments pending a subsequent 

suitability determination or designation decision by Congress. Their free-flowing condition cannot be 

modified, their ORVs and water quality are to be maintained or enhanced, and their tentative classification 

is to be maintained.

WSR-C-MA-4. Conduct suitability studies and make suitability determinations on eligible river segments 

entirely within the planning area; coordinate suitability studies on segments forming the boundary with the 

Burley and Shoshone Field Offices.

WSR-C-MA-5. The existing powerline south of Murphy Hot Springs on the East Fork of the Jarbidge River 

would be retained; designated, suitable, and eligible WSR corridors would be right-of-way avoidance 

areas. 

WSR-C-MA-6. If, through legislation, Congress decides not to designate a suitable segment as part of the 

Wild and Scenic River System, the protective management outlined in this section would no longer apply 

and these segments would be managed according to direction in other sections of the RMP.

2.2.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs)

Goal and Objective

WSA-C-G-1. Manage and protect the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA to preserve wilderness 

characteristics so as not to impair the suitability for designation by Congress as wilderness. 

Allocation

WSA-C-A-1. Manage 2,000 acres of public land as the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA. 

See Map 145 for the WSA location.

Management Actions

WSA-C-MA-1. Manage the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA according to the Management of Wilderness 

Study Areas (BLM Manual 6330) until Congress either designates the land as wilderness or releases it for 

other uses. 

WSA-C-MA-2. If the WSA is designated by Congress as Wilderness, manage it according to 

Congressional mandates and BLM’s Wilderness Manual 6340 until a Wilderness Management Plan is 

developed.

WSA-C-MA-3. If the WSA is released for other uses by Congress, manage the lands within the Area of 

Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) and Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridor according to 

management specified for that ACEC and WSR corridor.

2.2.5 Social and Economic Features

2.2.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

No objective stated.
Chapter 2: No Action Alternative Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Social and Economic Features

2-54

Management Action

SE-NA-MA-1. BLM will ensure any management action undertaken in connection with this plan is costeffective and takes into account local social and economic factors. Cost-effectiveness may be determined 

by any method deemed appropriate by the Bureau for the specific management action involved.

2.2.5.2 Hazardous Materials

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

No objective stated.

Management Action

No management action stated.

2.2.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 

Goal

No goal stated.

Objective

No objective stated.

Management Action

No management action stated.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Tribal Rights and Interests

2-55

2.3 ALTERNATIVE I

2.3.1 Tribal Rights and Interests

Goals and Objectives

TI-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to protect resources and values associated with Native American treaty 

rights. 

TI-CA-G-2. Manage natural and cultural resources of importance to the tribes in a manner that respects 

tribal beliefs, traditions, and values. 

TI-CA-G-3. Protect the physical condition of sacred sites and traditional cultural properties and preserve 

tribal access to such sites.

Management Actions

TI-CA-MA-1. Consult with the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes and Shoshone-Bannock Tribes in accordance with 

BLM policy and other authorities. Consultation would be an ongoing process between BLM and the tribes, 

within the context of general management of public lands and programs, as well as specific proposals 

that may affect natural and cultural resources of importance to the tribes.

TI-CA-MA-2. Identify the effects of decisions on vegetation, fish, wildlife, mineral, and water resources of 

importance to the tribes, through consultation, and seek ways to lessen or avoid impacts. 

TI-CA-MA-3. Work collaboratively with the tribes regarding the identification and management of 

traditional cultural properties. 

TI-CA-MA-4. Provide general information to staff and contractors regarding existing and historic uses of 

the planning area by the tribes, Federal government trust responsibilities, and the importance of Native 

American treaty rights in order to foster a greater understanding and appreciation of tribal rights and 

interests related to public land management. 

2.3.2 Resources

2.3.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 

Goal

AAV-CA-G-1. Ensure BLM management activities and authorized uses maintain the quality of the 

planning area's air resources.

Objective

AAV-CA-O-1. Maintain the quality of air resources and limit impacts to air quality to meet National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards and Idaho Department of Environmental Quality air quality standards. 

Management Actions

AAV-CA-MA-1. Manage the planning area airshed as Class II unless it is reclassified by the State 

through the process prescribed in the Clean Air Act.

AAV-CA-MA-2. Ensure BLM management activities and authorized uses, including prescribed fire, are 

designed to comply with Federal, State, and local air quality regulations, classifications, and standards.

AAV-CA-MA-3. Minimize impacts of smoke from prescribed fires to sensitive areas such as the Class I 

airshed of the Jarbidge Wilderness (on US Forest Service-managed land), non-attainment areas, and 

communities adjacent to the planning area. 
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-56

AAV-CA-MA-4. Coordinate with the Montana-Idaho Airshed Group Smoke Management Program or its 

equivalent for all actions related to prescribed fire. 

AAV-CA-MA-5. Develop dust abatement stipulations for BLM-authorized construction and maintenance 

activities that have the potential to exceed State of Idaho air quality standards.

AAV-CA-MA-6. Design BLM activities and authorized uses to minimize night time light intrusions (e.g., 

modifications to the structure and timing of lighting).

AAV-CA-MA-7. Design BLM activities and authorized uses to comply with State of Idaho requirements for 

noise management. 

2.3.2.2 Geologic Features 

Goal

GE-CA-G-1. Manage unique geologic features for their tribal, scientific, recreational, and educational 

values. 

Objective

GE-CA-O-1. Protect unique geologic features and provide opportunities for their use and enjoyment.

Management Actions

GE-CA-MA-1. Protect unique geologic features from human-caused damage or extraction. 

GE-CA-MA-2. Conduct and maintain a cave inventory with participation from the tribes and interested 

organizations to identify and compile quantitative and qualitative data on cave resources and to determine 

cave significance in accordance with the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988.

GE-CA-MA-3. Based on the results of the cave inventory, designate significant caves and protect their 

resources. 

GE-CA-MA-4. Set management objectives and setting prescriptions for significant caves.

2.3.2.3 Soil Resources 

Goal and Objective

SR-CA-G-1. Manage resources and uses to maintain or enhance biological and physical functions and 

stability of soils. 

Management Actions

SR-CA-MA-1. Minimize soil erosion by maintaining perennial vegetation cover based on site potential.

SR-CA-MA-2. Design construction, maintenance, and land treatments to reduce impacts to soils. 

SR-CA-MA-3. Collaborate with County Highway Districts to reduce impacts from road maintenance along 

stream corridors and in areas of highly erosive soils.

SR-CA-MA-4. Reduce the erosive effects of transportation and travel by modifying routes or mitigating 

the impacts (e.g., water bars or control structures) where problems are identified. 

SR-CA-MA-5. Revegetate or stabilize areas where BLM management activities or authorized uses have 

resulted in unanticipated erosion.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resources

2-57

SR-CA-MA-6. Where new road construction or reconstruction occurs, the location and design should 

minimize soil erosion, including closure or decommissioning of the road if the need for the road is 

temporary.

SR-CA-MA-7. Soil and snow should not be side cast into surface waters during road maintenance.

SR-I-MA-1. Mitigate impacts of BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses on soils 

with severe or very severe potential for wind erosion (218,000 acres; Map 4) or with high potential for 

water erosion (443,000 acres; Map 5) for watershed and ecosystem health.

SR-I-MA-2. Develop and implement an erosion control strategy for new land use authorizations, Special 

Recreation Permits, and mineral exploration and development involving surface disturbance on slopes 

greater than 20% or on soils with severe or very severe potential for wind erosion or with high potential for 

water erosion. 

2.3.2.4 Water Resources

Goal

WR-CA-G-1. Maintain or improve the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of water resources.

Objective

WR-CA-O-1. Make progress towards meeting Federal and State water quality standards. 

Management Actions

WR-CA-MA-1. Priority streams for restoration of water quality include streams containing special status 

species and their habitat (Map 24), fish-bearing streams, and water quality impaired streams (Map 6). 

Map 6 displays the location of streams meeting these criteria in 2011; this map can be updated to reflect 

changes in a stream’s status through the life of the plan.

WR-CA-MA-2. Prevent or mitigate the impacts of BLM management activities and authorized and allowed 

uses on water quality to comply with Federal, State, and local water quality regulations.

WR-CA-MA-3. Modify or suspend BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses that are 

a factor in not meeting water quality standards.

WR-CA-MA-4. Where applicable, incorporate best management practices to maintain and improve water 

quality (Appendix B). Recommendations may be implemented from State water quality plans to achieve 

the goal and objective (e.g., Idaho Agricultural Pollution Abatement Plan).

WR-CA-MA-5. Consider new water development projects and improvements to existing water 

development projects if impacts to water and riparian resources can be mitigated; see the Livestock 

Grazing section for additional guidance on water developments. See the Wildland Fire Ecology and 

Management section for guidance on water developments for fire suppression activities.

WR-CA-MA-6. Consult or coordinate with the Tribes and with Federal, State, and local agencies when 

determining location and designs for water development projects.

WR-CA-MA-7. Coordinate with Idaho Department of Water Resources, Idaho Department of 

Environmental Quality, and Nevada Division of Environmental Protection to identify opportunities to 

mitigate impacts of water management on public land resources.

WR-CA-MA-8. Where total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for water quality restoration are developed, 

land management activities would be consistent with the water quality restoration plan and TMDLs.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-58

•

•

•

•

•

•

WR-CA-MA-9. Water bodies that are supporting beneficial uses (e.g., cold water biota, salmonid 

spawning, recreation, and agriculture) would be managed to meet or exceed State of Idaho and Nevada 

regulations.

WR-CA-MA-10. Consult or coordinate as appropriate with tribal, Federal, State, and local governments to 

identify and secure instream flows needed to maintain riparian resources, channel conditions, and aquatic 

habitat.

WR-CA-MA-11. Apply chemicals (i.e., herbicides, pesticides, insecticides, and other toxicants) in a 

manner that does not impair water quality or prevent attainment of objectives for riparian areas and 

wetlands and avoids adverse effects on inland non-game fish and their habitat. When applying chemicals

in a Riparian Conservation Area (RCA), a spill kit would be onsite as appropriate. Prohibit storing and 

mixing chemicals within RCAs unless there are no other practical alternatives.

WR-CA-MA-12. Prohibit storage of fuels and other toxicants and refueling within RCAs unless there are 

no other practical alternatives. Any refueling sites and/or storage areas within an RCA would have an 

approved refueling and spill containment plan.

2.3.2.5 Vegetation Communities

Upland Vegetation

The Upland Vegetation section outlines goals and objectives for vegetation treatments. Management 

actions for restoration treatments, treatments for annual communities, and treatments for perennial 

communities are described in this section. Treatments for weeds and fuels are in the Noxious Weeds and 

Invasive Plants and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

For management and analysis purposes, the 55 vegetation communities in the planning area were 

grouped into five vegetation sub-groups (VSGs; see the Upland Vegetation section in Chapter 3 for 

vegetation communities included in each VSG); Map 9 displays existing vegetation as of 2011. 

Vegetation communities were grouped into VSGs based on the dominant vegetation and community 

structure as well as similarity in management objectives:

Annual communities – dominated by invasive annual grasses; includes communities with and 

without a shrub overstory.

Non-Native Perennial communities – dominated by non-native perennial grasses; some also have 

an overstory of four-wing saltbush or rabbitbrush.

Non-Native Understory communities – dominated by non-native perennial grasses in the 

understory; have an overstory of Wyoming big sagebrush, basin big sagebrush, black sagebrush, or 

low sage.

Native Grassland communities – dominated by native perennial grasses; do not have a shrub 

overstory.

Native Shrubland communities – dominated by native perennial grasses in the understory; have a 

shrub overstory; also includes aspen, juniper, and mountain mahogany communities which are 

present in small, scattered inclusions within other native shrubland communities.

Unvegetated areas – include breaks, barren areas, and sand dunes. 

The planning area was divided into Vegetation Management Areas (VMAs) A, B, C, and D, creating westeast bands across the planning area based on potential natural community, elevation, and mean annual 

precipitation (Map 8). 

Goals

UV-CA-G-1. Manage upland vegetation communities to promote soil stability, water infiltration, nutrient 

cycling, and energy flow; provide habitat for sage-grouse and other sagebrush steppe obligates; and 

provide for multiple use.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resources

2-59

VMA A

A

A

UV-I-G-1. Manage vegetation to enhance and sustain existing and historic uses and to improve big game 

winter range and habitat for sage-grouse.

Objective

VMA A

UV-I-O-1. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 83,000 56,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 94,000 96,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 3,000 3,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 34,000 42,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 5,000 22,000

Unvegetated Areas 2,000 2,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA A

UV-I-MA-1. Treat approximately 33% of annual communities. Annual communities would be restored to 

native shrubland in wildlife tracts, the Middle Snake and Lower Bruneau Canyon Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern, and the Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone. Half of the annual 

communities within the Deadman-Yahoo Special Recreation Management Area would be treated using 

fire-tolerant native and non-native species.

UV-I-MA-2. Restore approximately 5% of non-native perennial communities to native shrubland. 

Treatments would focus on the wildlife tracts and the Middle Snake and Lower Bruneau Canyon Areas of 

Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs). Actively maintain the remainder of the non-native perennial 

communities for livestock grazing. 

UV-I-MA-3. Non-native understory and native shrubland communities would not be a focus for active 

restoration treatments.

UV-I-MA-4. Native grassland communities would not be a focus for active restoration treatments. Natural 

succession of shrubs would be allowed throughout native grassland communities. 

UV-I-MA-5. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-60

VMA B

A

A

Objective

VMA B

UV-I-O-2. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 39,000 20,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 212,000 169,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 19,000 13,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 211,000 106,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 125,000 298,000

Unvegetated Areas 24,000 24,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA B

UV-I-MA-6. Restore approximately 50% of annual communities to native shrubland, focusing on big game 

winter range and wildlife tracts. 

UV-I-MA-7. Restore approximately 20% of non-native perennial communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on big game winter range. Actively maintain the remainder of the non-native perennial 

communities for livestock grazing.

UV-I-MA-8. Restore approximately 33% of non-native understory communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on big game winter range. The remainder of the non-native understory communities may be 

treated to introduce forbs to the understory. 

UV-I-MA-9. Restore approximately 50% of native grassland communities to native shrubland. Treatments 

would focus on big game winter range and sage-grouse habitat. Natural succession of shrubs would be 

allowed in the remainder of the native grassland communities. 

UV-I-MA-10. Native shrubland communities may be treated to introduce forbs and late-seral grasses to 

the understory.

UV-I-MA-11. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resources

2-61

VMA C 

A

A

Objective

VMA C

UV-I-O-3. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 2,000 2,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 46,000 30,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 26,000 7,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 150,000 75,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 78,000 188,000

Unvegetated Areas 11,000 11,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA C

UV-I-MA-12. Treatment of annual communities would be limited due to the location of these areas in

canyons and within wilderness. Localized treatments may be used when necessary.

UV-I-MA-13. Restore approximately 33% of non-native perennial communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on big game winter range, sage-grouse habitat, and the Canyonlands and Jarbidge Foothills 

Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs). Actively maintain the remaining non-native perennial 

communities for livestock grazing.

UV-I-MA-14. Restore approximately 75% of non-native understory communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on big game winter range, sage-grouse habitat, and the Canyonlands and Jarbidge Foothills 

SRMAs.

UV-I-MA-15. Restore approximately 50% of native grassland communities to native shrubland, focusing 

on big game winter range and connecting native shrubland communities. Natural succession of shrubs 

would be allowed throughout native grassland communities.

UV-I-MA-16. Native shrubland communities may be treated to introduce forbs and late-seral grasses to 

the understory.

UV-I-MA-17. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-62

VMA D 

A

A

Objective

VMA D

UV-I-O-4. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 1,000 500

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 4,000 13,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 12,000 12,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 80,000 19,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 97,000 150,000

Unvegetated Areas 11,000 11,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA D

UV-I-MA-18. Treat approximately 50% of annual communities to move toward non-native perennial; 

treatments would focus on species that provide wildlife food and cover (e.g., four-wing saltbush, alfalfa, 

winterfat).

UV-I-MA-19. Actively maintain non-native perennial communities for livestock grazing. Up to 50% of nonnative perennial communities may be seeded with species that provide wildlife food and cover (e.g., fourwing saltbush, alfalfa, winterfat).

UV-I-MA-20. Non-native understory communities would not be a focus for active restoration treatments.

UV-I-MA-21. Restore approximately 67% of native grassland communities to native shrubland; treatments 

would include primarily native species that provide wildlife food and cover (e.g., bitterbrush, chokecherry, 

winterfat); approximately 10% of native grassland communities would be treated with non-native species 

that provide wildlife food and cover, primarily around similarly treated annual communities. Natural 

succession of shrubs would be allowed throughout native grassland communities. 

UV-I-MA-22. Native shrubland communities may be treated to introduce forbs and late-seral grasses to 

the understory.

UV-I-MA-23. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections.

Management Actions

All VMAs

UV-CA-MA-1. Design BLM management activities and authorized uses to consider plant reproductive 

and physiological needs with a focus on the critical growing season, as well as vegetation objectives; 

guidelines for specific uses are found in the appropriate sections.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resources

2-63

•

•

•

UV-CA-MA-2. Implement drought management guidelines during periods of drought to maintain or 

achieve long-term resource productivity (Appendix F).

UV-CA-MA-3. Rest vegetation treatment areas from uses, including but not limited to livestock and wild 

horse grazing and recreational use, until treatment objectives are met and are predicted to be 

sustainable. This management action would not apply to uses that do not conflict with the treatment 

objectives.

UV-I-MA-24. The first priority for implementing vegetation treatments would be treatments identified for 

VMA C to improve habitat for mule deer and sage-grouse; the second priority would be treatments 

identified for VMA A to move toward perennial vegetation. Opportunities for treatments outside these 

priority areas would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

UV-I-MA-25. Focus restoration treatments identified for each VMA on habitat for sage-grouse, other 

special status species, and mule deer.

UV-I-MA-26. The toolbox to restore or treat upland vegetation communities would include:

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; and 

Targeted grazing. 

Prescribed fire would not be allowed. See the Glossary for definition of targeted grazing.

UV-I-MA-27. Upland vegetation treatments may use native species, including cultivars of native species,

and non-native species, consistent with management actions to achieve vegetation objectives. Native 

species would be used in vegetation treatments when practical, with special emphasis on species of 

importance to the tribes. However, desirable non-native species may be used on harsh or degraded sites, 

when native seed is not available, or where they would structurally mimic the natural plant community and 

prevent soil loss and invasion by noxious weeds and invasive plants. The non-native species used would 

be those that have the highest probability of establishment on these sites. These "placeholders" would 

maintain the area for potential future native restoration. Native seed would be used more frequently and 

at larger scales as species adapted to local areas become more available.

UV-I-MA-28. Establish 75 ungrazed reference areas (12,000 acres total) in annual, non-native perennial, 

non-native understory, native grassland, and native shrubland communities (Map 11). Each reference 

area would be approximately 160 acres and would be paired with an adjacent grazed area in a similar 

vegetation type and condition to monitor the effects of livestock grazing on a variety of plant communities.

UV-I-MA-29. Reseed areas disturbed during project construction, maintenance, or removal with a mixture 

of grasses, forbs, or shrubs appropriate to surrounding vegetation where appropriate (e.g. roads, parking 

areas, etc., would not be seeded). 

UV-I-MA-30. Assess biological soil crusts in native grassland and shrubland communities and manage 

them to move toward site potential by modifying levels and timing of BLM management activities and 

authorized uses during periods when soil crusts are most vulnerable to damage. 

Riparian Areas and Wetlands

Goal

RI-CA-G-1. Achieve healthy, functioning watersheds, riparian areas, wetlands, and associated aquatic 

habitats.

RI-CA-G-2. Provide habitat to support populations of well-distributed native and desired non-native plant, 

vertebrate, and invertebrate populations that contribute to the sustainability of riparian-dependent 

communities. 
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-64

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

RI-CA-G-3. Maintain or improve naturally functioning vegetation communities that include natural timing 

and variability of surface and groundwater in riparian areas and wetlands, and diversity and productivity of 

native and desired non-native plant communities. 

Objectives

RI-I-O-1. Maintain 85 miles of Priority 3 streams at proper functioning condition (PFC); improve 60 miles 

of Priority 1 streams to achieve PFC; and improve the remaining 17 miles of Priority 1 streams and 63 

miles of Priority 2 streams to be moving toward PFC over the life of the plan. 

RI-I-O-2. Manage wetlands to move toward PFC.

Management Actions

RI-CA-MA-1. Identify Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) around riparian areas and wetlands that 

contain or are tributaries to streams that contain special status species or their habitat to protect riparian 

vegetation, fisheries, and water quality. RCA widths would be as follows:

Category 1 – Fish-bearing streams: The RCA consists of the stream and the area on either side of 

the stream. This area extends from the edges of the active channel to the top of the inner gorge, to 

the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, or 300 feet 

slope distance (600 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), whichever is widest.

Category 2 – Permanently flowing non-fish-bearing streams: The RCA consists of the stream and the 

area on either side of the stream. This area extends from the edges of the active channel to the top of 

the inner gorge, to the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, to the outer edges of the riparian 

vegetation, or 150 feet slope distance (300 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), 

whichever is widest.

Category 3 – Ponds, lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands greater than one acre: The RCA consists of the 

body of water or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, to the extent of 

the seasonally saturated soil, or 150 feet slope distance from the edge of the maximum pool elevation 

of constructed ponds and reservoirs, or from the edge of the wetland, pond, or lake, whichever is 

widest.

Category 4 – Seasonally flowing or intermittent streams, wetlands less than one acre, landslides, and 

landslide-prone areas: This category includes features with high variability in size and site-specific 

characteristics. The RCA includes the intermittent stream channel and the area to the top of the inner 

gorge, the intermittent stream channel or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian 

vegetation, the area from the edges of the stream channel, wetland, or slide/landslide-prone area, or 

50 feet slope distance, whichever is widest.

RI-CA-MA-2. Use adaptive management to reduce impacts on riparian areas and wetlands from uses and 

activities (see the Aquatic and Riparian Management Strategy [ARMS], Appendix D). 

RI-CA-MA-3. Riparian management priorities would include the following:

Priority 1 streams – Streams rated as functioning-at-risk or functioning-at-risk with a downward 

trend. The management emphasis for Priority 1 streams would be restoration. 

Priority 2 streams – Streams rated as functioning-at-risk with an upward trend or non-functioning. 

The management emphasis for Priority 2 streams would be restoration.

Priority 3 streams – Streams rated at PFC. The management emphasis for Priority 3 streams would 

be on maintaining proper function.

Specific streams are prioritized in the ARMS (Appendix D, Tables D-3 and D-5). 

RI-CA-MA-4. Assess condition of wetlands associated with ponds and springs.

RI-CA-MA-5. Survey aquatic habitat (instream, riparian, and wetland) and maintain aquatic habitat 

inventories.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resources

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2-65

RI-CA-MA-6. Consider authorizing activities or facilities where long-term benefits outweigh short-term 

impacts to riparian vegetation and fish habitat.

RI-CA-MA-7. Remove nonessential human-made structures and objects that adversely impact the 

function of floodplains (e.g., unused bridge abutments, unused diversions, abandoned cars).

RI-CA-MA-8. Modify existing management activities and authorized uses in RCAs to attain PFC and 

ensure that habitat conditions of streams, riparian areas, and wetlands are moving toward achieving the 

goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

RI-CA-MA-9. Conduct new management activities within or affecting RCAs only if they are consistent with 

achieving the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. New management activities would 

avoid or reduce adverse effects on inland non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs. 

RI-CA-MA-10. Trees may be felled in RCAs when they pose a safety risk. Keep felled trees on-site when 

needed to maintain or improve riparian or instream conditions. 

RI-CA-MA-11. Cooperate with Tribal, Federal, State, and local agencies and private landowners to 

develop watershed-based coordinated resource management plans or other cooperative agreements to 

achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands.

RI-I-MA-1. Within the priorities identified in the ARMS (Appendix D), stream reaches with game fish or 

habitat suitable for game fish would be a high priority for restoration.

RI-I-MA-2. The toolbox for restoration of stream reaches would include, but not be limited to: 

Road closures, 

Culvert replacements, 

Closing pastures, 

Exclosure fencing, 

Modification or removal of water developments, 

 Planting of riparian areas, 

Active herding, 

Reintroduction of beaver, 

Erosion control measures, 

Riparian pastures, 

Instream fish habitat improvements, and

Modification or elimination of land uses that prevent attainment of the goals and objectives for riparian 

areas and wetlands. 

RI-I-MA-3. Conduct multiple indicator surveys on riparian areas according to BLM policy.

RI-I-MA-4. Establish 10 ungrazed riparian reference areas (3,000 acres total; Map 11). Each reference

area would be paired with an adjacent grazed area in a similar vegetation type and condition to monitor 

the effects of livestock grazing on a variety of plant communities. 

2.3.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 

Fish

Native aquatic species in the planning area can be described in three broad categories:

Aquatic species Federally listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973,

Aquatic species identified on the BLM Sensitive species list for Idaho and Nevada, and

 Other non-game fish present in the planning area.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-66

Aquatic species included in the first two categories are discussed in the Special Status Species section. 

The goals, objectives, and management actions for other non-game fish (i.e. sculpin, suckers, and 

minnows) are provided below. For a majority of the streams within the planning area, the habitat needs 

for non-game fish are met through goals, objectives, and management actions for special status species 

in riparian areas, wetlands, and streams. The goals, objectives, and management actions below 

encompass the streams containing only non-game fish. 

Goal

FI-I-G-1. Manage public lands to promote diverse, structured, resilient, and connected habitats for fish. 

Objective

FI-I-O-1. Maintain or improve streams so 70% of the miles of non-game fish-bearing streams are

managed for properly functioning condition. The remaining 30% of non-game fish-bearing streams would 

be moving toward properly functioning condition. 

Management Actions

FI-CA-MA-1. Maintain, improve, or restore native non-game fish habitat through actions identified for 

riparian areas, water resources, and special status species through restoration priorities in the Aquatic 

and Riparian Management Strategy (ARMS; Appendix D). Incorporate best management practices to 

maintain and improve habitat for non-game fish (Appendix B).

FI-CA-MA-2. Inventory and monitor non-game fish habitat. Use adaptive management as outlined in the 

ARMS to minimize impacts to non-game fish habitat from uses and activities (Appendix D).

FI-CA-MA-3. Activities within riparian areas and wetlands would be designed to mitigate impacts to the 

riparian and aquatic habitat(s) containing non-game fish. 

FI-CA-MA-4. To avoid adverse effects on non-game fish and instream flows, locate water drafting sites in 

upland areas (e.g., stock ponds, storage tanks, hydrants). Where these water sources are not available, 

locate water drafting sites at existing stream road crossings (e.g., bridges, culverts, fords) to divert water

in a manner that does not retard or prevent achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas 

and wetlands. 

FI-CA-MA-5. Design and implement watershed restoration projects in a manner that promotes the longterm ecological integrity of ecosystems, conserves the genetic integrity of non-game fish species, and 

contributes to the achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

FI-CA-MA-6. New fisheries and instream channel restoration projects would avoid or minimize adverse 

effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and Riparian Conservation Areas.

FI-CA-MA-7. Cooperate with Federal and State fish management agencies to identify and reduce 

adverse effects on non-game fish associated with habitat manipulation, fish stocking, fish harvest, and 

illegal harvest.

Wildlife

Goal

WI-I-G-1. Manage public lands to promote diverse, structured, resilient, and connected habitats for 

wildlife.

Objective

WI-I-O-1. Maintain or improve habitat for big game species by managing uses and activities and actively 

restoring annual, non-native perennial, and native communities.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resources

2-67

•

•

•

•

Management Actions

WI-CA-MA-1. When making management decisions affecting big game, use the most current big game 

winter range map provided by Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) and the Nevada Department 

of Wildlife. Areas considered big game winter range as of 2011 are shown on Map 17. 

WI-CA-MA-2. Implement habitat projects to maintain or improve habitat for mule deer and pronghorn 

when and where needed. 

WI-CA-MA-3. Under Executive Order 13186, promote the maintenance and improvement of migratory 

bird habitat quantity and quality through the permitting process for all land use authorizations. Avoid, 

reduce, or mitigate adverse impacts on the habitats of migratory bird species of conservation concern to 

the extent feasible, and in a manner consistent with regional or statewide bird conservation priorities.

WI-CA-MA-4. Incorporate best management practices (BMPs) for wildlife into BLM management activities 

and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B). Specific BMPs would be applied at the project level.

WI-CA-MA-5. Install and maintain BLM approved wildlife escape devices on troughs and open tanks.

WI-CA-MA-6. Modify existing and construct new fences to comply with BLM standards for wildlife 

(Karsky, 1999). Existing fences would be modified according to the following priority order: 

Key sage-grouse habitat, 

Big game winter range, 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, and

The remainder of the planning area. 

WI-CA-MA-7. Schedule construction and maintenance activities to avoid or minimize disturbance to 

priority species and their habitat during their important seasonal periods (see WI-I-MA-1 for a list of 

priority species). 

WI-CA-MA-8. Schedule energy-related activities (e.g., exploration, development, and maintenance) to 

avoid or minimize disturbance to priority species and their habitat during important seasonal periods. 

WI-I-MA-1. Mule deer and special status species, including bighorn sheep and sage-grouse, have the 

highest priority for habitat management; secondary priorities are pronghorn, chukar, and pheasant. 

Special status species management is discussed in the Special Status Species section.

WI-I-MA-2. Focus vegetation treatments for mule deer winter range areas as shown on Map 17. 

WI-I-MA-3. Plant desirable browse or seed species appropriate to site potential on big game winter range 

where browse was reduced by past wildland fires. Species may include, but not be limited to: winterfat, 

fourwing saltbush, bitterbrush, chokecherry, and serviceberry. 

WI-I-MA-4. Reconfigure and expand wildlife tracts (from 13,000 acres to 20,000 acres) to reduce conflicts 

with uses, to improve management efficiency, and to increase the average size of individual tracts (Map 

18). 

WI-I-MA-5. Prepare a plan for joint IDFG-BLM management of wildlife tracts through a public process and 

to obtain partners for projects to improve wildlife values. 

WI-I-MA-6. Minimize disturbance to raptors by restricting construction or other authorized human activities 

both spatially and seasonally. Restrictions would be required during courtship and nesting (February 1 

through July 31) and applied as appropriate. Buffer distances from raptor nests during nesting would be 

as follows (Whittington and Allen, 2008): 
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-68

Raptor Species Spatial Buffer

Bald eagle 0.5 to 1.0 mile

Northern goshawk 0.50 mile

Ferruginous hawk 1.00 mile

Golden eagle 0.50 mile

Peregrine falcon 1.00 mile

Red-tailed hawk 0.33 mile

Prairie falcon 0.50 mile

Swainson’s hawk 0.25 mile

Burrowing owl 0.25 mile

2.3.2.7 Special Status Species

Goal

SS-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to contribute to the conservation and recovery of sage-grouse and 

other special status species. 

Objective

SS-I-O-1. Maintain or improve the quality and quantity of habitat for sage-grouse and other special status 

species by managing public land activities to sustain or benefit those species. 

Management Actions

SS-C-MA-1. Follow conservation measures in relevant biological opinions and letters of concurrence, as 

appropriate. Conservation measures in place as of 2012 can be found in Appendix E; conservation 

measures can be updated, revised, or replaced through future consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife 

Service (FWS).

SS-CA-MA-1. Special status species management would apply to Endangered, Threatened, Candidate, 

and Proposed species (Type 1 BLM Sensitive); other BLM Sensitive species (Types 2 through 4); and 

proposed or designated critical habitat; this includes plants, fish and other aquatic species, and wildlife. 

SS-CA-MA-2. Special status species management would not apply to species that are removed from the 

BLM Sensitive species list. Those species would be managed according to applicable delisting 

requirements, conservation strategies, BLM guidance, and Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) 

or Nevada Department of Wildlife management guidance.

SS-CA-MA-3. Management of one special status species would take into account the needs of other 

special status species.

SS-CA-MA-4. Follow applicable conservation plans, strategies, and agreements for special status 

species (Appendix E).

SS-CA-MA-5. Monitor special status species and their habitats, and maintain data on their populations, 

distribution, and habitats. Use adaptive management or mitigation to reduce impacts on special status 

species and their habitats from uses and activities.

SS-CA-MA-6. Work cooperatively with tribes, Federal and State agencies, private landowners, and 

companies to identify and mitigate threats to special status species and habitat on BLM-managed lands. 

SS-I-MA-1. Where alternative management strategies would result in the same relative effect to a 

species, implement those strategies least harmful to other resource uses, where practical. 

SS-I-MA-2. Support projects to identify and monitor pollinators of special status plants.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resources

2-69

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

SS-I-MA-3. Evaluate special status plant habitat, and where it has been historically occupied, reintroduce

special status plant species where practical. 

SS-I-MA-4. Conduct habitat suitability evaluations for potential reintroductions of special status wildlife, 

fish, and aquatic invertebrates in cooperation with FWS, IDFG, NDOW, and other interested and affected 

parties. Work with FWS, IDFG, and NDOW on reintroductions as appropriate.

Management Related to Resource Uses

SS-CA-MA-7. Leasable and salable mineral development activities should avoid special status species 

habitat if the activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. 

Permits would include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats.

SS-CA-MA-8. Promote conservation and recovery of special status species through land actions such as:

Conservation easements that protect or conserve special status species habitat, 

Land acquisitions or exchanges that improve management of special status species, and

Acquisition of lands with a high value for special status species.

SS-CA-MA-9. New communication sites would avoid special status species habitat if the project would 

have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be reduced. 

SS-CA-MA-10. Right-of-way construction and maintenance activities should avoid disturbing special 

status species during important seasonal periods, unless the disturbance can be mitigated. 

SS-I-MA-5. Adjust livestock use levels, season of use, or other management techniques to maintain or 

enhance special status species and their habitat. 

SS-I-MA-6. Construct, maintain, modify, or remove range infrastructure and other facilities as necessary 

to maintain or enhance special status species and their habitat.

Management for Special Status Species in Upland Areas

SS-CA-MA-11. Manage native shrubland communities in a landscape context to ensure that the seasonal 

habitat needs of sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate species are met across the planning area, 

where site conditions are suitable.

SS-CA-MA-12. Mark fences that have been identified as a collision risk to improve fence visibility for 

sage-grouse, using appropriate collision diverters or other reasonable approaches. Fences posing higher 

risks to sage-grouse are generally within 1.25 miles of a lek and are:

On flat topography,

Where spans exceed 12 feet between T-posts,

Without wooden posts, or

Where fence densities exceed 1.6 miles of fence per section (640 acres) (Stevens et al., 2011).

SS-CA-MA-13. Maintain or improve the habitat for special status species by protecting and restoring their 

habitat, controlling noxious weeds and invasive plants, and minimizing direct habitat disturbance.

SS-CA-MA-14. When designing seed mixes for vegetation treatments and surface-disturbing projects, 

consider the needs of special status species and their habitat in the project area.

SS-CA-MA-15. Use seeding methods that minimize impacts to special status species populations.

SS-CA-MA-16. If a conflict between authorized uses and bighorn sheep is identified, schedule authorized 

uses to avoid pastures that contain bighorn sheep habitat during breeding, wintering, and lambing periods 

to minimize disturbance during these important seasonal periods.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-70

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

SS-CA-MA-17. Avoid locating new transmission lines, phone lines, or communication towers/facilities in 

native shrubland and native grassland communities to minimize impacts to sage-grouse. If a transmission 

or phone line project must be located in sage-grouse habitat, the project should incorporate measures to 

reduce impacts to sage-grouse such as: 

Burying lines;

Using devices or structure design to deter raptor and raven perching and nesting; 

Avoiding construction and maintenance during important seasonal periods for sage-grouse; 

 Restoring or improving sage-grouse habitat outside the project area; 

Constructing lines, towers, and related facilities in lower quality habitats; and

Clustering or co-locating facilities.

SS-I-MA-7. Implement management actions described in the Upland Vegetation section to maintain or 

improve habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species. Upland vegetation management to 

benefit sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate special status species includes but is not limited to: 

Restoring annual, non-native perennial, and non-native understory communities toward native;

 Restoring native grassland communities to native shrublands; and

 Introducing forbs and late-seral grasses to native shrubland communities. 

See the Upland Vegetation section for more details.

SS-I-MA-8. BLM management activities and authorized uses within one mile of known ferruginous hawk 

or prairie falcon nests would be designed to minimize impacts to their prey base and availability of nesting

material from February through July.

SS-I-MA-9. Remove troughs within one mile of the Bruneau and Jarbidge Canyon rims within bighorn 

sheep habitat. Relocate troughs more than one mile from the Bruneau and Jarbidge Canyon rims if the 

watering site is needed for livestock grazing.

SS-I-MA-10. Remove fences and corrals within one mile of the Bruneau and Jarbidge Canyon rims within 

bighorn sheep habitat, except fences for pasture and allotment boundaries or for other resource 

protection.

SS-I-MA-11. New troughs, reservoirs, permanent fences, and corrals would be located at least one mile 

from the Bruneau and Jarbidge Canyon rims within bighorn sheep habitat.

SS-I-MA-12. Fences identified to protect resources would be allowed and would be designed to meet the 

needs of bighorn sheep.

SS-I-MA-13. Minimize the transmission of disease by maintaining a nine-mile separation between 

domestic sheep/goats and bighorn sheep. The separation would be accomplished by:

Not converting cattle animal unit months (AUMs) to domestic sheep or goat AUMs in the separation 

distance,

Not allowing trailing of domestic sheep or goats within that separation distance, and

Requiring a herder to be present during trailing of domestic sheep or goats.

Management for Special Status Species in Riparian Areas, Wetlands, and Streams

SS-CA-MA-18. Incorporate best management practices as appropriate to maintain and improve habitat 

for special status fish and aquatic invertebrates (Appendix B).

SS-CA-MA-19. Identify and eliminate, where feasible, migration barriers to special status fish species 

movement.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resources

2-71

•

•

•

•

SS-CA-MA-20. Identify and implement specific habitat improvement projects in redband trout habitat to 

reduce habitat fragmentation and promote their long-term recovery. Projects may include, but not be 

limited to:

Replacing culverts,

Working with private landowners so diversions are not a barrier,

Screening diversions, and

Planting riparian vegetation.

SS-CA-MA-21. Implement specific habitat improvement projects for Jarbidge River bull trout (bull trout) as 

identified in the Recovery Plan for the Jarbidge River Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout.

Additional management direction for BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses in 

special status species habitat can be found in the Resource Uses sections.

2.3.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 

Goal

NW-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to prevent, eliminate, or control noxious weeds and invasive plants.

Objectives

Noxious Weeds

NW-I-O-1. Reduce the number of acres containing noxious weeds by at least 10%; reduce the number of 

noxious weed species present.

Invasive Species

NW-I-O-2. Reduce cover of invasive plants in native communities to less than 5%; reduce cover of 

invasive plants in non-native perennial and non-native understory communities to less than 10%.

Management Actions

NW-CA-MA-1. Apply herbicides consistent with BLM policy. 

NW-CA-MA-2. Inventory noxious weeds and invasive plants. 

NW-CA-MA-3. Consult with the tribes on herbicide use to consider timing of projects and impacts to 

plants of importance to the tribes.

NW-CA-MA-4. Formulate methods of control in or near special status species habitat on a site-specific

and species-specific basis to minimize impacts to special status species. 

NW-CA-MA-5. Incorporate best management practices for noxious weeds and invasive plants into BLM 

management activities and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B).

NW-CA-MA-6. Include site-specific stipulations in land use authorizations, permits, and leases to limit 

introduction and spread of noxious weeds.

NW-CA-MA-7. Collaborate with Federal agencies, State and County governments, non-governmental 

organizations, and individuals to establish a Jarbidge Cooperative Weed Management Area or other 

cooperative agreements for noxious weed and invasive plants management. 

NW-CA-MA-8. Use of certified weed-free forage, seed, straw, and mulch (as defined in the Idaho Noxious 

Weed Free Forage and Straw Certification Rules [IAC 02.06.31]) would be required for all BLM 

management activities and authorized and allowed uses.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-72

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

NW-I-MA-1. Treat areas containing noxious weeds and invasive plants. Priority areas would include (not 

in priority order): 

Special designations, 

Motorized and recreational access points, 

Riparian areas, 

Special status species habitat, 

Mule deer winter range, 

 Roadsides, and 

Native plant communities.

NW-I-MA-2. Focus control efforts on species with new or small infestations and species that have higher 

potential for resource impacts. Eradicate noxious weeds and invasive plants where practical. Focus 

treatments for large infestations on reducing the size of the infestation.

NW-I-MA-3. The toolbox for treating noxious weeds and invasive plants would include:

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; and 

Targeted grazing. 

NW-I-MA-4. Develop and implement activities to prevent the introduction and spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants on public lands. The toolbox for preventing introduction and spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants would include:

 Public outreach (e.g., kiosks, media, mailings, publications, brochures); 

Vehicle wash stations; and

 Modifying uses to minimize new introductions and spread (e.g., closing roads, not authorizing Special 

Recreation Permits in highly infested areas).

2.3.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management

Wildland Fire Management

Goal

WFM-CA-G-1. Fire management strategies would result in firefighter and public safety and protection of 

property and natural and cultural resources, while considering suppression and rehabilitation costs.

Objectives

WFM-I-O-1. Strive to reduce average wildland fire size and number of human-caused fire starts within the 

Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). 

WFM-I-O-2. Reduce acres burned in vegetation types outside the WUI where more wildland fires have 

burned than desired/historic levels to enhance and sustain existing and historic uses of the planning area.

Allocations

WFM-CA-A-1. The planning area would not be available for Wildland Fire Use (1,371,000 acres).

WFM-I-A-1. Critical suppression areas within the planning area would be (491,000 acres): 

WUI;

Bruneau-Jarbidge, Lower Bruneau Canyon, Middle Snake, and Salmon Falls Creek Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concerns; and 

Key sage-grouse habitat.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resources

2-73

•

•

•

•

The types of critical suppression areas would remain the same throughout the life of the plan; however, 

the acres and specific locations for the WUI and key sage-grouse habitat can be updated to reflect 

changing conditions. See Map 30 for the locations of these areas in 2011. 

WFM-I-A-2. The remainder of the planning area would be a conditional suppression area (880,000 

acres). 

Management Actions

WFM-C-MA-1. Fire management within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness is addressed in the 

Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan.

WFM-CA-MA-1. All wildland fires in critical or conditional suppression areas would receive an Appropriate 

Management Response (AMR). AMR includes any action taken to meet resource objectives identified in 

RMPs and Fire Management Plans (FMPs). AMR ranges across a spectrum of tactical operations (from 

monitoring to aggressive/intensive suppression actions). 

WFM-CA-MA-2. Critical suppression areas represent highest suppression priority. The AMR in critical 

suppression areas assumes suppression actions would be taken to reduce fire size and acres burned 

unless safety warrants alternative strategies. Wildland fire is generally not desired in these areas, with the 

exception of prescribed fire to be used for site preparation as described in the RMP. 

WFM-CA-MA-3. Conditional suppression areas represent areas of lower suppression priority where 

suppression efforts would be adjusted based on resource values and fire’s desired role in the ecosystem. 

The AMR in conditional suppression areas assumes suppression actions would be taken commensurate 

with the values at risk and considering suppression costs. Wildland fire management strategies may be 

changed if fire danger is high or there would likely be undesired fire effects. Conditional suppression 

areas also represent areas where cost of suppression may exceed the value of resources to be protected 

as identified in the RMP.

WFM-CA-MA-4. Areas for Wildland Fire for Resource Benefit would be determined by the BLM after the 

wildland fire has been contained or controlled. Areas where vegetation treatments were planned and 

analyzed in the NEPA process or those ecosystems found to “need more disturbance” through the Fire 

Regime Condition Class process would be candidates for “benefit” fires. Post-fire site visits would be 

required to determine if fire effects actually resulted in conditions that moved the area toward resource 

objectives. 

WFM-CA-MA-5. Revise the FMP as required to incorporate updated fire, vegetation, resource value, 

WUI, and fuels data. The FMP would be used to refine suppression, fuels treatment, community 

assistance, and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation priorities. 

WFM-CA-MA-6. In addition to safety and resource concerns, consider fire suppression and rehabilitation 

costs when evaluating fire suppression techniques.

WFM-CA-MA-7. Work collaboratively with the military to reduce the risk of wildland fire, improve 

suppression logistics on military lands adjacent to public lands, and protect public lands from wildland 

fires originating on military lands. 

WFM-CA-MA-8. Incorporate best management practices for wildland and prescribed fire into BLM 

management activities and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B).

WFM-CA-MA-9. Foster the public's understanding of the role of fire in the ecosystem, hazards associated 

with living in the WUI, and wildland fire prevention and suppression activities through methods such as: 

 Using mass media, 

 Providing outreach to local groups, 

 Developing interpretive signs and kiosks, and 

 Participating in the County Wildfire Protection Plan process.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-74

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

WFM-CA-MA-10. Fire suppression strategies, practices, and actions in Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs) should be designed to minimize disturbance to riparian vegetation. 

WFM-CA-MA-11. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used within RCAs unless safety to 

human life or property is an issue. 

WFM-CA-MA-12. Incident bases, camps, helibases, staging areas, helispots, and other centers for 

incident activities would be located outside of RCAs. If the only suitable location for these activities is 

within the RCA, an exemption may be granted by the BLM authorized officer. 

WFM-CA-MA-13. Avoid delivery of chemical retardant, foam, or additives into surface waters. An 

exception is warranted where overriding immediate safety imperatives exist or when the BLM determines 

a fire would cause more long-term damage to fish habitats than chemical delivery to surface waters.

WFM-I-MA-1. When multiple wildland fire ignitions occur in critical suppression areas, based on the 

management priorities of Alternative I, the suppression priorities would be (in order of importance):

 Vegetation Management Area (VMA) C,

VMA B,

VMA D, and

VMA A.

These priorities would also be used for general fire suppression management planning.

WFM-I-MA-2. Within the perimeter of a contained wildland fire, protect unburned islands of native 

grassland and native shrubland communities. Unburned islands of annual and non-native perennial 

communities within the perimeter of a contained fire may be allowed to burn.

WFM-I-MA-3. Use minimum impact suppression tactics in:

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness;

Lower Salmon Creek Falls Wilderness Study Area; 

Oregon National Historic Trail; 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, Salmon Falls Creek, and Sand Point Areas of Critical Environmental Concern; 

Bull trout habitat;

Slickspot peppergrass habitat; and 

Other areas where appropriate to mitigate potential impacts of fire suppression.

WFM-I-MA-4. Improve water availability for fire suppression in high recreational use areas, in accordance 

with Idaho State Law regarding the appropriation and use of water.

WFM-I-MA-5. Design water developments for fire suppression to mitigate impacts to water resources. 

Water developments may include, but are not limited to:

Water storage tanks, 

Draft sites, and

Hydrants off pipelines. 

Water storage may also be increased by enlarging and filling existing stock and storage ponds.

WFM-I-MA-6. Consistent with other resource objectives, implement measures to reduce response time 

for fire suppression activities including, but not limited to: 

 Building new guard stations, 

 Improving roads, 

 Building new roads in areas with limited access, 

 Improving stream crossings, and 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resources

2-75

• Developing better signage. 

Tools to improve fire suppression access would not include building new or improving existing airstrips or 

building helipads. 

WFM-I-MA-7. Transportation and travel restrictions may be imposed to reduce risk of wildland fire during 

times of fire restrictions, as determined by an authorized officer; restrictions may include, but not be 

limited to closing primitive roads, trails, and areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use. Travel 

related to administrative uses and emergency services may continue during fire restrictions. 

WFM-I-MA-8. Dozer blading should not occur within 300 feet of playas to protect associated cultural 

resources. 

Fuels and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation (ES&BAR)

Goals

FE-CA-G-1. Reduce fire hazard within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). 

FE-I-G-1. Manage vegetation communities outside the WUI to maintain or restore their fire regimes and

mosaic of successional classes to within their historic range. 

Objectives

Fuels

FE-CA-O-1. Manage plant communities within the WUI to reduce relative risk rating. 

FE-I-O-1. Manage plant communities outside the WUI to move toward Fire Regime Condition Class 

(FRCC) 1. 

FE-I-O-2. Implement fuels treatments to protect critical suppression areas; limit the spread, size, and 

intensity of wildland fire; and maintain or improve vegetation.

ES&BAR

FE-I-O-3. Rehabilitate and stabilize areas to help stabilize soils, promote natural recovery, and establish 

pre-fire or historic vegetation communities.

Management Actions

Fuels

FE-CA-MA-1. Update the FRCC analysis for the planning area when 20% of the planning area has been 

disturbed by wildland fires or treated by fuels projects since the previous FRCC analysis was completed.

FE-CA-MA-2. Progress towards FRCC objectives would be achieved through actions and guidelines 

specified in the Upland Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants, 

and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

FE-CA-MA-3. Coordinate fuels treatments with adjacent landowners and agencies through County 

Wildfire Protection Plans or other methods.

FE-CA-MA-4. Rest fuels treatment areas from uses until treatment objectives are met and are predicted 

to be sustainable or if the treatment is determined by the BLM to be unsuccessful. This would not apply to 

uses that do not conflict with the treatment objectives.

FE-CA-MA-5. Fuels treatments in Riparian Conservation Areas would be designed to maintain or improve 

riparian vegetation. 

FE-I-MA-1. Implement fuels treatments to reduce fuel loads with consideration for other resource and 

resource use objectives.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-76

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

FE-I-MA-2. Fuels treatments in the WUI would include fuels reduction treatments and fuel breaks. These 

treatments would focus on areas with high and high/moderate relative risk ratings in the northern portion 

of the planning area.

FE-I-MA-3. Fuels treatments outside the WUI would include: 

 Restoration, 

 Fuel breaks, and 

 Noxious weed and invasive plant treatments.

FE-I-MA-4. The toolbox for fuels treatments would include:

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; and 

Targeted grazing.

FE-I-MA-5. Fuels treatments would use native and non-native species.

FE-I-MA-6. Upland vegetation management related to fuels treatments, includes but is not limited to: 

 Converting annual communities to native or non-native perennial, 

 Restoring non-native perennial and non-native understory communities toward native, 

 Restoring native grassland communities to native shrublands, and 

 Introducing forbs and late-seral grasses to native shrubland communities. 

See the Upland Vegetation section for more details.

FE-I-MA-7. Outside Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs), fuel breaks would follow 

disturbance corridors or would protect restoration and ES&BAR treatments; fuel breaks for SRMAs could 

be used to protect adjacent areas, protect facilities, and protect high-use areas. Construct fuel breaks 

consistent with objectives in the Upland Vegetation section.

FE-I-MA-8. Noxious weed and invasive plants management related to fuels treatments includes 

measures for treating and preventing noxious weeds and invasive plants; see the Noxious Weeds and 

Invasive Plants section for more details. 

ES&BAR

FE-CA-MA-6. Use the full range of treatment options available to meet ES&BAR objectives, including:

Mechanical treatments,

Drill or broadcast seeding treatments,

Chemical treatments,

Seedling transplants, and

Erosion control structures.

FE-CA-MA-7. Implement the Programmatic ES&BAR Plan and update as needed. Individual ES&BAR 

plans would be completed through the interdisciplinary process to reduce impacts of wildland fire and 

suppression and to achieve resource objectives. 

FE-CA-MA-8. Use seed mixes that would help stabilize soils and achieve objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Fish and Wildlife, and Special Status Species sections.

FE-CA-MA-9. Use seed drilling equipment, tools, or techniques that minimize soil disturbance and place 

seed at the correct depth.

FE-CA-MA-10. Rest burned areas from uses, including livestock and wild horse grazing and recreational 

use, until ES&BAR objectives are met and are predicted to be sustainable or if the treatment is 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resources

2-77

determined by the BLM to be unsuccessful. This would not apply to uses that do not conflict with the 

treatment objectives.

FE-CA-MA-11. Consider emergency closures to motorized vehicle use when necessary for ES&BAR

efforts.

FE-I-MA-9. Consider using temporary fences on a case-by-case basis to protect burned plant 

communities and to allow for uses in pastures with burned plant communities. Temporary fences may 

only be considered when there are at least 2,000 unburned acres in the pasture. Reconstruction of firedamaged permanent facilities on BLM-managed lands would follow BLM policy. 

FE-I-MA-10. When planning temporary fences, consider the size of the pasture, the amount burned, the 

amount of pasture unaffected by rehabilitation, resource concerns, location of water, and expense. 

FE-I-MA-11. Temporary fences would be removed once ES&BAR objectives have been met. 

2.3.2.10 Wild Horses 

Goal

WH-I-G-1. The Saylor Creek Wild Horse Herd Management Area (HMA) would be managed for a thriving 

natural ecological balance.

Objective

WH-I-O-1. Manage a reproducing herd with an appropriate management level range of 100 to 200 wild 

horses in the Saylor Creek Wild Horse HMA.

Allocations

WH-I-A-1. Manage the entire Saylor Creek Wild Horse Herd Area as an HMA (95,000 acres). 

WH-I-A-2. The estimated herd size for a reproducing population of wild horses would be 100 to 200 head. 

WH-I-A-3. Allocate forage sufficient to maintain the wild horse population within the HMA (2,400 animal 

unit months). 

Management Actions

WH-I-MA-1. Develop a Herd Management Area Plan. 

WH-I-MA-2. The HMA would remain open to livestock grazing, although grazing levels on an allotmentspecific basis would be adjusted to accommodate wild horse numbers.

WH-I-MA-3. Redesign pasture configurations and fences within the HMA to facilitate genetic exchange,

wild horse social interactions, and free-roaming characteristics.

WH-I-MA-4. Increase the reliability of artificial water sources for wild horses within the HMA.

WH-I-MA-5. Seasonal restrictions would be placed on travel within the HMA during foaling (from March 

through July); motorized travel would not be allowed on primitive roads during this time.

WH-I-MA-6. Seasonal restrictions on authorized uses within HMA to avoid disturbing wild horses during 

foaling (March through July) would be defined in the permit or authorization.

WH-I-MA-7. Commercial Special Recreation Permits would not be allowed in the HMA.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-78

•

•

•

•

•

•

2.3.2.11 Paleontological Resources 

Goal

PR-CA-G-1. Identify, manage, and protect paleontological resources for scientific research, educational 

purposes, and public use.

Objective

PR-CA-O-1. Identify, manage, and protect important paleontological sites.

Management Actions

PR-CA-MA-1. Implement measures to protect paleontological resources. Measures may include:

Avoidance,

Fencing, 

Stabilization, 

Data recovery through collection or excavation,

Interpretation, or

Administrative closure.

PR-CA-MA-2. Identify areas at risk of damage from illegal activities and implement management to 

discourage those activities.

PR-CA-MA-3. Minimize or prevent human-caused damage to paleontological resources through 

educational and interpretive outreach programs.

PR-CA-MA-4. Analyze effects of surface-disturbing activities on fossil-bearing geologic units (Potential 

Fossil Yield Classification Class 5) and mitigate potential impacts to paleontological resources. 

PR-CA-MA-5. The collection of paleontological resources would be managed in accordance with the 

Paleontological Resources Preservation Act and 43 CFR 8365. In general, reasonable amounts of 

common invertebrate and plant fossils may be collected for non-commercial personal use without a 

permit. The collection of vertebrate fossils and rare or unusual invertebrate and plant fossils requires a 

permit under the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act.

PR-I-MA-1. Issue permits for paleontological research to qualified paleontologists. Actively solicit 

research efforts to identify, monitor, and collect data on fossil resources. 

2.3.2.12 Cultural Resources 

Goals

Management

CR-CA-G-1. Identify, preserve, and protect important cultural resources and ensure they are available for 

appropriate uses by present and future generations.

Protection

CR-CA-G-2. Seek to reduce imminent threats and resolve potential conflicts from natural or humancaused deterioration or potential conflict with other resource uses by ensuring all authorizations for land 

use and resource use complies with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), as amended,

Section 106. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resources

2-79

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Objectives

Management 

CR-CA-O-1. Manage and protect cultural resources according to their potential traditional, scientific, 

conservation, public, or experimental value. 

Protection

CR-CA-O-2. Strive to limit the adverse effects of BLM decisions on important cultural resources.

Allocations

CR-CA-A-1. Cultural resources would be allocated as described in Appendix G. 

CR-CA-A-2. The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors include 0.25 mile on either side of 

the trail segments or the visual horizon of those segments, whichever is narrower.

Management Actions

Management

CR-CA-MA-1. Maintain on-going cultural resource inventory information in geographic information system

format in accordance with confidentiality mandates.

CR-CA-MA-2. Identify priority geographic areas for future inventory based on the probability of 

unrecorded cultural resources, and conduct inventories independent of specific land use actions.

CR-CA-MA-3. Implement measures to minimize or prevent damage to cultural resources due to BLM 

management activities, authorized and allowed uses, and human-caused damage such as vandalism, 

unauthorized surface collection of artifacts, and unintentional disturbances. Measures may include:

Avoidance,

Fencing, 

Stabilization,

Data recovery through collection or excavation,

Interpretation, 

Administrative closure, or

Proactive law enforcement patrols.

CR-CA-MA-4. Develop cultural resource project plans as needed to address preservation actions for 

cultural resource complexes or individual sites identified as high risk for adverse impacts.

CR-CA-MA-5. Avoid placement of salting, supplemental feeding, watering, and holding facilities for 

livestock that adversely affect the Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors. 

CR-CA-MA-6. Developments such as roads, trails, pipelines, fences, and powerlines may be allowed, 

after consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), to cross segments of the Kelton 

and Toana Freight Roads in areas where previous disturbance has occurred. On occasions where 

adverse impacts are unavoidable, the BLM would require mitigation commensurate with the impacts as a 

condition of authorization.

CR-CA-MA-7. Surface-disturbing equipment, such as bulldozers and road graders, cannot be used on 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligible or contributing segments of the Kelton or Toana 

Freight Roads or within their protective corridors without prior management approval, unless to protect life 

or property.

CR-I-MA-1. Allow research, including archaeological, historic, ethnographic, and non-intrusive research, 

to better define the extent, nature, and value of cultural resources in the planning area.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-80

CR-I-MA-2. Important cultural resources, as determined by the BLM through consultation with tribes 

and/or SHPO, would generally be retained in Federal ownership. Under limited circumstances, after 

appropriate consultation and mitigation, lands containing important cultural resources may be exchanged 

for lands containing resources of greater or equal value. 

CR-I-MA-3. Avoid or minimize new ground disturbance within 300 feet of playas to protect associated 

cultural resources.

Protection

CR-CA-MA-8. Authorizations for land and resource use would not be approved until compliance with 

Section 106 of the NHPA has been completed and documented, including, where applicable, consultation 

with the SHPO and Federally recognized Indian tribes.

CR-CA-MA-9. Nominate eligible sites for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) on a case-bycase basis.

CR-CA-MA-10. Manage sites that are eligible for the NRHP for their local, regional, or national 

significance. If natural or human-caused deterioration cannot be prevented, BLM would consult with the 

tribes and SHPO, as appropriate, to mitigate the adverse effects.

CR-CA-MA-11. Consider all prudent and feasible alternatives to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on 

cultural resources and their uses when resolving site-specific conflicts between cultural resource use 

allocations and competing land use allocations. 

CR-CA-MA-12. The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors are closed to new salable 

mineral development. Existing salable mineral developments could be renewed but the footprint could not 

be expanded.

2.3.2.13 Visual Resources 

Visual Resource Management (VRM) classes identify the degree of acceptable visual change within a 

characteristic landscape. A classification is assigned to public lands based on the guidelines established 

for scenic quality, visual sensitivity, and visibility.

Class I - Provides primarily for natural ecological changes only. It is applied to wilderness areas, some 

natural areas, and similar situations where management activities are to be restricted.

Class II - Changes in the basic elements caused by a management activity may be evident in the 

characteristic landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate to the visual strength of the existing 

character. 

Class III - Contrasts to the basic elements caused by management activity may be evident and begin to 

attract attention in the landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate in the existing landscape.

Class IV - Contrasts may attract attention and be a dominant feature in the landscape in terms of scale, 

but the change should repeat the basic element of the characteristic landscape.

Class V - Applies to areas where the characteristic landscape has been so disturbed that rehabilitation is 

needed. Generally considered an interim short-term classification until rehabilitation or enhancement is 

completed.

Goal and Objective

VR-CA-G-1. Maintain visual resource characteristics and values of public lands according to VRM

classes.

Allocations

VR-I-A-1. Areas to be managed as VRM Class I (106,000 acres) include: 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resources

2-81

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness;

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors with scenic outstandingly

remarkable values (i.e., lower Salmon Falls Creek, Cougar Point Creek, Bruneau River, and Jarbidge 

River);

Bruneau-Jarbidge Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC); and

Salmon Falls Creek ACEC.

VR-I-A-2. Areas to be managed as VRM Class II (191,000 acres) include: 

The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone, 

 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics, 

Jarbidge Foothills and Salmon Falls Reservoir Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs), 

Wilkins Island,

 The Jarbidge River corridor between Murphy Hot Springs and the Jarbidge Forks, and 

 Areas near Buck Creek. 

VR-I-A-3. Areas to be managed as VRM Class III (142,000 acres) include: 

The Snake River corridor (from the planning area boundary to 0.25 mile above the breaks), 

 The Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor, 

 Right-of-way corridors through areas otherwise managed as VRM Class I or II, 

 Portions of the Diamond A Desert not otherwise managed as VRM Class I or II, 

Deadman/Yahoo SRMA, and 

 The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors. 

VR-I-A-4. The remainder of the planning area would be managed as VRM Class IV (932,000 acres).

See Map 42 for locations of areas allocated to VRM Class I, II, III, and IV. 

Management Action

VR-CA-MA-1. BLM management activities and authorized uses would be compatible with VRM class 

objectives as follows:

VRM Class I areas are managed to preserve the existing character of the landscape. The level of 

change to the landscape should be very low and must not attract attention.

VRM Class II areas are managed to retain the existing character of the landscape. The level of 

change to the landscape should be low and repeat the basic elements of form, line, color, and texture 

found in the natural features of the landscape.

VRM Class III areas are managed to partially retain the existing character of the landscape. The level 

of change to the landscape can be moderate and should repeat the basic elements found in the 

natural landscape. Management activities may attract attention, but should not dominate the view of 

the casual observer.

VRM Class IV areas are managed to provide for activities that require major modification of the 

landscape. The level of change to the landscape can be high, and management activities may 

dominate the view and be the major focus of attention. Impacts can still be minimized through location 

and design by repeating the basic elements found in the natural landscape.

2.3.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 

Goal

WC-I-G-1. Protect wilderness characteristics of Lands with Wilderness Characteristics generally west of 

the Jarbidge River as a priority over other multiple uses.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-82

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Objectives

WC-I-O-1. Manage Lands with Wilderness Characteristics generally west of the Jarbidge River for their 

undeveloped character and to provide opportunities for primitive recreational activities and solitude.

Management Actions

WC-I-MA-1. Manage Lands with Wilderness Characteristics generally west of the Jarbidge River to 

maintain their wilderness characteristics (52,000 acres). These lands include: 

Columbet Table, 

Crater Hole,

East Fork Jarbidge, 

Hole in the Ground, 

Larios Camp, and

Long Draw. 

See Map 49 for locations.

WC-I-MA-2. Management for these lands would be as follows:

Retain in Federal ownership (Land Tenure Zone 1);

Manage as Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class II, with the exception of the existing utility 

corridor managed as VRM Class III; 

Close to motorized vehicle use. See the Transportation and Travel section for more details; 

Close to leasable mineral exploration and development; 

Close to salable mineral development; 

Allow new range infrastructure if the infrastructure would help enhance wilderness characteristics;

Existing range infrastructure may be maintained; and

Manage as right-of-way exclusion areas. 

2.3.3 Resource Uses

2.3.3.1 Livestock Grazing 

Goals

LG-CA-G-1. Manage livestock grazing to ensure achievement of or movement towards meeting Idaho 

Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management.

LG-I-G-1. Provide for livestock grazing through proper grazing management to enhance and sustain 

existing and historic uses and to improve habitat for big game and sage-grouse. 

Objectives

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-CA-O-1. Manage livestock grazing in annual communities to achieve objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

LG-I-O-1. In native plant communities excluding Sandberg/non-native areas, manage livestock grazing to 

help maintain and improve native plant species diversity and abundance, focusing on plant reproductive 

and physiological needs.

LG-I-O-2. In non-native perennial communities including Sandberg/non-native areas (see Map 9), 

manage livestock grazing to maintain and improve perennial plant species diversity and abundance, 

taking into account sage-grouse and big game habitat needs.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resource Uses

2-83

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

•

o

o

Range Infrastructure

LG-I-O-3. Manage (e.g., maintain, improve, build, realign, remove) range infrastructure at levels 

appropriate to the amount of livestock use to provide for efficient management of livestock grazing 

allotments, consistent with resource objectives.

Allocations

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-I-A-1. The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing (1,389,000 acres). 

The following areas would not be available for livestock grazing (74,000 acres):

Canyons associated with the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers and Salmon Falls Creek; 

Middle Snake Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), except the Asquena pasture; 

 Wildlife tracts; 

Reference areas; 

Areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use; and

Areas not contained within grazing allotments.

See Map 53 for locations.

LG-I-A-2. Allocate vegetation production as follows:

Native perennial grass production: 

65% to 75% to watershed and wildlife,

Less than 1% to wild horses, and

25% to 35% to livestock. 

Non-native perennial grass production: 

60% to 70% to watershed and wildlife, 

Less than 1% to wild horses, and

30% to 40% to livestock. 

Annual grass production: 

70% to 80% to watershed and wildlife and

20% to 30% to livestock. 

Shrub and forb production: 

89% to 92% to watershed and wildlife and

8% to 11% to livestock. 

Allocate approximately 189,000 to 259,000 animal unit months (AUMs) to livestock at initial 

implementation and approximately 179,000 to 245,000 at full implementation. The purpose of allocating 

vegetation is to determine the total AUMs available for livestock grazing in the planning area. AUMs for

livestock grazing are an estimate based on 2006 production data collected while conducting ecological 

site inventories. At the time of permit renewal, additional production data may be considered when 

determining the appropriate allocation for a specific allotment. 

These vegetation allocations would be implemented during the permit renewal process. Allocation 

percentages are not the same as utilization, as the allocation is used to identify the total number of AUMs 

for livestock, while utilization identifies the amount of vegetation used by livestock in a specific area. 

Allocation is not intended to prescribe what livestock actually consume. Livestock use of specific 

vegetation types would be managed through the implementation of grazing use indicators developed on 

an allotment-specific basis. 

LG-I-A-3. The amount of forage available for livestock use would likely change as the RMP is 

implemented, although allocation percentages would remain the same. Changes to AUMs in the future 

would be determined by the BLM after monitoring and site-specific NEPA analysis.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-84

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Management Actions

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-CA-MA-1. Implement adaptive management using grazing use indicators to meet resource and 

special designation area objectives. Grazing use indicators include:

 Utilization for upland vegetation and riparian areas, 

 Bank and soil surface alteration, and

 Other indicators identified on an allotment-specific basis depending on the resources present.

LG-CA-MA-2. The grazing permit renewal process, following the approval of the RMP, would be in 

conformance with BLM policy and guidance current at the time of renewal. 

LG-CA-MA-3. The toolbox for managing livestock grazing would include, but not be limited to: 

Rest rotation, 

Deferred rotation, 

Seasons of use, 

Stocking rates, 

Class and kind of livestock, 

Herding, 

Frequency of grazing, 

Closure for resource protection,

 Location and types of range infrastructure, and 

Location and types of supplements.

Specific tools to be used would be identified on an allotment-specific basis through the permit renewal 

process, depending on the resources present.

LG-CA-MA-4. Seasons of use and changes in class and kind of livestock would be consistent with 

resource objectives and analyzed in site-specific NEPA analysis.

LG-CA-MA-5. Identify and implement measures to prevent livestock from entering areas closed to 

grazing, such as: 

 Fencing, 

Using natural barriers, 

Active herding, 

Water placement, and 

Salt/supplement placement.

LG-CA-MA-6. Implement drought management guidelines during periods of drought to maintain or 

achieve long-term resource productivity (Appendix F).

LG-CA-MA-7. Allow spring and early summer livestock grazing periodically in big game winter range to 

improve browse production.

LG-CA-MA-8. Manage livestock grazing to move riparian and wetland conditions toward goals and 

objectives in the Riparian Areas and Wetlands section. 

LG-CA-MA-9. Livestock trailing may be allowed consistent with other resource objectives. Trailing must 

be supervised by the permittee to ensure active movement of livestock. Terms and conditions would be 

added to permits to ensure compliance.

LG-CA-MA-10. When livestock are moved between pastures or allotments through riparian areas, stream 

crossings would be perpendicular to the riparian area where practical.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resource Uses

2-85

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LG-CA-MA-11. Grazing management activities (e.g., grazing, trailing, bedding, watering, salting, loading, 

other handling efforts) would be modified, discontinued, or relocated if they are not maintaining aquatic 

and riparian conditions. 

LG-CA-MA-12. In areas that are readily accessible to cattle and known or suspected special status fish 

spawning habitat, develop and implement grazing practices to avoid or restrict trampling of redds (eggs) 

and other direct and indirect effects that may result in adverse impacts to the species.

LG-I-MA-1. Utilization would be determined on a case-by-case basis to meet objectives in the Livestock 

Grazing, Upland Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Fish and Wildlife, and Special Status Species

sections.

LG-I-MA-2. Reserve common allotments would not be established. 

LG-I-MA-3. Temporary Non-Renewable (TNR) permits would be allowed except in the following areas:

Pastures containing areas within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, 

 The riparian pasture of the Lower Saylor Creek Allotment in the Sand Point ACEC, 

 Pastures comprised of more than 50% big game winter range, or 

 Pastures comprised of more than 50% native communities (by cover) excluding Sandberg/non-native 

areas. 

LG-I-MA-4. Criteria for issuing TNR permits in a particular pasture would include:

TNR may be allowed in years where additional forage for livestock is temporarily available, as 

determined by utilization levels; 

TNR must be consistent with the drought management guidelines; 

TNR may not be allowed within the operation of the applicant if grazing use criteria are exceeded in 

any pasture in planning area controlled by the applicant; and

TNR must be consistent with other resource objectives.

LG-I-MA-5. Manage livestock grazing to provide a variety of residual cover heights to meet the needs of

ground-nesting birds present in an allotment. 

LG-I-MA-6. Follow BLM guidelines for livestock grazing management in sage-grouse habitat. 

LG-I-MA-7. Livestock grazing may be considered on a case-by-case basis in a portion of big game winter 

range in native shrubland communities during the winter (November 15 through April 30). No date 

restrictions on livestock grazing in big game winter range in other vegetation communities would be 

made.

LG-I-MA-8. During big game calving, fawning, and lambing, livestock grazing management would provide 

adequate cover for big game species, appropriate to site potential. 

LG-I-MA-9. Adjust livestock grazing in the Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC so livestock seasons of use would not 

overlap bighorn sheep breeding and winter periods in those pastures that contain bighorn sheep habitat. 

LG-I-MA-10. In aspen groves, grazing management would allow for natural regeneration with a diversity 

of vegetation species and age classes. 

LG-I-MA-11. Even though livestock grazing would not be authorized in the Jarbidge Canyon, trailing to 

the Wilkins Island Allotment would be permitted along the existing route across the East Fork of the

Jarbidge River and up an un-named draw just south of Murphy Hot Springs. Riders would be used to herd 

livestock to ensure livestock do not remain in the riparian area after the crossing.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-86

•

•

•

•

Range Infrastructure

LG-C-MA-1. Management actions for range infrastructure apply to watering sites, fences, and corrals 

within wilderness, consistent with the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Management Plan. 

LG-CA-MA-13. Follow BLM-approved design features and construction and maintenance practices for 

range infrastructure.

LG-CA-MA-14. Grazing facilities and infrastructure (e.g., livestock handling and management facilities, 

fences, watering facilities) would be modified, discontinued, or relocated if they are not maintaining 

aquatic and riparian conditions. 

LG-CA-MA-15. To protect associated resources, minimize disturbance at developed springs by using 

existing routes for access, redesigning the spring development, or limiting maintenance or reconstruction 

activities to areas disturbed during previous construction or to areas outside the wetland.

LG-CA-MA-16. Modify existing and construct new fences to comply with BLM standards for wildlife 

(Karsky, 1999). Existing fences would be modified according to the following priority order: 

Key sage-grouse habitat, 

Big game winter range, 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, and

The remainder of the planning area. 

LG-CA-MA-17. If a reservoir is fenced, where practical, provide water for livestock use outside the fence.

LG-CA-MA-18. For permittee-maintained projects, the BLM authorized officer would be notified prior to 

initiating work that requires the use of heavy equipment so that appropriate measures are adopted to 

protect resources. 

LG-I-MA-12. Consider installing or constructing new pipelines on a case-by-case basis where they would

help meet resource objectives. New pipelines would not be allowed within Wilderness; eligible, suitable, 

and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; or ACECs.

LG-I-MA-13. Maintain existing pipelines for livestock or wild horse use. Modify any pipeline where 

monitoring determines the pipeline is preventing attainment of resource objectives.

LG-I-MA-14. Consider installing or constructing new reservoirs or wells on a case-by-case basis where 

they would help meet resource objectives.

LG-I-MA-15. Maintain existing reservoirs or wells for livestock, wildlife, or wild horse use. Modify 

reservoirs or wells preventing attainment of resource objectives, as identified through monitoring. 

LG-I-MA-16. Consider new spring developments on a case-by-case basis. New spring developments 

must be consistent with resource objectives, avoid or minimize ground disturbance, protect the spring

source, and ensure adequate water to maintain the wetland.

LG-I-MA-17. Modify existing spring developments with wetlands rated as non-functioning, functioning-atrisk with a downward trend, or functioning-at-risk to improve wetland areas by protecting the spring 

source and ensuring adequate water to support spring hydrology and associated riparian vegetation.

LG-I-MA-18. Place salt, minerals, supplements, new troughs, new reservoirs, and new holding facilities 

more than 300 feet from canyon rims and playas. Avoid placing salt, minerals, supplements, troughs, 

reservoirs, and holding facilities in the protective zone of the Oregon National Historic Trail and the Kelton 

and Toana Freight Road protective corridors. Ensure salt, minerals, supplements, new troughs, new 

reservoirs, and new holding facilities are located to avoid conflicts with other cultural resources.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resource Uses

2-87

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LG-I-MA-19. Adjust locations of livestock watering facilities and salting/supplements in sage-grouse and 

other upland game bird habitat where monitoring indicates a conflict to provide adequate nesting and 

winter cover. 

LG-I-MA-20. Avoid placing new water developments in key sage-grouse habitat unless they would 

contribute to meeting resource objectives for sage-grouse. If a new water development is necessary, it 

should be located in a previously disturbed area.

LG-I-MA-21. Consider installing or constructing new fences to meet resource objectives.

2.3.3.2 Recreation

Goal

REC-CA-G-1. Provide and sustain a variety of dispersed and developed recreational opportunities and 

experiences while avoiding or minimizing resource impacts.

Objectives

REC-CA-O-1. Provide basic information on recreational opportunities on public lands not designated as 

Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) or Extensive Recreation Management Areas. Provide

access and minimal facilities (e.g., signs, protective fences) as needed to ensure visitor health and safety, 

reduce user conflict, and protect resources. 

REC-I-O-1. Manage 326,000 acres as SRMAs to protect and enhance recreation settings, activities, 

experiences, and benefits. 

Allocations

REC-I-A-1. Designate the following SRMAs:

Deadman/Yahoo SRMA (36,000 acres), 

Balanced Rock SRMA (500 acres), 

Little Pilgrim SRMA (300 acres), 

Jarbidge Forks SRMA (2,000 acres), 

Canyonlands SRMA (149,000 acres), 

Jarbidge Foothills SRMA (133,000 acres), and

Salmon Falls Reservoir SRMA (5,000 acres). 

See Map 61 for locations. 

REC-I-A-2. All lands not established as a SRMA would be managed to meet basic recreation and visitor 

services needs and resource objectives. Recreation would not be emphasized; however, recreation 

activities may occur to the extent that they are consistent with other resource uses.

Management Actions

REC-CA-MA-1. Develop implementation and monitoring plans for SRMAs to address the purpose specific 

to the SRMA.

REC-CA-MA-2. Where appropriate, implement management methods to protect riparian resources, 

special status species, and wildlife habitat while enhancing recreation opportunities. Management 

methods may include: 

Limiting visitor numbers, 

Adopting camping and travel controls, 

 Implementing fees, and 
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-88

•

•

•

•

•

•

Imposing scheduling restrictions to minimize impacts to fish and wildlife during important seasonal 

periods.

REC-CA-MA-3. New and existing recreation-related activities and facilities within or affecting Riparian 

Conservation Areas would be designed, modified, relocated, or discontinued if they are not maintaining 

aquatic and riparian conditions. 

REC-CA-MA-4. Dispersed camping would be allowed. Dispersed camping may be closed or limited 

seasonally if resource objectives are impacted. 

REC-CA-MA-5. If campground fees are implemented, they would not apply to Federally recognized tribes 

exercising treaty rights or engaging in traditional cultural practices.

REC-CA-MA-6. Consider Special Recreation Permits (SRPs) within Areas of Environmental Concern with 

mitigation for impacts to relevant and important values. 

REC-I-MA-1. The Deadman/Yahoo SRMA would consist of four Recreation Management Zones (RMZs; 

see Map 67) with the following management:

Manage the Deadman, Pasadena, and Yahoo RMZs to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in 

all-terrain vehicle and motorcycle riding.

Manage the Rosevear Gulch RMZ to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in motorized trail 

riding opportunities on a series of designated routes.

REC-I-MA-2. Manage the Balanced Rock SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in hiking, 

viewing wildlife and natural scenery, and non-motorized boating. 

REC-I-MA-3. Manage the Little Pilgrim SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in sturgeon 

fishing and bird hunting.

REC-I-MA-4. Manage the Jarbidge Forks SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing, 

rafting, picnicking, camping, and viewing wildlife and natural scenery.

REC-I-MA-5. Manage the Canyonlands SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in nonmotorized recreation experiences including hunting, fishing, hiking, equestrian activities, and viewing 

wildlife and natural scenery.

REC-I-MA-6. Manage the Jarbidge Foothills SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in nonmotorized recreation experiences including hunting, mountain biking, hiking, equestrian activities, and 

viewing wildlife and natural scenery.

REC-I-MA-7. The Salmon Falls Reservoir SRMA would consist of three RMZs (see Map 67) with the 

following management:

Manage the Antelope Bay RMZ to provide opportunities to engage in hunting, fishing, camping, 

boating, water sports, and motorized and non-motorized trail riding on a series of designated routes.

Manage the Cedar Creek RMZ to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing, camping, and 

boating.

Manage the Luds Point RMZ to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in hunting, fishing, 

primitive camping, and viewing wildlife and natural scenery.

See Appendix H for more information on the management and settings prescribed for each SRMA. 

REC-I-MA-8. Give priority to SRP applicants proposing to make use of less-crowded weekdays and focus 

on visitation on sites and areas resilient to repeated use.

REC-I-MA-9. Issue and manage SRPs for a wide variety of uses to enhance outdoor recreational 

opportunities, provide opportunities for private enterprise, manage user-group interaction, and limit the 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resource Uses

2-89

•

•

•

•

•

impacts of such uses upon natural and cultural resources, with increased emphasis on realizing positive 

economic and community benefits through SRP management.

REC-I-MA-10. Commercial SRPs would not be allowed in the Herd Management Area. 

REC-I-MA-11. Require organized group permits for groups with 50 or more people.

2.3.3.3 Transportation and Travel 

Goal

TR-CA-G-1. Manage and provide for motorized, non-motorized, and non-mechanized access that would

balance resource protection and use.

Objective

TR-I-O-1. Provide a transportation and travel system that facilitates multiple use, with an emphasis on 

recreational use, livestock grazing, and minimizing impacts to big game habitats.

Allocations

TR-C-A-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized and mechanized 

vehicle use (60,000 acres). The Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area would be closed to 

motorized vehicle use (2,000 acres).

TR-I-A-1. Designated areas in the Deadman/Yahoo Special Recreation Management Area would be open 

to cross-country motorized vehicle use (4,000 acres).

TR-I-A-2. Salmon Falls Creek Area of Critical Environmental Concern north and south of Lilly Grade 

crossing and Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for wilderness characteristics would be 

closed to motorized vehicle use (54,000 acres). 

TR-I-A-3. Travel would be limited to designated routes in the remainder of the planning area (1,253,000

acres). Specific route designations would be made in an implementation-level travel and transportation 

management planning process following the approval of the RMP. Until route designation occurs, areas 

limited to designated routes would be managed as limited to existing routes as depicted on Map 71. A 

more thorough review of the existing transportation routes would be performed as part of the travel 

management planning process, which may include additional on-the-ground data collection and 

verification.

See Map 73 for locations of transportation and travel allocations.

TR-I-A-4. Travel within the Herd Management Area would be seasonally restricted during foaling (March 

through July); motorized travel would not be allowed on primitive roads during this time.

Management Actions

TR-CA-MA-1. Area designations apply to all off-highway vehicles, which include any motorized vehicle 

capable of, or designed for, travel on or immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain, excluding: 

Any non-amphibious registered motorboat; 

Any military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle while being used for emergency purposes;

Any vehicle whose use is expressly authorized by the BLM authorized officer or otherwise officially 

approved; 

Vehicles in official use; and

Any combat or combat support vehicle when used in times of national defense emergencies (43 CFR 

8340.0-5[a]).
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-90

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Area and route designations, with the exception of designated wilderness areas, also do not apply to 

vehicles being used by members of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes or the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to 

access traditional use areas of importance to the tribes or to vehicles being used by members of the 

Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to exercise their tribally reserved treaty rights.

TR-CA-MA-2. Where motorized, non-motorized, mechanized, or non-mechanized use would cause or is 

causing considerable adverse effects on soil, vegetation, wildlife, wildlife habitat, cultural resources, 

historical resources, threatened or endangered species, wilderness suitability, other authorized uses, or 

other resources, the BLM authorized officer may close the affected areas to the type(s) of use causing the 

adverse effect until the adverse effects are reduced and measures implemented to prevent reoccurrence.

TR-CA-MA-3. Minimize construction and maintenance of roads within or adjacent to special status wildlife 

and fish habitat and big game winter range during important seasonal periods.

TR-CA-MA-4. Continue to recognize and update agreements and Memoranda of Understanding with 

local highway districts for road maintenance.

TR-CA-MA-5. Complete a Travel Management Plan (TMP) within five years of the signing of the Record 

of Decision. The TMP would be developed through a public process to determine the transportation and 

travel system for the planning area. The TMP would determine the routes and trails to be designated, 

modified, closed, or rehabilitated as well as the maintenance level, modes of travel, and seasonal and 

access restrictions for designated routes. During the TMP process, additional data needs and a strategy 

to collect information will be identified. Decisions made in the TMP would be limited to management of 

BLM roads. 

A TMP is not intended to provide evidence bearing on or addressing the validity of any R.S. 2477 

assertions. R.S. 2477 rights are determined through a process that is entirely independent of the BLM's 

planning process. Consequently, travel management planning should not take into consideration R.S. 

2477 assertions or evidence. Travel management planning should be founded on an independently 

determined purpose and need that is based on resource uses and associated access to public lands and 

waters. At such time as a decision is made on R.S. 2477 assertions, the BLM would adjust its travel 

routes accordingly.

TR-CA-MA-6. Route designation would, at a minimum, follow criterion in 43 CFR 8342.1 and BLM 

Manual 1626.

TR-CA-MA-7. Route designation would also adhere to the following: 

Conflict with cultural and paleontological resources would be minimized when designating routes.

Designated routes may follow or cross the Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) and National Register 

of Historic Places-eligible and -listed segments of the Kelton and Toana Freight Roads in areas 

where previous disturbance has occurred, and after consultation with the State Historic Preservation 

Officer. 

Where motorized vehicle use is allowed within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor, travel 

would not degrade the Oregon NHT or its setting. 

Designated routes within suitable and eligible Wild and Scenic River corridors must maintain/enhance 

their outstandingly remarkable values, free-flowing condition, water quality, and tentative classification 

until Congress acts. 

Loop routes are preferred to dead end routes.

Parking areas and turnouts would be considered under the same criteria used for routes.

Provide access to private lands or other agency lands (e.g., State, Forest Service, other BLM field 

offices).

Provide access for authorized activities, including livestock grazing, energy development, and 

recreation.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resource Uses

2-91

•

•

•

•

•

TR-CA-MA-8. As part of the travel management planning process, the BLM would identify any easements 

and rights-of-way (to be issued to the BLM or others) needed to maintain the preliminary or existing road 

and trail network.

TR-CA-MA-9. Cooperate with tribes, Federal, State, and county agencies to reduce adverse effects and 

support the achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands in the long term.

TR-CA-MA-10. Minimize locating new roads or road-related facilities in Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs). Before building new roads or other road-related facilities in RCAs, complete a watershed or sitespecific analysis. The level of analysis should be commensurate with the scope and issues of the project 

and related aquatic resources. Analysis should identify how road design features would minimize or avoid 

adverse effects to aquatic and riparian resources at site-specific, reach, and watershed scales.

TR-CA-MA-11. Temporary roads within or affecting RCAs would be fully decommissioned and 

rehabilitated once the road is no longer needed to meet the intended purpose. 

TR-CA-MA-12. Avoid or minimize sediment delivery to streams from the road surface to allow the 

achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

TR-CA-MA-13. Avoid sidecasting road surface material into areas where it may reach RCAs. 

TR-CA-MA-14. Design new, replacement, and reconstructed stream crossings (culverts, bridges, and 

other stream crossings) to:

Accommodate a 100-year flood, including associated bedload and debris in bull trout occupied 

watersheds. In watersheds containing other non-game fish, design new, replacement, and 

reconstructed stream crossings to accommodate a 100-year flood event, unless a site-specific 

analysis determines the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands could be achieved with 

fewer impacts to the RCA; 

Provide and maintain fish passage at all road crossings of existing and potential fish bearing streams; 

and

Accommodate mean bankfull channel widths to maintain channel integrity. 

TR-I-MA-1. Motorized vehicle restrictions would apply to everyone including lessees, BLM permit holders, 

and right-of-way (ROW) holders, but site-specific exceptions to motorized vehicle restrictions could be 

authorized in the lease, permits, or ROW grant. 

TR-I-MA-2. Other activities in areas limited or closed to motorized travel may be allowed on a case-bycase basis, but would require prior written permission of an authorized officer. These activities may 

include but not be limited to: 

Motorized cross-country travel for non-BLM government entities on official administrative business 

(e.g., noxious weed control, surveying, and animal damage control efforts) and

Motorized cross-country travel by entities requiring access to private lands, resources, or legal 

improvements within or adjacent to closed or limited areas.

TR-I-MA-3. Access and use restrictions may be imposed to reduce risk of wildland fire during fire 

restrictions, as determined by an authorized officer; restrictions may include, but not be limited to, closing 

primitive roads, trails, and areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use. Travel related to 

administrative uses and emergency services may continue during fire restrictions.

TR-I-MA-4. Game retrieval using motorized vehicles would be allowed within 300 feet of a designated 

route, but would not be allowed within areas closed to motorized vehicle use.

TR-I-MA-5. Motorized cross-country travel to a camp site would be allowed within 25 feet of designated 

routes, but would not be allowed within areas closed to motorized vehicle use or in riparian areas. 
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-92

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

•

o

•

o

Motorized cross-country travel to a camp site may be closed or limited seasonally or as impacts or 

environmental conditions warrant.

TR-I-MA-6. Identify locations and install gates and cattle guards along designated routes to minimize 

conflicts between motorized recreation activities and livestock grazing operations.

TR-I-MA-7. Travel Management Areas (TMAs) are delineated areas where travel management (either 

motorized or non-motorized) needs particular focus. These areas would have a designated network of 

roads, trails, ways, and other routes that provide for public access and travel. The priority emphasis for 

each TMA is based on resource management, wildland fire suppression, and use objectives outlined in 

the RMP. The TMAs and their travel and transportation planning focus would be as follows: 

Snake River TMA (316,000 acres): Focus on balancing the needs for public access with resource 

objectives. 

Deadman/Yahoo TMA (41,000 acres): Focus on facilitating motorized recreation activities, including 

open play areas and a designated trail system. 

Devil Creek TMA (667,000 acres): Focus on balancing livestock grazing management needs with 

habitat restoration activities. 

Canyonlands TMA (213,000 acres): Focus on increasing core habitat size for mule deer and 

providing opportunities for non-motorized recreation experiences. 

Jarbidge Foothills TMA (135,000 acres): Focus on increasing core habitat size for mule deer and 

providing opportunities for non-motorized recreation experiences.

See Map 79 for locations of TMAs. 

TR-I-MA-8. The BLM authorized officer has the authority to adjust TMA boundaries and their focus, 

consistent with objectives in the RMP. 

2.3.3.4 Land Use Authorizations

Goal

LA-CA-G-1. Public needs for land use authorizations would be met with consideration for other resource 

values. 

Objective

LA-I-O-1. Provide for the development of renewable energy resources, transportation routes, utility 

corridors, transmission lines, communication sites and other uses with consideration for resource 

objectives.

Allocations

LA-CA-A-1. Retain existing withdrawals, with the option of a Section 24 restoration for power site 

classifications and power site reserves if needed, as provided for in the Federal Power Act of 1920.

LA-I-A-1. The following areas would be avoidance areas for rights-of-way (ROWs; 1,001,000 acres); 

ROWs would be allowed in these areas only if the avoidance stipulations are met and if the area is not 

identified for ROW exclusion: 

Areas within US Air Force (USAF) Military Operating Areas (983,000 acres): 

New ROWs must be consistent with USAF airspace restrictions.

 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for wilderness characteristics (52,000 acres): 

ROWs must not impact naturalness, opportunities for solitude, or opportunities for primitive and/or 

unconfined recreation in these areas. 

Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone (11,000 acres): 

 New surface or overhead ROWs would follow existing ROW or disturbance corridors, 

underground ROWs would be allowed with mitigation for disturbance within the protective zone. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resource Uses

2-93

•

o

•

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors (30,000 acres): 

ROWs must maintain/enhance the river segment's outstandingly remarkable values, free-flowing 

condition, water quality, and tentative classification. 

Bruneau-Jarbidge and Salmon Falls Creek Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs; 88,000 

acres): 

 New ROWs would be restricted to ROW corridors and locations of existing ROWs. 

Several ROW avoidance areas overlap; where this occurs, all avoidance stipulations must be met. In 

addition, some ROW avoidance areas overlap with ROW exclusion areas; where this occurs, the more 

restrictive exclusion management applies. See Map 87 for locations of ROW avoidance areas.

LA-I-A-2. The following areas would be exclusion areas for ROWs (63,000 acres); they would not be 

available for ROWs under any conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, 

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area, and

Sand Point ACEC.

See Map 94 for locations of ROW exclusion areas. 

LA-I-A-3. Designate the following ROW corridors for utilities (i.e., corridors for oil, gas, and hydrogen 

pipelines, electricity transmission, phone lines, and distribution facilities), all of which are 1-mile wide:

Pilgrim Gulch (Section 368 energy corridor) (4,000 acres), 

Shoestring (Section 368 energy corridor) (5,000 acres), 

Saylor Creek (Section 368 energy corridor) (11,000 acres), 

Balanced Rock (Section 368 energy corridor) (10,000 acres), and

Jarbidge (24,000 acres). 

See Map 97 for locations of ROW corridors. Section 368 energy corridors were designated in the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005.

LA-I-A-4. Wind energy developments could be considered in areas with annual or non-native vegetation 

communities, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and outside ROW exclusion areas

and utility ROW corridors. Map 100 displays areas meeting these criteria in 2011; the map can be 

updated as vegetation conditions change on the ground.

Management Actions

LA-C-MA-1. Implement the Programmatic Policies and Design Features in the Record of Decision on 

Wind Energy Development on BLM-Administered Lands in the Western United States (2005) (Appendix 

B).

LA-C-MA-2. Interagency Operating Procedures, located in Appendix B, would be implemented for 

projects proposed within the Section 368 corridors.

LA-C-MA-3. The BLM would review all withdrawals on and classifications of public lands to eliminate all 

unnecessary withdrawals and classifications. Reviews would consider:

For what purposes were the lands withdrawn? 

Are these purposes still being served?

Are the lands suitable for return to the public domain?

LA-CA-MA-1. Place new ROWs for oil and gas pipelines and overhead lines within ROW corridors where 

practical; other locations would be considered in areas not identified for ROW avoidance or exclusion, 

consistent with allocations listed above.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-94

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LA-CA-MA-2. New ROWs would be located in areas of previous disturbance where practical.

LA-CA-MA-3. New ROWs would meet Visual Resource Management class objectives.

LA-CA-MA-4. Co-locate new communication sites with existing sites where practical; communication 

sites present in 2011 are located at:

Black Mesa, 

Blue Butte, 

Frog Hollow,

Indian Butte, 

Lower Salmon Falls, 

Signal Butte, and

Yahoo Creek. 

See Map 85. Other locations would be considered, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas 

and outside ROW exclusion areas.

LA-CA-MA-5. BLM management activities and authorized uses on lands with existing withdrawals would 

be consistent with the purposes of the withdrawal. Proposed BLM management activities and authorized 

uses that are not consistent with the purposes of the withdrawal would be evaluated to determine whether 

the proposal can be modified or whether the withdrawal is still necessary.

LA-CA-MA-6. Land use permits may be considered, on a case-by-case basis, consistent with resource 

objectives. 

LA-CA-MA-7. Trespass resolution would be limited to removal of facilities and/or restoration of the area 

as determined by the BLM authorized officer. Trespass resolution, as determined by the BLM authorized 

officer, may include:

 Removal (depending on the nature of the trespass), 

 Restoration, 

 Authorization of a ROW grant or land use permit, or 

 Disposal of the affected land through sale or exchange.

LA-CA-MA-8. Land use permits for irrigation pivot crossings may be allowed, in accordance with policy 

and regulations. In cases where a pivot crosses public land, the lands are to remain unfarmed and 

unirrigated.

LA-CA-MA-9. Airport leases may be considered if proposals are outside ROW exclusion areas and 

consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and Federal Aviation Administration regulations. 

LA-CA-MA-10. Access across non-BLM lands would be identified and obtained, where possible, through 

easements, ROWs, or acquisitions to accomplish BLM objectives. 

LA-CA-MA-11. Future access needs and priorities would be coordinated with the Shoshone-Bannock 

Tribes, Shoshone-Paiute Tribes, Idaho and Nevada State agencies, and local governments to ensure 

resource values are evaluated along with public needs.

LA-CA-MA-12. Authorizations involving water use on BLM land must comply with applicable State water 

law. Final authorization to proceed with water developments on BLM lands would be withheld until 

compliance from the appropriate authorizing agency (i.e., Idaho Department of Water Resources) is 

obtained. Any new water right established on public land would be solely in the name of the United 

States.

LA-CA-MA-13. New land use authorizations would avoid or minimize adverse effects on non-game fish, 

their habitats, and Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs). 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resource Uses

2-95

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LA-CA-MA-14. For existing land use authorizations that prevent the achievement of the goals and 

objectives for riparian areas and wetlands, use existing authorities to redesign, modify, or apply 

mitigations to reduce impacts to non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LA-CA-MA-15. During Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensing or relicensing of 

hydroelectric projects, terms and conditions that achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and 

wetlands over the new license term should be submitted to the FERC.

LA-I-MA-1. ROW construction and maintenance activities should avoid disturbing special status species 

and mule deer during important seasonal periods, unless the disturbance can be mitigated. 

LA-I-MA-2. Locate new transmission and phone lines, communications towers, meteorological towers, 

and wind turbines at least one to three miles away from occupied and unknown-status sage-grouse leks if 

it can be documented the structure would not conflict with the lek. If this cannot be documented, 

structures must be at least three miles away from active sage-grouse leks. Within designated ROW 

corridors, buffer distances for sage-grouse leks would not apply. BLM may impose constraints on timing 

of construction for routine maintenance. 

LA-I-MA-3. Do not locate new communication sites in special status species habitat if the project would 

affect special status species or their habitat, unless those impacts can be mitigated.

LA-I-MA-4. Restrict wind energy site testing, monitoring, and development from occupied habitat for 

special status plants and animals, and cultural resources where direct and indirect adverse effects cannot 

be mitigated. 

LA-I-MA-5. Applications for solar energy developments would be considered on a case-by-case basis. 

2.3.3.5 Land Tenure 

Goal

LT-CA-G-1. Manage land tenure to provide for public ownership of lands with high resource and multiple 

use values and to improve management efficiency. 

Objective

LT-CA-O-1. Improve BLM's ability to manage the land base and resource values, and help meet resource 

objectives through land tenure adjustments.

Allocations

LT-I-A-1. Zone 1 consists of lands for retention that are not available for disposal (1,108,000 acres). Zone 

1 lands include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness;

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 

The Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone; 

 Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; 

The Bruneau-Jarbidge, Lower Bruneau Canyon, and Sand Point Areas of Critical Environmental 

Concern; 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area; 

Land with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics; and 

Other consolidated public lands. 

LT-I-A-2. Zone 2 consists of lands for consolidation within the planning area (243,000 acres); these can 

be exchanged for other lands adjacent to Zone 1 or Zone 2 or offered as Recreation and Public Purposes 

(R&PP) leases. Zone 2 lands include: 
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-96

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Selected lands near Indian Cove, Hammett, Glenns Ferry, and King Hill;

Selected lands in the northeast corner of the planning area;

Selected lands in the Jarbidge Foothills;

Selected lands between Clover Creek and Cedar Creek Reservoir; and

Selected lands near the Jarbidge River in Nevada.

LT-I-A-3. Zone 3 lands (20,000 acres) are available for Federal Land Policy and Management Act

(FLPMA) Section 203 sales (as listed in Appendix I) subject to NEPA compliance and consistent with 

other decisions in this RMP. Zone 3 lands include:

Selected lands near Hammett, Glenns Ferry, King Hill, and Roseworth. 

See Map 107 for locations of Land Tenure Zones 1, 2, and 3.

LT-I-A-4. Lands identified for disposal in previous RMPs prior to July 25, 2000 (3,000) would continue to 

be available for disposal under the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act of 2000 (FLTFA) (Appendix 

I). Proceeds from the sale or exchange of these public lands may be used to purchase additional public 

lands, as provided for in FLTFA.

LT-I-A-5. R&PP leases to State and local governments and non-profit organizations would be considered 

on a case-by-case basis on lands in Zones 2 and 3. 

Management Actions

LT-CA-MA-1. Public lands, in order to be considered for any form of land tenure adjustment (including 

exchanges, R&PP, fee or easement acquisitions, etc.), except for FLPMA Section 203 sales, would be 

evaluated and must meet one or more of the land ownership adjustment criteria (described in Appendix I), 

or one or more of the following criteria:

Is in the public interest; accommodates the needs of State, local, or private entities, including for the 

economy and community growth and expansion; and is in accordance with other land use goals, 

objectives, and planning decisions; 

Results in net gain of important and manageable resource values on public lands such as crucial 

wildlife habitat, significant cultural sites, high-value recreation areas, high quality riparian areas, live 

water, special status species habitat, or areas key to maintenance of productive ecosystems; 

Ensures the accessibility of public lands in areas where access is needed and cannot otherwise be 

obtained; 

Is essential to allow effective management of public lands in areas where consolidation of ownership 

is necessary to meet resource management objectives; and/or

Results in acquisition of lands that serve a national priority as identified in national policy directives.

LT-CA-MA-2. Initiate tribal consultation early in the process for any land tenure adjustments.

LT-CA-MA-3. In general, lands with the following characteristics would be retained in Federal ownership: 

Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, and Candidate species habitat and designated critical habitat; 

Those lands specifically identified by the tribes as having special importance related to treaty and/or 

traditional uses/values;

National Register of Historic Places eligible and listed properties; and 

 Wildlife tracts.

These lands could be disposed of if the transaction helped achieve resource objectives; see the Cultural 

Resources section for additional guidance for disposal of lands containing National Register properties or 

other important cultural resources. Lands acquired under the Land and Water Conservation Fund must be 

retained.

LT-CA-MA-4. BLM’s acquisition priorities (not in priority order) would include:
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resource Uses

2-97

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Land identified by Shoshone-Paiute Tribes or Shoshone-Bannock Tribes;

Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, or Candidate species habitat; 

BLM Type 2 Sensitive species habitat;

Lands within special designations;

Big game winter range;

Riparian areas;

Lands containing known archaeological, paleontological, or historical values determined by the BLM 

to be unique or of traditional or scientific importance;

Lands that would provide public access to public lands, including but not limited to river access; 

Lands that would help consolidate public land; 

Lands that would help improve livestock grazing management; and 

Lands adjacent to Zones 1 and 2.

LT-CA-MA-5. Vegetation treatments, construction of new range infrastructure, and other public land 

improvements in areas involved in a land tenure transaction would be kept to a minimum.

LT-CA-MA-6. Disposal of public lands would be subject to all valid existing rights, including existing 

rights-of-way. Existing public access through those lands may be retained if necessary for BLM 

management or for accommodating uses.

LT-CA-MA-7. Use land acquisition, exchanges, and conservation easements to support achievement of 

the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands and facilitate restoration of native species and 

their habitat.

LT-CA-MA-8. No new Desert Land Act or Carey Act applications would be accepted for lands. The Desert 

Land Act and Carey Act applications submitted prior to 2009 (Case numbers IDD-7401, IDI-7402, IDI27888, and IDI-27889) would be processed within 10 years of the signing of the Record of Decision. 

LT-CA-MA-9. Manage newly acquired lands and lands returned to BLM the same as adjacent BLM lands 

(e.g., acquired lands within wilderness would be managed as wilderness).

LT-I-MA-1. Sales of public lands can be made upon consideration of the following criteria:

The parcel, because of its location or other characteristics, is difficult and uneconomic to manage as 

part of the public lands, and is not suitable for management by another Federal department or 

agency; 

The parcel was acquired for a specific purpose and is no longer required for that or any other Federal 

purpose; or

Disposal of the parcel would serve important public objectives, including but not limited to, expansion 

of communities and economic development which cannot be achieved prudently or feasibly on land 

other than public land and which outweigh other public objectives and values. These include, but are 

not limited to, wildlife, grazing, recreation, and scenic values which would be served by maintaining 

such parcel in Federal ownership.

2.3.3.6 Minerals 

Leasable Minerals

Leasable minerals include oil shale, oil and gas, phosphate, potash, sodium, geothermal resources, and 

other minerals that may be developed under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended.

Goal

LE-CA-G-1. Provide leasable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other 

resources.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-98

•

•

•

•

Objective

LE-I-O-1. Facilitate reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound exploration and development of 

leasable minerals where compatible with resource objectives.

Allocations

LE-I-A-1. The majority of the planning area (1,220,000 acres) would be open to mineral leasing, subject 

to laws, regulations, and formal orders; the terms and conditions of the standard lease form; and 

stipulations for the Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation and Cultural Resource Protection. 

Areas that would be subject to additional moderate or major constraints specific to Alternative I are as 

follows:

Moderate constraints (791,000 acres): Big game winter range, key sage-grouse habitat, and Riparian 

Conservation Areas (RCAs) in bull trout and redband trout spawning habitat would be open to mineral 

leasing with seasonal restrictions. RCAs would be open to mineral leasing, consistent with goals and 

objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

Major constraints (25,000 acres): The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone and the 

Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors would be open to mineral leasing with no surface 

occupancy (NSO). 

LE-I-A-2. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, the Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study 

Area; eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics, and the Areas of Critical Environmental 

Concern (ACECs; 151,000 acres) would be closed to mineral leasing.

See Map 116 for locations of leasable mineral allocations.

LE-I-A-3. Areas open or closed to exploration and development of non-energy leasable minerals (e.g., 

phosphate) would follow allocations outlined above.

Management Actions

LE-C-MA-1. Geothermal exploration, drilling, utilization, and reclamation projects would incorporate 

stipulations, best management practices, and management procedures from the Record of Decision and 

Resource Management Plan Amendments for Geothermal Leasing in the Western United States 

(December 2008) found in Appendix B. 

LE-CA-MA-1. The terms and conditions of the standard lease form (Form 3100-11, Offer to Lease and 

Lease for Oil and Gas) or future versions of the form would apply to all mineral leases.

LE-CA-MA-2. The following stipulations for Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) Section 7 

Consultation and Cultural Resource Protection would be used unless new stipulations are directed by 

BLM policy:

ESA Section 7 Consultation Stipulation – The lease area may now or hereafter contain plants, 

animals, or their habitats determined to be Threatened, Endangered, or other special status species. 

BLM may recommend modifications to exploration and development proposals to further its 

conservation and management objective to avoid BLM-approved activity that would contribute to a 

need to list such a species or their habitat. BLM may require modifications to or disapprove proposed 

activity that is likely to result in jeopardy to the continued existence of a proposed or listed Threatened 

or Endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of a designated or 

proposed critical habitat. BLM would not approve any ground-disturbing activity that may affect any 

such species or critical habitat until it completes its obligations under applicable requirements of the 

ESA, including completion of any required procedure for conference or consultation.

Cultural Resource Protection Stipulation – This lease may be found to contain historic properties 

and/or resources protected under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), American Indian 

Religious Freedom Act, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, Executive Order 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resource Uses

2-99

•

•

•

o

o

o

•

13007, or other statutes and executive orders. The BLM would not approve any ground-disturbing 

activities that may affect any such properties or resources until it completes its obligations under 

applicable requirements of the NHPA and other authorities. The BLM may require modification to 

exploration or development proposals to protect such properties, or disapprove any activity that is 

likely to result in adverse effects that cannot be successfully avoided, minimized, or mitigated.

LE-CA-MA-3. Exceptions, waivers, and modifications may not be made for the following lease

stipulations:

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Special Status Species Habitat: ESA Section 7 Consultation

and

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Cultural Resources: Cultural Resource Protection Stipulation. 

LE-CA-MA-4. Lease stipulations, conditions of approval, and actions would be developed to achieve 

resource objectives on a site-specific basis.

LE-CA-MA-5. Mineral leasing and development decisions also apply to geophysical exploration.

LE-CA-MA-6. Exploration and development of non-energy leasable minerals would follow standard

stipulations outlined above; additional stipulations would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

LE-CA-MA-7. Leasable mineral development activities would avoid special status species habitat if the 

activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. Permits would 

include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

LE-CA-MA-8. For those leasable mineral development activities conducted pursuant to valid existing 

rights that pose risks to achievement of management objectives, use existing authorities to mitigate 

and/or require, to the extent authorized, design features that would contribute to the maintenance of 

streambanks, shorelines, streambed configuration, water quality, amount and distribution of woody 

debris, thermal regulation, characteristic erosion rates, and amount and distribution of source habitats.

LE-CA-MA-9. Locate leasable mineral project related infrastructure outside RCAs. Where there is no 

alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. Keep the number of roads 

to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission and revegetate roads no 

longer required for mineral management and related activities.

LE-CA-MA-10. New leasable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LE-CA-MA-11. Develop inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for leasable mineral activities

within or affecting RCAs. Evaluate and apply the results of inspection and monitoring to modify mineral 

plans, leases, or permits as needed to achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

LE-I-MA-1. Exceptions, waivers, or modifications may be made for lease stipulations as described below: 

NSO Stipulation for Oregon NHT Protective zone – Surface occupancy is not allowed within the 

Oregon NHT protective zone. 

Exception: After coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), the BLM 

authorized officer may grant an exception if an environmental review demonstrates the action as 

proposed or conditioned would not impair the integrity of the trail.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may grant a waiver if an environmental review demonstrates

the action as proposed or conditioned would only impact non-contributing trail segments.

Modification: This stipulation may not be modified.

NSO Stipulation for Kelton and Toana Freight Roads – Surface occupancy would not be allowed 

within the Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-100

o

o

o

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

o

•

Exception: After coordination with SHPO, the BLM authorized officer may grant an exception if an 

environmental review demonstrates the action as proposed or conditioned would not impair the 

integrity of the trails.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may grant a waiver if an environmental review demonstrates

the action as proposed or conditioned would only impact non-contributing trail segments.

Modification: This stipulation may not be modified.

Seasonal Restriction Stipulation for Big Game Winter Range, Key Habitat for Sage-Grouse, and 

Redband Trout Spawning Habitat – No surface use would be allowed (e.g., exploration, construction, 

and drilling) within big game winter range from December through March, key sage-grouse habitat 

from mid-February through mid-June, or redband trout spawning habitat from May through June.

Exception: The BLM authorized officer may grant an exception if an environmental review 

demonstrates the action as proposed or conditioned would not affect the species or habitat during 

important seasonal periods. An exception may also be granted if the proponent, BLM, and State 

wildlife agencies negotiate compensation or mitigation that would offset the anticipated impact to 

the species or habitat.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may waive a stipulation if after discussion with State wildlife 

agencies it is determined the described lands are incapable of serving the long-term requirements 

of the species and these areas no longer warrant consideration of habitat.

Modification: The BLM authorized officer may modify the size and shape of the area under 

seasonal restrictions if an environmental analysis indicates the actual habitat suitability for the 

species is different. Time periods may be modified based on studies documenting local periods of 

actual use.

Seasonal Restriction Stipulation for Bull Trout Spawning Habitat – No surface use would be allowed 

(e.g., exploration, construction, and drilling) within RCAs in bull trout spawning habitat from August 

through November.

Exception: The BLM authorized officer may grant an exception if an environmental review 

demonstrates the action as proposed or conditioned would not affect the species or habitat during 

important seasonal periods. An exception may also be granted if the proponent, BLM, US Fish 

and Wildlife Service (FWS), and State wildlife agencies negotiate compensation or mitigation that 

would offset the anticipated impact to the species or habitat.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may waive a stipulation if after consulting with FWS and 

discussion with State wildlife agencies it is determined the described lands are incapable of 

serving the long-term requirements of the species and these areas no longer warrant 

consideration of habitat.

Modification: The BLM authorized officer may modify the size and shape of the area under 

seasonal restrictions if an environmental analysis indicates the actual habitat suitability for the 

species is different. Time periods may be modified based on studies documenting local periods of 

actual use.

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Riparian Areas and Wetlands – Surface use within RCAs must 

be consistent with the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

Salable Minerals

Salable minerals include minerals and building materials such as sand, stone, gravel, pumice, pumicite, 

cinders, and clay.

Goal

SA-CA-G-1. Provide salable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other 

resources.

Objective

SA-I-O-1. Provide salable minerals needed for community and economic purposes and facilitate their 

reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound development where available and compatible with 

resource objectives.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Resource Uses

2-101

•

•

•

•

•

•

Allocations

SA-CA-A-1. The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone and the Kelton and Toana Freight

Road protective corridors (27,000 acres) would be closed to new salable mineral development. See NHTCA-MA-8 and CR-CA-MA-12. 

SA-I-A-1. The majority of the planning area would be open to salable mineral development (1,200,000 

acres), subject to site-specific NEPA analysis, stipulations, and 43 CFR 3600 regulations, except for the 

following areas which are closed to salable mineral exploration and development (144,000 acres):

The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness; 

The Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, Lower Bruneau Canyon, Salmon Falls Creek, and Sand Point Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern (ACECs); 

 Playas (300-feet buffer); and 

Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics. 

See Map 123 for locations of salable mineral allocations.

Management Actions

SA-C-MA-1. Promote the use of existing sites for mineral disposals. 

SA-C-MA-2. Exploration would be allowed where appropriate under a letter of authorization from the BLM 

authorized officer. Exploration for new sites would be the responsibility of the applicant. 

SA-CA-MA-1. Salable mineral development activities would avoid special status species habitat if the 

activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. Permits would 

include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

SA-CA-MA-2. All mineral material sites would be reclaimed in accordance with resource objectives for the 

adjacent area as specified in the permit.

SA-CA-MA-3. Site specific terms, conditions, and special considerations would be included in all 

commercial salable mineral permits to protect resource values.

SA-CA-MA-4. Stipulations for community pits would be developed on a site-specific basis. 

SA-CA-MA-5. For those salable mineral development activities conducted pursuant to valid existing rights 

that pose risks to achievement of goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands, use existing 

authorities to mitigate and/or require, to the extent authorized, design features that would contribute to the 

maintenance of streambanks, shorelines, streambed configuration, water quality, amount and distribution 

of woody debris, thermal regulation, characteristic erosion rates, and amount and distribution of source 

habitats.

SA-CA-MA-6. Locate salable mineral project related infrastructure outside Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs). Where there is no alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. 

Keep the number of roads to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission

and revegetate roads no longer required for mineral management and related activities.

SA-CA-MA-7. New salable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

SA-I-MA-1. New salable mineral development or expansion of existing developments would not be 

allowed within the Middle Snake ACEC. 
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-102

•

•

•

•

•

Locatable Minerals

Minerals or materials subject to claim and development under the Mining Law of 1872, as amended. 

Generally includes metallic minerals such as gold and silver, and other materials not subject to lease or 

sale (some bentonites, limestone, talc, some xeolites, etc.).

Goal

LO-CA-G-1. Locatable mineral development would not cause unnecessary and undue degradation of 

resources. 

Objective

LO-CA-O-1. Facilitate reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound exploration and development 

of locatable minerals. 

Allocations

LO-C-A-1. The planning area, excluding the following withdrawn areas (60,000 acres), would be available 

for location of mining claims: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and

Designated Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridors.

LO-I-A-1. Recommend the following areas for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable exploration and 

development (117,000 acres): 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, Middle Snake, Salmon Falls Creek, and Sand Point Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern (ACECs); 

The Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone; and 

Eligible and suitable WSR corridors. 

See Map 130 for locations of areas recommended for withdrawal and withdrawn by statute. 

Recommendations by BLM for withdrawal are subject to final consideration by the Secretary of the 

Interior.

Management Actions

LO-CA-MA-1. Determine whether locatable mineral plans of operation cause unnecessary and undue 

degradation to resources, including habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species, on a caseby-case basis and identify stipulations or mitigation measures as appropriate. 

LO-CA-MA-2. Locate mineral project related infrastructure outside Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs). 

Where there is no alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. Keep the 

number of roads to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission and 

revegetate roads no longer required for mineral management and related activities.

LO-CA-MA-3. New locatable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LO-CA-MA-4. Develop inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for locatable mineral activities

within or affecting RCAs. Evaluate and apply the results of inspection and monitoring to modify mineral 

plans, leases, or permits as needed to achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Special Designations

2-103

2.3.4 Special Designations

2.3.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 

Goal

ACEC-I-G-1. ACECs would be managed to protect the important biological, cultural, scenic, and historic 

resources that meet the criteria for relevance and importance. 

Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC

Objective

ACEC-I-O-1. Manage the lands within the Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC to protect their fish, wildlife, botanical, 

scenic, and cultural resource values.

Allocation

ACEC-I-A-1. Manage 85,000 acres of public land as the Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC (Map 137).

Management Actions

ACEC-I-MA-1. All actions within the portions of the ACEC that are also within the Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness must be consistent with the Wilderness Act and the Omnibus Public Lands 

Management Act of 2009 and with allocations and management actions made for wilderness.

ACEC-I-MA-2. Areas within the ACEC with concentrated recreational and livestock grazing use would be 

a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment with integrated weed management 

techniques for control, containment, and where practical, eradication. Use of domestic sheep or goats to 

reduce noxious weeds would not be allowed within the ACEC to eliminate potential contact with bighorn 

sheep.

ACEC-I-MA-3. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.

ACEC-I-MA-4. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used to suppress wildland fires within the 

ACEC. Fire lines would be rehabilitated to help stabilize soils.

ACEC-I-MA-5. Manage the portion of the Jarbidge right-of-way (ROW) corridor within the ACEC as Visual 

Resource Management (VRM) Class III; manage the remainder of the ACEC as VRM Class I.

ACEC-I-MA-6. Adjust livestock grazing so livestock seasons of use would not overlap bighorn sheep 

breeding and winter periods in those pastures that contain bighorn sheep habitat. 

ACEC-I-MA-7. Placing salt or other supplements would not be allowed within the ACEC to reduce 

livestock use of bighorn sheep habitat. 

ACEC-I-MA-8. Monitor recreational use within the ACEC. If this use reaches levels that impair the 

relevant and important values of the ACEC, implement protective measures appropriate to the type of 

recreational activity. Protective measures may include, but not be limited to, implementing a permit 

system for the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers in coordination with the Bruneau Field Office, requiring the 

use of certified weed-free forage and straw, and designating camping areas outside the ACEC. 

ACEC-I-MA-9. Special Recreation Permits would be allowed within ACECs as long as the relevant and 

important values are protected. 

ACEC-I-MA-10. Motorized vehicle use within the ACEC would be limited to designated routes. To avoid 

disturbing bighorn sheep during wintering and lambing periods or to protect other relevant and important 

values, seasonal closures of specific designated routes may be considered in the Travel Management 

Plan. 
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-104

ACEC-I-MA-11. Continue to maintain the low level of human disturbance in bighorn sheep habitat by not 

constructing new roads or substantially improving other routes in the ACEC. Some designated routes 

within the ACEC, including the road to Indian Hot Springs, could have spot surface treatments to reduce 

resource damage due to road braiding and to improve public safety. 

ACEC-I-MA-12. The ACEC would be a ROW avoidance area; new ROWs would be restricted to ROW 

corridors and locations of existing ROWs.

ACEC-I-MA-13. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1; where practical, acquire private 

and/or State inholdings. The ACEC designation and management would apply to lands acquired within 

the ACEC boundary.

ACEC-I-MA-14. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing. 

ACEC-I-MA-15. The ACEC would be closed to salable mineral development. 

ACEC-I-MA-16. Recommend lands within the ACEC for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable 

exploration and development.

Lower Bruneau Canyon ACEC

Objective

ACEC-I-O-2. Protect vertebrate and invertebrate paleontological resources; restore and protect special 

status plant habitat for Packard’s cowpie buckwheat, spine-node milkvetch, and rare desert annuals.

Allocation

ACEC-I-A-2. Manage 1,000 acres of public lands as the Lower Bruneau Canyon ACEC (Map 137).

Management Actions

ACEC-I-MA-17. Restore native upland and riparian plant communities within the ACEC to improve habitat 

for special status species. 

ACEC-I-MA-18. The ACEC would be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment with 

integrated weed management techniques for control, containment, and where practical, eradication. 

ACEC-I-MA-19. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area. 

ACEC-I-MA-20. Manage the ACEC as VRM Class III. 

ACEC-I-MA-21. The ACEC would be available for livestock grazing and new infrastructure as long as 

they are compatible with recovery of the area, including protecting seed production of special status 

plants and reducing impacts to their pollinators. 

ACEC-I-MA-22. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1. 

ACEC-I-MA-23. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing.

ACEC-I-MA-24. The ACEC would be closed to salable mineral development.

Middle Snake ACEC

Objective

ACEC-I-O-3. Manage the lands within the Middle Snake ACEC to protect their fish and botanical values.

Allocation

ACEC-I-A-3. Manage 7,000 acres of public lands as the Middle Snake ACEC (Map 137). 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Special Designations

2-105

Management Actions

ACEC-I-MA-25. Restore habitat for special status plants within the ACEC. Maintain existing high-quality 

special status plant habitat.

ACEC-I-MA-26. Where habitat is suitable, transplant or seed special status plants within the ACEC.

ACEC-I-MA-27. The ACEC would be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment with 

integrated weed management techniques for control, containment, and where practical eradication. 

Special conditions would apply in habitat occupied by special status plant species.

ACEC-I-MA-28. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area. 

ACEC-I-MA-29. Mitigate the effects of surface-disturbing activities in the ACEC, such as recreation and 

transportation. 

ACEC-I-MA-30. Implement use restrictions within the ACEC in areas with slopes greater than 20%, or in 

areas where soils are rated severe or very severe for wind erosion or high for water erosion. 

ACEC-I-MA-31. Manage the ACEC as VRM Class III.

ACEC-I-MA-32. The Asquena pasture within the ACEC would be available for livestock grazing; the 

remainder of the ACEC would not be available for livestock grazing.

ACEC-I-MA-33. Livestock trailing through the ACEC would be allowed in the designated trailing corridor, 

but livestock would not be allowed to remain in the ACEC overnight. 

ACEC-I-MA-34. Monitor recreational use within the ACEC. If this use reaches levels that impair the 

relevant and important values of the ACEC, implement protective measures appropriate to the type of 

recreational activity. Protective measures may include, but not be limited to, improving access routes to 

recreational sites along the Snake River, installing barriers to protect relevant and important values, and 

implementing measures to address water quality and public health concerns. 

ACEC-I-MA-35. BLM-managed lands within the ACEC can be exchanged for non-BLM-managed lands, 

consistent with the Land Tenure section, in order to obtain lands with relevant and important values or to 

improve management. Where practical, acquire private and/or State inholdings. The ACEC designation 

and management would apply to lands acquired within the ACEC boundary.

ACEC-I-MA-36. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing. 

ACEC-I-MA-37. The ACEC would be closed to new salable mineral development and expansion of 

existing developments.

ACEC-I-MA-38. Recommend lands within the ACEC for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable 

exploration and development. 

Salmon Falls Creek ACEC

Objective

ACEC-I-O-4. Protect scenic values, redband trout habitat, golden eagle nests, special status wildlife 

including prairie falcons and spotted bats, and native vegetation communities.

Allocation

ACEC-I-A-4. Manage 3,000 acres of public land as the Salmon Falls Creek ACEC (Map 137).
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-106

Management Actions

ACEC-I-MA-39. All actions within the portion of the ACEC that is also a Wilderness Study Area must be 

consistent with Management of Wilderness Study Areas (BLM Manual 6330). 

ACEC-I-MA-40. Restore vegetation within the riparian area to benefit redband trout habitat (e.g., 

increasing shade in the riparian area).

ACEC-I-MA-41. Use native species for any vegetation treatments within the ACEC, including for 

Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation. 

ACEC-I-MA-42. The ACEC would be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment with 

integrated weed management techniques for control, containment, and where practical eradication. 

ACEC-I-MA-43. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area. 

ACEC-I-MA-44. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used to suppress wildland fires within the 

ACEC.

ACEC-I-MA-45. Manage the portion of the Jarbidge ROW corridor within the ACEC as VRM Class III; 

manage the remainder of the ACEC as VRM Class I.

ACEC-I-MA-46. The ACEC would remain closed to livestock grazing. 

ACEC-I-MA-47. Monitor recreational use within the ACEC. If this use reaches levels that impair the 

relevant and important values of the ACEC, implement protective measures appropriate to the type of 

recreational activity. 

ACEC-I-MA-48. The ACEC north and south of Lilly Grade crossing would remain closed to motorized 

vehicle use.

ACEC-I-MA-49. The ACEC would remain a ROW avoidance area; new ROWs would be restricted to the 

Jarbidge ROW corridor and locations of existing ROWs.

ACEC-I-MA-50. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1. 

ACEC-I-MA-51. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing. 

ACEC-I-MA-52. The ACEC would remain closed to salable mineral development. 

ACEC-I-MA-53. Recommend lands within the ACEC for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable 

exploration and development.

Sand Point ACEC

Objective

ACEC-I-O-5. Protect the Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT), archaeological sites, vertebrate and 

invertebrate paleontological resources, and the Glenns Ferry geologic formation.

Allocation

ACEC-I-A-5. Manage 1,000 acres of public land as the Sand Point ACEC (Map 137).

Management Actions

ACEC-I-MA-54. Manage paleontological resources within the ACEC in accordance with the 1988 Sand

Point Natural History Management Plan or subsequent revision. Modify the 1988 plan to encompass the 

Morgan property extension and to be in conformance with the RMP. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Special Designations

2-107

ACEC-I-MA-55. The ACEC would be closed to fossil collecting except under permit for scientific research. 

ACEC-I-MA-56. Limit BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses that may contribute to 

wind or water erosion in the ACEC.

ACEC-I-MA-57. Work cooperatively with adjacent land owners to reduce or eliminate run-off from the 

agricultural fields that erode soils within the ACEC.

ACEC-I-MA-58. No surface-disturbing activities would be allowed in the ACEC unless they are directly 

related to research on the ACEC’s cultural, paleontological, or geological resources or they can be 

mitigated.

ACEC-I-MA-59. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used to suppress wildland fires within the 

ACEC to protect the paleontological resources. The BLM authorized officer may allow the use of bull 

dozers to construct control lines within the ACEC on a case-by-case basis. However, dozer lines would 

be rehabilitated to minimize erosion.

ACEC-I-MA-60. Manage the ACEC as VRM Class III, except within the Oregon NHT protective zone, 

which would be managed as VRM Class II.

ACEC-I-MA-61. The ACEC would be available for livestock grazing.

ACEC-I-MA-62. New range infrastructure may be considered if it does not impair the relevant and 

important values of the ACEC. Any infrastructure would be located so that it does not increase or 

encourage livestock trailing across fossil-bearing areas, cultural resource sites, or Oregon NHT ruts. 

ACEC-I-MA-63. Salt or other livestock supplements would not be placed within 0.25 mile of fossil-bearing 

areas or cultural resource sites. Locations closed to salt or other livestock supplements would be made 

known to the livestock permittees.

ACEC-I-MA-64. Motorized vehicle use within the ACEC would be limited to designated routes.

ACEC-I-MA-65. Consider upgrading the Wilson Grade Road if there is increased need for access for fire 

suppression activities or research.

ACEC-I-MA-66. Structures directly related to the preservation or interpretation of the site may be allowed

(e.g., kiosks, protective barriers). 

ACEC-I-MA-67. The ACEC would be a ROW exclusion area.

ACEC-I-MA-68. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1. 

ACEC-I-MA-69. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing.

ACEC-I-MA-70. The ACEC would be closed to salable mineral development.

ACEC-I-MA-71. Recommend lands within the ACEC for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable 

exploration and development. 

2.3.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 

Goal

NHT-CA-G-1. The Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor would be managed to preserve and 

protect the historic, scenic, and recreational values associated with the trail. 
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-108

•

•

•

Objective

NHT-CA-O-1. Protect, preserve, and provide opportunities to experience the historic, scenic, and 

recreational values of the Oregon NHT.

Allocation

NHT-I-A-1. Manage 1.5 miles on either side of the Oregon NHT as the National Trail Management 

Corridor (42,000 acres). Within the corridor, manage 0.25 mile on either side of the Oregon NHT or the 

visual horizon (whichever is narrower) as a protective zone (11,000 acres). 

See Map 143 for the location of the Oregon NHT.

Management Actions

NHT-CA-MA-1. Update the BLM’s 1984 Oregon Trail Management Plan and ensure consistency with the 

National Park Service’s 1999 Oregon NHT Comprehensive Management and Use Plan.

NHT-CA-MA-2. Until the 1984 plan is updated and unless otherwise directed in this document, continue 

to manage the Trail in accordance with the 1984 plan and BLM policy, and in cooperation with the 

National Park Service.

NHT-CA-MA-3. Manage the Oregon NHT protective zone as an avoidance area for surface-disturbing 

activities, including: 

 Placement of salting, supplemental feeding, temporary watering, and temporary holding facilities for 

livestock;

Staging areas for recreational activities and events; and

Staging areas for fire suppression and rehabilitation activities.

NHT-CA-MA-4. If use of a designated route within the Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor

is degrading the trail or its setting, the route would be modified or closed.

NHT-CA-MA-5. Design and implement restoration projects to mitigate the effects of natural and humancaused disturbances within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor. When practical, remove or 

modify visually intrusive facilities within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor. 

NHT-CA-MA-6. Lands within the Oregon NHT protective zone are not available for disposal; non-BLM 

lands within the corridor are a high priority for acquisition.

NHT-CA-MA-7. The Oregon NHT protective zone is open to leasable mineral exploration and 

development with no surface occupancy. 

NHT-CA-MA-8. The Oregon NHT protective zone is closed to new salable mineral development. Existing 

salable mineral developments could be renewed but the footprint could not be expanded.

NHT-CA-MA-9. Adverse effects to the Oregon NHT related to land use authorizations would be prevented 

through avoidance of impacting activities or through mitigation when disturbance or destruction is 

unavoidable. 

NHT-CA-MA-10. Developments such as roads, trails, pipelines, fences, and powerlines may be allowed 

to cross the Oregon NHT where the project is determined by the BLM, with the State Historic Preservation 

Officer concurrence, to not adversely affect the trail due to previous disturbance or visual intrusions. 

NHT-CA-MA-11. Surface-disturbing equipment, such as bulldozers and road graders, cannot be used on 

contributing segments of the Oregon NHT, or within the protective zone of such segments, unless to 

protect life or property.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Special Designations

2-109

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

NHT-CA-MA-12. Use techniques that minimize surface disturbance within the Oregon NHT protective 

zone during seeding projects (Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation, fuels treatments, 

or restoration). Trail remnants would not be disturbed during seeding operations.

NHT-CA-MA-13. Use educational and public outreach programs to minimize or prevent human-caused 

damage to the Oregon NHT including vandalism, unauthorized surface collection of artifacts, and 

unintentional disturbances.

NHT-CA-MA-14. Install and maintain signs identifying the routes of the Oregon NHT.

2.3.4.3 Wilderness 

Goal and Objective

WD-C-G-1. Manage the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to protect wilderness values.

Management Action

WD-C-MA-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness was designated by Congress in 2009 with the 

Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009, Section G, P.L. 111-11. The 90,000 acre BruneauJarbidge Rivers Wilderness Area (63,000 acres within the planning area) would be managed according to 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan. 

See Map 145 for the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness location.

2.3.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 

Goal and Objective

WSR-C-G-1. Maintain or enhance the outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs), free-flowing condition, 

and water quality of designated, suitable, and eligible WSR segments.

Allocations

WSR-C-A-1. River segments designated as Wild and Scenic include:

A 38.1-mile segment of the Bruneau River from the downstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness to the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau River, except for a 0.5-mile 

segment at the Indian Hot Springs public road access, to be administered as a wild river; 

A 0.5-mile segment of the Bruneau River at the Indian Hot Springs public road access to be 

administered as a recreational river; 

A 0.3-mile segment of the West Fork of the Bruneau River from the confluence with the Jarbidge 

River to the downstream boundary of the Bruneau Canyon Grazing Allotment to be administered as a 

wild river; and

A 27.9-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau 

River to the upstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to be administered as a 

wild river.

WSR-C-A-2. Segments recommended suitable for inclusion in the WSR system include:

A 23.0-mile segment of the Bruneau River from Blackrock Crossing to 0.3 mile above the confluence 

of the West Fork of the Bruneau River and the Jarbidge River.

WSR-C-A-3. Segments eligible for inclusion in the WSR system include: 

A 39.0-mile segment of Salmon Falls Creek from the Nevada border to Salmon Falls Reservoir and 

from Salmon Falls Dam to Balanced Rock Park; 

 A 25.0-mile segment of the Three Island, King Hill, and Hagerman reaches of the Snake River; 
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-110

•

•

•

•

•

A 10.2-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the planning area boundary to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 9.6-mile segment of the Jarbidge River, East Fork from the planning area boundary to Murphy Hot 

Springs and from Murphy Hot Springs to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 2.7-mile segment of Dave Creek from private land boundary to Jarbidge River, East Fork 

confluence;

A 1.0-mile segment of Cougar Point Creek from the planning area boundary to Jarbidge River, East 

Fork confluence; and 

A 1.5-mile segment of Rocky Canyon Creek from its headwaters to Salmon Falls Creek, North Fork 

confluence.

See Map 146 for locations of designated, suitable, and eligible river segments.

WSR-C-A-4. Wild and Scenic River corridors are designated to extend either the average distance of 

0.25 mile from the high water mark on each side of the river segment; or the distance to the nearest 

confined canyon rim, whichever is shorter. 

WSR-C-A-5. Wild and Scenic River corridors that are suitable or eligible extend outward from the ordinary 

high water mark 0.25 mile on both sides of the river.

Management Actions

WSR-C-MA-1. Manage the designated segments of the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers in accordance with 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan to maintain or 

enhance their ORVs, free-flowing condition, water quality, and classification.

WSR-C-MA-2. Manage the suitable segment of the Bruneau River to maintain or enhance its ORVs, freeflowing condition, water quality, and tentative classification until Congress acts.

WSR-C-MA-3. Protect or enhance the qualifying values of eligible river segments pending a subsequent 

suitability determination or designation decision by Congress. Their free-flowing condition cannot be 

modified, their ORVs and water quality are to be maintained or enhanced, and their tentative classification 

is to be maintained.

WSR-C-MA-4. Conduct suitability studies and make suitability determinations on eligible river segments 

entirely within the planning area; coordinate suitability studies on segments forming the boundary with the 

Burley and Shoshone Field Offices. 

WSR-C-MA-5. The existing powerline south of Murphy Hot Springs on the East Fork of the Jarbidge River 

would be retained; designated, suitable, and eligible WSR corridors would be right-of-way avoidance 

areas. 

WSR-C-MA-6. If, through legislation, Congress decides not to designate a suitable segment as part of the 

Wild and Scenic River System, the protective management outlined in this section would no longer apply 

and these segments would be managed according to direction in other sections of the RMP. 

WSR-I-MA-1. Designated, suitable, and eligible WSR corridors would be closed to exploration and 

development of leasable or salable minerals.

2.3.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs)

Goal and Objective

WSA-C-G-1. Manage and protect the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA to preserve wilderness 

characteristics so as not to impair the suitability for designation by Congress as wilderness.

Allocation

WSA-C-A-1. Manage 2,000 acres of public land as the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative I

Social and Economic Features

2-111

See Map 145 for the WSA location.

Management Actions

WSA-C-MA-1. Manage the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA according to the Management of Wilderness 

Study Areas (BLM Manual 6330) until Congress either designates the land as wilderness or releases it for 

other uses. 

WSA-C-MA-2. If the WSA is designated by Congress as Wilderness, manage it according to

Congressional mandates and BLM’s Wilderness Manual 6340 until a Wilderness Management Plan is 

developed.

WSA-C-MA-3. If the WSA is released for other uses by Congress, manage the lands within the Area of 

Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) and Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridor according to 

management specified for that ACEC and WSR corridor.

2.3.5 Social and Economic Features

2.3.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 

Goal

SE-CA-G-1. Management of the resources and uses of public lands would provide social and economic 

benefits to residents, businesses, visitors, and future generations.

Objective

SE-CA-O-1. Provide opportunities for economic and social benefit while maintaining natural and cultural 

resource values. 

Management Actions

SE-CA-MA-1. Planning for BLM management activities and authorized uses would consider whether the 

activity or action could be designed to support the social, economic, and environmental health and 

sustainability of affected communities of place.

SE-CA-MA-2. Consider proposals from communities of place and interest that contribute to their social, 

economic, and environmental health and sustainability. 

2.3.5.2 Hazardous Materials

Goal

HM-CA-G-1. Ensure hazardous substances on public lands remain a high priority for removal or 

mitigation. 

Objective

HM-CA-O-1. Mitigate issues related to hazardous substances. 

Management Actions

HM-CA-MA-1. Storage, treatment, or disposal of hazardous materials on public lands would not be 

allowed unless otherwise permitted by law. 

HM-CA-MA-2. Use law enforcement and public outreach to discourage the disposal of hazardous 

materials on public lands. 

HM-CA-MA-3. Storage and use of hazardous materials on public lands would not be allowed without BLM 

authorization.
Chapter 2: Alternative I Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Social and Economic Features

2-112

•

•

•

•

HM-CA-MA-4. Responses to hazardous materials incidents and sites would be as outlined and approved 

by the latest contingency plans for hazardous materials incidents (e.g., 2013 Twin Falls District BLM 

Environmental Contingency Plan for Emergency Preparedness and Response to Oil and Hazardous 

Materials Incidents).

HM-CA-MA-5. Identify and mitigate illegal hazardous material disposal sites and hazardous materials 

spills in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations.

HM-CA-MA-6. Develop interagency agreements with local law enforcement agencies to facilitate the 

enforcement of illegal hazardous material disposal and hazardous material laws.

HM-CA-MA-7. Coordinate with local government agencies during hazardous material prevention and 

response activities.

2.3.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 

Goal and Objective

IOE-CA-G-1. Working with partners, provide interpretation, outreach, and environmental education to 

highlight the natural, cultural, and historic features of the planning area and to further resource protection 

and public safety. 

Management Actions

IOE-CA-MA-1. Focus education, interpretation, and outreach on resources and activities occurring within 

the planning area. 

IOE-CA-MA-2. Partner with the tribes and Federal, State, and local agencies to educate the public on 

resource protection through activities such as education tours; kiosks at major entrances to the planning 

area; interpretive signs at off-highway vehicle staging areas; information on the identification, control, and 

prevention of noxious weeds and invasive plants; and programs such as Tread Lightly!® and Leave No 

Trace®. 

IOE-CA-MA-3. Create displays highlighting natural, cultural, and historic features of the planning area for 

use at area fairs, schools, public lands day, and other events. 

IOE-CA-MA-4. Participate in events that educate youth about natural resources.

IOE-CA-MA-5. Minimize or prevent human-caused damage to public land resources, including vandalism, 

illegal dumping, and unauthorized surface collection of fossils and artifacts, through educational and 

interpretive outreach programs.

IOE-CA-MA-6. Foster the public's understanding of the role of fire in the ecosystem, the hazards 

associated with living in the Wildland Urban Interface, and wildland fire prevention and suppression 

activities through methods such as: 

 Using mass media, 

 Providing outreach to local groups, 

 Developing interpretive signs and kiosks, and

Participating in County Wildfire Protection Plans. 

IOE-CA-MA-7. Provide interpretation and education on unique resource areas such as the Oregon 

National Historic Trail, Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, Wilderness, Wilderness Study Areas, and 

Wild and Scenic Rivers.

IOE-CA-MA-8. Provide education and outreach on resource protection for recreational users. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Tribal Rights and Interests

2-113

2.4 ALTERNATIVE II

2.4.1 Tribal Rights and Interests

Goals and Objectives

TI-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to protect resources and values associated with Native American treaty 

rights. 

TI-CA-G-2. Manage natural and cultural resources of importance to the tribes in a manner that respects 

tribal beliefs, traditions, and values. 

TI-CA-G-3. Protect the physical condition of sacred sites and traditional cultural properties and preserve 

tribal access to such sites.

Management Actions

TI-CA-MA-1. Consult with the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes and Shoshone-Bannock Tribes in accordance with 

BLM policy and other authorities. Consultation would be an ongoing process between BLM and the tribes, 

within the context of general management of public lands and programs, as well as specific proposals 

that may affect natural and cultural resources of importance to the tribes.

TI-CA-MA-2. Identify the effects of decisions on vegetation, fish, wildlife, mineral, and water resources of 

importance to the tribes, through consultation, and seek ways to lessen or avoid impacts. 

TI-CA-MA-3. Work collaboratively with the tribes regarding the identification and management of 

traditional cultural properties. 

TI-CA-MA-4. Provide general information to staff and contractors regarding existing and historic uses of 

the planning area by the tribes, Federal government trust responsibilities, and the importance of Native 

American treaty rights in order to foster a greater understanding and appreciation of tribal rights and 

interests related to public land management. 

2.4.2 Resources

2.4.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 

Goal

AAV-CA-G-1. Ensure BLM management activities and authorized uses maintain the quality of the 

planning area's air resources.

Objective

AAV-CA-O-1. Maintain the quality of air resources and limit impacts to air quality to meet National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards and Idaho Department of Environmental Quality air quality standards. 

Management Actions

AAV-CA-MA-1. Manage the planning area airshed as Class II unless it is reclassified by the State 

through the process prescribed in the Clean Air Act.

AAV-CA-MA-2. Ensure BLM management activities and authorized uses, including prescribed fire, are 

designed to comply with Federal, State, and local air quality regulations, classifications, and standards.

AAV-CA-MA-3. Minimize impacts of smoke from prescribed fires to sensitive areas such as the Class I 

airshed of the Jarbidge Wilderness (on US Forest Service-managed land), non-attainment areas, and 

communities adjacent to the planning area. 
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-114

AAV-CA-MA-4. Coordinate with the Montana-Idaho Airshed Group Smoke Management Program or its 

equivalent for all actions related to prescribed fire. 

AAV-CA-MA-5. Develop dust abatement stipulations for BLM-authorized construction and maintenance 

activities that have the potential to exceed State of Idaho air quality standards.

AAV-CA-MA-6. Design BLM activities and authorized uses to minimize night time light intrusions (e.g., 

modifications to the structure and timing of lighting).

AAV-CA-MA-7. Design BLM activities and authorized uses to comply with State of Idaho requirements for 

noise management. 

2.4.2.2 Geologic Features 

Goal

GE-CA-G-1. Manage unique geologic features for their tribal, scientific, recreational, and educational 

values. 

Objective

GE-CA-O-1. Protect unique geologic features and provide opportunities for their use and enjoyment.

Management Actions

GE-CA-MA-1. Protect unique geologic features from human-caused damage or extraction. 

GE-CA-MA-2. Conduct and maintain a cave inventory with participation from the tribes and interested 

organizations to identify and compile quantitative and qualitative data on cave resources and to determine 

cave significance in accordance with the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988.

GE-CA-MA-3. Based on the results of the cave inventory, designate significant caves and protect their 

resources. 

GE-CA-MA-4. Set management objectives and setting prescriptions for significant caves.

2.4.2.3 Soil Resources 

Goal and Objective

SR-CA-G-1. Manage resources and uses to maintain or enhance biological and physical functions and 

stability of soils. 

Management Actions

SR-CA-MA-1. Minimize soil erosion by maintaining perennial vegetation cover based on site potential.

SR-CA-MA-2. Design construction, maintenance, and land treatments to reduce impacts to soils. 

SR-CA-MA-3. Collaborate with County Highway Districts to reduce impacts from road maintenance along 

stream corridors and in areas of highly erosive soils.

SR-CA-MA-4. Reduce the erosive effects of transportation and travel by modifying routes or mitigating 

the impacts (e.g., water bars or control structures) where problems are identified. 

SR-CA-MA-5. Revegetate or stabilize areas where BLM management activities or authorized uses have 

resulted in unanticipated erosion.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resources

2-115

SR-CA-MA-6. Where new road construction or reconstruction occurs, the location and design should 

minimize soil erosion, including closure or decommissioning of the road if the need for the road is 

temporary.

SR-CA-MA-7. Soil and snow should not be side cast into surface waters during road maintenance.

SR-II-MA-1. Mitigate impacts of BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses on soils 

with severe or very severe potential for wind erosion (218,000 acres; Map 4) or with high potential for 

water erosion (443,000 acres; Map 5) for watershed and ecosystem health.

SR-II-MA-2. Develop and implement an erosion control strategy for new land use authorizations, Special 

Recreation Permits, and mineral exploration and development involving surface disturbance on slopes 

greater than 20% or on soils with severe or very severe potential for wind erosion or with high potential for 

water erosion.

2.4.2.4 Water Resources

Goal

WR-CA-G-1. Maintain or improve the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of water resources.

Objective

WR-CA-O-1. Make progress towards meeting Federal and State water quality standards. 

Management Actions

WR-CA-MA-1. Priority streams for restoration of water quality include streams containing special status 

species and their habitat (Map 24), fish-bearing streams, and water quality impaired streams (Map 6). 

Map 6 displays the location of streams meeting these criteria in 2011; this map can be updated to reflect 

changes in a stream’s status through the life of the plan.

WR-CA-MA-2. Prevent or mitigate the impacts of BLM management activities and authorized and allowed 

uses on water quality to comply with Federal, State, and local water quality regulations.

WR-CA-MA-3. Modify or suspend BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses that are 

a factor in not meeting water quality standards.

WR-CA-MA-4. Where applicable, incorporate best management practices to maintain and improve water 

quality (Appendix B). Recommendations may be implemented from State water quality plans to achieve 

the goal and objective (e.g., Idaho Agricultural Pollution Abatement Plan).

WR-CA-MA-5. Consider new water development projects and improvements to existing water 

development projects if impacts to water and riparian resources can be mitigated; see the Livestock 

Grazing section for additional guidance on water developments. See the Wildland Fire Ecology and 

Management section for guidance on water developments for fire suppression activities.

WR-CA-MA-6. Consult or coordinate with the tribes and with Federal, State, and local agencies when 

determining location and designs for water development projects.

WR-CA-MA-7. Coordinate with Idaho Department of Water Resources, Idaho Department of 

Environmental Quality, and Nevada Division of Environmental Protection to identify opportunities to 

mitigate impacts of water management on public land resources.

WR-CA-MA-8. Where total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for water quality restoration are developed, 

land management activities would be consistent with the water quality restoration plan and TMDLs.
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-116

•

•

•

•

•

•

WR-CA-MA-9. Water bodies that are supporting beneficial uses (e.g., cold water biota, salmonid 

spawning, recreation, and agriculture) would be managed to meet or exceed State of Idaho and Nevada 

regulations.

WR-CA-MA-10. Consult or coordinate as appropriate with tribal, Federal, State, and local governments to 

identify and secure instream flows needed to maintain riparian resources, channel conditions, and aquatic 

habitat.

WR-CA-MA-11. Apply chemicals (i.e., herbicides, pesticides, insecticides, and other toxicants) in a 

manner that does not impair water quality or prevent attainment of objectives for riparian areas and 

wetlands and avoids adverse effects on inland non-game fish and their habitat. When applying chemicals

in a Riparian Conservation Area (RCA), a spill kit would be onsite as appropriate. Prohibit storing and 

mixing chemicals within RCAs unless there are no other practical alternatives.

WR-CA-MA-12. Prohibit storage of fuels and other toxicants and refueling within RCAs unless there are 

no other practical alternatives. Any refueling sites and/or storage areas within an RCA would have an 

approved refueling and spill containment plan.

2.4.2.5 Vegetation Communities

Upland Vegetation

The Upland Vegetation section outlines goals and objectives for vegetation treatments. Management 

actions for restoration treatments, treatments for annual communities, and treatments for perennial 

communities are described in this section. Treatments for weeds and fuels are in the Noxious Weeds and 

Invasive Plants and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

For management and analysis purposes, the 55 vegetation communities in the planning area were 

grouped into five vegetation sub-groups (VSGs; see the Upland Vegetation section in Chapter 3 for 

vegetation communities included in each VSG); Map 9 displays existing vegetation as of 2011. 

Vegetation communities were grouped into VSGs based on the dominant vegetation and community 

structure as well as similarity in management objectives:

Annual communities – dominated by invasive annual grasses; includes communities with and 

without a shrub overstory.

Non-Native Perennial communities – dominated by non-native perennial grasses; some also have 

an overstory of four-wing saltbush or rabbitbrush.

Non-Native Understory communities – dominated by non-native perennial grasses in the 

understory; have an overstory of Wyoming big sagebrush, basin big sagebrush, black sagebrush, or 

low sage.

Native Grassland communities – dominated by native perennial grasses; do not have a shrub 

overstory.

Native Shrubland communities – dominated by native perennial grasses in the understory; have a 

shrub overstory; also includes aspen, juniper, and mountain mahogany communities which are 

present in small, scattered inclusions within other native shrubland communities.

Unvegetated areas – include breaks, barren areas, and sand dunes.

The planning area was divided into Vegetation Management Areas (VMAs) A, B, C, and D, creating westeast bands across the planning area based on potential natural community, elevation, and mean annual 

precipitation (Map 8). 

Goals

UV-CA-G-1. Manage upland vegetation communities to promote soil stability, water infiltration, nutrient 

cycling, and energy flow; provide habitat for sage-grouse and other sagebrush steppe obligates; and 

provide for multiple use.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resources

2-117

VMA A

A

A

UV-II-G-1. Manage vegetation to increase commercial uses while maintaining native plant communities 

and habitat for sage-grouse.

Objective

VMA A

UV-II-O-1. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 83,000 33,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 94,000 144,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 3,000 3,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 34,000 34,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 5,000 5,000

Unvegetated Areas 2,000 2,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA A

UV-II-MA-1. Treat approximately 60% of annual plant communities to move toward non-native perennial 

communities, with an emphasis on using fire-tolerant species that provide forage for livestock.

UV-II-MA-2. Actively maintain non-native perennial plant communities for livestock grazing.

UV-II-MA-3. Non-native understory, native grassland, and native shrubland communities would not be a 

focus for active restoration treatments.

UV-II-MA-4. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections.
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-118

VMA B

A

A

Objective

VMA B

UV-II-O-2. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 39,000 10,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 212,000 247,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 19,000 13,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 211,000 211,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 125,000 125,000

Unvegetated Areas 24,000 24,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA B

UV-II-MA-5. Treat approximately 75% of annual communities to move toward non-native perennial 

communities, focusing on areas adjacent to non-native perennial communities.

UV-II-MA-6. Actively maintain non-native perennial plant communities for livestock grazing.

UV-II-MA-7. Treat approximately 33% of non-native understory communities to move toward non-native 

perennial communities, focusing on pastures where non-native perennial communities predominate.

UV-II-MA-8. Native grassland communities may be treated to increase late-seral grasses. Native 

grassland areas that have been seeded with shrubs would be allowed to transition to native shrubland, 

and shrubs would continue to be allowed in Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation 

(ES&BAR) seedings. Natural succession of shrubs would be allowed throughout native grassland 

communities.

UV-II-MA-9. Native shrubland communities may be treated to increase late-seral grasses. Shrubs would 

continue to be allowed in ES&BAR seedings.

UV-II-MA-10. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resources

2-119

VMA C 

A

A

Objective

VMA C

UV-II-O-3. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 2,000 2,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 46,000 59,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 26,000 13,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 150,000 150,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 78,000 78,000

Unvegetated Areas 11,000 11,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA C

UV-II-MA-11. Treatment of annual communities would be limited due to the location of these areas at 

canyon bottoms and within wilderness. Localized treatments may be used when necessary.

UV-II-MA-12. Actively maintain non-native perennial plant communities for livestock grazing.

UV-II-MA-13. Treat approximately 50% of non-native understory communities to move toward non-native 

perennial communities, focusing on pastures where non-native perennial communities predominate.

UV-II-MA-14. Native grassland communities may be treated to increase late-seral grasses. Native 

grassland areas that have been seeded with shrubs would be allowed to transition to native shrubland, 

and shrubs would continue to be allowed in ES&BAR seedings. Natural succession of shrubs would be 

allowed throughout native grassland communities.

UV-II-MA-15. Native shrubland communities may be treated to increase late-seral grasses. Shrubs would 

continue to be allowed in ES&BAR seedings.

UV-II-MA-16. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-120

VMA D 

A

A

Objective

VMA D

UV-II-O-4. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 1,000 500

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 4,000 5,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 12,000 12,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 80,000 80,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 97,000 97,000

Unvegetated Areas 11,000 11,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA D

UV-II-MA-17. Treat approximately 50% of annual communities to move toward non-native perennial 

communities, focusing on Taylor Pocket and areas near China Creek.

UV-II-MA-18. Actively maintain non-native perennial plant communities for livestock grazing.

UV-II-MA-19. Actively remove shrubs in non-native understory communities for livestock grazing.

UV-II-MA-20. Native grassland communities may be treated to increase late-seral grasses. Native 

grassland areas that have been seeded with shrubs would be allowed to transition to native shrubland, 

and shrubs would continue to be allowed in ES&BAR seedings. Natural succession of shrubs would be 

allowed throughout native grassland communities.

UV-II-MA-21. Native shrubland communities may be treated to increase late-seral grasses. Shrubs would 

continue to be allowed in ES&BAR seedings.

UV-II-MA-22. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 

Management Actions

All VMAs

UV-CA-MA-1. Design BLM management activities and authorized uses to consider plant reproductive 

and physiological needs with a focus on the critical growing season, as well as vegetation objectives; 

guidelines for specific uses are found in the appropriate sections.

UV-CA-MA-2. Implement drought management guidelines during periods of drought to maintain or 

achieve long-term resource productivity (Appendix F).
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resources

2-121

•

•

•

•

UV-CA-MA-3. Rest vegetation treatment areas from uses, including but not limited to livestock and wild 

horse grazing and recreational use, until treatment objectives are met and are predicted to be 

sustainable. This management action would not apply to uses that do not conflict with the treatment 

objectives.

UV-II-MA-23. The first priority for implementing vegetation treatments would be treatments identified for 

VMA A to increase perennial forage for livestock; the second priority would be treatments identified for 

VMA B to increase forage for livestock. Opportunities for treatments outside these priority areas would be 

considered on a case-by-case basis.

UV-II-MA-24. Focus vegetation treatments identified for each VMA on habitat for sage-grouse and other 

special status species.

UV-II-MA-25. The toolbox to restore or treat upland vegetation communities would include:

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; 

Targeted grazing; and 

Prescribed fire.

See the Glossary for definition of targeted grazing.

UV-II-MA-26. Use primarily non-native species in upland vegetation treatments, consistent with 

management actions to achieve vegetation objectives; fire tolerant species would also be used, primarily 

in annual communities. 

UV-II-MA-27. Establish 52 ungrazed reference areas (2,000 acres total) in native grassland and native 

shrubland communities, as well as non-native perennial communities that have burned multiple times in 

the last 20 years (Map 12). Each reference area would be approximately 40 acres and would be paired 

with an adjacent grazed area in a similar vegetation type and condition to monitor the effects of livestock 

grazing on a variety of plant communities.

UV-II-MA-28. Reseed areas disturbed during project construction, maintenance, or removal with grasses

where appropriate (e.g. roads, parking areas, etc., would not be seeded). 

Riparian Areas and Wetlands

Goal

RI-CA-G-1. Achieve healthy, functioning watersheds, riparian areas, wetlands, and associated aquatic 

habitats.

RI-CA-G-2. Provide habitat to support populations of well-distributed native and desired non-native plant, 

vertebrate, and invertebrate populations that contribute to the sustainability of riparian-dependent 

communities. 

RI-CA-G-3. Maintain or improve naturally functioning vegetation communities that include natural timing 

and variability of surface and groundwater in riparian areas and wetlands, and diversity and productivity of 

native and desired non-native plant communities. 

Objectives

RI-II-O-1. Maintain 85 miles of Priority 3 streams at proper functioning condition (PFC) and manage

Priority 1 and 2 streams to move toward PFC over the life of the plan. 

RI-II-O-2. Manage wetlands to move toward PFC.
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-122

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Management Actions

RI-CA-MA-1. Identify Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) around riparian areas and wetlands that 

contain or are tributaries to streams that contain special status species or their habitat to protect riparian 

vegetation, fisheries, and water quality. RCA widths would be as follows:

Category 1 – Fish-bearing streams: The RCA consists of the stream and the area on either side of 

the stream. This area extends from the edges of the active channel to the top of the inner gorge, to 

the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, or 300 feet 

slope distance (600 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), whichever is widest.

Category 2 – Permanently flowing non-fish-bearing streams: The RCA consists of the stream and the 

area on either side of the stream. This area extends from the edges of the active channel to the top of 

the inner gorge, to the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, to the outer edges of the riparian 

vegetation, or 150 feet slope distance (300 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), 

whichever is widest.

Category 3 – Ponds, lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands greater than one acre: The RCA consists of the 

body of water or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, to the extent of 

the seasonally saturated soil, or 150 feet slope distance from the edge of the maximum pool elevation 

of constructed ponds and reservoirs, or from the edge of the wetland, pond, or lake, whichever is 

widest.

Category 4 – Seasonally flowing or intermittent streams, wetlands less than one acre, landslides, and 

landslide-prone areas: This category includes features with high variability in size and site-specific 

characteristics. The RCA includes the intermittent stream channel and the area to the top of the inner 

gorge, the intermittent stream channel or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian 

vegetation, the area from the edges of the stream channel, wetland, or slide/landslide-prone area, or 

50 feet slope distance, whichever is widest.

RI-CA-MA-2. Use adaptive management to reduce impacts on riparian areas and wetlands from uses and 

activities (see the Aquatic and Riparian Management Strategy [ARMS], Appendix D). 

RI-CA-MA-3. Riparian management priorities would include the following:

Priority 1 streams – Streams rated as functioning-at-risk or functioning-at-risk with a downward 

trend. The management emphasis for Priority 1 streams would be restoration. 

Priority 2 streams – Streams rated as functioning-at-risk with an upward trend or non-functioning. 

The management emphasis for Priority 2 streams would be restoration.

Priority 3 streams – Streams rated at PFC. The management emphasis for Priority 3 streams would 

be on maintaining proper function.

Specific streams are prioritized in the ARMS (Appendix D, Tables D-3 and D-5).

RI-CA-MA-4. Assess condition of wetlands associated with ponds and springs.

RI-CA-MA-5. Survey aquatic habitat (instream, riparian, and wetland) and maintain aquatic habitat 

inventories.

RI-CA-MA-6. Consider authorizing activities or facilities where long-term benefits outweigh short-term 

impacts to riparian vegetation and fish habitat.

RI-CA-MA-7. Remove nonessential human-made structures and objects that adversely impact the 

function of floodplains (e.g., unused bridge abutments, unused diversions, abandoned cars).

RI-CA-MA-8. Modify existing management activities and authorized uses in RCAs to attain PFC and 

ensure that habitat conditions of streams, riparian areas, and wetlands are moving toward achieving the 

goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resources

2-123

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

RI-CA-MA-9. Conduct new management activities within or affecting RCAs only if they are consistent with 

achieving the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. New management activities would 

avoid or reduce adverse effects on inland non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs. 

RI-CA-MA-10. Trees may be felled in RCAs when they pose a safety risk. Keep felled trees on-site when 

needed to maintain or improve riparian or instream conditions. 

RI-CA-MA-11. Cooperate with tribal, Federal, State, and local agencies and private landowners to 

develop watershed-based coordinated resource management plans or other cooperative agreements to 

achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands.

RI-II-MA-1. Within the priorities identified in the ARMS (Appendix D), fish-bearing stream reaches, 

including reaches containing game and non-game fish, would be a high priority for restoration. 

RI-II-MA-2. The toolbox for restoration of stream reaches would include, but not be limited to: 

Road closures, 

Culvert replacements, 

Exclosure fencing, 

Modification of water developments, 

 Planting of riparian areas, 

Active herding, 

Erosion control measures, 

Riparian pastures, 

Instream fish habitat improvements, and 

Modification or elimination of land uses that prevent attainment of the goals and objectives for riparian 

areas and wetlands. 

The toolbox would not include:

Closing pastures, 

Removal of water developments, or 

Reintroduction of beaver.

RI-II-MA-3. Conduct multiple indicator surveys on riparian areas according to BLM policy.

RI-II-MA-4. Establish 10 ungrazed riparian reference areas (1,000 acres total; Map 12). Each riparian 

reference area would be paired with an adjacent grazed area in a similar vegetation type and condition to 

monitor the effects of livestock grazing on a variety of plant communities.

2.4.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 

Fish

Native aquatic species in the planning area can be described in three broad categories:

Aquatic species Federally listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973,

Aquatic species identified on the BLM Sensitive species list for Idaho and Nevada, and

Other non-game fish present in the planning area.

Aquatic species included in the first two categories are discussed in the Special Status Species section. 

The goals, objectives, and management actions for other non-game fish (i.e. sculpin, suckers, and 

minnows) are provided below. For a majority of the streams within the planning area, the habitat needs 

for non-game fish are met through goals, objectives, and management actions for special status species 

in riparian areas, wetlands, and streams. The goals, objectives, and management actions below 

encompass the streams containing only non-game fish. 
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-124

Goal

FI-II-G-1. Manage public lands to maintain or improve habitat for fish.

Objective

FI-II-O-1. Maintain or improve all non-game fish-bearing streams so they remain or are moving toward 

properly functioning condition. 

Management Actions

FI-CA-MA-1. Maintain, improve, or restore native non-game fish habitat through actions identified for 

riparian areas, water resources, and special status species through restoration priorities in the Aquatic 

and Riparian Management Strategy (ARMS; Appendix D). Incorporate best management practices to 

maintain and improve habitat for non-game fish (Appendix B).

FI-CA-MA-2. Inventory and monitor non-game fish habitat. Use adaptive management as outlined in the 

ARMS to minimize impacts to non-game fish habitat from uses and activities (Appendix D).

FI-CA-MA-3. Activities within riparian areas and wetlands would be designed to mitigate impacts to the 

riparian and aquatic habitat(s) containing non-game fish. 

FI-CA-MA-4. To avoid adverse effects on non-game fish and instream flows, locate water drafting sites in 

upland areas (e.g., stock ponds, storage tanks, hydrants). Where these water sources are not available, 

locate water drafting sites at existing stream road crossings (e.g., bridges, culverts, fords) to divert water

in a manner that does not retard or prevent achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas 

and wetlands. 

FI-CA-MA-5. Design and implement watershed restoration projects in a manner that promotes the longterm ecological integrity of ecosystems, conserves the genetic integrity of non-game fish species, and 

contributes to the achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

FI-CA-MA-6. New fisheries and instream channel restoration projects would avoid or minimize adverse 

effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and Riparian Conservation Areas. 

FI-CA-MA-7. Cooperate with Federal and State fish management agencies to identify and reduce 

adverse effects on non-game fish associated with habitat manipulation, fish stocking, fish harvest, and 

illegal harvest.

Wildlife

Goal

WI-II-G-1. Manage public lands to maintain or improve habitat for wildlife.

Objective

WI-II-O-1. Maintain or improve wildlife habitat in native communities while promoting commercial uses 

throughout the planning area.

Management Actions

WI-CA-MA-1. When making management decisions affecting big game, use the most current big game 

winter range map provided by Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) and the Nevada Department 

of Wildlife. Areas considered big game winter range as of 2011 are shown on Map 17. 

WI-CA-MA-2. Implement habitat projects to maintain or improve habitat for mule deer and pronghorn 

when and where needed. 

WI-CA-MA-3. Under Executive Order 13186, promote the maintenance and improvement of migratory 

bird habitat quantity and quality through the permitting process for all land use authorizations. Avoid, 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resources

2-125

•

•

•

•

reduce, or mitigate adverse impacts on the habitats of migratory bird species of conservation concern to 

the extent feasible, and in a manner consistent with regional or statewide bird conservation priorities.

WI-CA-MA-4. Incorporate best management practices (BMPs) for wildlife into BLM management activities 

and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B). Specific BMPs would be applied at the project level.

WI-CA-MA-5. Install and maintain BLM approved wildlife escape devices on troughs and open tanks.

WI-CA-MA-6. Modify existing and construct new fences to comply with BLM standards for wildlife 

(Karsky, 1999). Existing fences would be modified according to the following priority order: 

Key sage-grouse habitat, 

Big game winter range, 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, and

The remainder of the planning area. 

WI-CA-MA-7. Schedule construction and maintenance activities to avoid or minimize disturbance to 

priority species and their habitat during their important seasonal periods (see WI-II-MA-1 for a list of 

priority species). 

WI-CA-MA-8. Schedule energy-related activities (e.g., exploration, development, and maintenance) to 

avoid or minimize disturbance to priority species and their habitat during important seasonal periods. 

WI-II-MA-1. Sage-grouse and other special status species are priority species for habitat management.

Special status species management is discussed in the Special Status Species section.

WI-II-MA-2. As part of Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation, plant desirable browse 

species on big game winter range where browse was reduced by past wildland fires. Species may 

include, but not be limited to: winterfat, four-wing saltbush, bitterbrush, chokecherry, and serviceberry.

WI-II-MA-3. Remove areas from the wildlife tract program that are difficult to access and manage and 

would otherwise be identified for disposal (from 13,000 acres to 10,000 acres; Map 18). Prepare a new 

plan for joint IDFG-BLM management of the remaining wildlife tracts (10,000 acres) through a public 

process and to obtain partners for projects to improve wildlife values.

2.4.2.7 Special Status Species

Goal

SS-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to contribute to the conservation and recovery of sage-grouse and 

other special status species. 

Objective

SS-II-O-1. Maintain or improve the quality of habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species by 

managing public land activities to sustain or benefit those species.

Management Actions

SS-C-MA-1. Follow conservation measures in relevant biological opinions and letters of concurrence, as 

appropriate. Conservation measures in place as of 2012 can be found in Appendix E; conservation 

measures can be updated, revised, or replaced through future consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife 

Service.

SS-CA-MA-1. Special status species management would apply to Endangered, Threatened, Candidate, 

and Proposed species (Type 1 BLM Sensitive); other BLM Sensitive species (Types 2 through 4); and 

proposed or designated critical habitat; this includes plants, fish and other aquatic species, and wildlife. 
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-126

•

•

•

SS-CA-MA-2. Special status species management would not apply to species that are removed from the 

BLM Sensitive species list. Those species would be managed according to applicable delisting 

requirements, conservation strategies, BLM guidance, and Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) 

or Nevada Department of Wildlife management guidance.

SS-CA-MA-3. Management of one special status species would take into account the needs of other 

special status species.

SS-CA-MA-4. Follow applicable conservation plans, strategies, and agreements for special status 

species (Appendix E). 

SS-CA-MA-5. Monitor special status species and their habitats, and maintain data on their populations, 

distribution, and habitats. Use adaptive management or mitigation to reduce impacts on special status 

species and their habitats from uses and activities.

SS-CA-MA-6. Work cooperatively with tribes, Federal and State agencies, private landowners, and 

companies to identify and mitigate threats to special status species and habitat on BLM-managed lands. 

SS-II-MA-1. Where alternative management strategies would result in the same relative effect to a 

species, implement those strategies most beneficial to commodity uses, where practical.

SS-II-MA-2. Reintroductions of special status species would be limited to species listed under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) as Threatened or Endangered and species that are Proposed or 

Candidates for listing under ESA.

Management Related to Resource Uses

SS-CA-MA-7. Leasable and salable mineral development activities should avoid special status species 

habitat if the activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. 

Permits would include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

SS-CA-MA-8. Promote conservation and recovery of special status species through land actions such as:

Conservation easements that protect or conserve special status species habitat,

Land acquisitions or exchanges that improve management of special status species, and

Acquisition of lands with a high value for special status species.

SS-CA-MA-9. New communication sites would avoid special status species habitat if the project would 

have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be reduced. 

SS-CA-MA-10. Right-of-way construction and maintenance activities should avoid disturbing special 

status species during important seasonal periods, unless the disturbance can be mitigated.

SS-II-MA-3. Adjust livestock use levels, season of use, or other management techniques to maintain or 

enhance special status species habitat.

SS-II-MA-4. Construct, maintain, modify, or remove range infrastructure and other facilities as necessary 

to maintain special status species and their habitat.

Management for Special Status Species in Upland Areas

SS-CA-MA-11. Manage native shrubland communities in a landscape context to ensure that the seasonal 

habitat needs of sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate species are met across the planning area, 

where site conditions are suitable.

SS-CA-MA-12. Mark fences that have been identified as a collision risk to improve fence visibility for

sage-grouse, using appropriate collision diverters or other reasonable approaches. Fences posing higher 

risks to sage-grouse are generally within 1.25 miles of a lek and are:
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resources

2-127

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

On flat topography,

Where spans exceed 12 feet between T-posts,

Without wooden posts, or

Where fence densities exceed 1.6 miles of fence per section (640 acres) (Stevens et al., 2011).

SS-CA-MA-13. Maintain or improve the habitat for special status species by protecting and restoring their 

habitat, controlling noxious weeds and invasive plants, and minimizing direct habitat disturbance.

SS-CA-MA-14. When designing seed mixes for vegetation treatments and surface-disturbing projects, 

consider the needs of special status species and their habitat in the project area.

SS-CA-MA-15. Use seeding methods that minimize impacts to special status species populations.

SS-CA-MA-16. If a conflict between authorized uses and bighorn sheep is identified, schedule authorized 

uses to avoid pastures that contain bighorn sheep habitat during breeding, wintering, and lambing periods 

to minimize disturbance during these important seasonal periods.

SS-CA-MA-17. Avoid locating new transmission lines, phone lines, or communication towers/facilities in 

native shrubland and native grassland communities to minimize impacts to sage-grouse. If a transmission 

or phone line project must be located in sage-grouse habitat, the project should incorporate measures to 

reduce impacts to sage-grouse such as: 

Burying lines;

Using devices or structure design to deter raptor and raven perching and nesting; 

Avoiding construction and maintenance during important seasonal periods for sage-grouse; 

 Restoring or improving sage-grouse habitat outside the project area; 

Constructing lines, towers, and related facilities in lower quality habitats; and

Clustering or co-locating facilities.

SS-II-MA-5. Implement management actions described in the Upland Vegetation section to maintain or 

improve habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species. Upland vegetation management to 

benefit sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate special status species includes, but is not limited to:

Allowing native grassland communities to transition to native shrubland communities and 

Introducing late-seral grasses to native grassland and native shrubland communities.

See the Upland Vegetation section for more details.

SS-II-MA-6. BLM management activities and authorized uses within 0.25 mile of known ferruginous hawk 

or prairie falcon nests would be designed to minimize impacts to their prey base and availability of nesting 

material from February through July.

SS-II-MA-7. Keep existing troughs and reservoirs in bighorn sheep habitat.

SS-II-MA-8. Keep existing fences and corrals in bighorn sheep habitat.

SS-II-MA-9. New troughs, reservoirs, permanent fences, and corrals can be located within bighorn sheep 

habitat if they do not conflict with bighorn sheep.

Management for Special Status Species in Riparian Areas, Wetlands, and Streams

SS-CA-MA-18. Incorporate best management practices as appropriate to maintain and improve habitat 

for special status fish and aquatic invertebrates (Appendix B).

SS-CA-MA-19. Identify and eliminate, where feasible, migration barriers to special status fish species 

movement.
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-128

•

•

•

•

SS-CA-MA-20. Identify and implement specific habitat improvement projects in redband trout habitat to 

reduce habitat fragmentation and promote their long-term recovery. Projects may include, but not be 

limited to:

Replacing culverts,

Working with private landowners so diversions are not a barrier,

Screening diversions, and

Planting riparian vegetation.

SS-CA-MA-21. Implement specific habitat improvement projects for Jarbidge River bull trout (bull trout) as 

identified in the Recovery Plan for the Jarbidge River Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout.

Additional management direction for BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses in 

special status species habitat can be found in the Resource Uses sections.

2.4.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 

Goal

NW-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to prevent, eliminate, or control noxious weeds and invasive plants.

Objectives

Noxious Weeds

NW-II-O-1. Reduce the number of acres containing noxious weeds by at least 10%; reduce the number of 

noxious weed species present.

Invasive Plants

NW-II-O-2. Reduce cover of invasive plants in native communities to less than 10%; reduce cover of 

invasive plants in non-native perennial and non-native understory communities to less than 15%.

Management Actions

NW-CA-MA-1. Apply herbicides consistent with BLM policy. 

NW-CA-MA-2. Inventory noxious weeds and invasive plants. 

NW-CA-MA-3. Consult with the tribes on herbicide use to consider timing of projects and impacts to 

plants of importance to the tribes.

NW-CA-MA-4. Formulate methods of control in or near special status species habitat on a site-specific

and species-specific basis to minimize impacts to special status species. 

NW-CA-MA-5. Incorporate best management practices for noxious weeds and invasive plants into BLM 

management activities and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B).

NW-CA-MA-6. Include site-specific stipulations in land use authorizations, permits, and leases to limit 

introduction and spread of noxious weeds.

NW-CA-MA-7. Collaborate with Federal agencies, State and County governments, non-governmental 

organizations, and individuals to establish a Jarbidge Cooperative Weed Management Area or other 

cooperative agreements for noxious weed and invasive plants management. 

NW-CA-MA-8. Use of certified weed-free forage, seed, straw, and mulch (as defined in the Idaho Noxious 

Weed Free Forage and Straw Certification Rules [IAC 02.06.31]) would be required for all BLM 

management activities and authorized and allowed uses.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resources

2-129

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

NW-II-MA-1. Treat areas containing noxious weeds and invasive plants. Priority areas would include (not 

in priority order): 

Riparian areas, 

Special status species habitat, and 

Native plant communities.

NW-II-MA-2. Focus control efforts on species with new or small infestations, species that respond well to 

treatment and species that have higher potential for resource impacts. Eradicate noxious weeds and 

invasive plants where practical. Focus treatments for large infestations on reducing the size of the 

infestation.

NW-II-MA-3. The toolbox for treating noxious weeds and invasive plants would include: 

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; 

Targeted grazing; and 

Prescribed fire.

NW-II-MA-4. Develop and implement activities to prevent the introduction and spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants on public lands. The toolbox for preventing introduction and spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants would include:

Public outreach (e.g., kiosks, media, mailings, publications, brochures) and 

Modifying uses to minimize new introductions and spread (e.g., closing roads).

2.4.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Wildland Fire Management

Goal

WFM-CA-G-1. Fire management strategies would result in firefighter and public safety and protection of 

property and natural and cultural resources, while considering suppression and rehabilitation costs.

Objectives

WFM-II-O-1. Strive to reduce average wildland fire size and number of human-caused fire starts within 

the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). 

WFM-II-O-2. Reduce acres burned in vegetation types outside the WUI where more wildland fires have 

burned than desired/historic levels to facilitate commercial use of the planning area. 

Allocations

WFM-CA-A-1. The planning area would not be available for Wildland Fire Use (1,371,000 acres).

WFM-II-A-1. Critical suppression areas within the planning area would be (170,000 acres): 

WUI. 

The acres and specific locations for the WUI can be updated to reflect changing conditions. See Map 31

for the locations of these areas.

WFM-II-A-2. The remainder of the planning area would be a conditional suppression area (1,201,000

acres). 
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-130

•

•

•

•

Management Actions

WFM-C-MA-1. Fire management within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness is addressed in the 

Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan.

WFM-CA-MA-1. All wildland fires in critical or conditional suppression areas would receive an Appropriate 

Management Response (AMR). AMR includes any action taken to meet resource objectives identified in 

RMPs and Fire Management Plans (FMPs). AMR ranges across a spectrum of tactical operations (from 

monitoring to aggressive/intensive suppression actions). 

WFM-CA-MA-2. Critical suppression areas represent highest suppression priority. The AMR in critical 

suppression areas assumes suppression actions would be taken to reduce fire size and acres burned 

unless safety warrants alternative strategies. Wildland fire is generally not desired in these areas, with the 

exception of prescribed fire to be used for site preparation as described in the RMP. 

WFM-CA-MA-3. Conditional suppression areas represent areas of lower suppression priority where 

suppression efforts would be adjusted based on resource values and fire’s desired role in the ecosystem. 

The AMR in conditional suppression areas assumes suppression actions would be taken commensurate 

with the values at risk and considering suppression costs. Wildland fire management strategies may be 

changed if fire danger is high or there would likely be undesired fire effects. Conditional suppression 

areas also represent areas where cost of suppression may exceed the value of resources to be protected 

as identified in the RMP.

WFM-CA-MA-4. Areas for Wildland Fire for Resource Benefit would be determined by the BLM after the 

wildland fire has been contained or controlled. Areas where vegetation treatments were planned and 

analyzed in the NEPA process or those ecosystems found to “need more disturbance” through the Fire 

Regime Condition Class process would be candidates for “benefit” fires. Post-fire site visits would be 

required to determine if fire effects actually resulted in conditions that moved the area toward resource 

objectives. 

WFM-CA-MA-5. Revise the FMP as required to incorporate updated fire, vegetation, resource value, 

WUI, and fuels data. The FMP would be used to refine suppression, fuels treatment, community 

assistance, and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation priorities. 

WFM-CA-MA-6. In addition to safety and resource concerns, consider fire suppression and rehabilitation 

costs when evaluating fire suppression techniques.

WFM-CA-MA-7. Work collaboratively with the military to reduce the risk of wildland fire, improve 

suppression logistics on military lands adjacent to public lands, and protect public lands from wildland 

fires originating on military lands. 

WFM-CA-MA-8. Incorporate best management practices for wildland and prescribed fire into BLM 

management activities and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B).

WFM-CA-MA-9. Foster the public's understanding of the role of fire in the ecosystem, hazards associated 

with living in the WUI, and wildland fire prevention and suppression activities through methods such as: 

 Using mass media, 

 Providing outreach to local groups, 

 Developing interpretive signs and kiosks, and 

 Participating in the County Wildfire Protection Plan process.

WFM-CA-MA-10. Fire suppression strategies, practices, and actions in Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs) should be designed to minimize disturbance to riparian vegetation. 

WFM-CA-MA-11. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used within RCAs unless safety to 

human life or property is an issue. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resources

2-131

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

WFM-CA-MA-12. Incident bases, camps, helibases, staging areas, helispots, and other centers for 

incident activities would be located outside of RCAs. If the only suitable location for these activities is 

within the RCA, an exemption may be granted by the BLM authorized officer. 

WFM-CA-MA-13. Avoid delivery of chemical retardant, foam, or additives into surface waters. An 

exception is warranted where overriding immediate safety imperatives exist or when the BLM determines 

a fire would cause more long-term damage to fish habitats than chemical delivery to surface waters.

WFM-II-MA-1. When multiple wildland fire ignitions occur in critical suppression areas, based on the 

management priorities of Alternative II, the suppression priorities would be (in order of importance):

Vegetation Management Area (VMA) A, 

VMA B, 

VMA D, and

VMA C. 

These priorities would also be used for general fire suppression management planning.

WFM-II-MA-2. Within the perimeter of a contained wildland fire, protect unburned islands of native and 

non-native perennial communities. Unburned islands of annual communities within the perimeter of a

contained fire may be allowed to burn.

WFM-II-MA-3. Use minimum impact suppression tactics in:

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness,

Lower Salmon Creek Falls Wilderness Study Area, 

Oregon National Historic Trail, 

Bull trout habitat, and 

Other areas where appropriate to mitigate potential impacts of fire suppression.

WFM-II-MA-4. In native plant communities and the WUI, improve water availability for fire suppression, in 

accordance with Idaho and Nevada State Law regarding the appropriation and use of water. 

WFM-II-MA-5. Design water developments for fire suppression to mitigate impacts to water resources. 

Water developments may include, but are not limited to:

Water storage tanks,

Draft sites, and 

Hydrants off pipelines.

Water storage may also be increased by enlarging and filling existing stock and storage ponds. 

WFM-II-MA-6. Consistent with resource use objectives, implement measures to reduce response time for 

fire suppression activities including, but not limited to: 

Building new guard stations, 

Improving roads, 

Building new roads in areas with limited access, 

Improving stream crossings, and 

Developing better signage. 

Tools to improve access do not include building new or improving existing airstrips or building helipads.

WFM-II-MA-7. Dozer blading should not occur within 150 feet of playas to protect associated cultural 

resources.
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-132

•

•

•

•

Fuels and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation (ES&BAR)

Goals

FE-CA-G-1. Reduce fire hazard within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). 

FE-II-G-1. Manage vegetation communities outside the WUI to maintain or restore their fire regimes and 

mosaic of successional classes to within their historic range.

Objectives

Fuels

FE-CA-O-1. Manage plant communities within the WUI to reduce relative risk rating.

FE-II-O-1. Manage native plant communities outside the WUI, excluding Sandberg/non-native areas, to 

move toward Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) 1. Manage non-native plant communities and 

Sandberg/non-native areas for commodity use, which may not be toward FRCC 1. 

FE-II-O-2. Implement fuels treatments to protect critical suppression areas; limit the spread, size, and 

intensity of wildland fire; and maintain or improve vegetation.

ES&BAR

FE-II-O-3. Rehabilitate and stabilize areas to help stabilize soils, promote natural recovery, and establish 

pre-fire or historic vegetation communities.

Management Actions

Fuels

FE-CA-MA-1. Update the FRCC analysis for the planning area when 20% of the planning area has been 

disturbed by wildland fires or treated by fuels projects since the previous FRCC analysis was completed.

FE-CA-MA-2. Progress towards FRCC objectives would be achieved through actions and guidelines 

specified in the Upland Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants, 

and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

FE-CA-MA-3. Coordinate fuels treatments with adjacent landowners and agencies through County 

Wildfire Protection Plans or other methods.

FE-CA-MA-4. Rest fuels treatment areas from uses until treatment objectives are met and are predicted 

to be sustainable or if the treatment is determined by the BLM to be unsuccessful. This would not apply to 

uses that do not conflict with the treatment objectives.

FE-CA-MA-5. Fuels treatments in Riparian Conservation Areas would be designed to maintain or improve 

riparian vegetation. 

FE-II-MA-1. Implement fuels treatments to reduce fuel loads with consideration for other resource and 

resource use objectives.

FE-II-MA-2. Fuels treatments in the WUI would include fuels reduction treatments and fuel breaks. Fuels 

treatments in the WUI would focus on areas with high, high/moderate, and moderate relative risk ratings 

in the northern portion of the planning area and near Roseworth.

FE-II-MA-3. Fuels treatments outside the WUI would include: 

Restoration,

Fuel breaks,

Landscape-scale fuels reduction, and 

Noxious weed and invasive plant treatments.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resources

2-133

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

FE-II-MA-4. The toolbox for fuels treatments would include:

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting;

Targeted grazing; and 

Prescribed fire. 

FE-II-MA-5. Fuels treatments would use primarily non-native species; fire-tolerant species would also be 

used, primarily in annual communities.

FE-II-MA-6. Upland vegetation management related to fuels treatments includes, but is not limited to:

Converting annual communities to non-native perennial, 

Allowing native grassland communities to transition to native shrublands communities, and 

Introducing late-seral grasses to native grassland and native shrubland communities.

FE-II-MA-7. Fuel breaks would focus on protecting commercial facilities; fuel breaks would also be placed 

in non-native communities to protect native communities. Construct fuel breaks consistent with objectives 

in the Upland Vegetation section.

FE-II-MA-8. Landscape-scale fuels reduction would occur primarily through increased allocation of 

vegetation for permitted livestock grazing and through increased livestock grazing utilization. See the 

Livestock Grazing section.

FE-II-MA-9. Noxious weed and invasive plants management related to fuels treatments includes 

measures for treating and preventing noxious weeds and invasive plants; see the Noxious Weeds and 

Invasive Plants section for more details.

ES&BAR

FE-CA-MA-6. Use the full range of treatment options available to meet ES&BAR objectives, including:

Mechanical treatments,

Drill or broadcast seeding treatments,

Chemical treatments,

Seedling transplants, and

Erosion control structures.

FE-CA-MA-7. Implement the Programmatic ES&BAR Plan and update as needed. Individual ES&BAR 

plans would be completed through the interdisciplinary process to reduce impacts of wildland fire and 

suppression and to achieve resource objectives.

FE-CA-MA-8. Use seed mixes that would help stabilize soils and achieve objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Fish and Wildlife, and Special Status Species sections.

FE-CA-MA-9. Use seed drilling equipment, tools, or techniques that minimize soil disturbance and place 

seed at the correct depth.

FE-CA-MA-10. Rest burned areas from uses, including livestock and wild horse grazing and recreational 

use, until ES&BAR objectives are met and are predicted to be sustainable or if the treatment is 

determined by the BLM to be unsuccessful. This would not apply to uses that do not conflict with the 

treatment objectives.

FE-CA-MA-11. Consider emergency closures to motorized vehicle use when necessary for ES&BAR 

efforts.
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-134

•

•

•

•

•

•

FE-II-MA-10. Consider using temporary fences on a case-by-case basis to protect burned plant 

communities and to allow for commercial uses. Reconstruction of fire-damaged permanent facilities on 

BLM-managed lands would follow BLM policy.

FE-II-MA-11. When planning temporary fences, consider the size of the pasture, the amount burned, the 

amount of pasture unaffected by rehabilitation, resource concerns, location of water, grazing 

management efficiency, and expense.

FE-II-MA-12. Temporary fences may become permanent if they enhance the management of the burned 

area; these would be considered on a case-by-case basis through site-specific analysis. 

2.4.2.10 Wild Horses 

Goal and Objective

WH-II-G-1. Manage the Saylor Creek Wild Horse Herd Area as an unpopulated herd area for a population 

of zero wild horses. 

Allocations

WH-II-A-1. Return the Saylor Creek Herd Management Area to Herd Area status. 

WH-II-A-2. The estimated herd size would be zero.

WH-II-A-3. No forage would be allocated for wild horses.

Management Action

WH-II-MA-1. Gather and remove the total wild horse population in the Saylor Creek Herd Area. Wild 

horses would be humanely gathered, cared for, and adopted in accordance with BLM policy and 

regulations. 

2.4.2.11 Paleontological Resources 

Goal

PR-CA-G-1. Identify, manage, and protect paleontological resources for scientific research, educational 

purposes, and public use.

Objective

PR-CA-O-1. Identify, manage, and protect important paleontological sites.

Management Actions

PR-CA-MA-1. Implement measures to protect paleontological resources. Measures may include:

Avoidance,

Fencing, 

Stabilization, 

Data recovery through collection or excavation,

Interpretation, or

Administrative closure.

PR-CA-MA-2. Identify areas at risk of damage from illegal activities and implement management to 

discourage those activities.

PR-CA-MA-3. Minimize or prevent human-caused damage to paleontological resources through 

educational and interpretive outreach programs.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resources

2-135

•

•

•

•

PR-CA-MA-4. Analyze effects of surface-disturbing activities on fossil-bearing geologic units (Potential 

Fossil Yield Classification Class 5) and mitigate potential impacts to paleontological resources. 

PR-CA-MA-5. The collection of paleontological resources would be managed in accordance with the 

Paleontological Resources Preservation Act and 43 CFR 8365. In general, reasonable amounts of 

common invertebrate and plant fossils may be collected for non-commercial personal use without a 

permit. The collection of vertebrate fossils and rare or unusual invertebrate and plant fossils requires a 

permit under the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act.

PR-II-MA-1. Issue permits for paleontological research to qualified paleontologists.

2.4.2.12 Cultural Resources 

Goals

Management

CR-CA-G-1. Identify, preserve, and protect important cultural resources and ensure they are available for 

appropriate uses by present and future generations.

Protection

CR-CA-G-2. Seek to reduce imminent threats and resolve potential conflicts from natural or humancaused deterioration or potential conflict with other resource uses by ensuring all authorizations for land 

use and resource use complies with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), as amended,

Section 106. 

Objectives

Management 

CR-CA-O-1. Manage and protect cultural resources according to their potential traditional, scientific, 

conservation, public, or experimental value. 

Protection

CR-CA-O-2. Strive to limit the adverse effects of BLM decisions on important cultural resources.

Allocations

CR-CA-A-1. Cultural resources would be allocated as described in Appendix G. 

CR-CA-A-2. The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors include 0.25 mile on either side of 

the trail segments or the visual horizon of those segments, whichever is narrower.

Management Actions

Management

CR-CA-MA-1. Maintain on-going cultural resource inventory information in geographic information system 

format in accordance with confidentiality mandates.

CR-CA-MA-2. Identify priority geographic areas for future inventory based on the probability of 

unrecorded cultural resources, and conduct inventories independent of specific land use actions.

CR-CA-MA-3. Implement measures to minimize or prevent damage to cultural resources due to BLM 

management activities, authorized and allowed uses, and human-caused damage such as vandalism, 

unauthorized surface collection of artifacts, and unintentional disturbances. Measures may include:

Avoidance,

Fencing, 

Stabilization, 

Data recovery through collection or excavation,
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-136

•

•

•

Interpretation, 

Administrative closure, or

Proactive law enforcement patrols.

CR-CA-MA-4. Develop cultural resource project plans as needed to address preservation actions for 

cultural resource complexes or individual sites identified as high risk for adverse impacts.

CR-CA-MA-5. Avoid placement of salting, supplemental feeding, watering, and holding facilities for 

livestock that adversely affect the Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors.

CR-CA-MA-6. Developments such as roads, trails, pipelines, fences, and powerlines may be allowed, 

after consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), to cross segments of the Kelton 

and Toana Freight Roads in areas where previous disturbance has occurred. On occasions where 

adverse impacts are unavoidable, the BLM would require mitigation commensurate with the impacts as a 

condition of authorization.

CR-CA-MA-7. Surface-disturbing equipment, such as bulldozers and road graders, cannot be used on 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligible or contributing segments of the Kelton or Toana 

Freight Roads or within their protective corridors without prior management approval, unless to protect life 

or property.

CR-II-MA-1. Allow research, including archaeological, historic, ethnographic, and non-intrusive research, 

to better define the extent, nature, and value of cultural resources in the planning area.

CR-II-MA-2. Important cultural resources, as determined by the BLM through consultation with tribes 

and/or SHPO, would generally be retained in Federal ownership. Under limited circumstances, after 

appropriate consultation and mitigation, lands containing important cultural resources may be exchanged 

or sold.

CR-II-MA-3. Avoid or minimize new ground disturbance within 150 feet of playas to protect associated 

cultural resources.

Protection

CR-CA-MA-8. Authorizations for land and resource use would not be approved until compliance with 

Section 106 of the NHPA has been completed and documented, including, where applicable, consultation 

with the SHPO and Federally recognized Indian tribes.

CR-CA-MA-9. Nominate eligible sites for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) on a case-bycase basis.

CR-CA-MA-10. Manage sites that are eligible for the NRHP for their local, regional, or national 

significance. If natural or human-caused deterioration cannot be prevented, BLM would consult with the 

tribes and SHPO, as appropriate, to mitigate the adverse effects.

CR-CA-MA-11. Consider all prudent and feasible alternatives to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on 

cultural resources and their uses when resolving site-specific conflicts between cultural resource use 

allocations and competing land use allocations.

CR-CA-MA-12. The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors are closed to new salable 

mineral development. Existing salable mineral developments could be renewed but the footprint could not 

be expanded.

2.4.2.13 Visual Resources 

Visual Resource Management (VRM) classes identify the degree of acceptable visual change within a 

characteristic landscape. A classification is assigned to public lands based on the guidelines established 

for scenic quality, visual sensitivity, and visibility.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resources

2-137

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Class I - Provides primarily for natural ecological changes only. It is applied to wilderness areas, some 

natural areas, and similar situations where management activities are to be restricted.

Class II - Changes in the basic elements caused by a management activity may be evident in the 

characteristic landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate to the visual strength of the existing 

character. 

Class III - Contrasts to the basic elements caused by management activity may be evident and begin to 

attract attention in the landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate in the existing landscape.

Class IV - Contrasts may attract attention and be a dominant feature in the landscape in terms of scale, 

but the change should repeat the basic element of the characteristic landscape.

Class V - Applies to areas where the characteristic landscape has been so disturbed that rehabilitation is 

needed. Generally considered an interim short-term classification until rehabilitation or enhancement is 

completed.

Goal and Objective

VR-CA-G-1. Maintain visual resource characteristics and values of public lands according to VRM

classes.

Allocations

VR-II-A-1. Areas to be managed as VRM Class I (70,000 acres) include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; and 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors with scenic outstandingly 

remarkable values (i.e., Lower Salmon Falls Creek, Cougar Point Creek, Bruneau River, and

Jarbidge River). 

VR-II-A-2. Areas to be managed as VRM Class II (10,000 acres) include: 

 The Oregon National Historic Trail National Trail Management Corridor and 

The Jarbidge River corridor between Murphy Hot Springs and the Jarbidge Forks.

VR-II-A-3. Areas to be managed as VRM Class III (25,000 acres) include:

 Right-of-way corridors through areas otherwise managed as VRM Class I or II, 

The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors, and 

Salmon Falls Reservoir Special Recreation Management Area. 

VR-II-A-4. The remainder of the planning area would be managed as VRM Class IV (1,266,000 acres).

See Map 43 for locations of areas allocated to VRM Class I, II, III, and IV.

Management Action

VR-CA-MA-1. BLM management activities and authorized uses would be compatible with VRM class 

objectives as follows:

VRM Class I areas are managed to preserve the existing character of the landscape. The level of 

change to the landscape should be very low and must not attract attention.

VRM Class II areas are managed to retain the existing character of the landscape. The level of 

change to the landscape should be low and repeat the basic elements of form, line, color, and texture 

found in the natural features of the landscape.

VRM Class III areas are managed to partially retain the existing character of the landscape. The level 

of change to the landscape can be moderate and should repeat the basic elements found in the 
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-138

•

•

•

•

•

natural landscape. Management activities may attract attention, but should not dominate the view of 

the casual observer.

VRM Class IV areas are managed to provide for activities that require major modification of the 

landscape. The level of change to the landscape can be high, and management activities may 

dominate the view and be the major focus of attention. Impacts can still be minimized through location 

and design by repeating the basic elements found in the natural landscape.

2.4.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics

Goal and Objective

WC-II-G-1. Lands with Wilderness Characteristics would not be managed to maintain wilderness 

characteristics. Lands with Wilderness Characteristics would be managed for multiple use consistent with 

resource objectives and designations. 

Management Actions

No management actions stated.

2.4.3 Resource Uses

2.4.3.1 Livestock Grazing

Goals

LG-CA-G-1. Manage livestock grazing to ensure achievement of or movement towards meeting Idaho 

Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management.

LG-II-G-1. Provide for livestock grazing through proper grazing management to maintain or improve the 

condition of forage resources while maintaining native plant communities and habitat for sage-grouse.

Objectives

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-CA-O-1. Manage livestock grazing in annual communities to achieve objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

LG-II-O-1. In native plant communities excluding the Sandberg/non-native areas, manage livestock 

grazing to help maintain or improve native plant species diversity and abundance, focusing on plant 

reproductive and physiological needs.

LG-II-O-2. In non-native perennial communities including Sandberg/non-native areas, manage livestock 

grazing to maintain or improve the perennial forage base and allow for other commercial uses.

Range Infrastructure

LG-II-O-3. Manage (e.g., maintain, improve, build, realign, remove) range infrastructure at levels 

appropriate to the amount of livestock use to provide for efficient management of livestock grazing 

allotments.

Allocations

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-II-A-1. The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing (1,408,000 acres). 

The following areas would not be available for livestock grazing (55,000 acres):

Canyons associated with the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers and Salmon Falls Creek, 

Reference areas, 

 Wildlife tracts, and

Areas not contained within grazing allotments.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resource Uses

2-139

•

o

o

•

o

o

•

o

o

•

o

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

See Map 54 for locations.

LG-II-A-2. Allocate vegetation production as follows:

Native perennial grass production: 

50% to 60% to watershed and wildlife and

40% to 50% to livestock. 

Non-native perennial grass production: 

40% to 50% to watershed and wildlife and

50% to 60% to livestock. 

Annual grass production: 

20% to 30% to watershed and wildlife and

70% to 80% to livestock. 

Shrub and forb production: 

84% to 88% to watershed and wildlife and

12% to 16% to livestock. 

Allocate approximately 350,000 to 423,000 animal unit months (AUMs) to livestock at initial 

implementation and approximately 362,000 to 440,000 at full implementation. The purpose of allocating 

vegetation is to determine the total AUMs available for livestock grazing in the planning area. AUMs for

livestock grazing are an estimate based on 2006 production data collected while conducting ecological 

site inventories. At the time of permit renewal, additional production data may be considered when 

determining the appropriate allocation for a specific allotment. 

These vegetation allocations would be implemented during the permit renewal process. Allocation 

percentages are not the same as utilization, as the allocation is used to identify the total number of AUMs 

for livestock, while utilization identifies the amount of vegetation used by livestock in a specific area. 

Allocation is not intended to prescribe what livestock actually consume. Livestock use of specific 

vegetation types would be managed through the implementation of grazing use indicators developed on 

an allotment-specific basis.

LG-II-A-3. The amount of forage available for livestock use would likely change as the RMP is 

implemented, although allocation percentages would remain the same. Changes to AUMs in the future 

would be determined by the BLM after monitoring and site-specific NEPA analysis.

Management Actions

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-CA-MA-1. Implement adaptive management using grazing use indicators to meet resource and 

special designation area objectives. Grazing use indicators include:

 Utilization for upland vegetation and riparian areas, 

 Bank and soil surface alteration, and

 Other indicators identified on an allotment-specific basis depending on the resources present.

LG-CA-MA-2. The grazing permit renewal process, following the approval of the RMP, would be in 

conformance with BLM policy and guidance current at the time of renewal. 

LG-CA-MA-3. The toolbox for managing livestock grazing would include, but not be limited to: 

Rest rotation, 

Deferred rotation, 

Seasons of use, 

Stocking rates, 

Class and kind of livestock, 

Herding, 

Frequency of grazing, 
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-140

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Closure for resource protection,

Location and types of range infrastructure, and 

Location and types of supplements.

Specific tools to be used would be identified on an allotment-specific basis through the permit renewal 

process, depending on the resources present.

LG-CA-MA-4. Seasons of use and changes in class and kind of livestock would be consistent with 

resource objectives and analyzed in site-specific NEPA analysis.

LG-CA-MA-5. Identify and implement measures to prevent livestock from entering areas closed to 

grazing, such as: 

 Fencing, 

Using natural barriers, 

Active herding, 

Water placement, and 

Salt/supplement placement.

LG-CA-MA-6. Implement drought management guidelines during periods of drought to maintain or 

achieve long-term resource productivity (Appendix F).

LG-CA-MA-7. Allow spring and early summer livestock grazing periodically in big game winter range to

improve browse production.

LG-CA-MA-8. Manage livestock grazing to move riparian and wetland conditions toward goals and 

objectives in the Riparian Areas and Wetlands section. 

LG-CA-MA-9. Livestock trailing may be allowed consistent with other resource objectives. Trailing must 

be supervised by the permittee to ensure active movement of livestock. Terms and conditions would be 

added to permits to ensure compliance.

LG-CA-MA-10. When livestock are moved between pastures or allotments through riparian areas, stream 

crossings would be perpendicular to the riparian area where practical.

LG-CA-MA-11. Grazing management activities (e.g., grazing, trailing, bedding, watering, salting, loading, 

other handling efforts) would be modified, discontinued, or relocated if they are not maintaining aquatic 

and riparian conditions. 

LG-CA-MA-12. In areas that are readily accessible to cattle and known or suspected special status fish 

spawning habitat, develop and implement grazing practices to avoid or restrict trampling of redds (eggs) 

and other direct and indirect effects that may result in adverse impacts to the species.

LG-II-MA-1. Utilization would be determined on a case-by-case basis to meet objectives in the Livestock 

Grazing, Upland Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Fish and Wildlife, and Special Status Species

sections.

LG-II-MA-2. Reserve common allotments may be established to facilitate vegetation treatment projects 

and to provide increased livestock grazing management flexibility. Reserve common allotments may be 

established on acquired lands; in allotments where permits are relinquished, transferred, expired, or 

cancelled; or by agreement with a permittee. However, permits would not be cancelled for the purpose of 

establishing a reserve common allotment. Reserve common allotments may be created from whole or 

partial allotments and can be permanent or temporary. Reserve common allotments would not be allowed 

within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness.

LG-II-MA-3. Considerations for selecting areas to be used as reserve common allotments include: 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resource Uses

2-141

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Whether the area has special management concerns, such as habitat for Type 1 BLM Sensitive 

species, slickspot peppergrass, or redband trout; noxious weeds or invasive plants; or wild horses; 

Whether the area has intermingled private or State lands; and 

 Whether the area can sustain grazing use without considerable resource impacts.

LG-II-MA-4. No more than 10% of the AUMs for livestock within the planning area can be within reserve 

common allotments without approval from the BLM State Director.

LG-II-MA-5. Priority for using reserve common allotments would be as follows:

Permittees and lessees whose normally permitted allotments are under an approved vegetation 

treatment project (e.g., restoration, fuels treatments); 

Permittees and lessees whose normally permitted allotments are temporarily unavailable due to 

wildland fire; and

Permittees and lessees whose normally permitted allotments are temporarily unavailable due to 

insect outbreaks. 

Permittees within the planning area would have the highest priority for using reserve common allotments; 

permittees within the Twin Falls District would have second priority.

LG-II-MA-6. When a reserve common allotment is established, a management plan for the allotment 

would be developed to ensure achievement of or movement towards meeting Idaho Standards for 

Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management. 

LG-II-MA-7. Temporary Non-Renewable (TNR) permits would be allowed, except in pastures containing 

areas within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness. Criteria for issuing TNR permits in a particular 

pasture would include:

TNR may be allowed in years where additional forage for livestock is temporarily available, as 

determined by utilization levels;

TNR must be consistent with the drought management guidelines;

TNR may not be allowed within the operation of the applicant if grazing use criteria are exceeded in 

any pasture in planning area controlled by the applicant; and

TNR must be consistent with other resource objectives.

LG-II-MA-8. Manage livestock grazing in allotments containing more than 50% native plant communities 

to provide a variety of residual cover heights to meet the needs of the ground-nesting birds present in an 

allotment.

LG-II-MA-9. Follow BLM guidelines for livestock grazing management in sage-grouse habitat.

LG-II-MA-10. Even though livestock grazing would not be authorized in the Jarbidge Canyons, trailing to 

the Wilkins Island Allotment would be permitted along the existing route across the East Fork of the 

Jarbidge River and up an un-named draw. Riders would be used to herd livestock to ensure livestock do 

not remain in the riparian area after the crossing.

Range Infrastructure

LG-C-MA-1. Management actions for range infrastructure apply to watering sites, fences, and corrals 

within wilderness, consistent with the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Management Plan. 

LG-CA-MA-13. Follow BLM-approved design features and construction and maintenance practices for 

range infrastructure.

LG-CA-MA-14. Grazing facilities and infrastructure (e.g., livestock handling and management facilities, 

fences, watering facilities) would be modified, discontinued, or relocated if they are not maintaining 

aquatic and riparian conditions. 
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-142

•

•

•

•

LG-CA-MA-15. To protect associated resources, minimize disturbance at developed springs by using 

existing routes for access, redesigning the spring development, or limiting maintenance or reconstruction 

activities to areas disturbed during previous construction or to areas outside the wetland.

LG-CA-MA-16. Modify existing and construct new fences to comply with BLM standards for wildlife 

(Karsky, 1999). Existing fences would be modified according to the following priority order: 

Key sage-grouse habitat, 

Big game winter range, 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, and

The remainder of the planning area. 

LG-CA-MA-17. If a reservoir is fenced, where practical, provide water for livestock use outside the fence.

LG-CA-MA-18. For permittee-maintained projects, the BLM authorized officer would be notified prior to 

initiating work that requires the use of heavy equipment so that appropriate measures are adopted to 

protect resources. 

LG-II-MA-11. Consider installing or constructing new pipelines on a case-by-case basis to promote 

livestock distribution or meet resource objectives. New pipelines would not be authorized within 

Wilderness or eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors.

LG-II-MA-12. Maintain existing pipelines for livestock use. Modify any pipeline where monitoring 

determines the pipeline is preventing attainment of resource objectives.

LG-II-MA-13. Consider installing or constructing new reservoirs or wells on a case-by-case basis to 

promote livestock distribution or meet resource objectives.

LG-II-MA-14. Maintain existing reservoirs or wells for livestock use. Modify reservoirs or wells that are 

preventing attainment of resource objectives, as identified through monitoring.

LG-II-MA-15. Consider new spring developments on a case-by-case basis. New spring developments 

must be consistent with resource objectives, avoid or minimize ground disturbance, protect the spring 

source, and ensure adequate water to maintain the wetland.

LG-II-MA-16. Modify spring developments with wetlands rated as non-functioning or functioning-at-risk 

downward trend to improve wetland areas by protecting the spring source and ensuring adequate water 

to support spring hydrology and associated riparian vegetation.

LG-II-MA-17. Ensure salting, minerals, supplements, new troughs, new reservoirs, and new holding 

facilities are located to avoid conflicts with cultural resources.

LG-II-MA-18. Adjust locations of livestock watering facilities and salting/supplements in sage-grouse 

habitat on a case-by-case basis to provide adequate nesting and winter cover.

LG-II-MA-19. Consider installing or constructing new fences on a case-by-case basis to promote livestock 

distribution and management or to meet resource objectives.

LG-II-MA-20. Maintain fences to BLM specifications; the amount of fence in an allotment would be 

appropriate to objectives for livestock grazing and resource management.

2.4.3.2 Recreation

Goal

REC-CA-G-1. Provide and sustain a variety of dispersed and developed recreational opportunities and 

experiences while avoiding or minimizing resource impacts.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resource Uses

2-143

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Objectives

REC-CA-O-1. Provide basic information on recreational opportunities on public lands not designated as 

Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) or Extensive Recreation Management Areas. Provide

access and minimal facilities (e.g., signs, protective fences) as needed to ensure visitor health and safety, 

reduce user conflict, and protect resources. 

REC-II-O-1. Manage 7,000 acres as SRMAs to protect and enhance recreation settings, activities, 

experiences, and benefits. 

Allocations

REC-II-A-1. Designate the following SRMAs:

Little Pilgrim SRMA (300 acres), 

Jarbidge Forks SRMA (2,000 acres), and

Salmon Falls Reservoir SRMA (5,000 acres). 

See Map 62 for locations. 

REC-II-A-2. All lands not established as a SRMA would be managed to meet basic recreation and visitor 

services needs and resource objectives. Recreation would not be emphasized; however, recreation 

activities may occur to the extent that they are consistent with other resource uses. 

Management Actions

REC-CA-MA-1. Develop implementation and monitoring plans for SRMAs to address the purpose specific 

to the SRMA.

REC-CA-MA-2. Where appropriate, implement management methods to protect riparian resources, 

special status species, and wildlife habitat while enhancing recreation opportunities. Management 

methods may include: 

 Limiting visitor numbers, 

Adopting camping and travel controls, 

 Implementing fees, and 

Imposing scheduling restrictions to minimize impacts to fish and wildlife during important seasonal 

periods.

REC-CA-MA-3. New and existing recreation-related activities and facilities within or affecting Riparian 

Conservation Areas would be designed, modified, relocated, or discontinued if they are not maintaining 

aquatic and riparian conditions. 

REC-CA-MA-4. Dispersed camping would be allowed. Dispersed camping may be closed or limited 

seasonally if resource objectives are impacted. 

REC-CA-MA-5. If campground fees are implemented, they would not apply to Federally recognized tribes 

exercising treaty rights or engaging in traditional cultural practices.

REC-CA-MA-6. Consider Special Recreation Permits (SRPs) within Areas of Environmental Concern with 

mitigation for impacts to relevant and important values. 

REC-II-MA-1. Manage the Little Pilgrim SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing 

and bird hunting.

REC-II-MA-2. Manage the Jarbidge Forks SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing, 

rafting, picnicking, camping, and viewing wildlife and natural scenery.
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-144

•

•

•

REC-II-MA-3. The Salmon Falls Reservoir SRMA would consist of three Recreation Management Zones

(RMZs; see Map 68) with the following management:

Manage the Antelope Bay RMZ to provide opportunities to engage in hunting, fishing, camping, 

boating, water sports, and motorized and non-motorized trail riding on a series of designated routes.

Manage the Cedar Creek RMZ to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing, camping, and 

boating.

Manage the Luds Point RMZ to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in hunting, fishing, 

primitive camping, and viewing wildlife and natural scenery.

See Appendix H for more information on the management and settings prescribed for each SRMA.

REC-II-MA-4. Partner with the State, counties, or local communities to create off-highway vehicle (OHV) 

parks at Deadman and Yahoo through land tenure adjustment or through a Recreation and Public 

Purposes Act of 1954 lease. OHV parks would be linked by a designated route/trail corridor.

REC-II-MA-5. Give priority to SRP applicants proposing to make use of less-crowded weekdays and 

focus on visitation on sites and areas resilient to repeated use.

REC-II-MA-6. Issue and manage SRPs for a wide variety of uses to enhance outdoor recreational 

opportunities, provide opportunities for private enterprise, manage user-group interaction, and limit the 

impacts of such uses upon natural and cultural resources, with increased emphasis on realizing positive 

economic and community benefits through SRP management.

REC-II-MA-7. Require organized group permits for groups with 50 or more people.

2.4.3.3 Transportation and Travel 

Goal

TR-CA-G-1. Manage and provide for motorized, non-motorized, and non-mechanized access that would

balance resource protection and use.

Objective

TR-II-O-1. Provide a transportation and travel system to facilitate multiple use, with an emphasis on 

commercial use and minimizing impacts on native vegetation.

Allocations

TR-C-A-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized and mechanized 

vehicle use (60,000 acres). The Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area would be closed to 

motorized vehicle use (2,000 acres).

TR-II-A-1. No areas would be open to cross-country motorized vehicle use.

TR-II-A-2. Travel would be limited to designated routes in the remainder of the planning area (1,309,000 

acres). Specific route designations would be made in an implementation-level travel and transportation 

management planning process following the completion of the RMP. Until route designation occurs, areas 

limited to designated routes would be managed as limited to existing routes as depicted on Map 71. A 

more thorough review of existing transportation routes would be performed as part of the travel 

management planning process, which may include additional on-the-ground data collection and 

verification.

See Map 74 for locations of transportation and travel allocations.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resource Uses

2-145

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Management Actions

TR-CA-MA-1. Area designations apply to all off-highway vehicles, which include any motorized vehicle 

capable of, or designed for, travel on or immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain, excluding: 

Any non-amphibious registered motorboat; 

Any military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle while being used for emergency purposes;

Any vehicle whose use is expressly authorized by the BLM authorized officer or otherwise officially 

approved; 

Vehicles in official use; and

Any combat or combat support vehicle when used in times of national defense emergencies (43 CFR 

8340.0-5[a]).

Area and route designations, with the exception of designated wilderness areas, also do not apply to 

vehicles being used by members of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes or the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to 

access traditional use areas of importance to the tribes or to vehicles being used by members of the 

Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to exercise their tribally reserved treaty rights.

TR-CA-MA-2. Where motorized, non-motorized, mechanized, or non-mechanized use would cause or is 

causing considerable adverse effects on soil, vegetation, wildlife, wildlife habitat, cultural resources, 

historical resources, threatened or endangered species, wilderness suitability, other authorized uses, or 

other resources, the BLM authorized officer may close the affected areas to the type(s) of use causing the 

adverse effect until the adverse effects are reduced and measures implemented to prevent reoccurrence.

TR-CA-MA-3. Minimize construction and maintenance of roads within or adjacent to special status wildlife 

and fish habitat and big game winter range during important seasonal periods.

TR-CA-MA-4. Continue to recognize and update agreements and Memoranda of Understanding with 

local highway districts for road maintenance.

TR-CA-MA-5. Complete a Travel Management Plan (TMP) within five years of the signing of the Record 

of Decision. The TMP would be developed through a public process to determine the transportation and 

travel system for the planning area. The TMP would determine the routes and trails to be designated, 

modified, closed, or rehabilitated as well as the maintenance level, modes of travel, and seasonal and 

access restrictions for designated routes. During the TMP process, additional data needs and a strategy 

to collect information will be identified. Decisions made in the TMP would be limited to management of 

BLM roads. 

A TMP is not intended to provide evidence bearing on or addressing the validity of any R.S. 2477 

assertions. R.S. 2477 rights are determined through a process that is entirely independent of the BLM's 

planning process. Consequently, travel management planning should not take into consideration R.S. 

2477 assertions or evidence. Travel management planning should be founded on an independently 

determined purpose and need that is based on resource uses and associated access to public lands and 

waters. At such time as a decision is made on R.S. 2477 assertions, the BLM would adjust its travel 

routes accordingly.

TR-CA-MA-6. Route designation would, at a minimum, follow criterion in 43 CFR 8342.1 and BLM 

Manual 1626.

TR-CA-MA-7. Route designation would also adhere to the following: 

Conflict with cultural and paleontological resources would be minimized when designating routes.

Designated routes may follow or cross the Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) and National Register 

of Historic Places-eligible and -listed segments of the Kelton and Toana Freight Roads in areas 

where previous disturbance has occurred, and after consultation with the State Historic Preservation 

Officer. 
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-146

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Where motorized vehicle use is allowed within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor, travel 

would not degrade the Oregon NHT or its setting. 

Designated routes within suitable and eligible Wild and Scenic River corridors must maintain/enhance 

their outstandingly remarkable values, free-flowing condition, water quality, and tentative classification 

until Congress acts. 

Loop routes are preferred to dead end routes.

Parking areas and turnouts would be considered under the same criteria used for routes.

Provide access to private lands or other agency lands (e.g., State, Forest Service, other BLM field 

offices).

Provide access for authorized activities, including livestock grazing, energy development, and 

recreation.

TR-CA-MA-8. As part of the travel management planning process, the BLM would identify any easements 

and rights-of-way (to be issued to the BLM or others) needed to maintain the preliminary or existing road 

and trail network.

TR-CA-MA-9. Cooperate with tribes, Federal, State, and county agencies to reduce adverse effects and 

support the achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands in the long term.

TR-CA-MA-10. Minimize locating new roads or road-related facilities in Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs). Before building new roads or other road-related facilities in RCAs, complete a watershed or sitespecific analysis. The level of analysis should be commensurate with the scope and issues of the project 

and related aquatic resources. Analysis should identify how road design features would minimize or avoid 

adverse effects to aquatic and riparian resources at site-specific, reach, and watershed scales. 

TR-CA-MA-11. Temporary roads within or affecting RCAs would be fully decommissioned and 

rehabilitated once the road is no longer needed to meet the intended purpose. 

TR-CA-MA-12. Avoid or minimize sediment delivery to streams from the road surface to allow the 

achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

TR-CA-MA-13. Avoid sidecasting road surface material into areas where it may reach RCAs. 

TR-CA-MA-14. Design new, replacement, and reconstructed stream crossings (culverts, bridges, and 

other stream crossings) to: 

Accommodate a 100-year flood, including associated bedload and debris in bull trout occupied 

watersheds. In watersheds containing other non-game fish, design new, replacement, and 

reconstructed stream crossings to accommodate a 100-year flood event, unless a site-specific 

analysis determines the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands could be achieved with 

fewer impacts to the RCA; 

Provide and maintain fish passage at all road crossings of existing and potential fish-bearing streams; 

and

Accommodate mean bankfull channel widths to maintain channel integrity.

TR-II-MA-1. Motorized vehicle restrictions would apply to everyone including lessees, BLM permit 

holders, and right-of-way (ROW) holders, but site-specific exceptions to motorized vehicle restrictions 

could be authorized in the lease, permits, or ROW grant. 

TR-II-MA-2. Other activities in areas limited or closed to motorized travel may be allowed on a case-bycase basis, but would require prior written permission of an authorized officer. These activities may 

include but not be limited to: 

Motorized cross-country travel for non-BLM government entities on official administrative business 

(e.g., noxious weed control, surveying, and animal damage control efforts).

Motorized cross-country travel by entities requiring access to private lands, resources, or legal 

improvements within or adjacent to closed or limited areas.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resource Uses

2-147

•

•

•

o

•

o

•

o

TR-II-MA-3. Game retrieval using motorized vehicles would be allowed off designated routes, but would 

not be allowed within areas closed to motorized vehicle use. Motorized or mechanized game retrieval 

would not be allowed within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness.

TR-II-MA-4. Motorized cross-country travel to a camp site would be allowed within 100 feet of designated 

routes, but would not be allowed within areas closed to motorized vehicle use or in riparian areas. 

Motorized cross-country travel to a camp site may be closed or limited seasonally or as impacts or 

environmental conditions warrant. 

TR-II-MA-5. Identify locations for and install gates and cattle guards along designated routes to minimize 

conflicts between motorized recreation activities and livestock grazing operations.

TR-II-MA-6. Travel Management Areas (TMAs) are delineated areas where travel management (either 

motorized or non-motorized) needs particular focus. These areas would have a designated network of 

roads, trails, ways, and other routes that provide for public access and travel. The priority emphasis for 

each TMA is based on resource management, wildland fire suppression, and use objectives outlined in 

the RMP. The TMAs and their travel and transportation planning focus would be as follows:

Bruneau Desert TMA (1,159,000 acres): Focus on facilitating commercial uses, while mitigating 

impacts to resources.

Canyonlands TMA (213,000 acres): Focus on facilitating livestock grazing management, while 

mitigating impacts to resources.

See Map 80 for locations of TMAs.

TR-II-MA-7. The BLM authorized officer has the authority to adjust TMA boundaries and their focus, 

consistent with objectives in the RMP.

2.4.3.4 Land Use Authorizations

Goal

LA-CA-G-1. Public needs for land use authorizations would be met with consideration for other resource 

values. 

Objective

LA-II-O-1. Provide for the development of renewable energy resources, transportation routes, utility 

corridors, transmission lines, communication sites and other uses with consideration for resource 

objectives.

Allocations

LA-CA-A-1. Retain existing withdrawals, with the option of a Section 24 restoration for power site 

classifications and power site reserves if needed, as provided for in the Federal Power Act of 1920.

LA-II-A-1. The following areas would be avoidance areas for rights-of-way (ROWs; 1,001,000 acres); 

ROWs would be allowed in these areas only if the avoidance stipulations are met and if the area is not 

identified for ROW exclusion:

Areas within US Air Force (USAF) Military Operating Areas (983,000 acres): 

New ROWs must be consistent with USAF airspace restrictions.

Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone (11,000 acres): 

Surface, overhead, and underground ROWs would be allowed with mitigation for disturbance 

within the protective zone. 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors (30,000 acres): 

ROWs must maintain/enhance the river segment's outstandingly remarkable values, free-flowing 

condition, water quality, and tentative classification.
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-148

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Several ROW avoidance areas overlap; where this occurs, all avoidance stipulations must be met. In 

addition, some ROW avoidance areas overlap with ROW exclusion areas; where this occurs, the more 

restrictive exclusion management applies. 

See Map 88 for locations of ROW avoidance areas.

LA-II-A-2. The following areas would be exclusion areas for ROW (62,000 acres); they would not be 

available for ROWs under any conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area. 

See Map 93 for locations of ROW exclusion areas.

LA-II-A-3. Designate the following ROW corridors for utilities (i.e., corridors for oil, gas, and hydrogen 

pipelines, electricity transmission, phone lines, and distribution facilities), all of which are one mile wide: 

Pilgrim Gulch (Section 368 energy corridor) (4,000 acres), 

Shoestring (Section 368 energy corridor) (5,000 acres), 

Saylor Creek (Section 368 energy corridor) (11,000 acres), 

Balanced Rock (Section 368 energy corridor) (10,000 acres), and

Jarbidge (24,000 acres). 

See Map 97 for locations of ROW corridors. Section 368 energy corridors were designated in the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005.

LA-II-A-4. Wind energy development can be considered throughout the planning area, consistent with 

stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and outside ROW exclusion areas and utility ROW corridors (Map 

101).

Management Actions

LA-C-MA-1. Implement the Programmatic Policies and Design Features in the Record of Decision on 

Wind Energy Development on BLM-Administered Lands in the Western United States (2005) (Appendix 

B).

LA-C-MA-2. Interagency Operating Procedures, located in Appendix B, would be implemented for 

projects proposed within the Section 368 corridors.

LA-C-MA-3. The BLM would review all withdrawals on and classifications of public lands to eliminate all 

unnecessary withdrawals and classifications. Reviews would consider:

For what purposes were the lands withdrawn? 

Are these purposes still being served? 

Are the lands suitable for return to the public domain?

LA-CA-MA-1. Place new ROWs for oil and gas pipelines and overhead lines within ROW corridors where 

practical; other locations would be considered in areas not identified for ROW avoidance or exclusion, 

consistent with allocations listed above.

LA-CA-MA-2. New ROWs would be located in areas of previous disturbance where practical.

LA-CA-MA-3. New ROWs would meet Visual Resource Management class objectives.

LA-CA-MA-4. Co-locate new communication sites with existing sites where practical; communication 

sites present in 2011 are located at:

Black Mesa, 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resource Uses

2-149

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Blue Butte, 

Frog Hollow,

Indian Butte, 

Lower Salmon Falls, 

Signal Butte, and

Yahoo Creek. 

See Map 85. Other locations would be considered, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas 

and outside ROW exclusion areas.

LA-CA-MA-5. BLM management activities and authorized uses on lands with existing withdrawals would 

be consistent with the purposes of the withdrawal. Proposed BLM management activities and authorized 

uses that are not consistent with the purposes of the withdrawal would be evaluated to determine whether 

the proposal can be modified or whether the withdrawal is still necessary.

LA-CA-MA-6. Land use permits may be considered, on a case-by-case basis, consistent with resource 

objectives. 

LA-CA-MA-7. Trespass resolution would be limited to removal of facilities and/or restoration of the area 

as determined by the BLM authorized officer. Trespass resolution, as determined by the BLM authorized 

officer, may include:

 Removal (depending on the nature of the trespass), 

 Restoration, 

 Authorization of a ROW grant or land use permit, or 

 Disposal of the affected land through sale or exchange.

LA-CA-MA-8. Land use permits for irrigation pivot crossings may be allowed, in accordance with policy 

and regulations. In cases where a pivot crosses public land, the lands are to remain unfarmed and 

unirrigated.

LA-CA-MA-9. Airport leases may be considered if proposals are outside ROW exclusion areas and 

consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and Federal Aviation Administration regulations.

LA-CA-MA-10. Access across non-BLM lands would be identified and obtained, where possible, through 

easements, ROWs, or acquisitions to accomplish BLM objectives. 

LA-CA-MA-11. Future access needs and priorities would be coordinated with the Shoshone-Bannock 

Tribes, Shoshone-Paiute Tribes, Idaho and Nevada State agencies, and local governments to ensure 

resource values are evaluated along with public needs.

LA-CA-MA-12. Authorizations involving water use on BLM land must comply with applicable State water 

law. Final authorization to proceed with water developments on BLM lands would be withheld until 

compliance from the appropriate authorizing agency (i.e., Idaho Department of Water Resources) is 

obtained. Any new water right established on public land would be solely in the name of the United 

States.

LA-CA-MA-13. New land use authorizations would avoid or minimize adverse effects on non-game fish, 

their habitats, and Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs). 

LA-CA-MA-14. For existing land use authorizations that prevent the achievement of the goals and 

objectives for riparian areas and wetlands, use existing authorities to redesign, modify, or apply 

mitigations to reduce impacts to non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LA-CA-MA-15. During Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensing or relicensing of 

hydroelectric projects, terms and conditions that achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and 

wetlands over the new license term should be submitted to the FERC.
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-150

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LA-II-MA-1. ROW construction and maintenance activities should avoid disturbing special status species 

during important seasonal periods, unless the disturbance can be mitigated.

LA-II-MA-2. Locate new transmission and phone lines, communications towers, meteorological towers, 

and wind turbines more than one mile from occupied sage-grouse leks. Within designated ROW corridors, 

buffer distances for sage-grouse leks would not apply. BLM may impose constraints on timing of 

construction for routine maintenance.

LA-II-MA-3. Design new communication sites to minimize impacts to special status species and their 

habitats where practical.

LA-II-MA-4. Restrict wind turbines and meteorological towers from occupied habitat for Endangered, 

Threatened, Proposed, and Candidate species where their direct adverse effects cannot be mitigated.

LA-II-MA-5. Applications for solar energy developments would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

2.4.3.5 Land Tenure 

Goal

LT-CA-G-1. Manage land tenure to provide for public ownership of lands with high resource and multiple 

use values and to improve management efficiency. 

Objective

LT-CA-O-1. Improve BLM's ability to manage the land base and resource values, and help meet resource 

objectives through land tenure adjustments.

Allocations

LT-II-A-1. Zone 1 consists of lands for retention that are not available for disposal (977,000 acres). Zone 

1 lands include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness;

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 

The Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone; 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area; and 

Other consolidated public lands. 

LT-II-A-2. Zone 2 consists of lands for consolidation within the planning area (349,000 acres); these can 

be exchanged for other lands adjacent to Zone 1 or Zone 2 or offered as Recreation and Public Purposes 

(R&PP) leases. Zone 2 lands include: 

Selected lands near Indian Cove and Hammett,

Selected lands in the northeast corner of the planning area,

Selected lands in the Jarbidge Foothills,

Selected lands between Clover Creek and Cedar Creek Reservoir,

Selected lands near the Jarbidge River in Nevada, and

Lands adjacent to private lands not in Zone 3.

LT-II-A-3. Zone 3 lands (46,000 acres) are available for Federal Land Policy and Management Act 

(FLPMA) Section 203 sales (as listed in Appendix I) subject to NEPA compliance and consistent with 

other decisions in this RMP. Zone 3 lands include:

Selected lands near Hammett, Glenns Ferry, King Hill, and Roseworth and

Selected lands between Castleford and Hagerman.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resource Uses

2-151

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

See Map 108 for locations of Land Tenure Zones 1, 2, and 3.

LT-II-A-4. Lands identified for disposal in previous RMPs prior to July 25, 2000 (4,000 acres) would

continue to be available for disposal under the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act of 2000 (FLTFA; 

Appendix I). Proceeds from the sale or exchange of these public lands may be used to purchase 

additional public lands, as provided for in FLTFA.

LT-II-A-5. R&PP leases to State and local governments and non-profit organizations would be considered 

on a case-by-case basis on lands in Zones 2 and 3.

Management Actions

LT-CA-MA-1. Public lands, in order to be considered for any form of land tenure adjustment (including 

exchanges, R&PP, fee or easement acquisitions, etc.), except for FLPMA Section 203 sales, would be 

evaluated and must meet one or more of the land ownership adjustment criteria (described in Appendix I), 

or one or more of the following criteria:

Is in the public interest; accommodates the needs of State, local, or private entities, including for the 

economy and community growth and expansion; and is in accordance with other land use goals, 

objectives, and planning decisions; 

Results in net gain of important and manageable resource values on public lands such as crucial 

wildlife habitat, significant cultural sites, high-value recreation areas, high quality riparian areas, live 

water, special status species habitat, or areas key to maintenance of productive ecosystems; 

Ensures the accessibility of public lands in areas where access is needed and cannot otherwise be 

obtained; 

Is essential to allow effective management of public lands in areas where consolidation of ownership 

is necessary to meet resource management objectives; and/or

Results in acquisition of lands that serve a national priority as identified in national policy directives.

LT-CA-MA-2. Initiate tribal consultation early in the process for any land tenure adjustments.

LT-CA-MA-3. In general, lands with the following characteristics would be retained in Federal ownership: 

Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, and Candidate species habitat and designated critical habitat; 

Those lands specifically identified by the tribes as having special importance related to treaty and/or 

traditional uses/values;

National Register of Historic Places eligible and listed properties; and 

Wildlife tracts.

These lands could be disposed of if the transaction helped achieve resource objectives; see the Cultural 

Resources section for additional guidance for disposal of lands containing National Register properties or 

other important cultural resources. Lands acquired under the Land and Water Conservation Fund must be 

retained.

LT-CA-MA-4. BLM’s acquisition priorities (not in priority order) would include:

Land identified by Shoshone-Paiute Tribes or Shoshone-Bannock Tribes;

Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, or Candidate species habitat; 

BLM Type 2 Sensitive species habitat;

Lands within special designations; 

Big game winter range; 

Riparian areas;

Lands containing known archaeological, paleontological, or historical values determined by the BLM 

to be unique or of traditional or scientific importance;

Lands that would provide public access to public lands, including but not limited to river access; 

Lands that would help consolidate public land; 

Lands that would help improve livestock grazing management; and 
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-152

•

•

•

•

Lands adjacent to Zones 1 and 2.

LT-CA-MA-5. Vegetation treatments, construction of new range infrastructure, and other public land 

improvements in areas involved in a land tenure transaction would be kept to a minimum.

LT-CA-MA-6. Disposal of public lands would be subject to all valid existing rights, including existing 

rights-of-way. Existing public access through those lands may be retained if necessary for BLM 

management or for accommodating uses.

LT-CA-MA-7. Use land acquisition, exchanges, and conservation easements to support achievement of 

the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands and facilitate restoration of native species and 

their habitat.

LT-CA-MA-8. No new Desert Land Act or Carey Act applications would be accepted for lands. The Desert 

Land Act and Carey Act applications submitted prior to 2009 (Case numbers IDD-7401, IDI-7402, IDI27888, and IDI-27889) would be processed within 10 years of the signing of the Record of Decision. 

LT-CA-MA-9. Manage newly acquired lands and lands returned to BLM the same as adjacent BLM lands 

(e.g., acquired lands within wilderness would be managed as wilderness).

LT-II-MA-1. Sales of public lands can be made upon consideration of the following criteria:

The parcel, because of its location or other characteristics, is difficult and uneconomic to manage as 

part of the public lands, and is not suitable for management by another Federal department or 

agency; 

The parcel was acquired for a specific purpose and is no longer required for that or any other Federal 

purpose; or 

Disposal of the parcel would serve important public objectives, including but not limited to, expansion 

of communities and economic development which cannot be achieved prudently or feasibly on land 

other than public land and which outweigh other public objectives and values. These include, but are 

not limited to, wildlife, grazing, recreation, and scenic values which would be served by maintaining 

such parcel in Federal ownership.

2.4.3.6 Minerals 

Leasable Minerals

Leasable minerals include oil shale, oil and gas, phosphate, potash, sodium, geothermal resources, and 

other minerals that may be developed under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended.

Goal

LE-CA-G-1. Provide leasable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other 

resources.

Objective

LE-II-O-1. Facilitate reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound exploration and development of 

leasable minerals where compatible with resource objectives.

Allocations

LE-II-A-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, the Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study 

Area, and designated Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridors (62,000 acres) would be closed to mineral 

leasing.

LE-II-A-2. The majority of the planning area (1,309,000 acres) would be open to mineral leasing, subject 

to laws, regulations, and formal orders; the terms and conditions of the standard lease form; and 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resource Uses

2-153

•

•

•

•

•

•

stipulations for Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation and Cultural Resource Protection. Areas 

that would be subject to additional moderate or major constraints specific to Alternative II are as follows:

Moderate constraints (8,000 acres): Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) would be open to mineral 

leasing, consistent with the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

Major constraints (25,000 acres): The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone and

eligible and suitable WSR corridors would be open to mineral leasing with no surface occupancy 

(NSO). 

See Map 117 for locations of leasable mineral allocations.

LE-II-A-3. Areas open or closed to exploration and development of non-energy leasable minerals (e.g. 

phosphate) would follow allocations outlined above.

Management Actions

LE-C-MA-1. Geothermal exploration, drilling, utilization, and reclamation projects would incorporate 

stipulations, best management practices, and management procedures from the Record of Decision and 

Resource Management Plan Amendments for Geothermal Leasing in the Western United States 

(December 2008) found in Appendix B. 

LE-CA-MA-1. The terms and conditions of the standard lease form (Form 3100-11, Offer to Lease and 

Lease for Oil and Gas) or future versions of the form would apply to all mineral leases.

LE-CA-MA-2. The following stipulations for Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) Section 7 

Consultation and Cultural Resource Protection would be used unless new stipulations are directed by 

BLM policy:

ESA Section 7 Consultation Stipulation – The lease area may now or hereafter contain plants, 

animals, or their habitats determined to be Threatened, Endangered, or other special status species. 

The BLM may recommend modifications to exploration and development proposals to further its 

conservation and management objective to avoid BLM-approved activity that would contribute to a 

need to list such a species or their habitat. The BLM may require modifications to or disapprove 

proposed activity that is likely to result in jeopardy to the continued existence of a proposed or listed 

Threatened or Endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of a 

designated or proposed critical habitat. The BLM would not approve any ground-disturbing activity 

that may affect any such species or critical habitat until it completes its obligations under applicable 

requirements of the ESA, including completion of any required procedure for conference or 

consultation.

Cultural Resource Protection Stipulation – This lease may be found to contain historic properties 

and/or resources protected under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), American Indian 

Religious Freedom Act, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, Executive Order 

13007, or other statutes and executive orders. The BLM would not approve any ground-disturbing 

activities that may affect any such properties or resources until it completes its obligations under 

applicable requirements of the NHPA and other authorities. The BLM may require modification to 

exploration or development proposals to protect such properties, or disapprove any activity that is 

likely to result in adverse effects that cannot be successfully avoided, minimized, or mitigated.

LE-CA-MA-3. Exceptions, waivers, and modifications may not be made for the following lease

stipulations:

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Special Status Species Habitat: ESA Section 7 Consultation

and

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Cultural Resources: Cultural Resource Protection Stipulation.

LE-CA-MA-4. Lease stipulations, conditions of approval, and actions would be developed to achieve 

resource objectives on a site-specific basis. 
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-154

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

o

•

LE-CA-MA-5. Mineral leasing and development decisions also apply to geophysical exploration.

LE-CA-MA-6. Exploration and development of non-energy leasable minerals would follow standard

stipulations outlined above; additional stipulations would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

LE-CA-MA-7. Leasable mineral development activities would avoid special status species habitat if the 

activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. Permits would 

include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

LE-CA-MA-8. For those leasable mineral development activities conducted pursuant to valid existing 

rights that pose risks to achievement of management objectives, use existing authorities to mitigate 

and/or require, to the extent authorized, design features that would contribute to the maintenance of 

streambanks, shorelines, streambed configuration, water quality, amount and distribution of woody 

debris, thermal regulation, characteristic erosion rates, and amount and distribution of source habitats.

LE-CA-MA-9. Locate leasable mineral project related infrastructure outside RCAs. Where there is no 

alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. Keep the number of roads 

to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission and revegetate roads no 

longer required for mineral management and related activities.

LE-CA-MA-10. New leasable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LE-CA-MA-11. Develop inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for leasable mineral activities

within or affecting RCAs. Evaluate and apply the results of inspection and monitoring to modify mineral 

plans, leases, or permits as needed to achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

LE-II-MA-1. Exceptions, waivers, or modifications may be made for lease stipulations as described below:

NSO Stipulation for Oregon NHT Protective zone– Surface occupancy is not allowed within the 

Oregon NHT protective zone. 

Exception: After coordination with State Historic Preservation Officer, the BLM authorized officer

may grant an exception if an environmental review demonstrates the action as proposed or 

conditioned would not impair the integrity of the trail.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may grant a waiver if an environmental review demonstrates

the action as proposed or conditioned would only impact non-contributing trail segments.

Modification: This stipulation may not be modified.

NSO Stipulation for Eligible and Suitable WSR corridors – Surface occupancy would not be allowed 

within the corridors of eligible, suitable, and designated WSR corridors.

Exception: The BLM authorized officer may grant an exception if an environmental review 

demonstrates the action as proposed or conditioned would not impair the area’s outstandingly 

remarkable values (ORVs) or its free-flowing nature.

Waiver: This authorized officer may grant a waiver if the environmental analysis finds a portion of 

the area does not contain the ORVs for which it was designated.

Modification: This stipulation may not be modified.

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Riparian Areas and Wetlands – Surface use within RCAs must 

be consistent with the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

Salable Minerals

Salable minerals include minerals and building materials such as sand, stone, gravel, pumice, pumicite, 

cinders, and clay.

Goal

SA-CA-G-1. Provide salable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other 

resources.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Resource Uses

2-155

•

•

•

Objective

SA-II-O-1. Provide salable minerals needed for community and economic purposes and facilitate their 

reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound development where available and compatible with 

resource objectives.

Allocations

SA-CA-A-1. The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone and the Kelton and Toana Freight 

Road protective corridors (27,000 acres) would be closed to new salable mineral development. See NHTCA-MA-8 and CR-CA-MA-12. 

SA-II-A-1. The majority of the planning area would be open to salable mineral development (1,282,000 

acres), subject to site-specific NEPA analysis, stipulations, and 43 CFR 3600 regulations, except for the 

following areas which are closed to salable mineral exploration and development (62,000 acres):

The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, 

 The Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area, and

Designated Wild and Scenic River corridors.

See Map 124 for locations of salable mineral allocations.

Management Actions

SA-C-MA-1. Promote the use of existing sites for mineral disposals. 

SA-C-MA-2. Exploration would be allowed where appropriate under a letter of authorization from the BLM 

authorized officer. Exploration for new sites would be the responsibility of the applicant. 

SA-CA-MA-1. Salable mineral development activities would avoid special status species habitat if the 

activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. Permits would 

include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

SA-CA-MA-2. All mineral material sites would be reclaimed in accordance with resource objectives for the 

adjacent area as specified in the permit.

SA-CA-MA-3. Site specific terms, conditions, and special considerations would be included in all 

commercial salable mineral permits to protect resource values.

SA-CA-MA-4. Stipulations for community pits would be developed on a site-specific basis. 

SA-CA-MA-5. For those salable mineral development activities conducted pursuant to valid existing rights 

that pose risks to achievement of goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands, use existing 

authorities to mitigate and/or require, to the extent authorized, design features that would contribute to the 

maintenance of streambanks, shorelines, streambed configuration, water quality, amount and distribution 

of woody debris, thermal regulation, characteristic erosion rates, and amount and distribution of source 

habitats.

SA-CA-MA-6. Locate salable mineral project related infrastructure outside Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs). Where there is no alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. 

Keep the number of roads to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission

and revegetate roads no longer required for mineral management and related activities.

SA-CA-MA-7. New salable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs. 

SA-II-MA-1. New sites may be developed if it is determined by the BLM authorized officer that an existing 

site would not meet the applicant’s needs and site impacts can be minimized. 
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-156

•

•

•

•

Locatable Minerals

Minerals or materials subject to claim and development under the Mining Law of 1872, as amended. 

Generally includes metallic minerals such as gold and silver, and other materials not subject to lease or 

sale (some bentonites, limestone, talc, some xeolites, etc.).

Goal

LO-CA-G-1. Locatable mineral development would not cause unnecessary and undue degradation of 

resources. 

Objective

LO-CA-O-1. Facilitate reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound exploration and development 

of locatable minerals. 

Allocations

LO-C-A-1. The planning area, excluding the following withdrawn areas (60,000 acres), would be available 

for location of mining claims: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and 

 Designated Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridors.

LO-II-A-1. Recommend the following areas for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable exploration and 

development (26,000 acres):

The Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone and 

Eligible and suitable WSR corridors.

See Map 131 for locations of areas recommended for withdrawal and withdrawn by statute. 

Recommendations by BLM for withdrawal are subject to final consideration by the Secretary of the 

Interior.

Management Actions

LO-CA-MA-1. Determine whether locatable mineral plans of operation cause unnecessary and undue 

degradation to resources, including habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species, on a caseby-case basis and identify stipulations or mitigation measures as appropriate. 

LO-CA-MA-2. Locate mineral project related infrastructure outside Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs). 

Where there is no alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. Keep the 

number of roads to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission and 

revegetate roads no longer required for mineral management and related activities.

LO-CA-MA-3. New locatable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LO-CA-MA-4. Develop inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for locatable mineral activities

within or affecting RCAs. Evaluate and apply the results of inspection and monitoring to modify mineral 

plans, leases, or permits as needed to achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Special Designations

2-157

•

•

•

2.4.4 Special Designations

2.4.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 

No ACECs would be designated.

2.4.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 

Goal

NHT-CA-G-1. The Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor would be managed to preserve and 

protect the historic, scenic, and recreational values associated with the trail. 

Objective

NHT-CA-O-1. Protect, preserve, and provide opportunities to experience the historic, scenic, and 

recreational values of the Oregon NHT.

Allocation

NHT-II-A-1. Manage 0.25 mile on either side of the Oregon NHT as the National Trail Management 

Corridor and the Oregon NHT protective zone (11,000 acres). 

See Map 143 for the location of the Oregon NHT.

Management Actions

NHT-CA-MA-1. Update the BLM’s 1984 Oregon Trail Management Plan and ensure consistency with the 

National Park Service’s 1999 Oregon NHT Comprehensive Management and Use Plan.

NHT-CA-MA-2. Until the 1984 plan is updated and unless otherwise directed in this document, continue 

to manage the Trail in accordance with the 1984 plan and BLM policy, and in cooperation with the 

National Park Service.

NHT-CA-MA-3. Manage the Oregon NHT protective zone as an avoidance area for surface-disturbing 

activities, including: 

 Placement of salting, supplemental feeding, temporary watering, and temporary holding facilities for 

livestock;

Staging areas for recreational activities and events; and

Staging areas for fire suppression and rehabilitation activities.

NHT-CA-MA-4. If use of a designated route within the Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor

is degrading the trail or its setting, the route would be modified or closed.

NHT-CA-MA-5. Design and implement restoration projects to mitigate the effects of natural and humancaused disturbances within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor. When practical, remove or 

modify visually intrusive facilities within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor. 

NHT-CA-MA-6. Lands within the Oregon NHT protective zone are not available for disposal; non-BLM 

lands within the corridor are a high priority for acquisition.

NHT-CA-MA-7. The Oregon NHT protective zone is open to leasable mineral exploration and 

development with no surface occupancy. 

NHT-CA-MA-8. The Oregon NHT protective zone is closed to new salable mineral development. Existing 

salable mineral developments could be renewed but the footprint could not be expanded.
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-158

•

•

•

NHT-CA-MA-9. Adverse effects to the Oregon NHT related to land use authorizations would be prevented 

through avoidance of impacting activities or through mitigation when disturbance or destruction is 

unavoidable. 

NHT-CA-MA-10. Developments such as roads, trails, pipelines, fences, and powerlines may be allowed 

to cross the Oregon NHT where the project is determined by the BLM, with the State Historic Preservation 

Officer concurrence, to not adversely affect the trail due to previous disturbance or visual intrusions.

NHT-CA-MA-11. Surface-disturbing equipment, such as bulldozers and road graders, cannot be used on 

contributing segments of the Oregon NHT, or within the protective zone of such segments, unless to 

protect life or property.

NHT-CA-MA-12. Use techniques that minimize surface disturbance within the Oregon NHT protective 

zone during seeding projects (Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation, fuels treatments, 

or restoration). Trail remnants would not be disturbed during seeding operations.

NHT-CA-MA-13. Use educational and public outreach programs to minimize or prevent human-caused 

damage to the Oregon NHT including vandalism, unauthorized surface collection of artifacts, and 

unintentional disturbances.

NHT-CA-MA-14. Install and maintain signs identifying the routes of the Oregon NHT.

2.4.4.3 Wilderness 

Goal and Objective

WD-C-G-1. Manage the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to protect wilderness values.

Management Action

WD-C-MA-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness was designated by Congress in 2009 with the 

Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009, Section G, P.L. 111-11. The 90,000 acre BruneauJarbidge Rivers Wilderness Area (63,000 acres within the planning area) would be managed according to 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan. 

See Map 145 for the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness location.

2.4.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 

Goal and Objective

WSR-C-G-1. Maintain or enhance the outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs), free-flowing condition, 

and water quality of designated, suitable, and eligible WSR segments.

Allocations

WSR-C-A-1. River segments designated as Wild and Scenic include:

A 38.1-mile segment of the Bruneau River from the downstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness to the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau River, except for a 0.5-mile 

segment at the Indian Hot Springs public road access, to be administered as a wild river; 

A 0.5-mile segment of the Bruneau River at the Indian Hot Springs public road access to be 

administered as a recreational river; 

A 0.3-mile segment of the West Fork of the Bruneau River from the confluence with the Jarbidge 

River to the downstream boundary of the Bruneau Canyon Grazing Allotment to be administered as a 

wild river; and
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Special Designations

2-159

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

A 27.9-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau 

River to the upstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to be administered as a 

wild river.

WSR-C-A-2. Segments recommended suitable for inclusion in the WSR system include:

A 23.0-mile segment of the Bruneau River from Blackrock Crossing to 0.3 mile above the confluence 

of the West Fork of the Bruneau River and the Jarbidge River.

WSR-C-A-3. Segments eligible for inclusion in the WSR system include: 

A 39.0-mile segment of Salmon Falls Creek from the Nevada border to Salmon Falls Reservoir and 

from Salmon Falls Dam to Balanced Rock Park; 

 A 25.0-mile segment of the Three Island, King Hill, and Hagerman reaches of the Snake River; 

A 10.2-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the planning area boundary to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 9.6-mile segment of the Jarbidge River, East Fork from the planning area boundary to Murphy Hot 

Springs and from Murphy Hot Springs to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 2.7-mile segment of Dave Creek from private land boundary to Jarbidge River, East Fork 

confluence;

A 1.0-mile segment of Cougar Point Creek from the planning area boundary to Jarbidge River, East 

Fork confluence; and 

A 1.5-mile segment of Rocky Canyon Creek from its headwaters to Salmon Falls Creek, North Fork 

confluence.

See Map 146 for locations of designated, suitable, and eligible river segments.

WSR-C-A-4. Wild and Scenic River corridors are designated to extend either the average distance of 

0.25 mile from the high water mark on each side of the river segment; or the distance to the nearest 

confined canyon rim, whichever is shorter.

WSR-C-A-5. Wild and Scenic River corridors that are suitable or eligible extend outward from the ordinary 

high water mark 0.25 mile on both sides of the river.

Management Actions

WSR-C-MA-1. Manage the designated segments of the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers in accordance with 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan to maintain or 

enhance their ORVs, free-flowing condition, water quality, and classification.

WSR-C-MA-2. Manage the suitable segment of the Bruneau River to maintain or enhance its ORVs, freeflowing condition, water quality, and tentative classification until Congress acts.

WSR-C-MA-3. Protect or enhance the qualifying values of eligible river segments pending a subsequent 

suitability determination or designation decision by Congress. Their free-flowing condition cannot be 

modified, their ORVs and water quality are to be maintained or enhanced, and their tentative classification 

is to be maintained.

WSR-C-MA-4. Conduct suitability studies and make suitability determinations on eligible river segments 

entirely within the planning area; coordinate suitability studies on segments forming the boundary with the 

Burley and Shoshone Field Offices. 

WSR-C-MA-5. The existing powerline south of Murphy Hot Springs on the East Fork of the Jarbidge River 

would be retained; designated, suitable, and eligible WSR corridors would be right-of-way avoidance 

areas. 
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Social and Economic Features

2-160

WSR-C-MA-6. If, through legislation, Congress decides not to designate a suitable segment as part of the 

Wild and Scenic River System, the protective management outlined in this section would no longer apply 

and these segments would be managed according to direction in other sections of the RMP. 

WSR-II-MA-1. Eligible and suitable WSR corridors would be open to salable mineral development.

WSR-II-MA-2. Eligible and suitable WSR corridors would be open to mineral leasing with no surface 

occupancy.

2.4.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs)

Goal and Objective

WSA-C-G-1. Manage and protect the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA to preserve wilderness 

characteristics so as not to impair the suitability for designation by Congress as wilderness.

Allocation

WSA-C-A-1. Manage 2,000 acres of public land as the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA. 

See Map 145 for the WSA location.

Management Actions

WSA-C-MA-1. Manage the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA according to the Management of Wilderness 

Study Areas (BLM Manual 6330) until Congress either designates the land as wilderness or releases it for 

other uses. 

WSA-C-MA-2. If the WSA is designated by Congress as Wilderness, manage it according to 

Congressional mandates and BLM’s Wilderness Manual 6340 until a Wilderness Management Plan is 

developed.

WSA-C-MA-3. If the WSA is released for other uses by Congress, manage the lands within the Area of 

Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) and Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridor according to 

management specified for that ACEC and WSR corridor.

2.4.5 Social and Economic Features

2.4.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 

Goal

SE-CA-G-1. Management of the resources and uses of public lands would provide social and economic 

benefits to residents, businesses, visitors, and future generations.

Objective

SE-CA-O-1. Provide opportunities for economic and social benefit while maintaining natural and cultural 

resource values. 

Management Actions

SE-CA-MA-1. Planning for BLM management activities and authorized uses would consider whether the 

activity or action could be designed to support the social, economic, and environmental health and 

sustainability of affected communities of place.

SE-CA-MA-2. Consider proposals from communities of place and interest that contribute to their social, 

economic, and environmental health and sustainability. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative II

Social and Economic Features

2-161

2.4.5.2 Hazardous Materials

Goal

HM-CA-G-1. Ensure hazardous substances on public lands remain a high priority for removal or 

mitigation. 

Objective

HM-CA-O-1. Mitigate issues related to hazardous substances. 

Management Actions

HM-CA-MA-1. Storage, treatment, or disposal of hazardous materials on public lands would not be 

allowed unless otherwise permitted by law. 

HM-CA-MA-2. Use law enforcement and public outreach to discourage the disposal of hazardous 

materials on public lands. 

HM-CA-MA-3. Storage and use of hazardous materials on public lands would not be allowed without BLM 

authorization.

HM-CA-MA-4. Responses to hazardous materials incidents and sites would be as outlined and approved 

by the latest contingency plans for hazardous materials incidents (e.g., 2013 Twin Falls District BLM 

Environmental Contingency Plan for Emergency Preparedness and Response to Oil and Hazardous 

Materials Incidents).

HM-CA-MA-5. Identify and mitigate illegal hazardous material disposal sites and hazardous materials 

spills in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations.

HM-CA-MA-6. Develop interagency agreements with local law enforcement agencies to facilitate the 

enforcement of illegal hazardous material disposal and hazardous material laws.

HM-CA-MA-7. Coordinate with local government agencies during hazardous material prevention and 

response activities.

2.4.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 

Goal and Objective

IOE-CA-G-1. Working with partners, provide interpretation, outreach, and environmental education to 

highlight the natural, cultural, and historic features of the planning area and to further resource protection 

and public safety. 

Management Actions

IOE-CA-MA-1. Focus education, interpretation, and outreach on resources and activities occurring within 

the planning area. 

IOE-CA-MA-2. Partner with the tribes and Federal, State, and local agencies to educate the public on 

resource protection through activities such as education tours; kiosks at major entrances to the planning 

area; interpretive signs at off-highway vehicle staging areas; information on the identification, control, and

prevention of noxious weeds and invasive plants; and programs such as Tread Lightly!® and Leave No 

Trace®. 

IOE-CA-MA-3. Create displays highlighting natural, cultural, and historic features of the planning area for 

use at area fairs, schools, public lands day, and other events. 

IOE-CA-MA-4. Participate in events that educate youth about natural resources.
Chapter 2: Alternative II Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Social and Economic Features

2-162

•

•

•

•

IOE-CA-MA-5. Minimize or prevent human-caused damage to public land resources, including vandalism, 

illegal dumping, and unauthorized surface collection of fossils and artifacts, through educational and 

interpretive outreach programs.

IOE-CA-MA-6. Foster the public's understanding of the role of fire in the ecosystem, the hazards 

associated with living in the Wildland Urban Interface, and wildland fire prevention and suppression 

activities through methods such as: 

 Using mass media, 

 Providing outreach to local groups, 

 Developing interpretive signs and kiosks, and

Participating in County Wildfire Protection Plans. 

IOE-CA-MA-7. Provide interpretation and education on unique resource areas such as the Oregon 

National Historic Trail, Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, Wilderness, Wilderness Study Areas, and 

Wild and Scenic Rivers.

IOE-CA-MA-8. Provide education and outreach on resource protection for recreational users. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Tribal Rights and Interests

2-163

2.5 ALTERNATIVE III

2.5.1 Tribal Rights and Interests

Goals and Objectives

TI-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to protect resources and values associated with Native American treaty 

rights. 

TI-CA-G-2. Manage natural and cultural resources of importance to the tribes in a manner that respects 

tribal beliefs, traditions, and values. 

TI-CA-G-3. Protect the physical condition of sacred sites and traditional cultural properties and preserve 

tribal access to such sites.

Management Actions

TI-CA-MA-1. Consult with the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes and Shoshone-Bannock Tribes in accordance with 

BLM policy and other authorities. Consultation would be an ongoing process between BLM and the tribes, 

within the context of general management of public lands and programs, as well as specific proposals 

that may affect natural and cultural resources of importance to the tribes.

TI-CA-MA-2. Identify the effects of decisions on vegetation, fish, wildlife, mineral, and water resources of 

importance to the tribes, through consultation, and seek ways to lessen or avoid impacts. 

TI-CA-MA-3. Work collaboratively with the tribes regarding the identification and management of 

traditional cultural properties. 

TI-CA-MA-4. Provide general information to staff and contractors regarding existing and historic uses of 

the planning area by the tribes, Federal government trust responsibilities, and the importance of Native 

American treaty rights in order to foster a greater understanding and appreciation of tribal rights and 

interests related to public land management. 

2.5.2 Resources

2.5.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 

Goal

AAV-CA-G-1. Ensure BLM management activities and authorized uses maintain the quality of the 

planning area's air resources.

Objective

AAV-CA-O-1. Maintain the quality of air resources and limit impacts to air quality to meet National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards and Idaho Department of Environmental Quality air quality standards. 

Management Actions

AAV-CA-MA-1. Manage the planning area airshed as Class II unless it is reclassified by the State 

through the process prescribed in the Clean Air Act.

AAV-CA-MA-2. Ensure BLM management activities and authorized uses, including prescribed fire, are 

designed to comply with Federal, State, and local air quality regulations, classifications, and standards.

AAV-CA-MA-3. Minimize impacts of smoke from prescribed fires to sensitive areas such as the Class I 

airshed of the Jarbidge Wilderness (on US Forest Service-managed land), non-attainment areas, and 

communities adjacent to the planning area. 
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-164

AAV-CA-MA-4. Coordinate with the Montana-Idaho Airshed Group Smoke Management Program or its 

equivalent for all actions related to prescribed fire. 

AAV-CA-MA-5. Develop dust abatement stipulations for BLM-authorized construction and maintenance 

activities that have the potential to exceed State of Idaho air quality standards.

AAV-CA-MA-6. Design BLM activities and authorized uses to minimize night time light intrusions (e.g., 

modifications to the structure and timing of lighting).

AAV-CA-MA-7. Design BLM activities and authorized uses to comply with State of Idaho requirements for 

noise management. 

2.5.2.2 Geologic Features 

Goal

GE-CA-G-1. Manage unique geologic features for their tribal, scientific, recreational, and educational 

values. 

Objective

GE-CA-O-1. Protect unique geologic features and provide opportunities for their use and enjoyment.

Management Actions

GE-CA-MA-1. Protect unique geologic features from human-caused damage or extraction. 

GE-CA-MA-2. Conduct and maintain a cave inventory with participation from the tribes and interested 

organizations to identify and compile quantitative and qualitative data on cave resources and to determine 

cave significance in accordance with the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988.

GE-CA-MA-3. Based on the results of the cave inventory, designate significant caves and protect their 

resources. 

GE-CA-MA-4. Set management objectives and setting prescriptions for significant caves.

2.5.2.3 Soil Resources 

Goal and Objective

SR-CA-G-1. Manage resources and uses to maintain or enhance biological and physical functions and 

stability of soils. 

Management Actions

SR-CA-MA-1. Minimize soil erosion by maintaining perennial vegetation cover based on site potential.

SR-CA-MA-2. Design construction, maintenance, and land treatments to reduce impacts to soils. 

SR-CA-MA-3. Collaborate with County Highway Districts to reduce impacts from road maintenance along 

stream corridors and in areas of highly erosive soils.

SR-CA-MA-4. Reduce the erosive effects of transportation and travel by modifying routes or mitigating 

the impacts (e.g., water bars or control structures) where problems are identified. 

SR-CA-MA-5. Revegetate or stabilize areas where BLM management activities or authorized uses have 

resulted in unanticipated erosion.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resources

2-165

SR-CA-MA-6. Where new road construction or reconstruction occurs, the location and design should 

minimize soil erosion, including closure or decommissioning of the road if the need for the road is 

temporary.

SR-CA-MA-7. Soil and snow should not be side cast into surface waters during road maintenance.

SR-III-MA-1. Mitigate impacts of BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses on soils 

with severe or very severe potential for wind erosion (218,000 acres; Map 4) or with high potential for 

water erosion (443,000 acres; Map 5) for watershed and ecosystem health.

SR-III-MA-2. Develop and implement an erosion control strategy for new land use authorizations, Special 

Recreation Permits, and mineral exploration and development involving surface disturbance on slopes 

greater than 20% or on soils with severe or very severe potential for wind erosion or with high potential for 

water erosion.

2.5.2.4 Water Resources

Goal

WR-CA-G-1. Maintain or improve the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of water resources.

Objective

WR-CA-O-1. Make progress towards meeting Federal and State water quality standards. 

Management Actions

WR-CA-MA-1. Priority streams for restoration of water quality include streams containing special status 

species and their habitat (Map 24), fish-bearing streams, and water quality impaired streams (Map 6). 

Map 6 displays the location of streams meeting these criteria in 2011; this map can be updated to reflect 

changes in a stream’s status through the life of the plan.

WR-CA-MA-2. Prevent or mitigate the impacts of BLM management activities and authorized and allowed 

uses on water quality to comply with Federal, State, and local water quality regulations.

WR-CA-MA-3. Modify or suspend BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses that are 

a factor in not meeting water quality standards.

WR-CA-MA-4. Where applicable, incorporate best management practices to maintain and improve water 

quality (Appendix B). Recommendations may be implemented from State water quality plans to achieve 

the goal and objective (e.g., Idaho Agricultural Pollution Abatement Plan).

WR-CA-MA-5. Consider new water development projects and improvements to existing water 

development projects if impacts to water and riparian resources can be mitigated; see the Livestock 

Grazing section for additional guidance on water developments. See the Wildland Fire Ecology and 

Management section for guidance on water developments for fire suppression activities.

WR-CA-MA-6. Consult or coordinate with the tribes and with Federal, State, and local agencies when 

determining location and designs for water development projects.

WR-CA-MA-7. Coordinate with Idaho Department of Water Resources, Idaho Department of 

Environmental Quality, and Nevada Division of Environmental Protection to identify opportunities to 

mitigate impacts of water management on public land resources.

WR-CA-MA-8. Where total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for water quality restoration are developed, 

land management activities would be consistent with the water quality restoration plan and TMDLs.
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-166

•

•

•

•

•

•

WR-CA-MA-9. Water bodies that are supporting beneficial uses (e.g., cold water biota, salmonid 

spawning, recreation, and agriculture) would be managed to meet or exceed State of Idaho and Nevada 

regulations.

WR-CA-MA-10. Consult or coordinate as appropriate with tribal, Federal, State, and local governments to 

identify and secure instream flows needed to maintain riparian resources, channel conditions, and aquatic 

habitat.

WR-CA-MA-11. Apply chemicals (i.e., herbicides, pesticides, insecticides, and other toxicants) in a 

manner that does not impair water quality or prevent attainment of objectives for riparian areas and 

wetlands and avoids adverse effects on inland non-game fish and their habitat. When applying chemicals

in a Riparian Conservation Area (RCA), a spill kit would be onsite as appropriate. Prohibit storing and 

mixing chemicals within RCAs unless there are no other practical alternatives.

WR-CA-MA-12. Prohibit storage of fuels and other toxicants and refueling within RCAs unless there are 

no other practical alternatives. Any refueling sites and/or storage areas within an RCA would have an 

approved refueling and spill containment plan.

2.5.2.5 Vegetation Communities

Upland Vegetation

The Upland Vegetation section outlines goals and objectives for vegetation treatments. Management 

actions for restoration treatments, treatments for annual communities, and treatments for perennial 

communities are described in this section. Treatments for weeds and fuels are in the Noxious Weeds and 

Invasive Plants and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

For management and analysis purposes, the 55 vegetation communities in the planning area were 

grouped into five vegetation sub-groups (VSGs; see the Upland Vegetation section in Chapter 3 for 

vegetation communities included in each VSG); Map 9 displays existing vegetation as of 2011. 

Vegetation communities were grouped into VSGs based on the dominant vegetation and community 

structure as well as similarity in management objectives:

Annual communities – dominated by invasive annual grasses; includes communities with and 

without a shrub overstory.

Non-Native Perennial communities – dominated by non-native perennial grasses; some also have 

an overstory of four-wing saltbush or rabbitbrush.

Non-Native Understory communities – dominated by non-native perennial grasses in the

understory; have an overstory of Wyoming big sagebrush, basin big sagebrush, black sagebrush, or 

low sage.

Native Grassland communities – dominated by native perennial grasses; do not have a shrub 

overstory.

Native Shrubland communities – dominated by native perennial grasses in the understory; have a 

shrub overstory; also includes aspen, juniper, and mountain mahogany communities which are 

present in small, scattered inclusions within other native shrubland communities.

Unvegetated areas – include breaks, barren areas, and sand dunes.

The planning area was divided into Vegetation Management Areas (VMAs) A, B, C, and D, creating westeast bands across the planning area based on potential natural community, elevation, and mean annual 

precipitation (Map 8). 

Goals

UV-CA-G-1. Manage upland vegetation communities to promote soil stability, water infiltration, nutrient 

cycling, and energy flow; provide habitat for sage-grouse and other sagebrush steppe obligates; and 

provide for multiple use.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resources

2-167

VMA A

A

B

A

B 

UV-III-G-1. Manage vegetation to reduce wildland fire size and intensity while maintaining habitat for 

sage-grouse. 

Objective

VMA A

UV-III-O-1. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 83,000 42,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 94,000 128,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 3,000 3,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 34,000 37,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 5,000 5,000

Unvegetated Areas 2,000 6,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Increase in unvegetated areas is approximate and would result from 

unvegetated fuel breaks.

Management Actions

VMA A

UV-III-MA-1. Treat at least 45% of annual communities with fire-tolerant, non-native perennial species 

between fuel breaks to reduce the fine fuel load.

UV-III-MA-2. Non-native perennial, non-native understory, native grassland, and native shrubland 

communities would not be a focus for vegetation treatments outside treatments discussed in the Noxious 

Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

UV-III-MA-3. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections.
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-168

VMA B

A

B

A

B 

Objective

VMA B

UV-III-O-2. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 39,000 10,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 212,000 242,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 19,000 19,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 211,000 96,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 125,000 230,000

Unvegetated Areas 24,000 33,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Increase in unvegetated areas is approximate and would result from 

unvegetated fuel breaks.

Management Actions

VMA B

UV-III-MA-4. Treat approximately 75% of annual communities with fire-tolerant non-native perennial 

species, focusing on areas adjacent to non-native perennial communities. 

UV-III-MA-5. Non-native perennial, non-native understory, and native shrubland communities would not 

be a focus for vegetation treatments outside treatments discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive 

Plants and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

UV-III-MA-6. Treat approximately 50% of native grassland communities to incorporate a shrub component 

to break up the continuity of grassland fuels. 

UV-III-MA-7. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resources

2-169

VMA C 

A

B

A

B 

Objective

VMA C

UV-III-O-3. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 2,000 2,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 46,000 49,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 26,000 26,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 150,000 68,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 78,000 152,000

Unvegetated Areas 11,000 16,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Increase in unvegetated areas is approximate and would result from 

unvegetated fuel breaks.

Management Actions

VMA C

UV-III-MA-8. Treatment of annual communities would be limited due to the location of these areas at 

canyon bottoms and within wilderness. Localized treatments may be used when necessary. 

UV-III-MA-9. Non-native perennial, non-native understory, and native shrubland communities would not 

be a focus for vegetation treatments outside treatments discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive 

Plants and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

UV-III-MA-10. Treat approximately 50% of native grassland communities to incorporate a shrub 

component to break up the continuity of grassland fuels. 

UV-III-MA-11. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-170

VMA D 

A

B

A

B 

Objective

VMA D

UV-III-O-4. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 1,000 250

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 4,000 6,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 12,000 11,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 80,000 57,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 97,000 119,000

Unvegetated Areas 11,000 12,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Increase in unvegetated areas is approximate and would result from 

unvegetated fuel breaks.

Management Actions

VMA D

UV-III-MA-12. Restore approximately 75% of annual communities to native grassland using fire-tolerant 

native species.

UV-III-MA-13. Non-native perennial, non-native understory, and native shrubland communities would not 

be a focus for vegetation treatments outside treatments discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive 

Plants and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

UV-III-MA-14. Treat approximately 30% of native grassland communities to incorporate a shrub 

component to break up the continuity of grassland fuels. 

UV-III-MA-15. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 

Management Actions

All VMAs

UV-CA-MA-1. Design BLM management activities and authorized uses to consider plant reproductive 

and physiological needs with a focus on the critical growing season, as well as vegetation objectives; 

guidelines for specific uses are found in the appropriate sections.

UV-CA-MA-2. Implement drought management guidelines during periods of drought to maintain or 

achieve long-term resource productivity (Appendix F).

UV-CA-MA-3. Rest vegetation treatment areas from uses, including but not limited to livestock and wild 

horse grazing and recreational use, until treatment objectives are met and are predicted to be 

sustainable. This management action would not apply to uses that do not conflict with the treatment 

objectives.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resources

2-171

•

•

•

•

UV-III-MA-16. The first priority for implementing vegetation treatments would be treatments identified for 

VMA A to help lengthen the fire return interval; the second priority would be treatments identified for VMA 

D to protect native shrubland communities. Opportunities for treatments outside these priority areas 

would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

UV-III-MA-17. Focus vegetation treatments identified for each VMA on protecting or restoring habitat for 

sage-grouse and other special status species.

UV-III-MA-18. The toolbox to restore or treat upland vegetation communities would include:

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; 

Targeted grazing; and 

Prescribed fire.

See the Glossary for definition of targeted grazing.

UV-III-MA-19. Fire-tolerant and fire-resistant species would have high priority for upland vegetation 

treatments. Treatments may use native species, including cultivars of native species, and non-native 

species, consistent with management actions to achieve vegetation objectives. 

UV-III-MA-20. Establish 75 ungrazed reference areas (3,000 acres total) in annual, non-native perennial, 

non-native understory, native grassland, and native shrubland communities (Map 13). Each reference 

area would be approximately 40 acres and would be paired with an adjacent grazed area in a similar 

vegetation type and condition to monitor the effects of livestock grazing on a variety of plant communities.

UV-III-MA-21. Treat areas disturbed during project construction, maintenance, or removal as appropriate 

to reduce wildland fire size and intensity.

Riparian Areas and Wetlands

Goal

RI-CA-G-1. Achieve healthy, functioning watersheds, riparian areas, wetlands, and associated aquatic 

habitats.

RI-CA-G-2. Provide habitat to support populations of well-distributed native and desired non-native plant, 

vertebrate, and invertebrate populations that contribute to the sustainability of riparian-dependent 

communities. 

RI-CA-G-3. Maintain or improve naturally functioning vegetation communities that include natural timing 

and variability of surface and groundwater in riparian areas and wetlands, and diversity and productivity of 

native and desired non-native plant communities.

Objectives

RI-III-O-1. Maintain 85 miles of Priority 3 streams at proper functioning condition (PFC); improve 77 miles 

of Priority 1 streams and 21 miles of Priority 2 streams to achieve PFC; and improve the remaining 42 

miles of Priority 2 streams to be moving toward PFC over the life of the plan. 

RI-III-O-2. Manage wetlands to move toward PFC.

Management Actions

RI-CA-MA-1. Identify Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) around riparian areas and wetlands that 

contain or are tributaries to streams that contain special status species or their habitat to protect riparian 

vegetation, fisheries, and water quality. RCA widths would be as follows:
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-172

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Category 1 – Fish-bearing streams: The RCA consists of the stream and the area on either side of 

the stream. This area extends from the edges of the active channel to the top of the inner gorge, to 

the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, or 300 feet 

slope distance (600 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), whichever is widest.

Category 2 – Permanently flowing non-fish-bearing streams: The RCA consists of the stream and the 

area on either side of the stream. This area extends from the edges of the active channel to the top of 

the inner gorge, to the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, to the outer edges of the riparian 

vegetation, or 150 feet slope distance (300 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), 

whichever is widest.

Category 3 – Ponds, lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands greater than one acre: The RCA consists of the 

body of water or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, to the extent of 

the seasonally saturated soil, or 150 feet slope distance from the edge of the maximum pool elevation 

of constructed ponds and reservoirs, or from the edge of the wetland, pond, or lake, whichever is 

widest.

Category 4 – Seasonally flowing or intermittent streams, wetlands less than one acre, landslides, and 

landslide-prone areas: This category includes features with high variability in size and site-specific 

characteristics. The RCA includes the intermittent stream channel and the area to the top of the inner 

gorge, the intermittent stream channel or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian 

vegetation, the area from the edges of the stream channel, wetland, or slide/landslide-prone area, or 

50 feet slope distance, whichever is widest.

RI-CA-MA-2. Use adaptive management to reduce impacts on riparian areas and wetlands from uses and 

activities (see the Aquatic and Riparian Management Strategy [ARMS], Appendix D). 

RI-CA-MA-3. Riparian management priorities would include the following:

Priority 1 streams – Streams rated as functioning-at-risk or functioning-at-risk with a downward 

trend. The management emphasis for Priority 1 streams would be restoration. 

Priority 2 streams – Streams rated as functioning-at-risk with an upward trend or non-functioning. 

The management emphasis for Priority 2 streams would be restoration.

Priority 3 streams – Streams rated at PFC. The management emphasis for Priority 3 streams would 

be on maintaining proper function.

Specific streams are prioritized in the ARMS (Appendix D, Tables D-3 and D-5).

RI-CA-MA-4. Assess condition of wetlands associated with ponds and springs.

RI-CA-MA-5. Survey aquatic habitat (instream, riparian, and wetland) and maintain aquatic habitat 

inventories.

RI-CA-MA-6. Consider authorizing activities or facilities where long-term benefits outweigh short-term 

impacts to riparian vegetation and fish habitat.

RI-CA-MA-7. Remove nonessential human-made structures and objects that adversely impact the 

function of floodplains (e.g., unused bridge abutments, unused diversions, abandoned cars).

RI-CA-MA-8. Modify existing management activities and authorized uses in RCAs to attain PFC and 

ensure that habitat conditions of streams, riparian areas, and wetlands are moving toward achieving the 

goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

RI-CA-MA-9. Conduct new management activities within or affecting RCAs only if they are consistent with 

achieving the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. New management activities would 

avoid or reduce adverse effects on inland non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs. 

RI-CA-MA-10. Trees may be felled in RCAs when they pose a safety risk. Keep felled trees on-site when 

needed to maintain or improve riparian or instream conditions. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resources

2-173

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

RI-CA-MA-11. Cooperate with tribal, Federal, State, and local agencies and private landowners to 

develop watershed-based coordinated resource management plans or other cooperative agreements to 

achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands.

RI-III-MA-1. Within the priorities identified in the ARMS (Appendix D, Table D-5), stream reaches/riparian 

areas with the potential to serve as fire breaks would be a high priority for restoration.

RI-III-MA-2. The toolbox for restoration of stream reaches would include, but not be limited to:

Culvert replacements, 

Closing pastures, 

Exclosure fencing, 

Modification of water developments, 

 Planting of riparian areas, 

Active herding, 

Reintroduction of beaver, 

Erosion control measures, 

Riparian pastures, 

Instream fish habitat improvements, and 

Modification or elimination of land uses that prevent attainment of the goals and objectives for riparian 

areas and wetlands. 

The toolbox would not include:

Removal of water developments or 

Road closures.

RI-III-MA-3. Conduct multiple indicator surveys on riparian areas according to BLM policy.

RI-III-MA-4. Establish 10 ungrazed riparian reference areas (1,000 acres total; Map 13). Each reference 

area would be paired with an adjacent grazed area in a similar vegetation type and condition to monitor 

the effects of livestock grazing on a variety of plant communities.

2.5.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 

Fish

Native aquatic species in the planning area can be described in three broad categories:

Aquatic species Federally listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973,

Aquatic species identified on the BLM Sensitive species list for Idaho and Nevada, and

Other non-game fish present in the planning area.

Aquatic species included in the first two categories are discussed in the Special Status Species section. 

The goals, objectives, and management actions for other non-game fish (i.e. sculpin, suckers, and 

minnows) are provided below. For a majority of the streams within the planning area, the habitat needs 

for non-game fish are met through goals, objectives, and management actions for special status species 

in riparian areas, wetlands, and streams. The goals, objectives, and management actions below 

encompass the streams containing only non-game fish.

Goal

FI-III-G-1. Manage public lands to maintain habitat for fish while reducing wildland fire size and intensity.
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-174

Objective

FI-III-O-1. Maintain or improve all non-game fish-bearing streams so they remain or are moving toward 

properly functioning condition. 

Management Actions

FI-CA-MA-1. Maintain, improve, or restore native non-game fish habitat through actions identified for 

riparian areas, water resources, and special status species through restoration priorities in the Aquatic 

and Riparian Management Strategy (ARMS; Appendix D). Incorporate best management practices to 

maintain and improve habitat for non-game fish (Appendix B).

FI-CA-MA-2. Inventory and monitor non-game fish habitat. Use adaptive management as outlined in the 

ARMS to minimize impacts to non-game fish habitat from uses and activities (Appendix D).

FI-CA-MA-3. Activities within riparian areas and wetlands would be designed to mitigate impacts to the 

riparian and aquatic habitat(s) containing non-game fish. 

FI-CA-MA-4. To avoid adverse effects on non-game fish and instream flows, locate water drafting sites in 

upland areas (e.g., stock ponds, storage tanks, hydrants). Where these water sources are not available, 

locate water drafting sites at existing stream road crossings (e.g., bridges, culverts, fords) to divert water

in a manner that does not retard or prevent achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas 

and wetlands. 

FI-CA-MA-5. Design and implement watershed restoration projects in a manner that promotes the longterm ecological integrity of ecosystems, conserves the genetic integrity of non-game fish species, and 

contributes to the achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

FI-CA-MA-6. New fisheries and instream channel restoration projects would avoid or minimize adverse 

effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and Riparian Conservation Areas. 

FI-CA-MA-7. Cooperate with Federal and State fish management agencies to identify and reduce 

adverse effects on non-game fish associated with habitat manipulation, fish stocking, fish harvest, and 

illegal harvest.

Wildlife

Goal

WI-III-G-1. Manage public lands to maintain habitat for wildlife while reducing wildland fire size and 

intensity.

Objective

WI-III-O-1. Maintain wildlife habitat in native communities while reducing wildland fire size and intensity 

throughout the planning area.

Management Actions

WI-CA-MA-1. When making management decisions affecting big game, use the most current big game 

winter range map provided by Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) and the Nevada Department 

of Wildlife. Areas considered big game winter range as of 2011 are shown on Map 17. 

WI-CA-MA-2. Implement habitat projects to maintain or improve habitat for mule deer and pronghorn 

when and where needed. 

WI-CA-MA-3. Under Executive Order 13186, promote the maintenance and improvement of migratory 

bird habitat quantity and quality through the permitting process for all land use authorizations. Avoid, 

reduce, or mitigate adverse impacts on the habitats of migratory bird species of conservation concern to 

the extent feasible, and in a manner consistent with regional or statewide bird conservation priorities.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resources

•

•

•

•

2-175

WI-CA-MA-4. Incorporate best management practices (BMPs) for wildlife into BLM management activities 

and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B). Specific BMPs would be applied at the project level.

WI-CA-MA-5. Install and maintain BLM approved wildlife escape devices on troughs and open tanks.

WI-CA-MA-6. Modify existing and construct new fences to comply with BLM standards for wildlife 

(Karsky, 1999). Existing fences would be modified according to the following priority order: 

Key sage-grouse habitat, 

Big game winter range, 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, and

The remainder of the planning area. 

WI-CA-MA-7. Schedule construction and maintenance activities to avoid or minimize disturbance to 

priority species and their habitat during their important seasonal periods (see WI-III-MA-1 for a list of 

priority species). 

WI-CA-MA-8. Schedule energy-related activities (e.g., exploration, development, and maintenance) to 

avoid or minimize disturbance to priority species and their habitat during important seasonal periods. 

WI-III-MA-1. Sage-grouse and other special status species are priority species for habitat management.

Special status species management is discussed in the Special Status Species section.

WI-III-MA-2. Reconfigure wildlife tracts to reduce conflicts with uses, to improve management efficiency, 

and to increase the average size of individual tracts (from 13,000 acres to 14,000 acres; Map 18). 

Prepare a new plan for joint IDFG-BLM management of wildlife tracts through a public process and to 

obtain partners for projects to improve wildlife values.

WI-III-MA-3. Minimize disturbance to raptors by restricting construction or other authorized human 

activities both spatially and seasonally. Restrictions would be required during courtship and nesting

(February 1 through July 31) and applied as appropriate. Buffer distances from raptor nests during 

nesting would be as follows (Whittington and Allen, 2008):

Raptor Species Spatial Buffer

Bald eagle 0.5 to 1.0 mile

Northern goshawk 0.50 mile

Ferruginous hawk 1.00 mile

Golden eagle 0.50 mile

Peregrine falcon 1.00 mile

Red-tailed hawk 0.33 mile

Prairie falcon 0.50 mile

Swainson’s hawk 0.25 mile

Burrowing owl 0.25 mile

2.5.2.7 Special Status Species

Goal

SS-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to contribute to the conservation and recovery of sage-grouse and 

other special status species. 

Objective

SS-III-O-1. Maintain or improve the quality of habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species by 

managing public land activities to sustain or benefit those species. 
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-176

•

•

•

Management Actions

SS-C-MA-1. Follow conservation measures in relevant biological opinions and letters of concurrence, as 

appropriate. Conservation measures in place as of 2012 can be found in Appendix E; conservation 

measures can be updated, revised, or replaced through future consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife 

Service.

SS-CA-MA-1. Special status species management would apply to Endangered, Threatened, Candidate, 

and Proposed species (Type 1 BLM Sensitive); other BLM Sensitive species (Types 2 through 4); and 

proposed or designated critical habitat; this includes plants, fish and other aquatic species, and wildlife. 

SS-CA-MA-2. Special status species management would not apply to species that are removed from the 

BLM Sensitive species list. Those species would be managed according to applicable delisting 

requirements, conservation strategies, BLM guidance, and Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) 

or Nevada Department of Wildlife management guidance.

SS-CA-MA-3. Management of one special status species would take into account the needs of other 

special status species.

SS-CA-MA-4. Follow applicable conservation plans, strategies, and agreements for special status 

species (Appendix E). 

SS-CA-MA-5. Monitor special status species and their habitats, and maintain data on their populations, 

distribution, and habitats. Use adaptive management or mitigation to reduce impacts on special status 

species and their habitats from uses and activities.

SS-CA-MA-6. Work cooperatively with tribes, Federal and State agencies, private landowners, and 

companies to identify and mitigate threats to special status species and habitat on BLM-managed lands. 

SS-III-MA-1. Where alternative management strategies would result in the same relative effect to a 

species, implement those strategies most beneficial to fire suppression and prevention activities, where 

practical.

SS-III-MA-2. Reintroductions of special status species would be limited to species listed under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) as Threatened or Endangered and species that are Proposed or 

Candidates for listing under ESA.

Management Related to Resource Uses

SS-CA-MA-7. Leasable and salable mineral development activities should avoid special status species 

habitat if the activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. 

Permits would include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

SS-CA-MA-8. Promote conservation and recovery of special status species through land actions such as:

Conservation easements that protect or conserve special status species habitat,

Land acquisitions or exchanges that improve management of special status species, and

Acquisition of lands with a high value for special status species.

SS-CA-MA-9. New communication sites would avoid special status species habitat if the project would 

have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be reduced. 

SS-CA-MA-10. Right-of-way construction and maintenance activities should avoid disturbing special 

status species during important seasonal periods, unless the disturbance can be mitigated.

SS-III-MA-3. Adjust livestock use levels, season of use, or other management techniques to maintain or 

enhance special status species and their habitat.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resources

2-177

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

SS-III-MA-4. Construct, maintain, modify, or remove range infrastructure and other facilities as necessary 

to maintain special status species and their habitat.

Management for Special Status Species in Upland Areas

SS-CA-MA-11. Manage native shrubland communities in a landscape context to ensure that the seasonal 

habitat needs of sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate species are met across the planning area, 

where site conditions are suitable.

SS-CA-MA-12. Mark fences that have been identified as a collision risk to improve fence visibility for 

sage-grouse, using appropriate collision diverters or other reasonable approaches. Fences posing higher 

risks to sage-grouse are generally within 1.25 miles of a lek and are:

On flat topography,

Where spans exceed 12 feet between T-posts,

Without wooden posts, or

Where fence densities exceed 1.6 miles of fence per section (640 acres) (Stevens et al., 2011). 

SS-CA-MA-13. Maintain or improve the habitat for special status species by protecting and restoring their 

habitat, controlling noxious weeds and invasive plants, and minimizing direct habitat disturbance.

SS-CA-MA-14. When designing seed mixes for vegetation treatments and surface-disturbing projects, 

consider the needs of special status species and their habitat in the project area.

SS-CA-MA-15. Use seeding methods that minimize impacts to special status species populations.

SS-CA-MA-16. If a conflict between authorized uses and bighorn sheep is identified, schedule authorized 

uses to avoid pastures that contain bighorn sheep habitat during breeding, wintering, and lambing periods 

to minimize disturbance during these important seasonal periods.

SS-CA-MA-17. Avoid locating new transmission lines, phone lines, or communication towers/facilities in 

native shrubland and native grassland communities to minimize impacts to sage-grouse. If a transmission 

or phone line project must be located in sage-grouse habitat, the project should incorporate measures to 

reduce impacts to sage-grouse such as: 

Burying lines;

Using devices or structure design to deter raptor and raven perching and nesting; 

Avoiding construction and maintenance during important seasonal periods for sage-grouse; 

 Restoring or improving sage-grouse habitat outside the project area; 

Constructing lines, towers, and related facilities in lower quality habitats; and

Clustering or co-locating facilities.

SS-III-MA-5. Avoid locating new transmission and phone lines in native shrubland and native grassland 

communities to minimize impacts to sage-grouse. If a transmission or phone line project must be located 

in sage-grouse habitat, the project should incorporate measures to reduce impacts to sage-grouse such 

as: 

Burying lines,

Using devices to deter raptor perching,

Avoiding construction and maintenance during important seasonal periods for sage-grouse, and

 Restoring or improving sage-grouse habitat outside the project area.

SS-III-MA-6. Implement management actions described in the Upland Vegetation and the Wildland Fire 

Ecology and Management sections to maintain or improve habitat for sage-grouse and other special 

status species. Upland vegetation management to benefit sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate 

special status species includes, but is not limited to:

Introducing shrubs to native grassland communities and 
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-178

•

•

•

•

•

Protecting islands of sagebrush habitat through extensive fuel breaks.

See the Upland Vegetation section for more details.

SS-III-MA-7. BLM management activities and authorized uses within one mile of known ferruginous hawk 

or prairie falcon nests would be designed to minimize impacts to their prey base and availability of nesting 

material from February through July.

SS-III-MA-8. Keep existing troughs and reservoirs in bighorn sheep habitat.

SS-III-MA-9. Keep existing fences and corrals in bighorn sheep habitat.

SS-III-MA-10. New troughs, reservoirs, permanent fences, and corrals can be located within bighorn 

sheep habitat if they do not conflict with bighorn sheep.

SS-III-MA-11. Trailing of domestic sheep or goats through bighorn sheep habitat would follow BLM policy.

SS-III-MA-12. Conversions from cattle to domestic sheep or goats in allotments containing bighorn sheep 

habitat would follow BLM policy.

Management for Special Status Species in Riparian Areas, Wetlands, and Streams

SS-CA-MA-18. Incorporate best management practices as appropriate to maintain and improve habitat 

for special status fish and aquatic invertebrates (Appendix B).

SS-CA-MA-19. Identify and eliminate, where feasible, migration barriers to special status fish species 

movement.

SS-CA-MA-20. Identify and implement specific habitat improvement projects in redband trout habitat to 

reduce habitat fragmentation and promote their long-term recovery. Projects may include, but not be 

limited to:

Replacing culverts,

Working with private landowners so diversions are not a barrier,

Screening diversions, and

Planting riparian vegetation.

SS-CA-MA-21. Implement specific habitat improvement projects for Jarbidge River bull trout (bull trout) as 

identified in the Recovery Plan for the Jarbidge River Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout.

Additional management direction for BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses in 

special status species habitat can be found in the Resource Uses sections.

2.5.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 

Goal

NW-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to prevent, eliminate, or control noxious weeds and invasive plants.

Objectives

Noxious Weeds

NW-III-O-1. Manage uses and treat noxious weeds such that there is no net increase in the number of 

acres containing noxious weeds; reduce the number of noxious weed species present.

Invasive Plants

NW-III-O-2. Reduce cover of invasive plants in native communities to less than 5%; reduce cover of 

invasive plants in non-native perennial and non-native understory communities to less than 5%.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resources

2-179

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Management Actions

NW-CA-MA-1. Apply herbicides consistent with BLM policy.

NW-CA-MA-2. Inventory noxious weeds and invasive plants. 

NW-CA-MA-3. Consult with the tribes on herbicide use to consider timing of projects and impacts to 

plants of importance to the tribes.

NW-CA-MA-4. Formulate methods of control in or near special status species habitat on a site-specific

and species-specific basis to minimize impacts to special status species. 

NW-CA-MA-5. Incorporate best management practices for noxious weeds and invasive plants into BLM 

management activities and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B).

NW-CA-MA-6. Include site-specific stipulations in land use authorizations, permits, and leases to limit 

introduction and spread of noxious weeds.

NW-CA-MA-7. Collaborate with Federal agencies, State and County governments, non-governmental 

organizations, and individuals to establish a Jarbidge Cooperative Weed Management Area or other 

cooperative agreements for noxious weed and invasive plants management. 

NW-CA-MA-8. Use of certified weed-free forage, seed, straw, and mulch (as defined in the Idaho Noxious 

Weed Free Forage and Straw Certification Rules [IAC 02.06.31]) would be required for all BLM 

management activities and authorized and allowed uses. 

NW-III-MA-1. Treat areas containing noxious weeds and invasive plants. Priority areas would include (not 

in priority order): 

Special designations,

Fuel breaks, 

Areas with high wildland fire occurrence, 

Areas around historic structures, 

Roadsides, and 

Special status species habitat.

NW-III-MA-2. Focus control efforts on species that decrease the fire return interval or contribute to high 

fuel loads. Eradicate noxious weeds and invasive plants where practical. Focus treatments for large 

infestations on reducing the size of the infestation.

NW-III-MA-3. The toolbox for treating noxious weeds and invasive plants would include: 

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; 

Targeted grazing; and 

Prescribed fire.

NW-III-MA-4. Develop and implement activities to prevent the introduction and spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants on public lands. The toolbox for preventing introduction and spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants would include:

Public outreach (e.g., kiosks, media, mailings, publications, brochures);

Wash stations; and 

Modifying uses to minimize new introductions and spread (e.g., quarantining livestock, closing 

pastures, closing roads, not authorizing Special Recreation Permits in highly infested areas).
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-180

•

•

•

2.5.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Wildland Fire Management

Goal

WFM-CA-G-1. Fire management strategies would result in firefighter and public safety and protection of 

property and natural and cultural resources, while considering suppression and rehabilitation costs.

Objective

WFM-III-O-1. Strive to reduce average wildland fire size, number of human-caused fire starts, and 

number of acres burned within and outside the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) throughout the planning 

area.

Allocations

WFM-CA-A-1. The planning area would not be available for Wildland Fire Use (1,371,000 acres).

WFM-III-A-1. Critical suppression areas within the planning area would be (476,000 acres): 

WUI,

Bruneau-Jarbidge and Salmon Falls Creek Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs), and 

Key sage-grouse habitat.

The types of critical suppression areas would remain the same throughout the life of the plan; however, 

the acres and specific locations for the WUI and key sage-grouse habitat can be updated to reflect 

changing conditions. See Map 32 for the locations of these areas in 2011. 

WFM-III-A-2. The remainder of the planning area would be a conditional suppression area (895,000 

acres). 

Management Actions

WFM-C-MA-1. Fire management within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness is addressed in the 

Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan.

WFM-CA-MA-1. All wildland fires in critical or conditional suppression areas would receive an Appropriate 

Management Response (AMR). AMR includes any action taken to meet resource objectives identified in 

RMPs and Fire Management Plans (FMPs). AMR ranges across a spectrum of tactical operations (from 

monitoring to aggressive/intensive suppression actions). 

WFM-CA-MA-2. Critical suppression areas represent highest suppression priority. The AMR in critical 

suppression areas assumes suppression actions would be taken to reduce fire size and acres burned 

unless safety warrants alternative strategies. Wildland fire is generally not desired in these areas, with the 

exception of prescribed fire to be used for site preparation as described in the RMP. 

WFM-CA-MA-3. Conditional suppression areas represent areas of lower suppression priority where 

suppression efforts would be adjusted based on resource values and fire’s desired role in the ecosystem. 

The AMR in conditional suppression areas assumes suppression actions would be taken commensurate 

with the values at risk and considering suppression costs. Wildland fire management strategies may be 

changed if fire danger is high or there would likely be undesired fire effects. Conditional suppression 

areas also represent areas where cost of suppression may exceed the value of resources to be protected 

as identified in the RMP.

WFM-CA-MA-4. Areas for Wildland Fire for Resource Benefit would be determined by the BLM after the 

wildland fire has been contained or controlled. Areas where vegetation treatments were planned and 

analyzed in the NEPA process or those ecosystems found to “need more disturbance” through the Fire 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resources

2-181

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Regime Condition Class process would be candidates for “benefit” fires. Post-fire site visits would be 

required to determine if fire effects actually resulted in conditions that moved the area toward resource 

objectives. 

WFM-CA-MA-5. Revise the FMP as required to incorporate updated fire, vegetation, resource value, 

WUI, and fuels data. The FMP would be used to refine suppression, fuels treatment, community 

assistance, and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation priorities. 

WFM-CA-MA-6. In addition to safety and resource concerns, consider fire suppression and rehabilitation 

costs when evaluating fire suppression techniques.

WFM-CA-MA-7. Work collaboratively with the military to reduce the risk of wildland fire, improve 

suppression logistics on military lands adjacent to public lands, and protect public lands from wildland 

fires originating on military lands. 

WFM-CA-MA-8. Incorporate best management practices for wildland and prescribed fire into BLM 

management activities and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B).

WFM-CA-MA-9. Foster the public's understanding of the role of fire in the ecosystem, hazards associated 

with living in the WUI, and wildland fire prevention and suppression activities through methods such as: 

 Using mass media, 

 Providing outreach to local groups, 

 Developing interpretive signs and kiosks, and 

 Participating in the County Wildfire Protection Plan process.

WFM-CA-MA-10. Fire suppression strategies, practices, and actions in Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs) should be designed to minimize disturbance to riparian vegetation. 

WFM-CA-MA-11. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used within RCAs unless safety to 

human life or property is an issue. 

WFM-CA-MA-12. Incident bases, camps, helibases, staging areas, helispots, and other centers for 

incident activities would be located outside of RCAs. If the only suitable location for these activities is 

within the RCA, an exemption may be granted by the BLM authorized officer. 

WFM-CA-MA-13. Avoid delivery of chemical retardant, foam, or additives into surface waters. An 

exception is warranted where overriding immediate safety imperatives exist or when the BLM determines 

a fire would cause more long-term damage to fish habitats than chemical delivery to surface waters.

WFM-III-MA-1. When multiple wildland fire ignitions occur in critical suppression areas, based on the 

management priorities of Alternative III, the suppression priorities would be (in order of importance):

Vegetation Management Area (VMA) B, 

VMA A, 

VMA C, and

VMA D. 

These priorities would also be used for general fire suppression management planning.

WFM-III-MA-2. Within the perimeter of a contained wildland fire, protect unburned islands of native and 

non-native perennial communities. Unburned islands of annual communities within the perimeter of a

contained fire may be allowed to burn.

WFM-III-MA-3. Use minimum impact suppression tactics in:

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness,
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-182

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Lower Salmon Creek Falls Wilderness Study Area, 

Salmon Falls Creek and Sand Point ACECs, and 

On a case-by-case basis where they would not affect fire containment.

WFM-III-MA-4. Improve water availability for fire suppression throughout the planning area, in accordance 

with Idaho and Nevada State Law regarding the appropriation and use of water. 

WFM-III-MA-5. Design water developments for fire suppression to mitigate impacts to water resources. 

Water developments may include:

New pipelines, 

Water storage tanks, 

Draft sites, and

Hydrants off pipelines. 

Water storage may also be increased by enlarging and filling existing stock and storage ponds.

WFM-III-MA-6. Implement measures to reduce response time for fire suppression activities including: 

Building new guard stations, 

Building new or improving existing airstrips, 

Building helipads, 

Improving roads, 

Building new roads in areas with limited access, 

Improving stream crossings, and 

Developing better signage.

WFM-III-MA-7. Close primitive roads, trails, and areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use during 

fire restrictions to reduce risk of wildland fire, as determined by an authorized officer. Travel related to 

BLM administrative uses and emergency services may continue during fire restrictions.

WFM-III-MA-8. Authorized uses may be limited or prohibited to reduce risk of wildland fire as determined 

by the BLM authorized officer. 

Fuels and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation (ES&BAR)

Goals

FE-CA-G-1. Reduce fire hazard within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). 

FE-III-G-1. Manage vegetation communities to lengthen the fire return interval.

Objectives

Fuels

FE-CA-O-1. Manage plant communities within the WUI to reduce relative risk rating.

FE-III-O-1. Manage native plant communities outside the WUI to move toward Fire Regime Condition 

Class (FRCC) 1. Manage non-native plant communities to reduce wildland fire size and intensity, which 

may not be toward FRCC 1.

FE-III-O-2. Implement fuels treatments to protect critical suppression areas and limit the spread, size, and 

intensity of wildland fire.

ES&BAR

FE-III-O-3. Rehabilitate and stabilize areas to help stabilize soils, promote natural recovery, and establish 

fire-tolerant vegetation communities.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resources

2-183

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Management Actions

Fuels

FE-CA-MA-1. Update the FRCC analysis for the planning area when 20% of the planning area has been 

disturbed by wildland fires or treated by fuels projects since the previous FRCC analysis was completed.

FE-CA-MA-2. Progress towards FRCC objectives would be achieved through actions and guidelines 

specified in the Upland Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants, 

and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

FE-CA-MA-3. Coordinate fuels treatments with adjacent landowners and agencies through County 

Wildfire Protection Plans or other methods.

FE-CA-MA-4. Rest fuels treatment areas from uses until treatment objectives are met and are predicted 

to be sustainable or if the treatment is determined by the BLM to be unsuccessful. This would not apply to 

uses that do not conflict with the treatment objectives.

FE-CA-MA-5. Fuels treatments in Riparian Conservation Areas would be designed to maintain or improve 

riparian vegetation. 

FE-III-MA-1. Implement fuels treatments to reduce fuel loads as appropriate to reduce wildland fire size 

and intensity.

FE-III-MA-2. Fuels treatments in the WUI would include fuels reduction treatments and fuel breaks. Fuels 

treatments in the WUI would focus on areas with high, high/moderate, and moderate relative risk ratings 

in the northern portion of the planning area and near Roseworth and Three Creek.

FE-III-MA-3. Fuels treatments outside the WUI would include: 

Restoration,

Fuel breaks,

Landscape-scale fuels reduction, and 

Noxious weed and invasive plant treatments. 

FE-III-MA-4. The toolbox for fuels treatments would include:

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; 

Targeted grazing; and 

Prescribed fire.

FE-III-MA-5. Fuels treatments may use both native and non-native species, with fire-tolerant and fireresistant species having a high priority.

FE-III-MA-6. Upland vegetation management related to fuels treatments includes:

Converting annual communities to non-native perennial, 

Introducing shrubs to native grassland communities, and 

Creating extensive unvegetated or type-converted fuel breaks.

FE-III-MA-7. Fuel breaks would focus on strategic locations to disrupt the continuity of fuels and to protect 

structures and important resources such as habitat for sage-grouse and slickspot peppergrass. Construct 

fuel breaks consistent with objectives in the Upland Vegetation section.

FE-III-MA-8. Landscape-scale fuels reduction would occur primarily through increased allocation of 

annual and non-native perennial vegetation for permitted livestock grazing and through increased 
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-184

•

•

•

•

•

livestock grazing utilization in annual and non-native perennial communities. See the Livestock Grazing

section.

FE-III-MA-9. Noxious weed and invasive plants management related to fuels treatments includes 

measures for treating and preventing noxious weeds and invasive plants; see the Noxious Weeds and 

Invasive Plants section for more details.

ES&BAR

FE-CA-MA-6. Use the full range of treatment options available to meet ES&BAR objectives, including :

Mechanical treatments,

Drill or broadcast seeding treatments,

Chemical treatments,

Seedling transplants, and

Erosion control structures.

FE-CA-MA-7. Implement the Programmatic ES&BAR Plan and update as needed. Individual ES&BAR 

plans would be completed through the interdisciplinary process to reduce impacts of wildland fire and 

suppression and to achieve resource objectives.

FE-CA-MA-8. Use seed mixes that would help stabilize soils and achieve objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Fish and Wildlife, and Special Status Species sections.

FE-CA-MA-9. Use seed drilling equipment, tools, or techniques that minimize soil disturbance and place 

seed at the correct depth.

FE-CA-MA-10. Rest burned areas from uses, including livestock and wild horse grazing and recreational 

use, until ES&BAR objectives are met and are predicted to be sustainable or if the treatment is 

determined by the BLM to be unsuccessful. This would not apply to uses that do not conflict with the 

treatment objectives.

FE-CA-MA-11. Consider emergency closures to motorized vehicle use when necessary for ES&BAR 

efforts.

FE-III-MA-10. Consider using temporary fences on a case-by-case basis to protect burned plant 

communities. Reconstruction of fire-damaged permanent facilities on BLM-managed lands would follow 

BLM policy.

FE-III-MA-11. When planning temporary fences, consider the size of the pasture, the amount burned, the 

amount of pasture unaffected by rehabilitation, resource concerns, location of water, grazing 

management efficiency, and expense. 

FE-III-MA-12. Temporary fences would be removed once ES&BAR objectives have been met.

2.5.2.10 Wild Horses 

Goal

WH-III-G-1. The Saylor Creek Wild Horse Herd Management Area (HMA) would be managed for a 

thriving natural ecological balance.

Objective

WH-III-O-1. Manage a reproducing herd with an appropriate management level range of 200 to 600 wild 

horses in the Saylor Creek Wild Horse HMA.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resources

2-185

•

•

•

•

•

•

Allocations

WH-III-A-1. Manage the entire Saylor Creek Wild Horse Herd Area as an HMA (95,000 acres). 

WH-III-A-2.The estimated herd size for a reproducing population of wild horses would be 200 to 600 

head.

WH-III-A-3. Allocate forage sufficient to maintain the wild horse population within the HMA (7,200 animal 

unit months). 

Management Actions

WH-III-MA-1. Develop a Herd Management Area Plan.

WH-III-MA-2. The HMA would remain open to livestock grazing, although grazing levels would be 

adjusted on an allotment-specific basis to accommodate wild horse numbers.

WH-III-MA-3. Reduce fences within the HMA to facilitate access to forage and water, genetic exchange,

wild horse social interactions, and free-roaming characteristics.

WH-III-MA-4. Increase the number and reliability of artificial water sources for wild horses and fire 

suppression within the HMA.

WH-III-MA-5. Seasonal restrictions would be placed on travel within the HMA during foaling (from March 

through July); motorized travel would not be allowed on primitive roads during this time.

WH-III-MA-6. Seasonal restrictions on authorized uses within HMA to avoid disturbing wild horses during 

foaling (March through July) would be defined in the permit or authorization.

WH-III-MA-7. Commercial Special Recreation Permits would not be allowed in the HMA.

2.5.2.11 Paleontological Resources 

Goal

PR-CA-G-1. Identify, manage, and protect paleontological resources for scientific research, educational 

purposes, and public use.

Objective

PR-CA-O-1. Identify, manage, and protect important paleontological sites.

Management Actions

PR-CA-MA-1. Implement measures to protect paleontological resources. Measures may include:

Avoidance,

Fencing, 

Stabilization, 

Data recovery through collection or excavation,

Interpretation, or

Administrative closure.

PR-CA-MA-2. Identify areas at risk of damage from illegal activities and implement management to 

discourage those activities.

PR-CA-MA-3. Minimize or prevent human-caused damage to paleontological resources through 

educational and interpretive outreach programs.
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-186

•

•

•

•

PR-CA-MA-4. Analyze effects of surface-disturbing activities on fossil-bearing geologic units (Potential 

Fossil Yield Classification Class 5) and mitigate potential impacts to paleontological resources. 

PR-CA-MA-5. The collection of paleontological resources would be managed in accordance with the 

Paleontological Resources Preservation Act and 43 CFR 8365. In general, reasonable amounts of 

common invertebrate and plant fossils may be collected for non-commercial personal use without a 

permit. The collection of vertebrate fossils and rare or unusual invertebrate and plant fossils requires a 

permit under the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act.

PR-III-MA-1. Issue permits for paleontological research to qualified paleontologists.

2.5.2.12 Cultural Resources 

Goals

Management

CR-CA-G-1. Identify, preserve, and protect important cultural resources and ensure they are available for 

appropriate uses by present and future generations.

Protection

CR-CA-G-2. Seek to reduce imminent threats and resolve potential conflicts from natural or humancaused deterioration or potential conflict with other resource uses by ensuring all authorizations for land 

use and resource use complies with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), as amended,

Section 106. 

Objectives

Management 

CR-CA-O-1. Manage and protect cultural resources according to their potential traditional, scientific, 

conservation, public, or experimental value. 

Protection

CR-CA-O-2. Strive to limit the adverse effects of BLM decisions on important cultural resources.

Allocations

CR-CA-A-1. Cultural resources would be allocated as described in Appendix G. 

CR-CA-A-2 The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors include 0.25 mile on either side of 

the trail segments or the visual horizon of those segments, whichever is narrower.

Management Actions

Management

CR-CA-MA-1. Maintain on-going cultural resource inventory information in geographic information system

format in accordance with confidentiality mandates.

CR-CA-MA-2. Identify priority geographic areas for future inventory based on the probability of 

unrecorded cultural resources, and conduct inventories independent of specific land use actions.

CR-CA-MA-3. Implement measures to minimize or prevent damage to cultural resources due to BLM 

management activities, authorized and allowed uses, and human-caused damage such as vandalism, 

unauthorized surface collection of artifacts, and unintentional disturbances. Measures may include:

Avoidance,

Fencing, 

Stabilization, 

Data recovery through collection or excavation,
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resources

2-187

•

•

•

Interpretation, 

Administrative closure, or

Proactive law enforcement patrols.

CR-CA-MA-4. Develop cultural resource project plans as needed to address preservation actions for 

cultural resource complexes or individual sites identified as high risk for adverse impacts.

CR-CA-MA-5.Avoid placement of salting, supplemental feeding, watering, and holding facilities for 

livestock that adversely affect the Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors.

CR-CA-MA-6. Developments such as roads, trails, pipelines, fences, and powerlines may be allowed, 

after consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), to cross segments of the Kelton 

and Toana Freight Roads in areas where previous disturbance has occurred. On occasions where 

adverse impacts are unavoidable, the BLM would require mitigation commensurate with the impacts as a 

condition of authorization.

CR-CA-MA-7. Surface-disturbing equipment, such as bulldozers and road graders, cannot be used on 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligible or contributing segments of the Kelton or Toana 

Freight Roads or within their protective corridors without prior management approval, unless to protect life 

or property.

CR-III-MA-1. Allow research, including archaeological, historic, ethnographic, and non-intrusive research, 

to better define the extent, nature, and value of cultural resources in the planning area.

CR-III-MA-2. Important cultural resources, as determined by the BLM through consultation with tribes 

and/or SHPO, would generally be retained in Federal ownership. Under limited circumstances, after 

appropriate consultation and mitigation, lands containing important cultural resources may be exchanged

for lands containing resources of greater or equal value.

CR-III-MA-3. Avoid or minimize new ground disturbance within 150 feet of playas to protect associated 

cultural resources; this restriction would not apply to fire suppression activities.

Protection

CR-CA-MA-8. Authorizations for land and resource use would not be approved until compliance with 

Section 106 of the NHPA has been completed and documented, including, where applicable, consultation 

with the SHPO and Federally recognized Indian tribes.

CR-CA-MA-9. Nominate eligible sites for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) on a case-bycase basis.

CR-CA-MA-10. Manage sites that are eligible for the NRHP for their local, regional, or national 

significance. If natural or human-caused deterioration cannot be prevented, BLM would consult with the 

tribes and SHPO, as appropriate, to mitigate the adverse effects.

CR-CA-MA-11. Consider all prudent and feasible alternatives to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on 

cultural resources and their uses when resolving site-specific conflicts between cultural resource use 

allocations and competing land use allocations.

CR-CA-MA-12. The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors are closed to new salable 

mineral development. Existing salable mineral developments could be renewed but the footprint could not 

be expanded.

2.5.2.13 Visual Resources 

Visual Resource Management (VRM) classes identify the degree of acceptable visual change within a 

characteristic landscape. A classification is assigned to public lands based on the guidelines established 

for scenic quality, visual sensitivity, and visibility.
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-188

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Class I - Provides primarily for natural ecological changes only. It is applied to wilderness areas, some 

natural areas, and similar situations where management activities are to be restricted.

Class II - Changes in the basic elements caused by a management activity may be evident in the 

characteristic landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate to the visual strength of the existing 

character. 

Class III - Contrasts to the basic elements caused by management activity may be evident and begin to 

attract attention in the landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate in the existing landscape.

Class IV - Contrasts may attract attention and be a dominant feature in the landscape in terms of scale, 

but the change should repeat the basic element of the characteristic landscape.

Class V - Applies to areas where the characteristic landscape has been so disturbed that rehabilitation is 

needed. Generally considered an interim short-term classification until rehabilitation or enhancement is 

completed.

Goal and Objective

VR-CA-G-1. Maintain visual resource characteristics and values of public lands according to VRM

classes.

Allocations

VR-III-A-1. Areas to be managed as VRM Class I (71,000 acres) include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors with scenic outstandingly 

remarkable values (i.e., lower Salmon Falls Creek, Cougar Point Creek, Bruneau River, and Jarbidge 

River);

Bruneau-Jarbidge Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC); and

Salmon Falls Creek ACEC.

VR-III-A-2. Areas to be managed as VRM Class II (10,000 acres) include: 

The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone and 

The Jarbidge River corridor between Murphy Hot Springs and the Jarbidge Forks.

VR-III-A-3. Areas to be managed as VRM Class III (345,000 acres) include: 

The Snake River corridor (from the planning area boundary to 0.25 mile above the breaks); 

 The Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor; 

 Right-of-way corridors through areas otherwise managed as VRM Class I or II; 

Portions of the Jarbidge Foothills and Diamond A Desert not otherwise managed as VRM Class I or 

II; 

Wilkins Island; 

Deadman/Yahoo Special Recreation Management Area; and 

The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors. 

VR-III-A-4. The remainder of the planning area would be managed as VRM Class IV (945,000 acres).

See Map 44 for locations of areas allocated to VRM Class I, II, III, and IV.

Management Action

VR-CA-MA-1. BLM management activities and authorized uses would be compatible with VRM class 

objectives as follows:
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resource Uses

2-189

•

•

•

•

VRM Class I areas are managed to preserve the existing character of the landscape. The level of 

change to the landscape should be very low and must not attract attention.

VRM Class II areas are managed to retain the existing character of the landscape. The level of 

change to the landscape should be low and repeat the basic elements of form, line, color, and texture 

found in the natural features of the landscape.

VRM Class III areas are managed to partially retain the existing character of the landscape. The level 

of change to the landscape can be moderate and should repeat the basic elements found in the 

natural landscape. Management activities may attract attention, but should not dominate the view of 

the casual observer.

VRM Class IV areas are managed to provide for activities that require major modification of the 

landscape. The level of change to the landscape can be high, and management activities may 

dominate the view and be the major focus of attention. Impacts can still be minimized through location 

and design by repeating the basic elements found in the natural landscape.

2.5.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 

Goal and Objective

WC-III-G-1. Lands with Wilderness Characteristics would not be managed to maintain wilderness 

characteristics. Lands with Wilderness Characteristics would be managed for multiple use consistent with 

resource objectives and designations.

Management Action

No management action stated.

2.5.3 Resource Uses

2.5.3.1 Livestock Grazing

Goal

LG-CA-G-1. Manage livestock grazing to ensure achievement of or movement towards meeting Idaho 

Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management.

LG-III-G-1. Provide for livestock grazing through proper grazing management to reduce wildland fire size 

and intensity while maintaining habitat for sage-grouse.

Objectives

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-CA-O-1. Manage livestock grazing in annual communities to achieve objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

LG-III-O-1. In native plant communities including the Sandberg/non-native areas, manage livestock 

grazing to help maintain and improve native plant species diversity and abundance, focusing on plant 

reproductive and physiological needs.

LG-III-O-2. Manage livestock grazing to reduce fuels in non-native perennial communities. 

Range Infrastructure

LG-III-O-3. Manage (e.g. maintain, improve, build, realign, remove) range infrastructure at levels 

appropriate to the amount of livestock use to provide for efficient management of livestock grazing 

allotments and support fire suppression efforts.
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-190

•

•

•

•

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

•

o

o

•

•

•

Allocations

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-III-A-1. The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing (1,407,000 acres). 

The following areas would not be available for livestock grazing (56,000 acres):

Canyons associated with the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers and Salmon Falls Creek, 

Reference areas, 

Wildlife tracts, and

Areas not contained within grazing allotments.

See Map 55 for locations.

LG-III-A-2. Allocate vegetation production as follows:

Native perennial grass production: 

55% to 65% to watershed and wildlife, 

Less than 1% to wild horses, and

35% to 45% to livestock. 

Non-native perennial grass production: 

50% to 60% to watershed and wildlife, 

Less than 1% to wild horses, and

40% to 50% to livestock. 

Annual grass production: 

50% to 60% to watershed and wildlife and

40% to 50% to livestock. 

Shrub and forb production: 

86% to 89% to watershed and wildlife and

11% to 14% to livestock. 

Allocate approximately 273,000 to 344,000 animal unit months (AUMs) to livestock at initial

implementation and approximately 276,000 to 348,000 at full implementation. The purpose of allocating 

vegetation is to determine the total AUMs available for livestock grazing in the planning area. AUMs for

livestock grazing are an estimate based on 2006 production data collected while conducting ecological 

site inventories. At the time of permit renewal, additional production data may be considered when 

determining the appropriate allocation for a specific allotment. 

These vegetation allocations would be implemented during the permit renewal process. Allocation 

percentages are not the same as utilization, as the allocation is used to identify the total number of AUMs 

for livestock, while utilization identifies the amount of vegetation used by livestock in a specific area. 

Allocation is not intended to prescribe what livestock actually consume. Livestock use of specific 

vegetation types would be managed through the implementation of grazing use indicators developed on 

an allotment-specific basis. 

LG-III-A-3. The amount of forage available for livestock use would likely change as the RMP is 

implemented, although allocation percentages would remain the same. Changes to AUMs in the future 

would be determined by the BLM after monitoring and site-specific NEPA analysis.

Management Actions

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-CA-MA-1. Implement adaptive management using grazing use indicators to meet resource and 

special designation area objectives. Grazing use indicators include:

 Utilization for upland vegetation and riparian areas, 

 Bank and soil surface alteration, and

 Other indicators identified on an allotment-specific basis depending on the resources present. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resource Uses

2-191

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LG-CA-MA-2. The grazing permit renewal process, following the approval of the RMP, would be in 

conformance with BLM policy and guidance current at the time of renewal. 

LG-CA-MA-3. The toolbox for managing livestock grazing would include, but not be limited to: 

Rest rotation, 

Deferred rotation, 

Seasons of use, 

Stocking rates, 

Class and kind of livestock, 

Herding, 

Frequency of grazing, 

Closure for resource protection,

Location and types of range infrastructure, and 

Location and types of supplements.

Specific tools to be used would be identified on an allotment-specific basis through the permit renewal 

process, depending on the resources present.

LG-CA-MA-4. Seasons of use and changes in class and kind of livestock would be consistent with 

resource objectives and analyzed in site-specific NEPA analysis.

LG-CA-MA-5. Identify and implement measures to prevent livestock from entering areas closed to 

grazing, such as: 

 Fencing, 

Using natural barriers, 

Active herding, 

Water placement, and 

Salt/supplement placement.

LG-CA-MA-6. Implement drought management guidelines during periods of drought to maintain or 

achieve long-term resource productivity (Appendix F).

LG-CA-MA-7. Allow spring and early summer livestock grazing periodically in big game winter range to 

improve browse production.

LG-CA-MA-8. Manage livestock grazing to move riparian and wetland conditions toward goals and 

objectives in the Riparian Areas and Wetlands section. 

LG-CA-MA-9. Livestock trailing may be allowed consistent with other resource objectives. Trailing must 

be supervised by the permittee to ensure active movement of livestock. Terms and conditions would be 

added to permits to ensure compliance.

LG-CA-MA-10. When livestock are moved between pastures or allotments through riparian areas, stream 

crossings would be perpendicular to the riparian area where practical.

LG-CA-MA-11. Grazing management activities (e.g., grazing, trailing, bedding, watering, salting, loading, 

other handling efforts) would be modified, discontinued, or relocated if they are not maintaining aquatic 

and riparian conditions. 

LG-CA-MA-12. In areas that are readily accessible to cattle and known or suspected special status fish 

spawning habitat, develop and implement grazing practices to avoid or restrict trampling of redds (eggs) 

and other direct and indirect effects that may result in adverse impacts to the species.

LG-III-MA-1. Allotment and pasture boundaries may be modified to facilitate the use of permitted livestock 

grazing to achieve fuels reduction objectives. Modifications may include but not be limited to aggregating 
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-192

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

allotments into larger allotments and realigning pasture boundary fences to concentrate livestock use for 

fuels reduction.

LG-III-MA-2. Utilization would be determined on a case-by-case basis to meet objectives in the Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, and Special Status Species sections.

LG-III-MA-3. Reserve common allotments may be established to facilitate vegetation treatment projects 

and to provide increased livestock grazing management flexibility. Reserve common allotments may be 

established on acquired lands; in allotments where permits are relinquished, transferred, or cancelled; or 

by agreement with a permittee; however, permits would not be cancelled for the purpose of establishing a 

reserve common allotment. Reserve common allotments may be created from whole or partial allotments 

and can be permanent or temporary. Reserve common allotments would not be allowed within the 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness.

LG-III-MA-4. Considerations for selecting areas to be used as reserve common allotments include: 

Whether the area has special management concerns, such as habitat for Type 1 BLM Sensitive 

species, slickspot peppergrass, or redband trout; noxious weeds or invasive plants; or wild horses; 

Whether the area has intermingled private and/or State lands; and 

Whether the area can sustain grazing use without considerable resource impacts.

LG-III-MA-5. No more than 10% of the AUMs for livestock within the planning area can be within reserve 

common allotments without approval from the BLM State Director.

LG-III-MA-6. Priority for using reserve common allotments would be as follows:

Permittees and lessees whose normally permitted allotments are temporarily unavailable due to 

wildland fire; 

Permittees and lessees whose normally permitted allotments are under an approved vegetation 

treatment project (e.g., restoration, fuels treatments); and

Permittees and lessees whose normally permitted allotments are temporarily unavailable due to 

insect outbreaks.

Permittees within the planning area would have the highest priority for using reserve common allotments; 

permittees within the Twin Falls District would have second priority.

LG-III-MA-7. When a reserve common allotment is established, a management plan for the allotment 

would be developed to ensure achievement of or movement towards meeting Idaho Standards for 

Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management. 

LG-III-MA-8. Temporary Non-Renewable (TNR) permits would be allowed except in the following areas:

Pastures containing areas within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness,

The riparian pasture of the Lower Saylor Creek Allotment in the Sand Point Area of Critical 

Environmental Concern, 

Pastures comprised of more than 50% big game winter range, or 

Pastures comprised of more than 50% native communities (by cover) excluding Sandberg/non-native 

areas.

LG-III-MA-9. Criteria for issuing TNR permits in a particular pasture would include:

TNR may be allowed in years where additional forage for livestock is temporarily available, as 

determined by utilization levels,

TNR must be consistent with the drought management guidelines,

TNR may not be allowed within the operation of the applicant if grazing use criteria are exceeded in 

any pasture in planning area controlled by the applicant, and

TNR must be consistent with other resource objectives.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resource Uses

2-193

•

•

•

•

LG-III-MA-10. Manage livestock grazing in allotments containing more than 50% native plant communities 

to provide a variety of residual cover heights to meet the needs of the ground-nesting birds present in an 

allotment.

LG-III-MA-11. Follow BLM guidelines for livestock grazing management in sage-grouse habitat. 

LG-III-MA-12. Livestock grazing may be considered on a case-by-case basis in a portion of big game 

winter range in native shrubland communities during the winter (November 15 through April 30). No date 

restrictions on livestock grazing in big game winter range in other vegetation communities would be 

made.

LG-III-MA-13. Adjust livestock grazing south of Sheep Creek so livestock seasons of use would not 

overlap bighorn sheep breeding and winter periods in those pastures that contain bighorn sheep habitat.

LG-III-MA-14. In aspen groves, grazing management would allow for natural regeneration with a diversity 

of vegetation species and age class.

LG-III-MA-15. Even though livestock grazing would not be authorized in the Jarbidge Canyons, trailing to 

the Wilkins Island Allotment would be permitted along the existing route across the East Fork of the 

Jarbidge River and up an un-named draw. Riders would be used to herd livestock to ensure livestock do 

not remain in the riparian area after the crossing.

Range Infrastructure

LG-C-MA-1. Management actions for range infrastructure apply to watering sites, fences, and corrals 

within wilderness, consistent with the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Management Plan. 

LG-CA-MA-13. Follow BLM-approved design features and construction and maintenance practices for 

range infrastructure.

LG-CA-MA-14. Grazing facilities and infrastructure (e.g., livestock handling and management facilities, 

fences, watering facilities) would be modified, discontinued, or relocated if they are not maintaining 

aquatic and riparian conditions. 

LG-CA-MA-15. To protect associated resources, minimize disturbance at developed springs by using 

existing routes for access, redesigning the spring development, or limiting maintenance or reconstruction 

activities to areas disturbed during previous construction or to areas outside the wetland.

LG-CA-MA-16. Modify existing and construct new fences to comply with BLM standards for wildlife 

(Karsky, 1999). Existing fences would be modified according to the following priority order: 

Key sage-grouse habitat, 

Big game winter range, 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, and

The remainder of the planning area. 

LG-CA-MA-17. If a reservoir is fenced, where practical, provide water for livestock use outside the fence.

LG-CA-MA-18. For permittee-maintained projects, the BLM authorized officer would be notified prior to 

initiating work that requires the use of heavy equipment so that appropriate measures are adopted to 

protect resources. 

LG-III-MA-16. Consider installing or constructing new pipelines where they would help meet resource 

objectives or to aid in fire suppression. New pipelines would not be authorized within Wilderness or

eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors.
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-194

•

•

•

LG-III-MA-17. Maintain existing pipelines for livestock and wild horse use and fire suppression. Modify 

any pipeline where monitoring determines the pipeline is preventing attainment of resource objectives.

LG-III-MA-18. Consider installing or constructing new reservoirs or wells to meet resource objectives or 

aid in fire suppression.

LG-III-MA-19. Maintain existing reservoirs or wells for livestock or wild horse use and fire suppression. 

Modify reservoirs or wells preventing attainment of resources objectives, as identified through monitoring.

LG-III-MA-20. New spring developments must be consistent with resource objectives, avoid or minimize 

ground disturbance, protect the spring source, and ensure adequate water to maintain the wetland.

LG-III-MA-21. Modify spring developments with wetlands rated as non-functioning, functioning-at-risk 

downward trend, functioning-at-risk to improve wetland areas by protecting the spring source and 

ensuring adequate water to support spring hydrology and associated riparian vegetation.

LG-III-MA-22. Place salt, minerals, supplements, new troughs, new reservoirs, and new holding facilities 

more than 300 feet from canyon rims and playas. Avoid placing salting, minerals, supplements, troughs, 

reservoirs, and holding facilities in the protective zone of the Oregon National Historic Trail and the Kelton 

and Toana Freight Road protective corridors. Ensure salting, minerals, supplements, new troughs, new 

reservoirs, and new holding facilities in other areas are located to avoid conflicts with other cultural 

resources as well.

LG-III-MA-23. Adjust locations of livestock watering facilities and salting/supplements in sage-grouse 

habitat to provide adequate nesting and winter cover.

LG-III-MA-24. Consider installing or constructing new fences on a case-by-case basis to meet resource 

objectives.

LG-III-MA-25. Remove fences that are not needed. Maintain fences to BLM specifications; the amount of 

fence in an allotment would be appropriate to objectives for livestock grazing and resource management. 

Modify, remove, or relocate fences contributing to not meeting resource objectives, as identified through 

monitoring.

2.5.3.2 Recreation

Goal

REC-CA-G-1. Provide and sustain a variety of dispersed and developed recreational opportunities and 

experiences while avoiding or minimizing resource impacts.

Objectives

REC-CA-O-1. Provide basic information on recreational opportunities on public lands not designated as 

Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) or Extensive Recreation Management Areas. Provide

access and minimal facilities (e.g., signs, protective fences) as needed to ensure visitor health and safety, 

reduce user conflict, and protect resources. 

REC-III-O-1. Manage 42,000 acres as SRMAs to protect and enhance recreation settings, activities, 

experiences, and benefits. 

Allocations

REC-III-A-1. Designate the following SRMAs:

Deadman/Yahoo SRMA (34,000 acres), 

Balanced Rock SRMA (500 acres), 

Little Pilgrim SRMA (300 acres), 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resource Uses

2-195

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Jarbidge Forks SRMA (2,000 acres), and

Salmon Falls Reservoir SRMA (5,000 acres). 

See Map 63 for locations.

REC-III-A-2. All lands not established as a SRMA would be managed to meet basic recreation and visitor 

services needs and resource objectives. Recreation would not be emphasized; however, recreation 

activities may occur to the extent that they are consistent with other resource uses. 

Management Actions

REC-CA-MA-1. Develop implementation and monitoring plans for SRMAs to address the purpose specific 

to the SRMA.

REC-CA-MA-2. Where appropriate, implement management methods to protect riparian resources, 

special status species, and wildlife habitat while enhancing recreation opportunities. Management 

methods may include: 

 Limiting visitor numbers, 

Adopting camping and travel controls, 

 Implementing fees, and 

Imposing scheduling restrictions to minimize impacts to fish and wildlife during important seasonal 

periods.

REC-CA-MA-3. New and existing recreation-related activities and facilities within or affecting Riparian 

Conservation Areas would be designed, modified, relocated, or discontinued if they are not maintaining 

aquatic and riparian conditions. 

REC-CA-MA-4. Dispersed camping would be allowed. Dispersed camping may be closed or limited 

seasonally if resource objectives are impacted. 

REC-CA-MA-5. If campground fees are implemented, they would not apply to Federally recognized tribes 

exercising treaty rights or engaging in traditional cultural practices.

REC-CA-MA-6. Consider Special Recreation Permits (SRPs) within Areas of Environmental Concern with 

mitigation for impacts to relevant and important values. 

REC-III-MA-1. The Deadman/Yahoo SRMA would consist of three Recreation Management Zones 

(RMZs; see Map 69) with the following management:

Manage the Deadman and Yahoo RMZs to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in all-terrain 

vehicle and motorcycle riding.

Manage the Rosevear Gulch RMZ to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in motorized trail 

riding opportunities on a series of designated routes.

REC-III-MA-2. Manage the Balanced Rock SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in hiking, 

viewing wildlife and natural scenery, and non-motorized boating. 

REC-III-MA-3. Manage the Little Pilgrim SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in sturgeon 

fishing and bird hunting.

REC-III-MA-4. Manage the Jarbidge Forks SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing, 

rafting, picnicking, camping, and viewing wildlife and natural scenery.

REC-III-MA-5. The Salmon Falls Reservoir SRMA would consist of three RMZs (see Map 69) with the 

following management:
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-196

•

•

•

Manage the Antelope Bay RMZ to provide opportunities to engage in hunting, fishing, camping, 

boating, water sports, and motorized and non-motorized trail riding on a series of designated routes.

Manage the Cedar Creek RMZ to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing, camping, and 

boating.

Manage the Luds Point RMZ to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in hunting, fishing, 

primitive camping, and viewing wildlife and natural scenery.

See Appendix H for more information on the management and settings prescribed for each SRMA. 

REC-III-MA-6. Give priority for SRP applicants proposing uses occurring outside fire season (October 

through May), that do not duplicate existing events, utilize facilities off public lands for overnight 

accommodation of guests, and focus on visitation on sites and areas resilient to repeated use.

REC-III-MA-7. Place increased emphasis in SRPs on mitigating the impacts of recreation uses in order to

support conservation of natural and cultural resource values.

REC-III-MA-8. Commercial SRPs would not be allowed in the Herd Management Area. 

REC-III-MA-9. Require organized group permits for groups with 30 or more people. 

2.5.3.3 Transportation and Travel 

Goal

TR-CA-G-1. Manage and provide for motorized, non-motorized, and non-mechanized access that would

balance resource protection and use.

Objective

TR-III-O-1. A transportation and travel system would provide for multiple use, with an emphasis on 

wildland fire prevention and suppression activities.

Allocations

TR-C-A-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized and mechanized 

vehicle use (60,000 acres). The Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area would be closed to 

motorized vehicle use (2,000 acres).

TR-III-A-1. Designated areas in the Deadman/Yahoo Special Recreation Management Area would be 

open to cross-country motorized vehicle use (4,000 acres).

TR-III-A-2. Salmon Falls Creek Area of Critical Environmental Concern north and south of Lilly Grade 

crossing would be closed to motorized vehicle use (3,000 acres).

TR-III-A-3. Travel would be limited to designated routes in the remainder of the planning area (1,304,000 

acres). Specific route designations would be made in an implementation-level travel and transportation 

management planning process following the completion of the RMP. Until route designation occurs, areas 

limited to designated routes would be managed as limited to existing routes as depicted on Map 71. A 

more thorough review of the existing transportation routes would be performed as part of the travel 

management planning process, which may include additional on-the-ground data collection and 

verification.

See Map 75 for locations of transportation and travel allocations.

TR-III-A-4. Travel within the Herd Management Area would be seasonally restricted during foaling (March 

through July); motorized travel would not be allowed on primitive roads during this time.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resource Uses

2-197

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Management Actions 

TR-CA-MA-1. Area designations apply to all off-highway vehicles, which include any motorized vehicle 

capable of, or designed for, travel on or immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain, excluding: 

Any non-amphibious registered motorboat; 

Any military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle while being used for emergency purposes;

Any vehicle whose use is expressly authorized by the BLM authorized officer or otherwise officially 

approved; 

Vehicles in official use; and

Any combat or combat support vehicle when used in times of national defense emergencies (43 CFR 

8340.0-5[a]).

Area and route designations, with the exception of designated wilderness areas, also do not apply to 

vehicles being used by members of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes or the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to 

access traditional use areas of importance to the tribes or to vehicles being used by members of the 

Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to exercise their tribally reserved treaty rights.

TR-CA-MA-2. Where motorized, non-motorized, mechanized, or non-mechanized use would cause or is 

causing considerable adverse effects on soil, vegetation, wildlife, wildlife habitat, cultural resources, 

historical resources, threatened or endangered species, wilderness suitability, other authorized uses, or 

other resources, the BLM authorized officer may close the affected areas to the type(s) of use causing the 

adverse effect until the adverse effects are reduced and measures implemented to prevent reoccurrence.

TR-CA-MA-3. Minimize construction and maintenance of roads within or adjacent to special status wildlife 

and fish habitat and big game winter range during important seasonal periods.

TR-CA-MA-4. Continue to recognize and update agreements and Memoranda of Understanding with 

local highway districts for road maintenance.

TR-CA-MA-5. Complete a Travel Management Plan (TMP) within five years of the signing of the Record 

of Decision. The TMP would be developed through a public process to determine the transportation and 

travel system for the planning area. The TMP would determine the routes and trails to be designated, 

modified, closed, or rehabilitated as well as the maintenance level, modes of travel, and seasonal and 

access restrictions for designated routes. During the TMP process, additional data needs and a strategy 

to collect information will be identified. Decisions made in the TMP would be limited to management of 

BLM roads. 

A TMP is not intended to provide evidence bearing on or addressing the validity of any R.S. 2477 

assertions. R.S. 2477 rights are determined through a process that is entirely independent of the BLM's 

planning process. Consequently, travel management planning should not take into consideration R.S. 

2477 assertions or evidence. Travel management planning should be founded on an independently 

determined purpose and need that is based on resource uses and associated access to public lands and 

waters. At such time as a decision is made on R.S. 2477 assertions, the BLM would adjust its travel 

routes accordingly.

TR-CA-MA-6. Route designation would, at a minimum, follow criterion in 43 CFR 8342.1 and BLM 

Manual 1626.

TR-CA-MA-7. Route designation would also adhere to the following: 

Conflict with cultural and paleontological resources would be minimized when designating routes.

Designated routes may follow or cross the Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) and National Register 

of Historic Places-eligible and -listed segments of the Kelton and Toana Freight Roads in areas 

where previous disturbance has occurred, and after consultation with the State Historic Preservation 

Officer. 
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-198

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Where motorized vehicle use is allowed within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor, travel 

would not degrade the Oregon NHT or its setting. 

Designated routes within suitable and eligible Wild and Scenic River corridors must maintain/enhance 

their outstandingly remarkable values, free-flowing condition, water quality, and tentative classification 

until Congress acts. 

Loop routes are preferred to dead end routes.

Parking areas and turnouts would be considered under the same criteria used for routes.

Provide access to private lands or other agency lands (e.g., State, Forest Service, other BLM field 

offices).

Provide access for authorized activities, including livestock grazing, energy development, and 

recreation.

TR-CA-MA-8. As part of the travel management planning process, the BLM would identify any easements 

and rights-of-way (to be issued to the BLM or others) needed to maintain the preliminary or existing road 

and trail network.

TR-CA-MA-9. Cooperate with tribes, Federal, State, and county agencies to reduce adverse effects and 

support the achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands in the long term.

TR-CA-MA-10. Minimize locating new roads or road-related facilities in Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs). Before building new roads or other road-related facilities in RCAs, complete a watershed or sitespecific analysis. The level of analysis should be commensurate with the scope and issues of the project 

and related aquatic resources. Analysis should identify how road design features would minimize or avoid 

adverse effects to aquatic and riparian resources at site-specific, reach, and watershed scales. 

TR-CA-MA-11. Temporary roads within or affecting RCAs would be fully decommissioned and 

rehabilitated once the road is no longer needed to meet the intended purpose. 

TR-CA-MA-12. Avoid or minimize sediment delivery to streams from the road surface to allow the 

achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

TR-CA-MA-13. Avoid sidecasting road surface material into areas where it may reach RCAs. 

TR-CA-MA-14. Design new, replacement, and reconstructed stream crossings (culverts, bridges, and 

other stream crossings) to: 

Accommodate a 100-year flood, including associated bedload and debris in bull trout occupied 

watersheds. In watersheds containing other non-game fish, design new, replacement, and 

reconstructed stream crossings to accommodate a 100-year flood event, unless a site-specific 

analysis determines the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands could be achieved with 

fewer impacts to the RCA; 

Provide and maintain fish passage at all road crossings of existing and potential fish bearing streams; 

and

Accommodate mean bankfull channel widths to maintain channel integrity.

TR-III-MA-1. Motorized vehicle restrictions would apply to everyone including lessees, BLM permit 

holders, and right-of-way (ROW) holders, but site-specific exceptions to motorized vehicle restrictions 

could be authorized in the lease, permits, or ROW grant. 

TR-III-MA-2. Other activities in areas limited or closed to motorized travel may be allowed, but would 

require prior written permission of an authorized officer. These activities may include but not be limited to: 

Motorized cross-country travel for non-BLM government entities on official administrative business 

(e.g., noxious weed control, surveying, and animal damage control efforts).

Motorized cross-country travel by entities requiring access to private lands, resources, or legal 

improvements within or adjacent to closed or limited areas.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resource Uses

2-199

•

•

•

•

•

TR-III-MA-3. Close primitive roads, trails, and areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use to 

reduce risk of wildland fire during fire restrictions or when conditions dictate as determined by an 

authorized officer. Travel related to BLM administrative uses and emergency services may continue 

during fire restrictions.

TR-III-MA-4. Game retrieval using motorized vehicles would not be allowed off designated routes.

TR-III-MA-5. Motorized cross-country travel to a camp site would be allowed within 25 feet of designated 

routes, but would not be allowed within areas closed to motorized vehicle use or in riparian areas. 

Motorized cross-country travel to a camp site may be closed or limited seasonally or as impacts or 

environmental conditions warrant.

TR-III-MA-6. Identify locations for and install gates and cattle guards along designated routes to minimize 

conflicts between motorized recreation activities and livestock grazing operations and to facilitate fire 

suppression.

TR-III-MA-7. Travel Management Areas (TMAs) are delineated areas where travel management (either 

motorized or non-motorized) needs particular focus. These areas would have a designated network of 

roads, trails, ways, and other routes that provide for public access and travel. The priority emphasis for 

each TMA is based on resource management, wildland fire suppression, and use objectives outlined in 

the RMP. The TMAs and their travel and transportation planning focus would be as follows:

Snake River TMA (312,000 acres): Focus on improving public access and facilitating fire suppression 

operations and wildland fire prevention.

Deadman/Yahoo TMA (34,000 acres): Focus on facilitating motorized recreation activities, including 

open play areas and a designated trail system.

Devil Creek TMA (485,000 acres): Focus on improving access and facilitating fire suppression 

operations and wildland fire prevention.

West Side TMA (405,000 acres): Focus on improving access and facilitating fire suppression 

operations and wildland fire prevention.

Jarbidge Foothills TMA (135,000 acres): Focus on improving access and facilitating fire suppression 

operations and wildland fire prevention.

See Map 81 for locations of TMAs.

TR-III-MA-8. The BLM authorized officer has the authority to adjust TMA boundaries and their focus, 

consistent with objectives in the RMP.

2.5.3.4 Land Use Authorizations

Goal

LA-CA-G-1. Public needs for land use authorizations would be met with consideration for other resource 

values. 

Objective

LA-III-O-1. Provide for the development of renewable energy resources, transportation routes, utility 

corridors, transmission lines, communication sites and other uses with consideration for resource 

objectives and wildland fire prevention and suppression objectives.

Allocations

LA-CA-A-1. Retain existing withdrawals, with the option of a Section 24 restoration for power site 

classifications and power site reserves if needed, as provided for in the Federal Power Act of 1920.
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-200

•

o

•

o

•

o

•

o

•

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LA-III-A-1. The following areas would be avoidance areas for rights-of-way (ROWs; 1,001,000 acres); 

ROWs would be allowed in these areas only if the avoidance stipulations are met and if the area is not 

identified for ROW exclusion: 

Areas within US Air Force (USAF) Military Operating Areas (983,000 acres): 

New ROWs must be consistent with USAF airspace restrictions.

Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone (11,000 acres): 

New surface or overhead ROWs would follow existing ROW or disturbance corridors, 

underground ROWs would be allowed with mitigation for disturbance within the protective zone. 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors (30,000 acres): 

ROWs must maintain/enhance the river segment's outstandingly remarkable values, free-flowing 

condition, water quality, and tentative classification. 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) (57,000 acres): 

No new overhead ROWs would be allowed. 

Salmon Falls Creek ACEC (3,000 acres): 

New ROWs would be restricted to ROW corridors and locations of existing ROWs.

Several ROW avoidance areas overlap; where this occurs, all avoidance stipulations must be met. In 

addition, some ROW avoidance areas overlap with ROW exclusion areas; where this occurs, the more 

restrictive exclusion management applies. See Map 89 for locations of ROW avoidance areas.

LA-III-A-2. The following areas would be exclusion areas for ROW (63,000 acres); they would not be 

available for ROWs under any conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, 

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area, and

Sand Point ACEC.

See Map 94 for locations of ROW exclusion areas.

LA-III-A-3. Designate the following ROW corridors for utilities ((i.e., corridors for oil, gas, and hydrogen 

pipelines, electricity transmission, phone lines, and distribution facilities), all of which are 1-mile wide: 

Pilgrim Gulch (Section 368 energy corridor) (4,000 acres), 

Shoestring (Section 368 energy corridor) (5,000 acres), 

Saylor Creek (Section 368 energy corridor) (11,000 acres), 

Balanced Rock (Section 368 energy corridor) (10,000 acres),and

Jarbidge (24,000 acres). 

See Map 97 for locations of ROW corridors. Section 368 energy corridors were designated in the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005.

LA-III-A-4. Wind energy development can be considered in areas with annual or non-native vegetation 

communities, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and outside ROW exclusion areas

and utility ROW corridors. Map 102 displays areas meeting these criteria in 2011; the map can be 

updated as vegetation conditions change on the ground.

Management Actions

LA-C-MA-1. Implement the Programmatic Policies and Design Features in the Record of Decision on 

Wind Energy Development on BLM-Administered Lands in the Western United States (2005) (Appendix 

B).

LA-C-MA-2. Interagency Operating Procedures, located in Appendix B, would be implemented for 

projects proposed within the Section 368 corridors.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resource Uses

2-201

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LA-C-MA-3. The BLM would review all withdrawals on and classifications of public lands to eliminate all 

unnecessary withdrawals and classifications. Reviews would consider:

For what purposes were the lands withdrawn? 

Are these purposes still being served? 

Are the lands suitable for return to the public domain?

LA-CA-MA-1. Place new ROWs for oil and gas pipelines and overhead lines within ROW corridors where 

practical; other locations would be considered in areas not identified for ROW avoidance or exclusion, 

consistent with allocations listed above.

LA-CA-MA-2. New ROWs would be located in areas of previous disturbance where practical.

LA-CA-MA-3. New ROWs would meet Visual Resource Management class objectives.

LA-CA-MA-4. Co-locate new communication sites with existing sites where practical; communication 

sites present in 2011 are located at:

Black Mesa, 

Blue Butte, 

Frog Hollow,

Indian Butte, 

Lower Salmon Falls, 

Signal Butte, and

Yahoo Creek. 

See Map 85. Other locations would be considered, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas 

and outside ROW exclusion areas.

LA-CA-MA-5. BLM management activities and authorized uses on lands with existing withdrawals would 

be consistent with the purposes of the withdrawal. Proposed BLM management activities and authorized 

uses that are not consistent with the purposes of the withdrawal would be evaluated to determine whether 

the proposal can be modified or whether the withdrawal is still necessary.

LA-CA-MA-6. Land use permits may be considered, on a case-by-case basis, consistent with resource 

objectives. 

LA-CA-MA-7. Trespass resolution would be limited to removal of facilities and/or restoration of the area 

as determined by the BLM authorized officer. Trespass resolution, as determined by the BLM authorized 

officer, may include:

 Removal (depending on the nature of the trespass), 

 Restoration, 

 Authorization of a ROW grant or land use permit, or 

 Disposal of the affected land through sale or exchange.

LA-CA-MA-8. Land use permits for irrigation pivot crossings may be allowed, in accordance with policy 

and regulations. In cases where a pivot crosses public land, the lands are to remain unfarmed and 

unirrigated.

LA-CA-MA-9. Airport leases may be considered if proposals are outside ROW exclusion areas and 

consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and Federal Aviation Administration regulations.

LA-CA-MA-10. Access across non-BLM lands would be identified and obtained, where possible, through 

easements, ROWs, or acquisitions to accomplish BLM objectives. 
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-202

•

•

•

LA-CA-MA-11. Future access needs and priorities would be coordinated with the Shoshone-Bannock 

Tribes, Shoshone-Paiute Tribes, Idaho and Nevada State agencies, and local governments to ensure 

resource values are evaluated along with public needs.

LA-CA-MA-12. Authorizations involving water use on BLM land must comply with applicable State water 

law. Final authorization to proceed with water developments on BLM lands would be withheld until 

compliance from the appropriate authorizing agency (i.e., Idaho Department of Water Resources) is 

obtained. Any new water right established on public land would be solely in the name of the United 

States.

LA-CA-MA-13. New land use authorizations would avoid or minimize adverse effects on non-game fish, 

their habitats, and Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs). 

LA-CA-MA-14. For existing land use authorizations that prevent the achievement of the goals and 

objectives for riparian areas and wetlands, use existing authorities to redesign, modify, or apply 

mitigations to reduce impacts to non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LA-CA-MA-15. During Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensing or relicensing of 

hydroelectric projects, terms and conditions that achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and 

wetlands over the new license term should be submitted to the FERC.

LA-III-MA-1. ROW construction and maintenance activities should avoid disturbing special status species 

during important seasonal periods, unless the disturbance can be mitigated.

LA-III-MA-2. Locate new transmission and phone lines, communications towers, meteorological towers, 

and wind turbines more than three miles from occupied and unknown-status sage-grouse leks. Within 

designated ROW corridors, buffer distances for sage-grouse leks would not apply. BLM may impose 

constraints on timing of construction for routine maintenance.

LA-III-MA-3. Design new communication sites to minimize impacts to special status species and their 

habitats where practical.

LA-III-MA-4. Restrict wind energy site testing and monitoring and wind energy development from 

occupied habitat for special status plants and animals, and cultural resources where their direct and 

indirect adverse effects cannot be mitigated. 

LA-III-MA-5. Applications for solar energy developments would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

2.5.3.5 Land Tenure 

Goal

LT-CA-G-1. Manage land tenure to provide for public ownership of lands with high resource and multiple 

use values and to improve management efficiency. 

Objective

LT-CA-O-1. Improve BLM's ability to manage the land base and resource values, and help meet resource 

objectives through land tenure adjustments.

Allocations

LT-III-A-1. Zone 1 consists of lands for retention that are not available for disposal (1,108,000 acres). 

Zone 1 lands include: 

The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 

The Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone; 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resource Uses

2-203

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; 

Bruneau-Jarbidge and Sand Point Areas of Critical Environmental Concern; 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area; and 

Other consolidated public lands. 

LT-III-A-2. Zone 2 consists of lands for consolidation within the planning area (243,000 acres); these can 

be exchanged for other lands adjacent to Zone 1 or Zone 2 or offered as Recreation and Public Purposes 

(R&PP) leases. Zone 2 lands include: 

Selected lands near Indian Cove, Hammett, Glenns Ferry, and King Hill;

Selected lands in the northeast corner of the planning area;

Selected lands in the Jarbidge Foothills;

Selected lands between Clover Creek and Cedar Creek Reservoir; and

Selected lands near the Jarbidge River in Nevada.

LT-III-A-3. Zone 3 lands (20,000 acres) are available for Federal Land Policy and Management Act 

(FLPMA) Section 203 sales (as listed in Appendix I) subject to NEPA compliance and consistent with 

other decisions in this RMP. Zone 3 lands include:

Selected lands near Hammett, Glenns Ferry, King Hill, and Roseworth.

See Map 109 for locations of Land Tenure Zones 1, 2, and 3.

LT-III-A-4. Lands identified for disposal in previous RMPs prior to July 25, 2000 (3,000 acres) would

continue to be available for disposal under the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act of 2000 (FLTFA; 

Appendix I). Proceeds from the sale or exchange of these public lands may be used to purchase 

additional public lands, as provided for in FLTFA.

LT-III-A-5. R&PP leases to State and local governments and non-profit organizations would be 

considered on lands in Zones 2 and 3.

Management Actions

LT-CA-MA-1. Public lands, in order to be considered for any form of land tenure adjustment (including 

exchanges, R&PP, fee or easement acquisitions, etc.), except for FLPMA Section 203 sales, would be 

evaluated and must meet one or more of the land ownership adjustment criteria (described in Appendix I), 

or one or more of the following criteria:

Is in the public interest; accommodates the needs of State, local, or private entities, including for the 

economy and community growth and expansion; and is in accordance with other land use goals, 

objectives, and planning decisions; 

Results in net gain of important and manageable resource values on public lands such as crucial 

wildlife habitat, significant cultural sites, high-value recreation areas, high quality riparian areas, live 

water, special status species habitat, or areas key to maintenance of productive ecosystems; 

Ensures the accessibility of public lands in areas where access is needed and cannot otherwise be 

obtained; 

Is essential to allow effective management of public lands in areas where consolidation of ownership 

is necessary to meet resource management objectives; and/or

Results in acquisition of lands that serve a national priority as identified in national policy directives.

LT-CA-MA-2. Initiate tribal consultation early in the process for any land tenure adjustments.

LT-CA-MA-3. In general, lands with the following characteristics would be retained in Federal ownership: 

Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, and Candidate species habitat and designated critical habitat; 

Those lands specifically identified by the tribes as having special importance related to treaty and/or 

traditional uses/values;
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-204

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

National Register of Historic Places eligible and listed properties; and 

Wildlife tracts.

These lands could be disposed of if the transaction helped achieve resource objectives; see the Cultural 

Resources section for additional guidance for disposal of lands containing National Register properties or 

other important cultural resources. Lands acquired under the Land and Water Conservation Fund must be 

retained.

LT-CA-MA-4. BLM’s acquisition priorities (not in priority order) would include:

Land identified by Shoshone-Paiute Tribes or Shoshone-Bannock Tribes;

Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, or Candidate species habitat; 

BLM Type 2 Sensitive species habitat;

Lands within special designations; 

Big game winter range; 

Riparian areas; 

Lands containing known archaeological, paleontological, or historical values determined by the BLM 

to be unique or of traditional or scientific importance;

Lands that would provide public access to public lands, including but not limited to river access; 

Lands that would help consolidate public land; 

Lands that would help improve livestock grazing management; and

Lands adjacent to Zones 1 and 2.

LT-CA-MA-5. Vegetation treatments, construction of new range infrastructure, and other public land 

improvements in areas involved in a land tenure transaction would be kept to a minimum.

LT-CA-MA-6. Disposal of public lands would be subject to all valid existing rights, including existing 

rights-of-way. Existing public access through those lands may be retained if necessary for BLM 

management or for accommodating uses.

LT-CA-MA-7. Use land acquisition, exchanges, and conservation easements to support achievement of 

the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands and facilitate restoration of native species and 

their habitat.

LT-CA-MA-8. No new Desert Land Act or Carey Act applications would be accepted for lands. The Desert 

Land Act and Carey Act applications submitted prior to 2009 (Case numbers IDD-7401, IDI-7402, IDI27888, and IDI-27889) would be processed within 10 years of the signing of the Record of Decision. 

LT-CA-MA-9. Manage newly acquired lands and lands returned to BLM the same as adjacent BLM lands 

(e.g., acquired lands within wilderness would be managed as wilderness).

LT-III-MA-1. Sales of public lands can be made upon consideration of the following criteria:

The parcel, because of its location or other characteristics, is difficult and uneconomic to manage as 

part of the public lands, and is not suitable for management by another Federal department or 

agency; 

The parcel was acquired for a specific purpose and is no longer required for that or any other Federal 

purpose; or 

Disposal of the parcel would serve important public objectives, including but not limited to, expansion 

of communities and economic development which cannot be achieved prudently or feasibly on land 

other than public land and which outweigh other public objectives and values. These include, but are 

not limited to, wildlife, grazing, recreation, and scenic values which would be served by maintaining 

such parcel in Federal ownership.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resource Uses

2-205

•

•

•

2.5.3.6 Minerals 

Leasable Minerals

Leasable minerals include oil shale, oil and gas, phosphate, potash, sodium, geothermal resources, and 

other minerals that may be developed under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended.

Goal

LE-CA-G-1. Provide leasable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other 

resources.

Objective

LE-III-O-1. Facilitate reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound exploration and development of 

leasable minerals where compatible with resource and wildland fire prevention and suppression 

objectives.

Allocations

LE-III-A-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, the Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study 

Area, eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; and the Bruneau-Jarbidge and 

Sand Point Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs; 79,000 acres) would be closed to mineral 

leasing.

LE-III-A-2. The majority of the planning area (1,292,000 acres) would be open to mineral leasing, subject 

to laws, regulations, and formal orders; and the terms and conditions of the standard lease form. 

However, exploration and development activities would not be allowed during fire restrictions. Areas that 

would be subject to additional moderate or major constraints specific to Alternative III are as follows:

Moderate constraints (8,000 acres): Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) would be open to mineral 

leasing, consistent with the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

Major constraints (9,000 acres): The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone would be 

open to mineral leasing with no surface occupancy (NSO). 

See Map 118 for locations of leasable mineral allocations.

LE-III-A-3. Areas open or closed to exploration and development of non-energy leasable minerals (e.g. 

phosphate) would follow allocations outlined above.

Management Actions

LE-C-MA-1. Geothermal exploration, drilling, utilization, and reclamation projects would incorporate 

stipulations, best management practices, and management procedures from the Record of Decision and 

Resource Management Plan Amendments for Geothermal Leasing in the Western United States 

(December 2008) found in Appendix B.

LE-CA-MA-1. The terms and conditions of the standard lease form (Form 3100-11, Offer to Lease and 

Lease for Oil and Gas) or future versions of the form would apply to all mineral leases.

LE-CA-MA-2. The following stipulations for Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) Section 7 

Consultation and Cultural Resource Protection would be used unless new stipulations are directed by 

BLM policy:

ESA Section 7 Consultation Stipulation – The lease area may now or hereafter contain plants, 

animals, or their habitats determined to be Threatened, Endangered, or other special status species. 

The BLM may recommend modifications to exploration and development proposals to further its 

conservation and management objective to avoid BLM-approved activity that would contribute to a 

need to list such a species or their habitat. The BLM may require modifications to or disapprove 
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-206

•

•

•

•

proposed activity that is likely to result in jeopardy to the continued existence of a proposed or listed 

Threatened or Endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of a 

designated or proposed critical habitat. The BLM would not approve any ground-disturbing activity 

that may affect any such species or critical habitat until it completes its obligations under applicable 

requirements of the ESA, including completion of any required procedure for conference or 

consultation.

Cultural Resource Protection Stipulation – This lease may be found to contain historic properties 

and/or resources protected under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), American Indian 

Religious Freedom Act, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, Executive Order 

13007, or other statutes and executive orders. The BLM would not approve any ground-disturbing 

activities that may affect any such properties or resources until it completes its obligations under 

applicable requirements of the NHPA and other authorities. The BLM may require modification to 

exploration or development proposals to protect such properties, or disapprove any activity that is 

likely to result in adverse effects that cannot be successfully avoided, minimized, or mitigated.

LE-CA-MA-3. Exceptions, waivers, and modifications may not be made for the following lease

stipulations:

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Special Status Species Habitat: ESA Section 7 Consultation

and 

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Cultural Resources: Cultural Resource Protection Stipulation.

LE-CA-MA-4. Lease stipulations, conditions of approval, and actions would be developed to achieve 

resource objectives on a site-specific basis. 

LE-CA-MA-5. Mineral leasing and development decisions also apply to geophysical exploration.

LE-CA-MA-6. Exploration and development of non-energy leasable minerals would follow standard

stipulations outlined above; additional stipulations would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

LE-CA-MA-7. Leasable mineral development activities would avoid special status species habitat if the 

activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. Permits would 

include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

LE-CA-MA-8. For those leasable mineral development activities conducted pursuant to valid existing 

rights that pose risks to achievement of management objectives, use existing authorities to mitigate 

and/or require, to the extent authorized, design features that would contribute to the maintenance of 

streambanks, shorelines, streambed configuration, water quality, amount and distribution of woody 

debris, thermal regulation, characteristic erosion rates, and amount and distribution of source habitats.

LE-CA-MA-9. Locate leasable mineral project related infrastructure outside RCAs. Where there is no 

alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. Keep the number of roads 

to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission and revegetate roads no 

longer required for mineral management and related activities.

LE-CA-MA-10. New leasable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LE-CA-MA-11. Develop inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for leasable mineral activities

within or affecting RCAs. Evaluate and apply the results of inspection and monitoring to modify mineral 

plans, leases, or permits as needed to achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

LE-III-MA-1. Exceptions, waivers, or modifications may be made for lease stipulations as described 

below:

NSO Stipulation for Oregon NHT Protective zone – Surface occupancy is not allowed within the 

Oregon NHT protective zone. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resource Uses

2-207

o

o

o

•

•

•

•

•

Exception: After coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer, the BLM authorized 

officer may grant an exception if an environmental review demonstrates the action as proposed or 

conditioned would not impair the integrity of the trail.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may grant a waiver if an environmental review demonstrates

the action as proposed or conditioned would only impact non-contributing trail segments.

Modification: This stipulation may not be modified.

LE-III-MA-2. The BLM authorized office may restrict surface use (exploration, construction, and drilling) 

during fire restrictions.

Salable Minerals

Salable minerals include minerals and building materials such as sand, stone, gravel, pumice, pumicite, 

cinders, and clay.

Goal

SA-CA-G-1. Provide salable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other 

resources.

Objective

SA-III-O-1. Provide salable minerals needed for community and economic purposes and facilitate their 

reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound development where available and compatible with 

resource and wildland fire prevention and suppression objectives.

Allocations

SA-CA-A-1. The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone and the Kelton and Toana Freight 

Road protective corridors (27,000 acres) would be closed to new salable mineral development. See NHTCA-MA-8 and CR-CA-MA-12. 

SA-III-A-1. The majority of the planning area would be open to salable mineral development (1,266,000 

acres), subject to site-specific NEPA analysis, stipulations, and 43 CFR 3600 regulations, except for the 

following areas which are closed to salable mineral exploration and development (78,000 acres):

The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness;

The Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; 

Sand Point, Bruneau-Jarbidge, and Salmon Falls Creek Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 

(ACECs); and 

Playas (300-feet buffer). 

See Map 125 for locations of salable mineral allocations.

Management Actions

SA-C-MA-1. Promote the use of existing sites for mineral disposals. 

SA-C-MA-2. Exploration would be allowed where appropriate under a letter of authorization from the BLM 

authorized officer. Exploration for new sites would be the responsibility of the applicant. 

SA-CA-MA-1. Salable mineral development activities would avoid special status species habitat if the 

activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. Permits would 

include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

SA-CA-MA-2. All mineral material sites would be reclaimed in accordance with resource objectives for the 

adjacent area as specified in the permit.
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-208

•

•

•

•

•

SA-CA-MA-3. Site specific terms, conditions, and special considerations would be included in all 

commercial salable mineral permits to protect resource values.

SA-CA-MA-4. Stipulations for community pits would be developed on a site-specific basis. 

SA-CA-MA-5. For those salable mineral development activities conducted pursuant to valid existing rights 

that pose risks to achievement of goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands, use existing 

authorities to mitigate and/or require, to the extent authorized, design features that would contribute to the 

maintenance of streambanks, shorelines, streambed configuration, water quality, amount and distribution 

of woody debris, thermal regulation, characteristic erosion rates, and amount and distribution of source 

habitats.

SA-CA-MA-6. Locate salable mineral project related infrastructure outside Riparian Conservation Areas

(RCAs). Where there is no alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. 

Keep the number of roads to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission

and revegetate roads no longer required for mineral management and related activities.

SA-CA-MA-7. New salable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

SA-III-MA-1. New sites may be developed if it is determined by the BLM authorized officer that an existing 

site would not meet the applicant’s needs and site impacts can be sufficiently mitigated.

Locatable Minerals

Minerals or materials subject to claim and development under the Mining Law of 1872, as amended. 

Generally includes metallic minerals such as gold and silver, and other materials not subject to lease or 

sale (some bentonites, limestone, talc, some xeolites, etc.).

Goal

LO-CA-G-1. Locatable mineral development would not cause unnecessary and undue degradation of 

resources. 

Objective

LO-CA-O-1. Facilitate reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound exploration and development 

of locatable minerals. 

Allocations

LO-C-A-1. The planning area, excluding the following withdrawn areas (60,000 acres), would be available 

for location of mining claims: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and 

 Designated Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridors.

LO-III-A-1. Recommend the following areas for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable exploration and 

development (28,000 acres): 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, Salmon Falls Creek, and Sand Point Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 

(ACECs); 

The Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone; and 

Eligible and suitable WSR corridors.

See Map 132 for locations of areas recommended for withdrawal and withdrawn by statute. 

Recommendations by BLM for withdrawal are subject to final consideration by the Secretary of the 

Interior. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Resource Uses

2-209

Management Actions

LO-CA-MA-1. Determine whether locatable mineral plans of operation cause unnecessary and undue 

degradation to resources, including habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species, on a caseby-case basis and identify stipulations or mitigation measures as appropriate. 

LO-CA-MA-2. Locate mineral project related infrastructure outside Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs). 

Where there is no alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. Keep the 

number of roads to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission and 

revegetate roads no longer required for mineral management and related activities.

LO-CA-MA-3. New locatable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LO-CA-MA-4. Develop inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for locatable mineral activities

within or affecting RCAs. Evaluate and apply the results of inspection and monitoring to modify mineral 

plans, leases, or permits as needed to achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

2.5.4 Special Designations

2.5.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 

Goal

ACEC-III-G-1. ACECs would be managed to protect the important biological, cultural, scenic, and historic 

resources that meet the criteria for relevance and importance. 

Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC

Objective

ACEC-III-O-1. Manage the lands within the Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC to protect their fish, wildlife, 

botanical, scenic, and cultural resource values.

Allocation

ACEC-III-A-1. Manage 57,000 acres of public land as the Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC (Map 138).

Management Actions

ACEC-III-MA-1. All actions within the portions of the ACEC that are also within the Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness must be consistent with the Wilderness Act and the Omnibus Public Lands 

Management Act of 2009 and with allocations and management actions made for wilderness.

ACEC-III-MA-2. The ACEC would be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment with 

integrated weed management techniques for control, containment, and where practical, eradication. Use 

of domestic sheep or goats to reduce noxious weeds would not be allowed within the ACEC to eliminate 

potential contact with bighorn sheep.

ACEC-III-MA-3. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.

ACEC-III-MA-4. Manage the ACEC as Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class I. 

ACEC-III-MA-5. Placing salt or other supplements within the ACEC would not be allowed to reduce 

livestock use of bighorn sheep habitat and protect winter range. 

ACEC-III-MA-6. Monitor recreational use within the ACEC. If recreational use reaches levels that impair 

the relevant and important values of the ACEC, implement protective measures appropriate to the type of 

recreational activity. Protective measures may include: 
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-210

•

•

•

 Implementing a permit system for the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers in coordination with the Bruneau 

Field Office, 

 Requiring the use of certified weed-free forage and straw, and 

 Designating camping areas outside the ACEC.

ACEC-III-MA-7. Special Recreation Permits would be allowed within ACECs as long as the relevant and 

important values are protected. 

ACEC-III-MA-8. Motorized vehicle use within the ACEC would be limited to designated routes. To avoid 

disturbing bighorn sheep during wintering and lambing periods or to protect other relevant and important 

values, seasonal closures of specific designated routes may be considered in the Travel Management 

Plan. 

ACEC-III-MA-9. Some designated routes within and adjoining the ACEC, including the road to Indian Hot 

Springs, could be improved to reduce resource damage due to road braiding, improve public safety, and 

facilitate visitor traffic. 

ACEC-III-MA-10. The ACEC would be a right-of-way (ROW) avoidance area; no overhead authorizations 

would be allowed.

ACEC-III-MA-11. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1; where practical, acquire 

private inholdings. The ACEC designation and management would apply to lands acquired within the 

ACEC boundary.

ACEC-III-MA-12. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing.

ACEC-III-MA-13. The ACEC would be closed to salable mineral development.

ACEC-III-MA-14. Recommend lands within the ACEC for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable 

exploration and development.

Salmon Falls Creek ACEC

Objective

ACEC-III-O-2. Protect scenic values, redband trout habitat, golden eagle nests, special status wildlife 

including prairie falcons and spotted bats, and native vegetation communities.

Allocation

ACEC-III-A-2. Manage 3,000 acres of public land as the Salmon Falls Creek ACEC (Map 138).

Management Actions

ACEC-III-MA-15. All actions within the portion of the ACEC that is also a Wilderness Study Area must be 

consistent with Management of Wilderness Study Areas (BLM Manual 6330). 

ACEC-III-MA-16. Restore vegetation within the riparian area to benefit redband trout habitat (e.g., 

increasing shade in the riparian area).

ACEC-III-MA-17. Use native species for any vegetation treatments within the ACEC, including for 

Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation. 

ACEC-III-MA-18. The ACEC would be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment 

with integrated weed management techniques for control, containment, and where practical eradication. 

ACEC-III-MA-19. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Special Designations

2-211

ACEC-III-MA-20. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used to suppress wildland fires within the 

ACEC.

ACEC-III-MA-21. Manage the portion of the Jarbidge ROW corridor within the ACEC as VRM Class III; 

manage the remainder of the ACEC as VRM Class I.

ACEC-III-MA-22. The ACEC would remain closed to livestock grazing. 

ACEC-III-MA-23. Monitor recreational use within the ACEC. If this use reaches levels that impair the 

relevant and important values of the ACEC, implement protective measures appropriate to the type of 

recreational activity. 

ACEC-III-MA-24. The ACEC north and south of Lilly Grade crossing would remain closed to motorized 

vehicle use.

ACEC-III-MA-25. The ACEC would remain a ROW avoidance area; new ROWs would be restricted to the 

Jarbidge ROW corridor and locations of existing ROWs.

ACEC-III-MA-26. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1.

ACEC-III-MA-27. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing.

ACEC-III-MA-28. The ACEC would remain closed to salable mineral development.

ACEC-III-MA-29. Recommend lands within the ACEC for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable 

exploration and development.

Sand Point ACEC

Objective

ACEC-III-O-3. Protect the Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT), archaeological sites, vertebrate and 

invertebrate paleontological resources, and the Glenns Ferry geologic formation.

Allocation

ACEC-III-A-3. Manage 1,000 acres of public land as the Sand Point ACEC (Map 138).

Management Actions

ACEC-III-MA-30. Manage paleontological resources within the ACEC in accordance with the 1988 Sand 

Point Natural History Management Plan or subsequent revision. Modify the 1988 plan to encompass the 

Morgan property extension and to be in conformance with the RMP. 

ACEC-III-MA-31. The ACEC would be closed to fossil collecting except under permit for scientific 

research. 

ACEC-III-MA-32. Limit BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses that may contribute 

to water or wind erosion in the ACEC.

ACEC-III-MA-33. Work cooperatively with adjacent land owners to reduce or eliminate run-off from the 

agricultural fields that erode soils within the ACEC.

ACEC-III-MA-34. No surface-disturbing activities would be allowed in the ACEC unless they are directly 

related to research on the ACEC’s cultural, paleontological, or geological resources or they can be 

mitigated.

ACEC-III-MA-35. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used to suppress wildland fires within the 

ACEC to protect the paleontological resources. The BLM authorized officer may allow the use of bull 
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-212

dozers to construct control lines within the ACEC on a case-by-case basis. However, dozer lines would 

be rehabilitated to minimize erosion.

ACEC-III-MA-36. Manage the ACEC as VRM Class III, except within the Oregon NHT protective zone, 

which would be managed as VRM Class II.

ACEC-III-MA-37. The ACEC would be available for livestock grazing.

ACEC-III-MA-38. New range infrastructure may be considered if it does not impair the relevant and 

important values of the ACEC. Any infrastructure would be located so that it does not increase or 

encourage livestock trailing across fossil-bearing areas, cultural resource sites, or Oregon NHT ruts.

ACEC-III-MA-39. Salt or other livestock supplements would not be placed within 0.25 mile of fossilbearing areas or cultural resource sites. Locations closed to salt or other livestock supplements would be 

made known to the livestock permittees.

ACEC-III-MA-40. Motorized vehicle use within the ACEC would be limited to designated routes.

ACEC-III-MA-41. Consider upgrading the Wilson Grade Road if there is increased need for access for fire 

suppression activities or research.

ACEC-III-MA-42. Structures directly related to the preservation or interpretation of the site may be 

allowed (e.g., kiosks, protective barriers).

ACEC-III-MA-43. The ACEC would be a ROW exclusion area.

ACEC-III-MA-44. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1. 

ACEC-III-MA-45. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing.

ACEC-III-MA-46. The ACEC would be closed to salable mineral development.

ACEC-III-MA-47. Recommend lands within the ACEC for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable 

exploration and development.

2.5.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 

Goal

NHT-CA-G-1. The Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor would be managed to preserve and 

protect the historic, scenic, and recreational values associated with the trail. 

Objective

NHT-CA-O-1. Protect, preserve, and provide opportunities to experience the historic, scenic, and 

recreational values of the Oregon NHT.

Allocation

NHT-III-A-1. Manage 1.5 miles on either side of the Oregon NHT as the National Trail Management 

Corridor (42,000 acres). Within the corridor, manage 0.25 mile on either side of the Oregon NHT or the 

visual horizon (whichever is narrower) as a protective zone (11,000 acres). 

See Map 143 for the location of the Oregon NHT.

Management Actions

NHT-CA-MA-1. Update the BLM’s 1984 Oregon Trail Management Plan and ensure consistency with the 

National Park Service’s 1999 Oregon NHT Comprehensive Management and Use Plan.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Special Designations

2-213

•

•

•

NHT-CA-MA-2. Until the 1984 plan is updated and unless otherwise directed in this document, continue 

to manage the Trail in accordance with the 1984 plan and BLM policy, and in cooperation with the 

National Park Service.

NHT-CA-MA-3. Manage the Oregon NHT protective zone as an avoidance area for surface-disturbing 

activities, including: 

 Placement of salting, supplemental feeding, temporary watering, and temporary holding facilities for 

livestock;

Staging areas for recreational activities and events; and

Staging areas for fire suppression and rehabilitation activities.

NHT-CA-MA-4. If use of a designated route within the Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor

is degrading the trail or its setting, the route would be modified or closed.

NHT-CA-MA-5. Design and implement restoration projects to mitigate the effects of natural and humancaused disturbances within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor. When practical, remove or 

modify visually intrusive facilities within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor. 

NHT-CA-MA-6. Lands within the Oregon NHT protective zone are not available for disposal; non-BLM 

lands within the corridor are a high priority for acquisition.

NHT-CA-MA-7. The Oregon NHT protective zone is open to leasable mineral exploration and 

development with no surface occupancy. 

NHT-CA-MA-8. The Oregon NHT protective zone is closed to new salable mineral development. Existing 

salable mineral developments could be renewed but the footprint could not be expanded.

NHT-CA-MA-9. Adverse effects to the Oregon NHT related to land use authorizations would be prevented 

through avoidance of impacting activities or through mitigation when disturbance or destruction is 

unavoidable. 

NHT-CA-MA-10. Developments such as roads, trails, pipelines, fences, and powerlines may be allowed 

to cross the Oregon NHT where the project is determined by the BLM, with the State Historic Preservation 

Officer concurrence, to not adversely affect the trail due to previous disturbance or visual intrusions. 

NHT-CA-MA-11. Surface-disturbing equipment, such as bulldozers and road graders, cannot be used on 

contributing segments of the Oregon NHT, or within the protective zone of such segments, unless to 

protect life or property.

NHT-CA-MA-12. Use techniques that minimize surface disturbance within the Oregon NHT protective 

zone during seeding projects (Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation, fuels treatments, 

or restoration). Trail remnants would not be disturbed during seeding operations.

NHT-CA-MA-13. Use educational and public outreach programs to minimize or prevent human-caused 

damage to the Oregon NHT including vandalism, unauthorized surface collection of artifacts, and 

unintentional disturbances.

NHT-CA-MA-14. Install and maintain signs identifying the routes of the Oregon NHT.

2.5.4.3 Wilderness 

Goal and Objective

WD-C-G-1. Manage the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to protect wilderness values.
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-214

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Management Action

WD-C-MA-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness was designated by Congress in 2009 with the 

Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009, Section G, P.L. 111-11. The 90,000 acre BruneauJarbidge Rivers Wilderness Area (63,000 acres within the planning area) would be managed according to 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan. 

See Map 145 for the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness location.

2.5.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 

Goal and Objective

WSR-C-G-1. Maintain or enhance the outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs), free-flowing condition, 

and water quality of designated, suitable, and eligible WSR segments.

Allocations

WSR-C-A-1. River segments designated as Wild and Scenic include:

A 38.1-mile segment of the Bruneau River from the downstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness to the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau River, except for a 0.5-mile 

segment at the Indian Hot Springs public road access, to be administered as a wild river; 

A 0.5-mile segment of the Bruneau River at the Indian Hot Springs public road access to be 

administered as a recreational river; 

A 0.3-mile segment of the West Fork of the Bruneau River from the confluence with the Jarbidge 

River to the downstream boundary of the Bruneau Canyon Grazing Allotment to be administered as a 

wild river; and

A 27.9-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau 

River to the upstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to be administered as a 

wild river.

WSR-C-A-2. Segments recommended suitable for inclusion in the WSR system include:

A 23.0-mile segment of the Bruneau River from Blackrock Crossing to 0.3 mile above the confluence 

of the West Fork of the Bruneau River and the Jarbidge River.

WSR-C-A-3. Segments eligible for inclusion in the WSR system include: 

A 39.0-mile segment of Salmon Falls Creek from the Nevada border to Salmon Falls Reservoir and 

from Salmon Falls Dam to Balanced Rock Park; 

 A 25.0-mile segment of the Three Island, King Hill, and Hagerman reaches of the Snake River; 

A 10.2-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the planning area boundary to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 9.6-mile segment of the Jarbidge River, East Fork from the planning area boundary to Murphy Hot 

Springs and from Murphy Hot Springs to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 2.7-mile segment of Dave Creek from private land boundary to Jarbidge River, East Fork 

confluence;

A 1.0-mile segment of Cougar Point Creek from the planning area boundary to Jarbidge River, East 

Fork confluence; and 

A 1.5-mile segment of Rocky Canyon Creek from its headwaters to Salmon Falls Creek, North Fork 

confluence.

See Map 146 for locations of designated, suitable, and eligible river segments.

WSR-C-A-4. Wild and Scenic River corridors are designated to extend either the average distance of 

0.25 mile from the high water mark on each side of the river segment; or the distance to the nearest 

confined canyon rim, whichever is shorter. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Special Designations

2-215

WSR-C-A-5. Wild and Scenic River corridors that are suitable or eligible extend outward from the ordinary 

high water mark 0.25 mile on both sides of the river.

Management Actions

WSR-C-MA-1. Manage the designated segments of the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers in accordance with 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan to maintain or 

enhance their ORVs, free-flowing condition, water quality, and classification.

WSR-C-MA-2. Manage the suitable segment of the Bruneau River to maintain or enhance its ORVs, freeflowing condition, water quality, and tentative classification until Congress acts.

WSR-C-MA-3. Protect or enhance the qualifying values of eligible river segments pending a subsequent 

suitability determination or designation decision by Congress. Their free-flowing condition cannot be 

modified, their ORVs and water quality are to be maintained or enhanced, and their tentative classification 

is to be maintained.

WSR-C-MA-4. Conduct suitability studies and make suitability determinations on eligible river segments 

entirely within the planning area; coordinate suitability studies on segments forming the boundary with the 

Burley and Shoshone Field Offices. 

WSR-C-MA-5. The existing powerline south of Murphy Hot Springs on the East Fork of the Jarbidge River 

would be retained; designated, suitable, and eligible WSR corridors would be right-of-way avoidance 

areas.

WSR-C-MA-6. If, through legislation, Congress decides not to designate a suitable segment as part of the 

Wild and Scenic River System, the protective management outlined in this section would no longer apply 

and these segments would be managed according to direction in other sections of the RMP. 

WSR-III-MA-1. Designated, suitable, and eligible WSR corridors would be closed to exploration and 

development of leasable or salable minerals.

2.5.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs)

Goal and Objective

WSA-C-G-1. Manage and protect the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA to preserve wilderness 

characteristics so as not to impair the suitability for designation by Congress as wilderness.

Allocation

WSA-C-A-1. Manage 2,000 acres of public land as the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA. 

See Map 145 for the WSA location.

Management Actions

WSA-C-MA-1. Manage the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA according to the Management of Wilderness 

Study Areas (BLM Manual 6330) until Congress either designates the land as wilderness or releases it for 

other uses. 

WSA-C-MA-2. If the WSA is designated by Congress as Wilderness, manage it according to 

Congressional mandates and BLM’s Wilderness Manual 6340 until a Wilderness Management Plan is 

developed.

WSA-C-MA-3. If the WSA is released for other uses by Congress, manage the lands within the Area of 

Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) and Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridor according to 

management specified for that ACEC and WSR corridor.
Chapter 2: Alternative III Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Social and Economic Features

2-216

2.5.5 Social and Economic Features

2.5.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 

Goal

SE-CA-G-1. Management of the resources and uses of public lands would provide social and economic 

benefits to residents, businesses, visitors, and future generations.

Objective

SE-CA-O-1. Provide opportunities for economic and social benefit while maintaining natural and cultural 

resource values. 

Management Actions

SE-CA-MA-1. Planning for BLM management activities and authorized uses would consider whether the 

activity or action could be designed to support the social, economic, and environmental health and 

sustainability of affected communities of place.

SE-CA-MA-2. Consider proposals from communities of place and interest that contribute to their social, 

economic, and environmental health and sustainability. 

2.5.5.2 Hazardous Materials

Goal

HM-CA-G-1. Ensure hazardous substances on public lands remain a high priority for removal or 

mitigation. 

Objective

HM-CA-O-1. Mitigate issues related to hazardous substances. 

Management Actions

HM-CA-MA-1. Storage, treatment, or disposal of hazardous materials on public lands would not be 

allowed unless otherwise permitted by law. 

HM-CA-MA-2. Use law enforcement and public outreach to discourage the disposal of hazardous 

materials on public lands. 

HM-CA-MA-3. Storage and use of hazardous materials on public lands would not be allowed without BLM 

authorization.

HM-CA-MA-4. Responses to hazardous materials incidents and sites would be as outlined and approved 

by the latest contingency plans for hazardous materials incidents (e.g., 2013 Twin Falls District BLM 

Environmental Contingency Plan for Emergency Preparedness and Response to Oil and Hazardous 

Materials Incidents).

HM-CA-MA-5. Identify and mitigate illegal hazardous material disposal sites and hazardous materials 

spills in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations.

HM-CA-MA-6. Develop interagency agreements with local law enforcement agencies to facilitate the 

enforcement of illegal hazardous material disposal and hazardous material laws.

HM-CA-MA-7. Coordinate with local government agencies during hazardous material prevention and 

response activities.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative III

Social and Economic Features

2-217

•

•

•

•

2.5.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 

Goal and Objective

IOE-CA-G-1. Working with partners, provide interpretation, outreach, and environmental education to 

highlight the natural, cultural, and historic features of the planning area and to further resource protection 

and public safety. 

Management Actions

IOE-CA-MA-1. Focus education, interpretation, and outreach on resources and activities occurring within 

the planning area. 

IOE-CA-MA-2. Partner with the tribes and Federal, State, and local agencies to educate the public on 

resource protection through activities such as education tours; kiosks at major entrances to the planning 

area; interpretive signs at off-highway vehicle staging areas; information on the identification, control, and 

prevention of noxious weeds and invasive plants; and programs such as Tread Lightly!® and Leave No 

Trace®. 

IOE-CA-MA-3. Create displays highlighting natural, cultural, and historic features of the planning area for 

use at area fairs, schools, public lands day, and other events. 

IOE-CA-MA-4. Participate in events that educate youth about natural resources.

IOE-CA-MA-5. Minimize or prevent human-caused damage to public land resources, including vandalism, 

illegal dumping, and unauthorized surface collection of fossils and artifacts, through educational and 

interpretive outreach programs.

IOE-CA-MA-6. Foster the public's understanding of the role of fire in the ecosystem, the hazards 

associated with living in the Wildland Urban Interface, and wildland fire prevention and suppression 

activities through methods such as: 

 Using mass media, 

 Providing outreach to local groups, 

 Developing interpretive signs and kiosks, and

Participating in County Wildfire Protection Plans. 

IOE-CA-MA-7. Provide interpretation and education on unique resource areas such as the Oregon 

National Historic Trail, Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, Wilderness, Wilderness Study Areas, and 

Wild and Scenic Rivers.

IOE-CA-MA-8. Provide education and outreach on resource protection for recreational users. 
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Tribal Rights and Interests

2-218

2.6 ALTERNATIVE IV

2.6.1 Tribal Rights and Interests

Goals and Objectives

TI-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to protect resources and values associated with Native American treaty 

rights. 

TI-CA-G-2. Manage natural and cultural resources of importance to the tribes in a manner that respects 

tribal beliefs, traditions, and values. 

TI-CA-G-3. Protect the physical condition of sacred sites and traditional cultural properties and preserve 

tribal access to such sites.

Management Actions

TI-CA-MA-1. Consult with the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes and Shoshone-Bannock Tribes in accordance with 

BLM policy and other authorities. Consultation would be an ongoing process between BLM and the tribes, 

within the context of general management of public lands and programs, as well as specific proposals 

that may affect natural and cultural resources of importance to the tribes.

TI-CA-MA-2. Identify the effects of decisions on vegetation, fish, wildlife, mineral, and water resources of 

importance to the tribes, through consultation, and seek ways to lessen or avoid impacts. 

TI-CA-MA-3. Work collaboratively with the tribes regarding the identification and management of 

traditional cultural properties. 

TI-CA-MA-4. Provide general information to staff and contractors regarding existing and historic uses of 

the planning area by the tribes, Federal government trust responsibilities, and the importance of Native 

American treaty rights in order to foster a greater understanding and appreciation of tribal rights and 

interests related to public land management. 

2.6.2 Resources

2.6.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 

Goal

AAV-CA-G-1. Ensure BLM management activities and authorized uses maintain the quality of the 

planning area's air resources.

Objective

AAV-CA-O-1. Maintain the quality of air resources and limit impacts to air quality to meet National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards and Idaho Department of Environmental Quality air quality standards. 

Management Actions

AAV-CA-MA-1. Manage the planning area airshed as Class II unless it is reclassified by the State 

through the process prescribed in the Clean Air Act.

AAV-CA-MA-2. Ensure BLM management activities and authorized uses, including prescribed fire, are 

designed to comply with Federal, State, and local air quality regulations, classifications, and standards.

AAV-CA-MA-3. Minimize impacts of smoke from prescribed fires to sensitive areas such as the Class I 

airshed of the Jarbidge Wilderness (on US Forest Service-managed land), non-attainment areas, and 

communities adjacent to the planning area. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

2-219

AAV-CA-MA-4. Coordinate with the Montana-Idaho Airshed Group Smoke Management Program or its 

equivalent for all actions related to prescribed fire. 

AAV-CA-MA-5. Develop dust abatement stipulations for BLM-authorized construction and maintenance 

activities that have the potential to exceed State of Idaho air quality standards.

AAV-CA-MA-6. Design BLM activities and authorized uses to minimize night time light intrusions (e.g., 

modifications to the structure and timing of lighting).

AAV-CA-MA-7. Design BLM activities and authorized uses to comply with State of Idaho requirements for 

noise management.

2.6.2.2 Geologic Features 

Goal

GE-CA-G-1. Manage unique geologic features for their tribal, scientific, recreational, and educational 

values. 

Objective

GE-CA-O-1. Protect unique geologic features and provide opportunities for their use and enjoyment.

Management Actions

GE-CA-MA-1. Protect unique geologic features from human-caused damage or extraction. 

GE-CA-MA-2. Conduct and maintain a cave inventory with participation from the tribes and interested 

organizations to identify and compile quantitative and qualitative data on cave resources and to determine 

cave significance in accordance with the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988.

GE-CA-MA-3. Based on the results of the cave inventory, designate significant caves and protect their 

resources. 

GE-CA-MA-4. Set management objectives and setting prescriptions for significant caves.

2.6.2.3 Soil Resources

Goal and Objective

SR-CA-G-1. Manage resources and uses to maintain or enhance biological and physical functions and 

stability of soils. 

Management Actions

SR-CA-MA-1. Minimize soil erosion by maintaining perennial vegetation cover based on site potential.

SR-CA-MA-2. Design construction, maintenance, and land treatments to reduce impacts to soils. 

SR-CA-MA-3. Collaborate with County Highway Districts to reduce impacts from road maintenance along 

stream corridors and in areas of highly erosive soils.

SR-CA-MA-4. Reduce the erosive effects of transportation and travel by modifying routes or mitigating 

the impacts (e.g., water bars or control structures) where problems are identified. 

SR-CA-MA-5. Revegetate or stabilize areas where BLM management activities or authorized uses have 

resulted in unanticipated erosion.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-220

SR-CA-MA-6. Where new road construction or reconstruction occurs, the location and design should 

minimize soil erosion, including closure or decommissioning of the road if the need for the road is 

temporary.

SR-CA-MA-7. Soil and snow should not be side cast into surface waters during road maintenance.

SR-IV-MA-1. Mitigate impacts of BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses on soils 

with moderate, severe, or very severe potential for wind erosion (1,129,000 acres; Map 4) or with medium 

or high potential for water erosion (1,296,000 acres; Map 5) for watershed and ecosystem health.

SR-IV-MA-2. Develop and implement an erosion control strategy for new land use authorizations, Special 

Recreation Permits, and mineral exploration and development involving surface disturbance on slopes 

20% to 40% or on soils with moderate, severe, or very severe potential for wind erosion or with medium 

or high potential for water erosion. No surface disturbance from these activities would be allowed on 

slopes greater than 40%.

2.6.2.4 Water Resources

Goal

WR-CA-G-1. Maintain or improve the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of water resources.

Objective

WR-CA-O-1. Make progress towards meeting Federal and State water quality standards. 

Management Actions

WR-CA-MA-1. Priority streams for restoration of water quality include streams containing special status 

species and their habitat (Map 24), fish-bearing streams, and water quality impaired streams (Map 6). 

Map 6 displays the location of streams meeting these criteria in 2011; this map can be updated to reflect 

changes in a stream’s status through the life of the plan.

WR-CA-MA-2. Prevent or mitigate the impacts of BLM management activities and authorized and allowed 

uses on water quality to comply with Federal, State, and local water quality regulations.

WR-CA-MA-3. Modify or suspend BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses that are 

a factor in not meeting water quality standards.

WR-CA-MA-4. Where applicable, incorporate best management practices to maintain and improve water 

quality (Appendix B). Recommendations may be implemented from State water quality plans to achieve 

the goal and objective (e.g., Idaho Agricultural Pollution Abatement Plan).

WR-CA-MA-5. Consider new water development projects and improvements to existing water 

development projects if impacts to water and riparian resources can be mitigated; see the Livestock 

Grazing section for additional guidance on water developments. See the Wildland Fire Ecology and 

Management section for guidance on water developments for fire suppression activities.

WR-CA-MA-6. Consult or coordinate with the tribes and with Federal, State, and local agencies when 

determining location and designs for water development projects.

WR-CA-MA-7. Coordinate with Idaho Department of Water Resources, Idaho Department of 

Environmental Quality, and Nevada Division of Environmental Protection to identify opportunities to 

mitigate impacts of water management on public land resources.

WR-CA-MA-8. Where total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for water quality restoration are developed, 

land management activities would be consistent with the water quality restoration plan and TMDLs.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

2-221

•

•

•

•

•

•

WR-CA-MA-9. Water bodies that are supporting beneficial uses (e.g., cold water biota, salmonid 

spawning, recreation, and agriculture) would be managed to meet or exceed State of Idaho and Nevada 

regulations.

WR-CA-MA-10. Consult or coordinate as appropriate with tribal, Federal, State, and local governments to 

identify and secure instream flows needed to maintain riparian resources, channel conditions, and aquatic 

habitat.

WR-CA-MA-11. Apply chemicals (i.e., herbicides, pesticides, insecticides, and other toxicants) in a 

manner that does not impair water quality or prevent attainment of objectives for riparian areas and 

wetlands and avoids adverse effects on inland non-game fish and their habitat. When applying chemicals

in a Riparian Conservation Area (RCA), a spill kit would be onsite as appropriate. Prohibit storing and 

mixing chemicals within RCAs unless there are no other practical alternatives.

WR-CA-MA-12. Prohibit storage of fuels and other toxicants and refueling within RCAs unless there are 

no other practical alternatives. Any refueling sites and/or storage areas within an RCA would have an 

approved refueling and spill containment plan.

2.6.2.5 Vegetation Communities

Upland Vegetation

The Upland Vegetation section outlines goals and objectives for vegetation treatments. Management 

actions for restoration treatments, treatments for annual communities, and treatments for perennial 

communities are described in this section. Treatments for weeds and fuels are in the Noxious Weeds and 

Invasive Plants and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

For management and analysis purposes, the 55 vegetation communities in the planning area were 

grouped into five vegetation sub-groups (VSGs; see the Upland Vegetation section in Chapter 3 for 

vegetation communities included in each VSG); Map 9 displays existing vegetation as of 2011. 

Vegetation communities were grouped into VSGs based on the dominant vegetation and community 

structure as well as similarity in management objectives:

Annual communities – dominated by invasive annual grasses; includes communities with and 

without a shrub overstory.

Non-Native Perennial communities – dominated by non-native perennial grasses; some also have 

an overstory of four-wing saltbush or rabbitbrush.

Non-Native Understory communities – dominated by non-native perennial grasses in the 

understory; have an overstory of Wyoming big sagebrush, basin big sagebrush, black sagebrush, or 

low sage.

Native Grassland communities – dominated by native perennial grasses; do not have a shrub 

overstory.

Native Shrubland communities – dominated by native perennial grasses in the understory; have a 

shrub overstory; also includes aspen, juniper, and mountain mahogany communities which are 

present in small, scattered inclusions within other native shrubland communities.

Unvegetated areas – include breaks, barren areas, and sand dunes.

The planning area was divided into Vegetation Management Areas (VMAs) A, B, C, and D, creating westeast bands across the planning area based on potential natural community, elevation, and mean annual 

precipitation (Map 8). 

Goals

UV-CA-G-1. Manage upland vegetation communities to promote soil stability, water infiltration, nutrient 

cycling, and energy flow; provide habitat for sage-grouse and other sagebrush steppe obligates; and 

provide for multiple use.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

A

A

2-222

VMA A

UV-IV-G-1. Manage vegetation to restore the resiliency of ecosystem structure and function and reduce 

fragmentation of habitat for sage-grouse and other native species. 

Objective

VMA A 

UV-IV-O-1. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 83,000 33,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 94,000 88,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 3,000 3,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 34,000 17,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 5,000 78,000

Unvegetated Areas 2,000 2,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA A

UV-IV-MA-1. Treat approximately 60% of annual plant communities. Areas along the Snake River to the 

top of the canyon rim, drainages into the Snake River, and areas that would help connect native 

grassland and shrubland communities would be restored to native shrubland. Areas adjacent to nonnative perennial communities would be treated using non-native species.

UV-IV-MA-2. Restore approximately 25% of non-native perennial plant communities to native shrubland. 

Treatments would focus on connecting native grassland and shrubland communities in the Saylor Creek 

Herd Management Area and in the eastern portion of the VMA. Natural succession of shrubs would be 

allowed in the remainder of the non-native perennial communities.

UV-IV-MA-3. Non-native understory communities would not be a focus for active restoration treatments to 

native shrubland. Treatments in these areas would focus on introducing forbs to the understory.

UV-IV-MA-4. Restore approximately 50% of native grassland communities to native shrubland. 

Treatments would focus on areas adjacent to native shrubland communities. Natural succession of 

shrubs would be allowed throughout native grassland communities.

UV-IV-MA-5. Native shrubland communities may be treated to introduce forbs and late-seral grasses to 

the understory. Forb species could include both native and non-native species.

UV-IV-MA-6. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

A

VMA B

A

2-223

Objective

VMA B

UV-IV-O-2. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 39,000 10,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 212,000 73,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 19,000 76,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 211,000 106,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 125,000 341,000

Unvegetated Areas 24,000 24,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA B

UV-IV-MA-7. Treat approximately 75% of annual communities. Areas adjacent to native grassland and 

shrubland communities would be restored to native shrubland; areas adjacent to non-native perennial 

communities would be treated with non-native species.

UV-IV-MA-8. Restore approximately 40% of non-native perennial communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on the Inside Desert Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) and areas in the central 

and eastern portion of the VMA adjacent to native communities. Introduce shrubs into approximately 30% 

of non-native perennial communities, focusing on areas adjacent to native communities. Natural 

succession of shrubs would be allowed in the remainder of the non-native perennial communities. 

UV-IV-MA-9. Restore approximately 33% of non-native understory communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on areas adjacent to native communities. The remainder of the non-native understory 

communities may be treated to introduce forbs to the understory. 

UV-IV-MA-10. Restore approximately 50% of native grassland communities to native shrubland. 

Treatments would focus on areas that would expand or connect native shrubland communities. Natural 

succession of shrubs would be allowed throughout native grassland communities. 

UV-IV-MA-11. Native shrubland communities may be treated to introduce forbs and late-seral grasses to 

the understory.

UV-IV-MA-12. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

A

VMA C 

A

2-224

Objective

VMA C

UV-IV-O-3. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 2,000 2,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 46,000 0 

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 26,000 48,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 150,000 37,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 78,000 215,000

Unvegetated Areas 11,000 11,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA C

UV-IV-MA-13. Treatment of annual communities would be limited due to the location of these areas at 

canyon bottoms and within wilderness. Localized treatments may be used when necessary.

UV-IV-MA-14. Restore approximately 50% of non-native perennial communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on ACECs and islands within native communities. Treat the remaining non-native perennial 

communities to introduce shrubs; natural succession of shrubs would also be allowed in non-native 

perennial communities. 

UV-IV-MA-15. Restore approximately 5% of non-native understory communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on areas adjacent to native communities. The remainder of the non-native understory 

communities may be treated to introduce forbs to the understory. 

UV-IV-MA-16. Restore approximately 75% of native grassland communities to native shrubland. 

Treatments would focus on areas that would expand or connect native shrubland communities. Natural 

succession of shrubs would be allowed throughout native grassland communities.

UV-IV-MA-17. Native shrubland communities may be treated to introduce forbs and late-seral grasses to 

the understory.

UV-IV-MA-18. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

A

VMA D 

A

2-225

Objective

VMA D

UV-IV-O-4. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 1,000 500

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 4,000 0 

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 12,000 5,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 80,000 8,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 97,000 181,000

Unvegetated Areas 11,000 11,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA D

UV-IV-MA-19. Restore approximately 50% of annual communities to native shrubland, focusing on Taylor 

Pocket and areas near China Creek.

UV-IV-MA-20. Restore approximately 75% of non-native perennial communities to native shrubland; 

treatment would focus on areas adjacent to native shrubland communities. The remaining non-native 

perennial communities would be treated to introduce shrubs; natural succession of shrubs would be 

allowed throughout non-native perennial communities. 

UV-IV-MA-21. Restore approximately 67% of non-native understory communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on areas adjacent to native shrubland communities. The remainder of the non-native understory 

communities may be treated to introduce forbs to the understory. 

UV-IV-MA-22. Restore approximately 90% of native grassland communities to native shrubland.

UV-IV-MA-23. Native shrubland communities may be treated to introduce forbs and late-seral grasses to 

the understory.

UV-IV-MA-24. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections.

Management Actions

All VMAs

UV-CA-MA-1. Design BLM management activities and authorized uses to consider plant reproductive 

and physiological needs with a focus on the critical growing season, as well as vegetation objectives; 

guidelines for specific uses are found in the appropriate sections.

UV-CA-MA-2. Implement drought management guidelines during periods of drought to maintain or 

achieve long-term resource productivity (Appendix F).
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-226

•

•

•

•

UV-CA-MA-3. Rest vegetation treatment areas from uses, including but not limited to livestock and wild 

horse grazing and recreational use, until treatment objectives are met and are predicted to be 

sustainable. This management action would not apply to uses that do not conflict with the treatment 

objectives.

UV-IV-MA-25. The first priority for implementing vegetation treatments would be treatments identified for 

VMA D to improve sage-grouse habitat; the second priority would be treatments identified for VMA C to 

reconnect and expand habitat for sage-grouse. Opportunities for treatments outside these priority areas 

would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

UV-IV-MA-26. Focus restoration treatments identified for each VMA on habitat for sage-grouse, other 

special status species, mule deer, and pronghorn.

UV-IV-MA-27. The toolbox to restore or treat upland vegetation communities would include:

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; 

Targeted grazing; and 

Prescribed fire.

See the Glossary for definition of targeted grazing.

UV-IV-MA-28. Upland vegetation treatments may use native species, including cultivars of native species, 

and non-native species, consistent with management actions to achieve vegetation objectives. Native 

species would be used in vegetation treatments when practical, with special emphasis on species of 

importance to the tribes. Desirable non-native species may be used on harsh or degraded sites, when 

native seed is not available, or where they would structurally mimic the natural plant community and 

prevent soil loss and invasion by noxious weeds and invasive plants. The non-native species used would 

be those that have the highest probability of establishment on these sites. These "placeholders" would 

maintain the area for potential future native restoration. Native seed would be used more frequently and 

at larger scales as species adapted to local areas become more available.

UV-IV-MA-29. Establish 75 ungrazed reference areas (12,000 acres total) in annual, non-native 

perennial, non-native understory, native grassland, and native shrubland communities (Map 11). Each 

reference area would be approximately 160 acres and would be paired with an adjacent grazed area in a 

similar vegetation type and condition to monitor the effects of livestock grazing on a variety of plant 

communities.

UV-IV-MA-30. Reseed areas disturbed during project construction, maintenance, or removal with a

mixture of native grasses, forbs, or shrubs that are appropriate to the ecological site. 

UV-IV-MA-31. Assess biological soil crusts and manage them to move toward site potential by modifying 

levels and timing of BLM management activities and authorized uses during periods when soil crusts are 

most vulnerable to damage.

Riparian Areas and Wetlands

Goal

RI-CA-G-1. Achieve healthy, functioning watersheds, riparian areas, wetlands, and associated aquatic 

habitats.

RI-CA-G-2. Provide habitat to support populations of well-distributed native and desired non-native plant, 

vertebrate, and invertebrate populations that contribute to the sustainability of riparian-dependent 

communities. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

2-227

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

RI-CA-G-3. Maintain or improve naturally functioning vegetation communities that include natural timing 

and variability of surface and groundwater in riparian areas and wetlands, and diversity and productivity of 

native and desired non-native plant communities. 

Objectives

RI-IV-O-1. Maintain 85 miles of Priority 3 streams at proper functioning condition (PFC); improve 77 miles 

of Priority 1 streams and 21 miles of Priority 2 streams to achieve PFC; and improve the remaining 42 

miles of Priority 2 streams to be moving toward PFC over the life of the plan. 

RI-IV-O-2. Manage wetlands to move toward PFC.

Management Actions

RI-CA-MA-1. Identify Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) around riparian areas and wetlands that 

contain or are tributaries to streams that contain special status species or their habitat to protect riparian 

vegetation, fisheries, and water quality. RCA widths would be as follows:

Category 1 – Fish-bearing streams: The RCA consists of the stream and the area on either side of 

the stream. This area extends from the edges of the active channel to the top of the inner gorge, to 

the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, or 300 feet 

slope distance (600 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), whichever is widest.

Category 2 – Permanently flowing non-fish-bearing streams: The RCA consists of the stream and the 

area on either side of the stream. This area extends from the edges of the active channel to the top of 

the inner gorge, to the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, to the outer edges of the riparian 

vegetation, or 150 feet slope distance (300 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), 

whichever is widest.

Category 3 – Ponds, lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands greater than one acre: The RCA consists of the 

body of water or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, to the extent of 

the seasonally saturated soil, or 150 feet slope distance from the edge of the maximum pool elevation 

of constructed ponds and reservoirs, or from the edge of the wetland, pond, or lake, whichever is 

widest.

Category 4 – Seasonally flowing or intermittent streams, wetlands less than one acre, landslides, and 

landslide-prone areas: This category includes features with high variability in size and site-specific 

characteristics. The RCA includes the intermittent stream channel and the area to the top of the inner 

gorge, the intermittent stream channel or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian 

vegetation, the area from the edges of the stream channel, wetland, or slide/landslide-prone area, or 

50 feet slope distance, whichever is widest.

RI-CA-MA-2. Use adaptive management to reduce impacts on riparian areas and wetlands from uses and 

activities (see the Aquatic and Riparian Management Strategy [ARMS], Appendix D). 

RI-CA-MA-3. Riparian management priorities would include the following:

Priority 1 streams – Streams rated as functioning-at-risk or functioning-at-risk with a downward 

trend. The management emphasis for Priority 1 streams would be restoration. 

Priority 2 streams – Streams rated as functioning-at-risk with an upward trend or non-functioning. 

The management emphasis for Priority 2 streams would be restoration.

Priority 3 streams – Streams rated at PFC. The management emphasis for Priority 3 streams would 

be on maintaining proper function.

Specific streams are prioritized in the ARMS (Appendix D, Tables D-3 and D-5).

RI-CA-MA-4. Assess condition of wetlands associated with ponds and springs.

RI-CA-MA-5. Survey aquatic habitat (instream, riparian, and wetland) and maintain aquatic habitat 

inventories.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-228

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

RI-CA-MA-6. Consider authorizing activities or facilities where long-term benefits outweigh short-term 

impacts to riparian vegetation and fish habitat.

RI-CA-MA-7. Remove nonessential human-made structures and objects that adversely impact the 

function of floodplains (e.g., unused bridge abutments, unused diversions, abandoned cars).

RI-CA-MA-8. Modify existing management activities and authorized uses in RCAs to attain PFC and 

ensure that habitat conditions of streams, riparian areas, and wetlands are moving toward achieving the 

goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

RI-CA-MA-9. Conduct new management activities within or affecting RCAs only if they are consistent with 

achieving the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. New management activities would 

avoid or reduce adverse effects on inland non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs. 

RI-CA-MA-10. Trees may be felled in RCAs when they pose a safety risk. Keep felled trees on-site when 

needed to maintain or improve riparian or instream conditions. 

RI-CA-MA-11. Cooperate with tribal, Federal, State, and local agencies and private landowners to 

develop watershed-based coordinated resource management plans or other cooperative agreements to 

achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

RI-IV-MA-1. Within the priorities identified in the ARMS (Appendix D), stream reaches containing special 

status species or their habitat would be a high priority for restoration. 

RI-IV-MA-2. The toolbox for restoration of stream reaches would include, but not be limited to: 

 Road closures, 

 Culvert replacements, 

 Closing pastures, 

 Exclosure fencing, 

 Modification or removal of water developments, 

 Planting of riparian areas, 

 Active herding, 

Reintroduction of beaver, 

 Erosion control measures, 

 Riparian pastures, 

 Instream fish habitat improvements, and 

Modification or elimination of land uses that prevent attainment of the goals and objectives for riparian 

areas and wetlands.

RI-IV-MA-3. Conduct multiple indicator surveys on riparian areas according to BLM policy.

RI-IV-MA-4. Establish 10 ungrazed riparian reference areas (3,000 acres total; Map 11). Each reference 

area would be paired with an adjacent grazed area in a similar vegetation type and condition to monitor 

the effects of livestock grazing on a variety of plant communities.

2.6.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 

Fish

Native aquatic species in the planning area can be described in three broad categories:

Aquatic species Federally listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973,

Aquatic species identified on the BLM Sensitive species list for Idaho and Nevada, and

Other non-game fish present in the planning area.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

2-229

Aquatic species included in the first two categories are discussed in the Special Status Species section. 

The goals, objectives, and management actions for other non-game fish (i.e. sculpin, suckers, and 

minnows) are provided below. For a majority of the streams within the planning area, the habitat needs 

for non-game fish are met through goals, objectives, and management actions for special status species 

in riparian areas, wetlands, and streams. The goals, objectives, and management actions below 

encompass the streams containing only non-game fish.

Goal

FI-IV-G-1. Manage public lands to promote diverse, structured, resilient, and connected habitats for nongame fish. 

Objective

FI-IV-O-1. Maintain or improve streams so 70% of the miles of non-game fish-bearing streams and their 

perennial tributaries are managed for properly functioning condition. The remaining 30% of miles of nongame fish-bearing streams and their perennial tributaries would be moving toward properly functioning 

condition. 

Management Actions

FI-CA-MA-1. Maintain, improve, or restore native non-game fish habitat through actions identified for 

riparian areas, water resources, and special status species through restoration priorities in the Aquatic 

and Riparian Management Strategy (ARMS; Appendix D). Incorporate best management practices to 

maintain and improve habitat for non-game fish (Appendix B).

FI-CA-MA-2. Inventory and monitor non-game fish habitat. Use adaptive management as outlined in the 

ARMS to minimize impacts to non-game fish habitat from uses and activities (Appendix D).

FI-CA-MA-3. Activities within riparian areas and wetlands would be designed to mitigate impacts to the 

riparian and aquatic habitat(s) containing non-game fish. 

FI-CA-MA-4. To avoid adverse effects on non-game fish and instream flows, locate water drafting sites in 

upland areas (e.g., stock ponds, storage tanks, hydrants). Where these water sources are not available, 

locate water drafting sites at existing stream road crossings (e.g., bridges, culverts, fords) to divert water

in a manner that does not retard or prevent achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas 

and wetlands. 

FI-CA-MA-5. Design and implement watershed restoration projects in a manner that promotes the longterm ecological integrity of ecosystems, conserves the genetic integrity of non-game fish species, and 

contributes to the achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

FI-CA-MA-6. New fisheries and instream channel restoration projects would avoid or minimize adverse 

effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and Riparian Conservation Areas. 

FI-CA-MA-7. Cooperate with Federal and State fish management agencies to identify and reduce 

adverse effects on non-game fish associated with habitat manipulation, fish stocking, fish harvest, and 

illegal harvest.

Wildlife

Goal

WI-IV-G-1. Manage public lands to promote diverse, structured, resilient, and connected habitats for 

wildlife.

Objective

WI-IV-O-1. Maintain or improve wildlife habitat by managing uses and activities and actively restoring 

annual, non-native perennial, and native communities.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-230

•

•

•

•

Management Actions

WI-CA-MA-1. When making management decisions affecting big game, use the most current big game 

winter range map provided by Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) and the Nevada Department 

of Wildlife. Areas considered big game winter range as of 2011 are shown on Map 17. 

WI-CA-MA-2. Implement habitat projects to maintain or improve habitat for mule deer and pronghorn 

when and where needed. 

WI-CA-MA-3. Under Executive Order 13186, promote the maintenance and improvement of migratory 

bird habitat quantity and quality through the permitting process for all land use authorizations. Avoid, 

reduce, or mitigate adverse impacts on the habitats of migratory bird species of conservation concern to 

the extent feasible, and in a manner consistent with regional or statewide bird conservation priorities.

WI-CA-MA-4. Incorporate best management practices (BMPs) for wildlife into BLM management activities 

and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B). Specific BMPs would be applied at the project level.

WI-CA-MA-5. Install and maintain BLM approved wildlife escape devices on troughs and open tanks.

WI-CA-MA-6. Modify existing and construct new fences to comply with BLM standards for wildlife 

(Karsky, 1999). Existing fences would be modified according to the following priority order: 

Key sage-grouse habitat, 

Big game winter range, 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, and

The remainder of the planning area. 

WI-CA-MA-7. Schedule construction and maintenance activities to avoid or minimize disturbance to 

priority species and their habitat during their important seasonal periods (see WI-IV-MA-1 for a list of 

priority species). 

WI-CA-MA-8. Schedule energy-related activities (e.g., exploration, development, and maintenance) to 

avoid or minimize disturbance to priority species and their habitat during important seasonal periods. 

WI-IV-MA-1. Sage-grouse, other special status species, mule deer, and pronghorn are priority species for 

habitat management. 

Special status species management is discussed in the Special Status Species section.

WI-IV-MA-2. Focus vegetation treatments for mule deer and pronghorn winter range on areas as shown 

on Map 17. 

WI-IV-MA-3. Plant desirable browse species appropriate to site potential on big game winter range where 

browse was reduced by past wildland fires. Species may include, but not be limited to: winter fat, fourwing saltbush, bitterbrush, chokecherry, and serviceberry.

WI-IV-MA-4. Reconfigure wildlife tracts to reduce conflicts with uses, to improve management efficiency, 

and to increase the average size of individual tracts (from 13,000 acres to 14,000 acres; Map 18). 

Prepare a Jarbidge Wildlife Tracts Management Plan for joint IDFG-BLM management of wildlife tracts

through a public process and to obtain partners for projects to improve wildlife values. 

WI-IV-MA-5. Minimize disturbance to raptors by restricting construction or other authorized human 

activities both spatially and seasonally. Restrictions would be required during courtship and nesting

(February 1 through July 31) and applied as appropriate. Buffer distances from raptor nests during 

nesting would be as follows (Whittington and Allen, 2008): 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

2-231

Raptor Species Spatial Buffer

Bald eagle 0.5 to 1.0 mile

Northern goshawk 0.50 mile

Ferruginous hawk 1.00 mile

Golden eagle 0.50 mile

Peregrine falcon 1.00 mile

Red-tailed hawk 0.33 mile

Prairie falcon 0.50 mile

Swainson’s hawk 0.25 mile

Burrowing owl 0.25 mile

2.6.2.7 Special Status Species

Goal

SS-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to contribute to the conservation and recovery of sage-grouse and 

other special status species. 

Objective

SS-IV-O-1. Maintain or improve the quality and quantity of habitat for sage-grouse and other special 

status species by managing public land activities to sustain or benefit those species.

Management Actions

SS-C-MA-1. Follow conservation measures in relevant biological opinions and letters of concurrence, as 

appropriate. Conservation measures in place as of 2012 can be found in Appendix E; conservation 

measures can be updated, revised, or replaced through future consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife 

Service (FWS).

SS-CA-MA-1. Special status species management would apply to Endangered, Threatened, Candidate, 

and Proposed species (Type 1 BLM Sensitive); other BLM Sensitive species (Types 2 through 4); and 

proposed or designated critical habitat; this includes plants, fish and other aquatic species, and wildlife. 

SS-CA-MA-2. Special status species management would not apply to species that are removed from the 

BLM Sensitive species list. Those species would be managed according to applicable delisting 

requirements, conservation strategies, BLM guidance, and Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) 

or Nevada Department of Wildlife management guidance.

SS-CA-MA-3. Management of one special status species would take into account the needs of other 

special status species.

SS-CA-MA-4. Follow applicable conservation plans, strategies, and agreements for special status 

species (Appendix E). 

SS-CA-MA-5. Monitor special status species and their habitats, and maintain data on their populations, 

distribution, and habitats. Use adaptive management or mitigation to reduce impacts on special status 

species and their habitats from uses and activities.

SS-CA-MA-6. Work cooperatively with tribes, Federal and State agencies, private landowners, and 

companies to identify and mitigate threats to special status species and habitat on BLM-managed lands. 

SS-IV-MA-1. Where alternative management strategies would result in the same relative effect to a 

species, implement those strategies most beneficial to other resources, where practical. 

SS-IV-MA-2. Support projects to identify and monitor pollinators of special status plants.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-232

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

SS-IV-MA-3. Evaluate special status plant habitat, and where it has been historically occupied, 

reintroduce special status plant species where practical. 

SS-IV-MA-4. Conduct habitat suitability evaluations for potential reintroductions of special status wildlife, 

fish, and aquatic invertebrates in cooperation with FWS, IDFG, NDOW, and other interested and affected 

parties. Work with FWS, IDFG, and NDOW on reintroductions as appropriate.

Management Related to Resource Uses

SS-CA-MA-7. Leasable and salable mineral development activities should avoid special status species 

habitat if the activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. 

Permits would include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

SS-CA-MA-8. Promote conservation and recovery of special status species through land actions such as:

Conservation easements that protect or conserve special status species habitat,

Land acquisitions or exchanges that improve management of special status species, and

Acquisition of lands with a high value for special status species.

SS-CA-MA-9. New communication sites would avoid special status species habitat if the project would 

have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be reduced. 

SS-CA-MA-10. Right-of-way construction and maintenance activities should avoid disturbing special 

status species during important seasonal periods, unless the disturbance can be mitigated.

SS-IV-MA-5. Adjust livestock use levels, season of use, or other management techniques to maintain or 

enhance special status species and their habitat.

SS-IV-MA-6. Construct, maintain, modify, or remove range infrastructure and other facilities as necessary 

to maintain or enhance special status species and their habitat.

Management for Special Status Species in Upland Areas

SS-CA-MA-11. Manage native shrubland communities in a landscape context to ensure that the seasonal 

habitat needs of sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate species are met across the planning area, 

where site conditions are suitable.

SS-CA-MA-12. Mark fences that have been identified as a collision risk to improve fence visibility for 

sage-grouse, using appropriate collision diverters or other reasonable approaches. Fences posing higher 

risks to sage-grouse are generally within 1.25 miles of a lek and are:

On flat topography,

Where spans exceed 12 feet between T-posts,

Without wooden posts, or

Where fence densities exceed 1.6 miles of fence per section (640 acres) (Stevens et al., 2011). 

SS-CA-MA-13. Maintain or improve the habitat for special status species by protecting and restoring their 

habitat, controlling noxious weeds and invasive plants, and minimizing direct habitat disturbance.

SS-CA-MA-14. When designing seed mixes for vegetation treatments and surface-disturbing projects, 

consider the needs of special status species and their habitat in the project area.

SS-CA-MA-15. Use seeding methods that minimize impacts to special status species populations.

SS-CA-MA-16. If a conflict between authorized uses and bighorn sheep is identified, schedule authorized 

uses to avoid pastures that contain bighorn sheep habitat during breeding, wintering, and lambing periods 

to minimize disturbance during these important seasonal periods.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

2-233

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

SS-CA-MA-17. Avoid locating new transmission lines, phone lines, or communication towers/facilities in 

native shrubland and native grassland communities to minimize impacts to sage-grouse. If a transmission 

or phone line project must be located in sage-grouse habitat, the project should incorporate measures to 

reduce impacts to sage-grouse such as: 

Burying lines;

Using devices or structure design to deter raptor and raven perching and nesting; 

Avoiding construction and maintenance during important seasonal periods for sage-grouse; 

 Restoring or improving sage-grouse habitat outside the project area; 

 Constructing lines, towers, and related facilities in lower quality habitats; and

Clustering or co-locating facilities.

SS-IV-MA-7. Implement management actions described in the Upland Vegetation section to maintain or 

improve habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species. Upland vegetation management to 

benefit sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate special status species includes, but is not limited to: 

 Restoring annual, non-native perennial, and non-native understory communities toward native; 

 Restoring native grassland communities to native shrublands; and 

 Introducing forbs and late-seral grasses to native shrubland communities. 

See the Upland Vegetation section for more details.

SS-IV-MA-8. BLM management activities and authorized uses within one mile of known ferruginous hawk 

or prairie falcon nests would be designed to minimize impacts to their prey base and availability of nesting 

material from February through July.

SS-IV-MA-9. Remove troughs and reservoirs within one mile of bighorn sheep habitat; relocate troughs 

and reservoirs more than one mile from bighorn sheep habitat if the watering site is needed for livestock 

grazing.

SS-IV-MA-10. Remove fences and corrals within one mile of bighorn sheep habitat, except fences for 

pasture and allotment boundaries or for other resource protection.

SS-IV-MA-11. New troughs, reservoirs, permanent fences, and corrals would be located at least one mile 

from bighorn sheep habitat.

SS-IV-MA-12. Fences identified to protect resources would be allowed and would be designed to meet 

the needs of bighorn sheep.

SS-IV-MA-13. Trailing of domestic sheep or goats would not be authorized in allotments containing 

bighorn sheep habitat.

SS-IV-MA-14. Conversions from cattle to domestic sheep or goats would not be allowed in allotments 

containing bighorn sheep habitat.

SS-IV-MA-15. Minimize the transmission of disease by maintaining a nine-mile separation between 

domestic sheep/goats and bighorn sheep. The separation would be accomplished by:

Not converting cattle animal unit months (AUMs) to domestic sheep or goat AUMs, 

Not allowing trailing of domestic sheep or goats within that separation distance, and

Requiring a herder to be present during trailing of domestic sheep or goats.

Management for Special Status Species in Riparian Areas, Wetlands, and Streams

SS-CA-MA-18. Incorporate best management practices as appropriate to maintain and improve habitat 

for special status fish and aquatic invertebrates (Appendix B).
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-234

•

•

•

•

SS-CA-MA-19. Identify and eliminate, where feasible, migration barriers to special status fish species 

movement.

SS-CA-MA-20. Identify and implement specific habitat improvement projects in redband trout habitat to 

reduce habitat fragmentation and promote their long-term recovery. Projects may include, but not be 

limited to:

Replacing culverts,

Working with private landowners so diversions are not a barrier,

Screening diversions, and

Planting riparian vegetation.

SS-CA-MA-21. Implement specific habitat improvement projects for Jarbidge River bull trout (bull trout) as 

identified in the Recovery Plan for the Jarbidge River Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout.

Additional management direction for BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses in 

special status species habitat can be found in the Resource Uses sections.

2.6.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 

Goal

NW-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to prevent, eliminate, or control noxious weeds and invasive plants.

Objective

Noxious Weeds

NW-IV-O-1. Reduce the number of acres containing noxious weeds by at least 50%; reduce the number 

of noxious weed species present.

Invasive Plants

NW-IV-O-2. Reduce cover of invasive plants in native communities to less than 5%; reduce cover of 

invasive plants in non-native perennial and non-native understory communities to less than 10%.

Management Actions

NW-CA-MA-1. Apply herbicides consistent with BLM policy.

NW-CA-MA-2. Inventory noxious weeds and invasive plants. 

NW-CA-MA-3. Consult with the tribes on herbicide use to consider timing of projects and impacts to 

plants of importance to the tribes.

NW-CA-MA-4. Formulate methods of control in or near special status species habitat on a site-specific

and species-specific basis to minimize impacts to special status species. 

NW-CA-MA-5. Incorporate best management practices for noxious weeds and invasive plants into BLM 

management activities and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B).

NW-CA-MA-6. Include site-specific stipulations in land use authorizations, permits, and leases to limit 

introduction and spread of noxious weeds.

NW-CA-MA-7. Collaborate with Federal agencies, State and County governments, non-governmental 

organizations, and individuals to establish a Jarbidge Cooperative Weed Management Area or other 

cooperative agreements for noxious weed and invasive plants management. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

2-235

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

NW-CA-MA-8. Use of certified weed-free forage, seed, straw, and mulch (as defined in the Idaho Noxious 

Weed Free Forage and Straw Certification Rules [IAC 02.06.31]) would be required for all BLM 

management activities and authorized and allowed uses.

NW-IV-MA-1. Treat areas containing noxious weeds and invasive plants. Priority areas would include (not 

in priority order): 

Special designations, 

Riparian areas, 

Special status species habitat, and 

Native plant communities.

NW-IV-MA-2. Focus control efforts on species with new or small infestations and species that have higher 

potential for resource impacts. Eradicate noxious weeds and invasive plants where practical. Focus 

treatments for large infestations on reducing the size of the infestation.

NW-IV-MA-3. The toolbox for treating noxious weeds and invasive plants would include: 

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; 

Targeted grazing; and 

Prescribed fire. 

NW-IV-MA-4. Develop and implement activities to prevent the introduction and spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants on public lands. The toolbox for preventing introduction and spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants would include:

 Public outreach (e.g., kiosks, media, mailings, publications, brochures) and 

 Modifying uses to minimize new introductions and spread (e.g., closing roads).

2.6.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Wildland Fire Management

Goal

WFM-CA-G-1. Fire management strategies would result in firefighter and public safety and protection of 

property and natural and cultural resources, while considering suppression and rehabilitation costs.

Objectives

WFM-IV-O-1. Strive to reduce average wildland fire size and number of human-caused fire starts within

the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). 

WFM-IV-O-2. Reduce acres burned in vegetation types outside the WUI where more wildland fires have 

burned than desired/historic levels to achieve resilient ecosystem structure and function.

Allocations

WFM-CA-A-1. The planning area would not be available for Wildland Fire Use (1,371,000 acres).

WFM-IV-A-1. Critical suppression areas within the planning area would be (594,000 acres in Alternative 

VI-A; 552,000 acres in Alternative VI-B): 

WUI;

Bruneau-Jarbidge, Inside Desert, Jarbidge Foothills, and Lower Bruneau Canyon Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern (ACECs); and 

Key sage-grouse habitat.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-236

•

•

•

The types of critical suppression areas would remain the same throughout the life of the plan; however, 

the acres and specific locations for the WUI and key sage-grouse habitat can be updated to reflect 

changing conditions. See Maps 33 and 34 for the locations of these areas in 2011 for Alternatives IV-A 

and IV-B, respectively.

WFM-IV-A-2. The remainder of the planning area would be a conditional suppression area (778,000 

acres in Alternative IV-A; 819,000 acres in Alternative IV-B). 

Management Actions

WFM-C-MA-1. Fire management within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness is addressed in the 

Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan.

WFM-CA-MA-1. All wildland fires in critical or conditional suppression areas would receive an Appropriate 

Management Response (AMR). AMR includes any action taken to meet resource objectives identified in 

RMPs and Fire Management Plans (FMPs). AMR ranges across a spectrum of tactical operations (from 

monitoring to aggressive/intensive suppression actions). 

WFM-CA-MA-2. Critical suppression areas represent highest suppression priority. The AMR in critical 

suppression areas assumes suppression actions would be taken to reduce fire size and acres burned 

unless safety warrants alternative strategies. Wildland fire is generally not desired in these areas, with the 

exception of prescribed fire to be used for site preparation as described in the RMP. 

WFM-CA-MA-3. Conditional suppression areas represent areas of lower suppression priority where 

suppression efforts would be adjusted based on resource values and fire’s desired role in the ecosystem. 

The AMR in conditional suppression areas assumes suppression actions would be taken commensurate 

with the values at risk and considering suppression costs. Wildland fire management strategies may be 

changed if fire danger is high or there would likely be undesired fire effects. Conditional suppression 

areas also represent areas where cost of suppression may exceed the value of resources to be protected 

as identified in the RMP.

WFM-CA-MA-4. Areas for Wildland Fire for Resource Benefit would be determined by the BLM after the 

wildland fire has been contained or controlled. Areas where vegetation treatments were planned and 

analyzed in the NEPA process or those ecosystems found to “need more disturbance” through the Fire 

Regime Condition Class process would be candidates for “benefit” fires. Post-fire site visits would be 

required to determine if fire effects actually resulted in conditions that moved the area toward resource 

objectives. 

WFM-CA-MA-5. Revise the FMP as required to incorporate updated fire, vegetation, resource value, 

WUI, and fuels data. The FMP would be used to refine suppression, fuels treatment, community 

assistance, and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation priorities. 

WFM-CA-MA-6. In addition to safety and resource concerns, consider fire suppression and rehabilitation 

costs when evaluating fire suppression techniques.

WFM-CA-MA-7. Work collaboratively with the military to reduce the risk of wildland fire, improve 

suppression logistics on military lands adjacent to public lands, and protect public lands from wildland 

fires originating on military lands. 

WFM-CA-MA-8. Incorporate best management practices for wildland and prescribed fire into BLM 

management activities and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B).

WFM-CA-MA-9. Foster the public's understanding of the role of fire in the ecosystem, hazards associated 

with living in the WUI, and wildland fire prevention and suppression activities through methods such as: 

 Using mass media, 

 Providing outreach to local groups, 

 Developing interpretive signs and kiosks, and 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

2-237

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

 Participating in the County Wildfire Protection Plan process.

WFM-CA-MA-10. Fire suppression strategies, practices, and actions in Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs) should be designed to minimize disturbance to riparian vegetation. 

WFM-CA-MA-11. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used within RCAs unless safety to 

human life or property is an issue. 

WFM-CA-MA-12. Incident bases, camps, helibases, staging areas, helispots, and other centers for 

incident activities would be located outside of RCAs. If the only suitable location for these activities is 

within the RCA, an exemption may be granted by the BLM authorized officer. 

WFM-CA-MA-13. Avoid delivery of chemical retardant, foam, or additives into surface waters. An 

exception is warranted where overriding immediate safety imperatives exist or when the BLM determines 

a fire would cause more long-term damage to fish habitats than chemical delivery to surface waters.

WFM-IV-MA-1. When multiple wildland fire ignitions occur in critical suppression areas, based on the 

management priorities of Alternative IV, the suppression priorities would be (in order of importance):

Vegetation Management Area (VMA) C, 

VMA D, 

VMA B, and

VMA A.

These priorities would also be used for general fire suppression management planning.

WFM-IV-MA-2. Within the perimeter of a contained wildland fire, protect unburned islands of native 

grassland and native shrubland communities. Unburned islands of annual and non-native perennial 

communities within the perimeter of a contained fire may be allowed to burn.

WFM-IV-MA-3. Use minimum impact suppression tactics in:

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness,

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area, 

Oregon National Historic Trail, 

Bruneau-Jarbidge and Sand Point ACECs,

Bull trout habitat,

Slickspot peppergrass habitat, and 

Other areas where appropriate to mitigate potential impacts of fire suppression. 

WFM-IV-MA-4. Improve water availability for fire suppression throughout the planning area, in 

accordance with Idaho and Nevada State Law regarding the appropriation and use of water. 

WFM-IV-MA-5. Design water developments for fire suppression to mitigate impacts to water resources. 

Water developments are limited to hydrants off pipelines. Water storage may be increased by enlarging 

and filling stock and storage ponds.

WFM-IV-MA-6. Consistent with other resource objectives, implement measures to reduce response time 

for fire suppression activities including, but not limited to: 

 Building new guard stations, 

 Improving roads, 

 Building new roads in areas with limited access, 

 Improving stream crossings, and 

 Developing better signage. 
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-238

Tools to improve access would not include building new or improving existing airstrips or building 

heliports. 

WFM-IV-MA-7. Transportation and travel restrictions may be imposed to reduce risk of wildland fire 

during times of fire restrictions, as determined by an authorized officer; restrictions may include, but not 

be limited to closing primitive roads, trails, and areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use. Travel 

related to administrative uses and emergency services may continue during fire restrictions.

WFM-IV-MA-8. Authorized uses may be limited or prohibited to reduce risk of wildland fire as determined 

by the BLM authorized officer. 

WFM-IV-MA-9. Dozer blading should not occur within 300 feet of playas to protect associated cultural 

resources.

Fuels and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation (ES&BAR)

Goals

FE-CA-G-1. Reduce fire hazard within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). 

FE-IV-G-1. Manage vegetation communities outside the WUI to maintain or restore their fire regimes and 

mosaic of successional classes to within their historic range.

Objectives

Fuels

FE-CA-O-1. Manage plant communities within the WUI to reduce relative risk rating. 

FE-IV-O-1. Manage plant communities outside the WUI to move toward Fire Regime Condition Class

(FRCC) 1.

FE-IV-O-2. Implement fuels treatments to protect critical suppression areas; limit the spread, size, and 

intensity of wildland fire; and maintain or improve vegetation.

ES&BAR

FE-IV-O-3. Rehabilitate and stabilize areas to help stabilize soils, promote natural recovery, and establish 

pre-fire or historic vegetation communities.

Management Actions

Fuels

FE-CA-MA-1. Update the FRCC analysis for the planning area when 20% of the planning area has been 

disturbed by wildland fires or treated by fuels projects since the previous FRCC analysis was completed.

FE-CA-MA-2. Progress towards FRCC objectives would be achieved through actions and guidelines 

specified in the Upland Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants, 

and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

FE-CA-MA-3. Coordinate fuels treatments with adjacent landowners and agencies through County 

Wildfire Protection Plans or other methods.

FE-CA-MA-4. Rest fuels treatment areas from uses until treatment objectives are met and are predicted 

to be sustainable or if the treatment is determined by the BLM to be unsuccessful. This would not apply to 

uses that do not conflict with the treatment objectives.

FE-CA-MA-5. Fuels treatments in Riparian Conservation Areas would be designed to maintain or improve 

riparian vegetation. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

2-239

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

FE-IV-MA-1. Implement fuels treatments to reduce fuel loads with consideration for other resource 

objectives.

FE-IV-MA-2. Fuels treatments in the WUI would include fuels reduction treatments and fuel breaks. Fuels 

treatments in the WUI would focus on areas with high and high/moderate relative risk ratings in the 

northern portion of the planning area.

FE-IV-MA-3. Fuels treatments outside the WUI would include: 

 Restoration, 

 Fuel breaks, and 

 Noxious weed and invasive plant treatments. 

FE-IV-MA-4. The toolbox to restore or treat upland vegetation communities would include:

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; 

Targeted grazing; and 

Prescribed fire.

FE-IV-MA-5. Fuels treatments would use native and non-native species.

FE-IV-MA-6. Upland vegetation management related to fuels treatments includes, but is not limited to: 

 Restoring annual, non-native perennial, and non-native understory communities toward native; 

 Restoring native grassland communities to native shrublands; and 

 Introducing forbs and late-seral grasses to native shrubland communities. 

See the Upland Vegetation section for more details.

FE-IV-MA-7. Fuel breaks would follow disturbance corridors or would protect restoration or ES&BAR 

treatments. Construct fuel breaks consistent with objectives in the Upland Vegetation section.

FE-IV-MA-8. Noxious weed and invasive plants management related to fuels treatments includes 

measures for treating and preventing noxious weeds and invasive plants; see the Noxious Weeds and 

Invasive Plants section for more details.

ES&BAR

FE-CA-MA-6. Use the full range of treatment options available to meet ES&BAR objectives, including:

Mechanical treatments,

Drill or broadcast seeding treatments,

Chemical treatments,

Seedling transplants, and

Erosion control structures.

FE-CA-MA-7. Implement the Programmatic ES&BAR Plan and update as needed. Individual ES&BAR 

plans would be completed through the interdisciplinary process to reduce impacts of wildland fire and 

suppression and to achieve resource objectives.

FE-CA-MA-8. Use seed mixes that would help stabilize soils and achieve objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Fish and Wildlife, and Special Status Species sections.

FE-CA-MA-9. Use seed drilling equipment, tools, or techniques that minimize soil disturbance and place 

seed at the correct depth.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-240

FE-CA-MA-10. Rest burned areas from uses, including livestock and wild horse grazing and recreational 

use, until ES&BAR objectives are met and are predicted to be sustainable or if the treatment is 

determined by the BLM to be unsuccessful. This would not apply to uses that do not conflict with the 

treatment objectives.

FE-CA-MA-11. Consider emergency closures to motorized vehicle use when necessary for ES&BAR 

efforts.

FE-IV-MA-9. Consider using temporary fences on a case-by-case basis to protect burned plant 

communities and to allow for uses in pastures with burned plant communities; however, temporary fences 

would not be allowed in pastures with native plant communities. Temporary fences may only be 

considered when there are at least 2,000 unburned acres in the pasture. Reconstruction of fire-damaged 

permanent facilities on BLM-managed lands would follow BLM policy.

FE-IV-MA-10. When planning temporary fences, consider the size of the pasture, the amount burned, the 

amount of pasture unaffected by rehabilitation, resource concerns, location of water, and expense. 

FE-IV-MA-11. Temporary fences would be removed once ES&BAR objectives have been met.

2.6.2.10 Wild Horses 

Goal

WH-IV-G-1. The Saylor Creek Wild Horse Herd Management Area (HMA) would be managed for a 

thriving natural ecological balance.

Objective

WH-IV-O-1. Manage a non-reproducing herd with an appropriate management level (AML) range of 100 

to 200 wild horses in the Saylor Creek Wild Horse HMA.

Allocations

WH-IV-A-1. Manage the entire Saylor Creek Wild Horse Herd Area as an HMA (95,000 acres). 

WH-IV-A-2. Manage the Saylor Creek HMA for a non-reproducing population of wild horses. The 

estimated herd size would be 100 to 200 non-reproducing wild horses. 

WH-IV-A-3. Allocate forage sufficient to maintain the wild horse population within the HMA (2,400 animal 

unit months). 

Management Actions

WH-IV-MA-1. Develop a Herd Management Area Plan. 

WH-IV-MA-2. The HMA would remain open to livestock grazing, although grazing levels would be 

adjusted on an allotment-specific basis to accommodate wild horse numbers.

WH-IV-MA-3. Redesign pasture configurations and fences within the HMA to facilitate wild horse social 

interactions and free-roaming characteristics.

WH-IV-MA-4. Increase the reliability of artificial water sources for horses within the HMA.

WH-IV-MA-5. Commercial Special Recreation Permits would not be allowed in the HMA. 

WH-IV-MA-6. The toolbox for managing a non-reproducing, free-roaming herd in the Saylor Creek HMA 

would include, but not be limited to: 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

2-241

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Gathering all wild horses in the HMA and returning only those horses that meet the population 

criteria,

Placing in the HMA excess wild horses removed from other HMAs within Idaho that meet the 

population criteria until the high end of AML is reached,

Placing wild horses gathered from other states that meet the population criteria in the HMA if wild 

horses from other Idaho HMAs do not place enough horses on the HMA to reach the midpoint of AML 

after ten years, and

Placing additional wild horses that meet the population criteria in the HMA up to the high end of AML 

as the HMA population decreases due to death of horses from natural causes.

WH-IV-MA-7. The population criteria for managing a non-reproducing, free-roaming herd in the Saylor 

Creek HMA would include, but not be limited to: 

Treating all wild horses surgically or chemically to eliminate reproduction capability,

Placing wild horses at least five years of age and older in the HMA to allow for the adoption of 

younger wild horses, and

Freeze marking all wild horses on the neck and/or hip to identify each wild horse within the HMA.

WH-IV-MA-8. No gathers would be conducted in the Saylor Creek HMA after the initial gather, except 

under the following circumstances: 

Emergency situations (i.e. wildland fires) and

Removal of untreated horses unlawfully released in the HMA.

Wild horses would be returned to the HMA once rehabilitation objectives or other criteria outlined in the 

Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation Plan were met.

2.3.2.11 Paleontological Resources 

Goal

PR-CA-G-1. Identify, manage, and protect paleontological resources for scientific research, educational 

purposes, and public use.

Objective

PR-CA-O-1. Identify, manage, and protect important paleontological sites.

Management Actions

PR-CA-MA-1. Implement measures to protect paleontological resources. Measures may include:

Avoidance,

Fencing, 

Stabilization, 

Data recovery through collection or excavation,

Interpretation, or

Administrative closure.

PR-CA-MA-2. Identify areas at risk of damage from illegal activities and implement management to 

discourage those activities.

PR-CA-MA-3. Minimize or prevent human-caused damage to paleontological resources through 

educational and interpretive outreach programs.

PR-CA-MA-4. Analyze effects of surface-disturbing activities on fossil-bearing geologic units (Potential 

Fossil Yield Classification Class 5) and mitigate potential impacts to paleontological resources. 
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-242

•

•

•

•

•

•

PR-CA-MA-5. The collection of paleontological resources would be managed in accordance with the 

Paleontological Resources Preservation Act and 43 CFR 8365. In general, reasonable amounts of 

common invertebrate and plant fossils may be collected for non-commercial personal use without a 

permit. The collection of vertebrate fossils and rare or unusual invertebrate and plant fossils requires a 

permit under the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act.

PR-IV-MA-1. Issue permits for paleontological research to qualified paleontologists if proposed research 

is compatible with Upland Vegetation objectives. 

2.6.2.12 Cultural Resources 

Goals

Management

CR-CA-G-1. Identify, preserve, and protect important cultural resources and ensure they are available for 

appropriate uses by present and future generations.

Protection

CR-CA-G-2. Seek to reduce imminent threats and resolve potential conflicts from natural or humancaused deterioration or potential conflict with other resource uses by ensuring all authorizations for land 

use and resource use complies with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), as amended,

Section 106. 

Objectives

Management 

CR-CA-O-1. Manage and protect cultural resources according to their potential traditional, scientific, 

conservation, public, or experimental value. 

Protection

CR-CA-O-2. Strive to limit the adverse effects of BLM decisions on important cultural resources.

Allocations

CR-CA-A-1. Cultural resources would be allocated as described in Appendix G. 

CR-CA-A-2. The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors include 0.25 mile on either side of 

the trail segments or the visual horizon of those segments, whichever is narrower.

Management Actions

Management

CR-CA-MA-1. Maintain on-going cultural resource inventory information in geographic information system

format in accordance with confidentiality mandates.

CR-CA-MA-2. Identify priority geographic areas for future inventory based on the probability of 

unrecorded cultural resources, and conduct inventories independent of specific land use actions.

CR-CA-MA-3. Implement measures to minimize or prevent damage to cultural resources due to BLM 

management activities, authorized and allowed uses, and human-caused damage such as vandalism, 

unauthorized surface collection of artifacts, and unintentional disturbances. Measures may include:

Avoidance,

Fencing, 

Stabilization, 

Data recovery through collection or excavation,

Interpretation, 

Administrative closure, or
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

2-243

• Proactive law enforcement patrols.

CR-CA-MA-4. Develop cultural resource project plans as needed to address preservation actions for 

cultural resource complexes or individual sites identified as high risk for adverse impacts.

CR-CA-MA-5.Avoid placement of salting, supplemental feeding, watering, and holding facilities for 

livestock that adversely affect the Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors. 

CR-CA-MA-6. Developments such as roads, trails, pipelines, fences, and powerlines may be allowed, 

after consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), to cross segments of the Kelton 

and Toana Freight Roads in areas where previous disturbance has occurred. On occasions where 

adverse impacts are unavoidable, the BLM would require mitigation commensurate with the impacts as a 

condition of authorization.

CR-CA-MA-7. Surface-disturbing equipment, such as bulldozers and road graders, cannot be used on 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligible or contributing segments of the Kelton or Toana 

Freight Roads or within their protective corridors without prior management approval, unless to protect life 

or property.

CR-IV-MA-1. Actively solicit researchers to identify, monitor, and gather data on cultural resources, 

including archaeological, historic, ethnographic, and non-intrusive research. Develop cooperative 

agreements and partnerships with tribes, historical societies, and colleges to encourage research and 

assist with monitoring.

CR-IV-MA-2. Important cultural resources, as determined by the BLM through consultation with tribes 

and/or SHPO, would generally be retained in Federal ownership. Under limited circumstances, after 

appropriate consultation and mitigation, lands containing important cultural resources may be exchanged 

for lands containing resources of greater or equal value.

CR-IV-MA-3. Avoid or minimize new ground disturbance within 300 feet of playas to protect associated 

cultural resources. 

Protection

CR-CA-MA-8. Authorizations for land and resource use would not be approved until compliance with 

Section 106 of the NHPA has been completed and documented, including, where applicable, consultation 

with the SHPO and Federally recognized Indian tribes.

CR-CA-MA-9. Nominate eligible sites for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) on a case-bycase basis.

CR-CA-MA-10. Manage sites that are eligible for the NRHP for their local, regional, or national 

significance. If natural or human-caused deterioration cannot be prevented, BLM would consult with the 

tribes and SHPO, as appropriate, to mitigate the adverse effects.

CR-CA-MA-11. Consider all prudent and feasible alternatives to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on 

cultural resources and their uses when resolving site-specific conflicts between cultural resource use 

allocations and competing land use allocations.

CR-CA-MA-12. The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors are closed to new salable 

mineral development. Existing salable mineral developments could be renewed but the footprint could not 

be expanded.

2.6.2.13 Visual Resources 

Visual Resource Management (VRM) classes identify the degree of acceptable visual change within a 

characteristic landscape. A classification is assigned to public lands based on the guidelines established 

for scenic quality, visual sensitivity, and visibility.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-244

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Class I - Provides primarily for natural ecological changes only. It is applied to wilderness areas, some 

natural areas, and similar situations where management activities are to be restricted.

Class II - Changes in the basic elements caused by a management activity may be evident in the 

characteristic landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate to the visual strength of the existing 

character. 

Class III - Contrasts to the basic elements caused by management activity may be evident and begin to 

attract attention in the landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate in the existing landscape.

Class IV - Contrasts may attract attention and be a dominant feature in the landscape in terms of scale, 

but the change should repeat the basic element of the characteristic landscape.

Class V - Applies to areas where the characteristic landscape has been so disturbed that rehabilitation is 

needed. Generally considered an interim short-term classification until rehabilitation or enhancement is 

completed.

Goal and Objective

VR-CA-G-1. Maintain visual resource characteristics and values of public lands according to VRM

classes.

Allocations

VR-IV-A-1. Areas to be managed as VRM Class I (126,000 acres) include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness;

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors with scenic outstandingly 

remarkable values (i.e., lower Salmon Falls Creek, Cougar Point Creek, Bruneau River, and Jarbidge 

River); and

Bruneau-Jarbidge Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC). 

VR-IV-A-2. Areas to be managed as VRM Class II (69,000 acres) include: 

The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone, 

Browns Bench,

Wilkins Island, 

 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics,

 The Jarbidge River corridor between Murphy Hot Springs and the Jarbidge Forks, and 

 Areas near Buck Creek. 

VR-IV-A-3. Areas to be managed as VRM Class III (374,000 acres in Alternative IV-A; 342,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B) include: 

The Snake River corridor (from the planning area boundary to 0.25 mile above the breaks), 

 The Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor, 

 Right-of-way corridors through areas otherwise managed as VRM Class I or II, 

 Portions of the Jarbidge Foothills and Diamond A Desert not otherwise managed as VRM Class I or 

II, 

Inside Desert ACEC, 

Deadman/Yahoo Special Recreation Management Area, 

The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors, and 

 Lands between the Toana Freight Road protective corridor and Salmon Falls Creek. 

VR-IV-A-4. The remainder of the planning area would be managed as VRM Class IV (802,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 833,000 acres in Alternative IV-B).
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resources

2-245

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

See Maps 45 and 46 for locations of areas allocated to VRM Class I, II, III, and IV.

Management Action

VR-CA-MA-1. BLM management activities and authorized uses would be compatible with VRM class 

objectives as follows:

VRM Class I areas are managed to preserve the existing character of the landscape. The level of 

change to the landscape should be very low and must not attract attention.

VRM Class II areas are managed to retain the existing character of the landscape. The level of 

change to the landscape should be low and repeat the basic elements of form, line, color, and texture 

found in the natural features of the landscape.

VRM Class III areas are managed to partially retain the existing character of the landscape. The level 

of change to the landscape can be moderate and should repeat the basic elements found in the 

natural landscape. Management activities may attract attention, but should not dominate the view of 

the casual observer.

VRM Class IV areas are managed to provide for activities that require major modification of the 

landscape. The level of change to the landscape can be high, and management activities may 

dominate the view and be the major focus of attention. Impacts can still be minimized through location 

and design by repeating the basic elements found in the natural landscape.

2.6.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 

Goal

WC-IV-G-1. Protect wilderness characteristics of Lands with Wilderness Characteristics in Twin Falls 

County as a priority over other multiple uses.

Objectives

WC-IV-O-1. Manage Lands with Wilderness Characteristics in Twin Falls County for their undeveloped 

character and to provide opportunities for primitive recreational activities and solitude.

WC-IV-O-2. Manage Lands with Wilderness Characteristics in Owyhee County, emphasizing other 

multiple uses as a priority over protecting wilderness characteristics.

Management Actions

WC-IV-MA-1. Manage the following Lands with Wilderness Characteristics to maintain wilderness 

characteristics (37,000 acres). These lands include:

Antelope Canyon,

Antelope Pocket 1,

Antelope Pocket 2, 

Black Canyon 2011, 

Browns Bench, and

China Creek. 

See Map 49 for locations.

WC-IV-MA-2. Management for these lands would be as follows:

Retain in Federal ownership (Land Tenure Zone 1); 

Manage as Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class II, with the exception of the existing utility 

corridor managed as VRM III; 

Close to motorized travel vehicle use. See the Transportation and Travel section for more details; 

Close to leasable mineral exploration and development; 

Close to salable mineral development; 
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-246

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

o

o

•

Allow new range infrastructure if the infrastructure would help enhance wilderness characteristics; 

Existing range infrastructure may be maintained; and

Manage as rights-of-way exclusion areas. 

2.6.3 Resource Uses

2.6.3.1 Livestock Grazing

Goals

LG-CA-G-1. Manage livestock grazing to ensure achievement of or movement towards meeting Idaho 

Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management.

LG-IV-G-1. Provide for livestock grazing through proper grazing management to support restoration of the 

resiliency of ecosystem structure and function and to reduce fragmentation of habitat for sage-grouse and 

other native species. 

Objectives

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-CA-O-1. Manage livestock grazing in annual communities to achieve objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

LG-IV-O-1. In native plant communities including the Sandberg/non-native areas, manage livestock 

grazing to help maintain and improve native plant species diversity and abundance, focusing on plant 

reproductive and physiological needs.

LG-IV-O-2. In non-native perennial communities, manage livestock grazing to achieve restoration 

objectives outlined in the Upland Vegetation section.

Range Infrastructure

LG-IV-O-3. Manage (e.g., maintain, improve, build, realign, remove) range infrastructure at levels 

appropriate to the amount of livestock use to provide for efficient management of livestock grazing 

allotments and support resource objectives.

Allocations

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-IV-A-1. The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing (1,324,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 1,355,000 acres in Alternative IV-B). The following areas would not be available for 

livestock grazing (139,000 acres in Alternative IV-A; 108,000 acres in Alternative IV-B):

Canyons or riparian corridors associated with the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers and the following 

creeks: Deer (NV), Dave, Rocky Canyon, and Salmon Falls; 

Inside Desert Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC); 

Wildlife tracts; 

Reference areas; and

Areas not contained within grazing allotments.

See Maps 56 and 57 for locations.

LG-IV-A-2. Allocate vegetation production as follows:

 Native perennial grass production: 

75% to 85% to watershed and wildlife, 

Less than1% to wild horses, and

15% to 25% to livestock. 

 Non-native perennial grass production: 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resource Uses

2-247

o

o

o

•

o

•

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

70% to 80% to watershed and wildlife, 

Less than1% to wild horses, and

20% to 30% to livestock. 

 Annual grass production: 

100% to watershed and wildlife. 

 Shrub and forb production: 

100% to watershed and wildlife. 

Allocate approximately 94,000 to 147,000 animal unit months (AUMs) for livestock at initial 

implementation in Alternative IV-A and approximately 97,000 to 151,000 in Alternative IV-B. At full 

implementation, allocate approximately 78,000 to 123,000 AUMs for livestock in Alternative IV-A and 

81,000 to 127,000 in Alternative IV-B. The purpose of allocating vegetation is to determine the total AUMs 

available for livestock grazing in the planning area. AUMs for livestock grazing are an estimate based on 

2006 production data collected while conducting ecological site inventories. At the time of permit renewal, 

additional production data may be considered when determining the appropriate allocation for a specific 

allotment. 

These vegetation allocations would be implemented during the permit renewal process. Allocation 

percentages are not the same as utilization, as the allocation is used to identify the total number of AUMs 

for livestock, while utilization identifies the amount of vegetation used by livestock in a specific area. 

Allocation is not intended to prescribe what livestock actually consume. Livestock use of specific 

vegetation types would be managed through the implementation of grazing use indicators developed on 

an allotment-specific basis. 

LG-IV-A-3. The amount of forage available for livestock use would likely change as the RMP is 

implemented, although allocation percentages would remain the same. Changes to AUMs in the future 

would be determined by the BLM after monitoring and site-specific NEPA analysis.

Management Actions

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-CA-MA-1. Implement adaptive management using grazing use indicators to meet resource and 

special designation area objectives. Grazing use indicators include:

 Utilization for upland vegetation and riparian areas, 

 Bank and soil surface alteration, and

 Other indicators identified on an allotment-specific basis depending on the resources present.

LG-CA-MA-2. The grazing permit renewal process, following the approval of the RMP, would be in 

conformance with BLM policy and guidance current at the time of renewal. 

LG-CA-MA-3. The toolbox for managing livestock grazing would include, but not be limited to: 

Rest rotation, 

Deferred rotation, 

Seasons of use, 

Stocking rates, 

Class and kind of livestock, 

Herding, 

Frequency of grazing, 

Closure for resource protection,

Location and types of range infrastructure, and 

Location and types of supplements.

Specific tools to be used would be identified on an allotment-specific basis through the permit renewal 

process, depending on the resources present.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-248

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LG-CA-MA-4. Seasons of use and changes in class and kind of livestock would be consistent with 

resource objectives and analyzed in site-specific NEPA analysis.

LG-CA-MA-5. Identify and implement measures to prevent livestock from entering areas closed to 

grazing, such as: 

 Fencing, 

Using natural barriers, 

Active herding, 

Water placement, and 

Salt/supplement placement.

LG-CA-MA-6. Implement drought management guidelines during periods of drought to maintain or 

achieve long-term resource productivity (Appendix F).

LG-CA-MA-7. Allow spring and early summer livestock grazing periodically in big game winter range to 

improve browse production.

LG-CA-MA-8. Manage livestock grazing to move riparian and wetland conditions toward goals and 

objectives in the Riparian Areas and Wetlands section. 

LG-CA-MA-9. Livestock trailing may be allowed consistent with other resource objectives. Trailing must 

be supervised by the permittee to ensure active movement of livestock. Terms and conditions would be 

added to permits to ensure compliance.

LG-CA-MA-10. When livestock are moved between pastures or allotments through riparian areas, stream 

crossings would be perpendicular to the riparian area where practical.

LG-CA-MA-11. Grazing management activities (e.g., grazing, trailing, bedding, watering, salting, loading, 

other handling efforts) would be modified, discontinued, or relocated if they are not maintaining aquatic 

and riparian conditions. 

LG-CA-MA-12. In areas that are readily accessible to cattle and known or suspected special status fish 

spawning habitat, develop and implement grazing practices to avoid or restrict trampling of redds (eggs) 

and other direct and indirect effects that may result in adverse impacts to the species.

LG-IV-MA-1. Utilization would be determined on an allotment-by-allotment basis to meet objectives in the 

Upland Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Fish and Wildlife, and Special Status Species sections.

LG-IV-MA-2. Reserve common allotments may be established to facilitate vegetation treatment projects 

and to provide increased livestock grazing management flexibility. Reserve common allotments may be 

established on acquired lands; in allotments where permits are relinquished, transferred, or cancelled; or 

by agreement with a permittee; however, permits would not be cancelled for the purpose of establishing a 

reserve common allotment. Reserve common allotments may be created from whole or partial allotments 

and can be permanent or temporary. Reserve common allotments would not be allowed within the 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness.

LG-IV-MA-3. Considerations for selecting areas to be used as reserve common allotments include: 

Whether the area has special management concerns, such as habitat for Type 1 Sensitive species, 

slickspot peppergrass, or redband trout; noxious weeds or invasive plants; or wild horses; 

Whether the area has intermingled private and/or State lands; and 

Whether the area can sustain grazing use without considerable resource impacts.

LG-IV-MA-4. No more than 10% of the AUMs for livestock within the planning area can be within reserve 

common allotments without approval from the State Director.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resource Uses

2-249

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LG-IV-MA-5. Priority for using reserve common allotments would be as follows:

Permittees and lessees whose normally permitted allotments are temporarily unavailable due to 

wildland fire; 

Permittees and lessees whose normally permitted allotments are under an approved vegetation 

treatment project (e.g., restoration, fuels treatments); and

Permittees and lessees whose normally permitted allotments are temporarily unavailable due to 

insect outbreaks. 

Permittees within the planning area would have the highest priority for using reserve common allotments; 

permittees within the Twin Falls District would have second priority.

LG-IV-MA-6. When a reserve common allotment is established, a management plan for the allotment 

would be developed to ensure achievement of or movement towards meeting Idaho Standards for 

Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management. 

LG-IV-MA-7. Temporary Non-Renewable (TNR) permits would be allowed except in the following areas:

Pastures containing areas within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, 

 The riparian pasture of the Lower Saylor Creek Allotment in the Sand Point ACEC, 

Pastures comprised of more than 50% big game winter range, or 

Pastures comprised of more than 25% native communities (by cover) excluding Sandberg/non-native 

areas. 

LG-IV-MA-8. Criteria for issuing TNR permits in a particular pasture would include:

TNR may be allowed in years where additional forage for livestock is temporarily available, as 

determined by utilization levels; 

TNR must be consistent with the drought management guidelines; 

TNR may not be allowed within the operation of the applicant if grazing use criteria are exceeded in 

any pasture in planning area controlled by the applicant; and

TNR must be consistent with other resource objectives.

LG-IV-MA-9. Manage livestock grazing to provide a variety of residual cover heights to meet the needs of 

the ground-nesting birds present in an allotment. 

LG-IV-MA-10. Follow BLM guidelines for livestock grazing management in sage-grouse habitat.

LG-IV-MA-11. Livestock grazing may be considered on a case-by-case basis in a portion of big game 

winter range in native shrubland communities during the winter (November 15 through April 30). No date 

restrictions on livestock grazing in big game winter range in other vegetation communities would be 

made.

LG-IV-MA-12. During big game calving, fawning, and lambing, livestock grazing management would 

provide adequate cover for big game species, appropriate to site potential.

LG-IV-MA-13. Adjust livestock grazing so livestock seasons of use would not overlap bighorn sheep

breeding and winter periods in those pastures that contain bighorn sheep habitat.

LG-IV-MA-14. In aspen groves, grazing management would allow for natural regeneration with a diversity 

of vegetation species and age class.

LG-IV-MA-15. Even though livestock grazing would not be authorized in the Jarbidge Canyons, trailing to 

the Wilkins Island Allotment would be permitted on existing roads using riders to herd livestock.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-250

•

•

•

•

Range Infrastructure

LG-C-MA-1. Management actions for range infrastructure apply to watering sites, fences, and corrals 

within wilderness, consistent with the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Management Plan. 

LG-CA-MA-13. Follow BLM-approved design features and construction and maintenance practices for 

range infrastructure.

LG-CA-MA-14. Grazing facilities and infrastructure (e.g., livestock handling and management facilities, 

fences, watering facilities) would be modified, discontinued, or relocated if they are not maintaining 

aquatic and riparian conditions. 

LG-CA-MA-15. To protect associated resources, minimize disturbance at developed springs by using 

existing routes for access, redesigning the spring development, or limiting maintenance or reconstruction 

activities to areas disturbed during previous construction or to areas outside the wetland.

LG-CA-MA-16. Modify existing and construct new fences to comply with BLM standards for wildlife 

(Karsky, 1999). Existing fences would be modified according to the following priority order: 

Key sage-grouse habitat, 

Big game winter range, 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, and

The remainder of the planning area. 

LG-CA-MA-17. If a reservoir is fenced, where practical, provide water for livestock use outside the fence.

LG-CA-MA-18. For permittee-maintained projects, the BLM authorized officer would be notified prior to 

initiating work that requires the use of heavy equipment so that appropriate measures are adopted to 

protect resources. 

LG-IV-MA-16. Consider installing or constructing new pipelines on a case-by-case basis where they 

would help meet resource objectives. New pipelines would not be allowed within Wilderness; eligible, 

suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; or ACECs.

LG-IV-MA-17. Maintain existing pipelines for livestock or wild horse use. Modify any pipeline where 

monitoring determines the pipeline is preventing attainment of resource objectives.

LG-IV-MA-18. Consider installing or constructing new reservoirs or wells on a case-by-case basis where 

they would help meet resource objectives.

LG-IV-MA-19. Maintain existing reservoirs or wells for livestock, wildlife, or wild horse use. Modify 

reservoirs or wells preventing attainment of resource objectives, as identified through monitoring.

LG-IV-MA-20. Consider new spring developments on a case-by-case basis. New spring developments 

must meet resource objectives, avoid or minimize ground disturbance, protect the spring source, and 

ensure adequate water to maintain the wetland.

LG-IV-MA-21. Modify spring developments with wetlands rated as non-functioning, functioning-at-risk 

downward trend, functioning-at-risk to improve wetland areas by protecting the spring source and 

ensuring adequate water to support spring hydrology and associated riparian vegetation.

LG-IV-MA-22. Place salt, minerals, supplements, new holding facilities, or new troughs or reservoirs more 

than 300 feet away from playas, canyon rims, the Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone, and the 

Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors. Ensure salt, minerals, supplements, new troughs, 

new reservoirs, and new holding facilities in other areas are located to avoid conflicts with other cultural 

resources as well.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resource Uses

2-251

•

•

•

•

LG-IV-MA-23. Adjust locations of livestock watering facilities and salting/supplements in sage-grouse and 

other upland game bird habitat on a case-by-case basis to provide adequate nesting and winter cover.

LG-IV-MA-24. Avoid placing new water developments in sage-grouse habitat unless they would 

contribute to meeting resource objectives for sage-grouse. If a new water development is necessary, it 

should be located in a previously disturbed area.

LG-IV-MA-25. Consider installing or constructing fences on a case-by-case basis to meet resource 

objectives.

LG-IV-MA-26. Remove fences that are not needed. Maintain fences to BLM specifications; the amount of 

fence in an allotment would be appropriate to objectives for livestock grazing and resource management. 

Modify, remove, or relocate fences contributing to not meeting resource objectives, as identified through 

monitoring.

LG-IV-MA-27. New range infrastructure would be allowed in Land with Wilderness Characteristics

managed for wilderness characteristics if the infrastructure would help enhance wilderness 

characteristics. Existing range infrastructure may be maintained.

2.6.3.2 Recreation

Goal

REC-CA-G-1. Provide and sustain a variety of dispersed and developed recreational opportunities and 

experiences while avoiding or minimizing resource impacts.

Objectives

REC-CA-O-1. Provide basic information on recreational opportunities on public lands not designated as 

Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) or Extensive Recreation Management Areas. Provide

access and minimal facilities (e.g., signs, protective fences) as needed to ensure visitor health and safety, 

reduce user conflict, and protect resources. 

REC-IV-O-1. Manage 190,000 acres as SRMAs to protect and enhance recreation settings, activities, 

experiences, and benefits. 

Allocations

REC-IV-A-1. Designate the following SRMAs:

Deadman/Yahoo SRMA (34,000 acres), 

Jarbidge Forks SRMA (2,000 acres), 

Canyonlands SRMA (149,000 acres), and

Salmon Falls Reservoir SRMA (5,000 acres). 

See Map 64 for locations. 

REC-IV-A-2. All lands not established as a SRMA would be managed to meet basic recreation and visitor 

services needs and resource objectives. Recreation would not be emphasized; however, recreation 

activities may occur to the extent that they are consistent with other resource uses. 

Management Actions

REC-CA-MA-1. Develop implementation and monitoring plans for SRMAs to address the purpose specific 

to the SRMA.

REC-CA-MA-2. Where appropriate, implement management methods to protect riparian resources, 

special status species, and wildlife habitat while enhancing recreation opportunities. Management 

methods may include: 
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-252

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

 Limiting visitor numbers, 

Adopting camping and travel controls, 

 Implementing fees, and 

Imposing scheduling restrictions to minimize impacts to fish and wildlife during important seasonal 

periods.

REC-CA-MA-3. New and existing recreation-related activities and facilities within or affecting Riparian 

Conservation Areas would be designed, modified, relocated, or discontinued if they are not maintaining 

aquatic and riparian conditions. 

REC-CA-MA-4. Dispersed camping would be allowed. Dispersed camping may be closed or limited 

seasonally if resource objectives are impacted. 

REC-CA-MA-5. If campground fees are implemented, they would not apply to Federally recognized tribes 

exercising treaty rights or engaging in traditional cultural practices.

REC-CA-MA-6. Consider Special Recreation Permits (SRPs) within Areas of Environmental Concern with 

mitigation for impacts to relevant and important values. 

REC-IV-MA-1. The Deadman/Yahoo SRMA would consist of three Recreation Management Zones 

(RMZs; see Map 69) with the following management:

Manage the Deadman and Yahoo RMZs to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in all-terrain 

vehicle and motorcycle riding.

Manage the Rosevear Gulch RMZ to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in motorized trail 

riding opportunities on a series of designated routes.

REC-IV-MA-2. Manage the Jarbidge Forks SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing, 

rafting, picnicking, camping, and viewing wildlife and natural scenery.

REC-IV-MA-3. Manage the Canyonlands SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in nonmotorized recreation experiences including hunting, fishing, hiking, equestrian activities, and viewing 

wildlife and natural scenery.

REC-IV-MA-4. The Salmon Falls Reservoir SRMA would consist of three RMZs (see Map 69) with the 

following management:

Manage the Antelope Bay RMZ to provide opportunities to engage in hunting, fishing, camping, 

boating, water sports, and motorized and non-motorized trail riding on a series of designated routes.

Manage the Cedar Creek RMZ to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing, camping, and 

boating.

Manage the Luds Point RMZ to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in hunting, fishing, 

primitive camping, and viewing wildlife and natural scenery.

See Appendix H for more information on the management and settings prescribed for each SRMA.

REC-IV-MA-5. Give priority to SRP applicants proposing to make use of less-crowded weekdays, utilize 

facilities off public lands for overnight accommodation of guests, and focus visitation on sites and areas 

resilient to repeated use.

REC-IV-MA-6. Place increased emphasis in SRPs on mitigating the impacts of recreation uses in order to

support conservation of natural and cultural resource values.

REC-IV-MA-7. Commercial SRPs would not be allowed in the Herd Management Area. 

REC-IV-MA-8. Require organized group permits for groups with 30 or more people. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resource Uses

2-253

•

•

•

•

•

2.6.3.3 Transportation and Travel 

Goal

TR-CA-G-1. Manage and provide for motorized, non-motorized, and non-mechanized access that would

balance resource protection and use.

Objective

TR-IV-O-1. Provide a transportation and travel system to facilitate multiple use and resource protection 

with an emphasis on meeting native vegetation and special status species objectives. 

Allocations

TR-C-A-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized and mechanized 

vehicle use (60,000 acres). The Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area would be closed to 

motorized vehicle use (2,000 acres).

TR-IV-A-1. Designated areas in the Deadman/Yahoo Special Recreation Management Area would be 

open to cross-country motorized vehicle use (4,000 acres).

TR-IV-A-2. Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics would be 

closed to motorized vehicle use (37,000 acres). 

TR-IV-A-3. Travel would be limited to designated routes in the remainder of the planning area (1,269,000 

acres). Specific route designations would be made in an implementation-level travel and transportation 

management planning process following the completion of the RMP. Until route designation occurs, areas 

limited to designated routes would be managed as limited to existing routes as depicted on Map 71. A 

more thorough review of the existing transportation routes would be performed as part of the travel 

management planning process, which may include additional on-the-ground data collection and 

verification.

See Map 76 for locations of transportation and travel allocations.

Management Actions

TR-CA-MA-1. Area designations apply to all off-highway vehicles, which include any motorized vehicle 

capable of, or designed for, travel on or immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain, excluding: 

Any non-amphibious registered motorboat; 

Any military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle while being used for emergency purposes;

Any vehicle whose use is expressly authorized by the BLM authorized officer or otherwise officially 

approved; 

Vehicles in official use; and

Any combat or combat support vehicle when used in times of national defense emergencies (43 CFR 

8340.0-5[a]).

Area and route designations, with the exception of designated wilderness areas, also do not apply to 

vehicles being used by members of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes or the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to 

access traditional use areas of importance to the tribes or to vehicles being used by members of the 

Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to exercise their tribally reserved treaty rights.

TR-CA-MA-2. Where motorized, non-motorized, mechanized, or non-mechanized use would cause or is 

causing considerable adverse effects on soil, vegetation, wildlife, wildlife habitat, cultural resources, 

historical resources, threatened or endangered species, wilderness suitability, other authorized uses, or 

other resources, the BLM authorized officer may close the affected areas to the type(s) of use causing the 

adverse effect until the adverse effects are reduced and measures implemented to prevent reoccurrence.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-254

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

TR-CA-MA-3. Minimize construction and maintenance of roads within or adjacent to special status wildlife 

and fish habitat and big game winter range during important seasonal periods.

TR-CA-MA-4. Continue to recognize and update agreements and Memoranda of Understanding with 

local highway districts for road maintenance.

TR-CA-MA-5. Complete a Travel Management Plan (TMP) within five years of the signing of the Record 

of Decision. The TMP would be developed through a public process to determine the transportation and 

travel system for the planning area. The TMP would determine the routes and trails to be designated, 

modified, closed, or rehabilitated as well as the maintenance level, modes of travel, and seasonal and 

access restrictions for designated routes. During the TMP process, additional data needs and a strategy 

to collect information will be identified. Decisions made in the TMP would be limited to management of 

BLM roads. 

A TMP is not intended to provide evidence bearing on or addressing the validity of any R.S. 2477 

assertions. R.S. 2477 rights are determined through a process that is entirely independent of the BLM's 

planning process. Consequently, travel management planning should not take into consideration R.S. 

2477 assertions or evidence. Travel management planning should be founded on an independently 

determined purpose and need that is based on resource uses and associated access to public lands and 

waters. At such time as a decision is made on R.S. 2477 assertions, the BLM would adjust its travel 

routes accordingly.

TR-CA-MA-6. Route designation would, at a minimum, follow criterion in 43 CFR 8342.1 and BLM 

Manual 1626.

TR-CA-MA-7. Route designation would also adhere to the following: 

Conflict with cultural and paleontological resources would be minimized when designating routes.

Designated routes may follow or cross the Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) and National Register 

of Historic Places-eligible and -listed segments of the Kelton and Toana Freight Roads in areas 

where previous disturbance has occurred, and after consultation with the State Historic Preservation 

Officer. 

Where motorized vehicle use is allowed within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor, travel 

would not degrade the Oregon NHT or its setting. 

Designated routes within suitable and eligible Wild and Scenic River corridors must maintain/enhance 

their outstandingly remarkable values, free-flowing condition, water quality, and tentative classification 

until Congress acts. 

Loop routes are preferred to dead end routes.

Parking areas and turnouts would be considered under the same criteria used for routes.

Provide access to private lands or other agency lands (e.g., State, Forest Service, other BLM field 

offices).

Provide access for authorized activities, including livestock grazing, energy development, and 

recreation.

TR-CA-MA-8. As part of the travel management planning process, the BLM would identify any easements 

and rights-of-way (to be issued to the BLM or others) needed to maintain the preliminary or existing road 

and trail network.

TR-CA-MA-9. Cooperate with tribes, Federal, State, and county agencies to reduce adverse effects and 

support the achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands in the long term.

TR-CA-MA-10. Minimize locating new roads or road-related facilities in Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs). Before building new roads or other road-related facilities in RCAs, complete a watershed or sitespecific analysis. The level of analysis should be commensurate with the scope and issues of the project 

and related aquatic resources. Analysis should identify how road design features would minimize or avoid 

adverse effects to aquatic and riparian resources at site-specific, reach, and watershed scales. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resource Uses

2-255

•

•

•

•

•

•

TR-CA-MA-11. Temporary roads within or affecting RCAs would be fully decommissioned and 

rehabilitated once the road is no longer needed to meet the intended purpose. 

TR-CA-MA-12. Avoid or minimize sediment delivery to streams from the road surface to allow the 

achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

TR-CA-MA-13. Avoid sidecasting road surface material into areas where it may reach RCAs. 

TR-CA-MA-14. Design new, replacement, and reconstructed stream crossings (culverts, bridges, and 

other stream crossings) to: 

Accommodate a 100-year flood, including associated bedload and debris in bull trout occupied 

watersheds. In watersheds containing other non-game fish, design new, replacement, and 

reconstructed stream crossings to accommodate a 100-year flood event, unless a site-specific 

analysis determines the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands could be achieved with 

fewer impacts to the RCA; 

Provide and maintain fish passage at all road crossings of existing and potential fish bearing streams; 

and

Accommodate mean bankfull channel widths to maintain channel integrity. 

TR-IV-MA-1. Motorized vehicle restrictions would apply to everyone including lessees, BLM permit 

holders, and right-of-way (ROW) holders, but site-specific exceptions to motorized vehicle restrictions 

could be authorized in the lease, permits, or ROW grant. 

TR-IV-MA-2. Other activities in areas limited or closed to motorized travel may be allowed on a case-bycase basis, but would require prior written permission of an authorized officer. These activities may 

include but not be limited to:

Motorized cross-country travel for non-BLM government entities on official administrative business 

(e.g., noxious weed control, surveying, and animal damage control efforts).

Motorized cross-country travel by entities requiring access to private lands, resources, or legal 

improvements within or adjacent to closed or limited areas.

TR-IV-MA-3. Access and use restrictions may be imposed to reduce risk of wildland fire during fire 

restrictions, as determined by an authorized officer; restrictions may include, but not be limited to, closing 

primitive roads, trails, and areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use. Travel related to 

administrative uses and emergency services may continue during fire restrictions.

TR-IV-MA-4. Game retrieval using motorized vehicles would not be allowed off designated routes.

TR-IV-MA-5. Motorized cross-country travel to a camp site would be allowed within 25 feet of designated 

routes, but would not be allowed within areas closed to motorized vehicle use or in riparian areas. 

Motorized cross-country travel to a camp site may be closed or limited seasonally or as impacts or 

environmental conditions warrant.

TR-IV-MA-6. Identify locations for and install gates and cattle guards along designated routes to minimize 

conflicts between motorized recreation activities and livestock grazing operations.

TR-IV-MA-7. Travel Management Areas (TMAs) are delineated areas where travel management (either 

motorized or non-motorized) needs particular focus. These areas would have a designated network of 

roads, trails, ways, and other routes that provide for public access and travel. The priority emphasis for 

each TMA is based on resource management, wildland fire suppression, and use objectives outlined in 

the RMP. The TMAs and their travel and transportation planning focus would be as follows:

Snake River TMA (323,000 acres): Focus on accommodating restoration while providing for public 

access.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-256

•

•

•

•

•

o

•

o

•

o

•

o

•

•

•

Deadman/Yahoo TMA (34,000 acres): Focus on facilitating motorized recreation activities, including 

open play areas and a designated trail system.

Devil Creek TMA (667,000 acres): Focus on increasing core habitat size for sage-grouse and big 

game and accommodating habitat restoration activities, while providing for public access.

Canyonlands TMA (213,000 acres): Focus on increasing core habitat size for sage-grouse and big 

game and providing opportunities for non-motorized recreation experiences.

 Jarbidge Foothills TMA (135,000 acres): Focus on increasing core habitat size for sage-grouse and 

big game and accommodating habitat restoration activities, while providing for public access.

See Map 82 for locations of TMAs.

TR-IV-MA-8. The BLM authorized officer has the authority to adjust TMA boundaries and their focus, 

consistent with objectives in the RMP.

2.6.3.4 Land Use Authorizations

Goal

LA-CA-G-1. Public needs for land use authorizations would be met with consideration for other resource 

values. 

Objective

LA-IV-O-1. Provide for the development of renewable energy resources, transportation routes, utility 

corridors, transmission lines, communication sites and other uses with consideration for resource 

objectives.

Allocations

LA-CA-A-1. Retain existing withdrawals, with the option of a Section 24 restoration for power site 

classifications and power site reserves if needed, as provided for in the Federal Power Act of 1920.

LA-IV-A-1. The following areas would be avoidance areas for rights-of-way (ROWs; 1,001,000 acres); 

ROWs would be allowed in these areas only if the avoidance stipulations are met and if the area is not 

identified for ROW exclusion: 

Areas within US Air Force (USAF) Military Operating Areas (983,000 acres): 

New ROWs must be consistent with USAF airspace restrictions. 

Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone (11,000 acres): 

 New surface or overhead ROWs would follow existing ROW or disturbance corridors, 

underground ROWs would be allowed with mitigation for disturbance within the protective zone. 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors (30,000 acres): 

ROWs must maintain/enhance the river segment's outstandingly remarkable values, free-flowing 

condition, water quality, and tentative classification. 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC; 123,000 acres): 

 New ROWs would be restricted to ROW corridors and locations of existing ROWs. 

Several ROW avoidance areas overlap; where this occurs, all avoidance stipulations must be met. In 

addition, some ROW avoidance areas overlap with ROW exclusion areas; where this occurs, the more 

restrictive exclusion management applies. See Map 90 for locations of ROW avoidance areas.

LA-IV-A-2. The following areas would be exclusion areas for ROW (100,000 acres); they would not be 

available for ROWs under any conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, 

 Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area, 

Sand Point ACEC, and
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resource Uses

2-257

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics. 

See Map 95 for locations of ROW exclusion areas.

LA-IV-A-3. Designate the following ROW corridors for utilities (i.e., corridors for oil, gas, and hydrogen 

pipelines, electricity transmission, phone lines, and distribution facilities), all of which are one mile wide: 

Pilgrim Gulch (Section 368 energy corridor) (4,000 acres), 

Shoestring (Section 368 energy corridor) (5,000 acres), 

Saylor Creek (Section 368 energy corridor) (11,000 acres), 

Balanced Rock (Section 368 energy corridor) (10,000 acres),and

Jarbidge (24,000 acres). 

See Map 97 for locations of ROW corridors. Section 368 energy corridors were designated in the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005.

LA-IV-A-4. Wind energy development can be considered in areas with annual or non-native perennial 

communities, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and outside ROW exclusion areas

and utility ROW corridors. Map 103 displays areas meeting these criteria in 2011; the map can be 

updated as vegetation conditions change on the ground.

Management Actions

LA-C-MA-1. Implement the Programmatic Policies and Design Features in the Record of Decision on 

Wind Energy Development on BLM-Administered Lands in the Western United States (2005) (Appendix 

B).

LA-C-MA-2. Interagency Operating Procedures, located in Appendix B, would be implemented for 

projects proposed within the Section 368 corridors.

LA-C-MA-3. The BLM would review all withdrawals on and classifications of public lands to eliminate all 

unnecessary withdrawals and classifications. Reviews would consider:

For what purposes were the lands withdrawn? 

Are these purposes still being served? 

Are the lands suitable for return to the public domain?

LA-CA-MA-1. Place new ROWs for oil and gas pipelines and overhead lines within ROW corridors where 

practical; other locations would be considered in areas not identified for ROW avoidance or exclusion, 

consistent with allocations listed above.

LA-CA-MA-2. New ROWs would be located in areas of previous disturbance where practical.

LA-CA-MA-3. New ROWs would meet Visual Resource Management class objectives.

LA-CA-MA-4. Co-locate new communication sites with existing sites where practical; communication 

sites present in 2011 are located at:

Black Mesa, 

Blue Butte, 

Frog Hollow,

Indian Butte, 

Lower Salmon Falls, 

Signal Butte, and

Yahoo Creek. 
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-258

•

•

•

•

See Map 85. Other locations would be considered, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas 

and outside ROW exclusion areas.

LA-CA-MA-5. BLM management activities and authorized uses on lands with existing withdrawals would 

be consistent with the purposes of the withdrawal. Proposed BLM management activities and authorized 

uses that are not consistent with the purposes of the withdrawal would be evaluated to determine whether 

the proposal can be modified or whether the withdrawal is still necessary.

LA-CA-MA-6. Land use permits may be considered, on a case-by-case basis, consistent with resource 

objectives. 

LA-CA-MA-7. Trespass resolution would be limited to removal of facilities and/or restoration of the area 

as determined by the BLM authorized officer. Trespass resolution, as determined by the BLM authorized 

officer, may include:

 Removal (depending on the nature of the trespass), 

 Restoration, 

 Authorization of a ROW grant or land use permit, or 

 Disposal of the affected land through sale or exchange.

LA-CA-MA-8. Land use permits for irrigation pivot crossings may be allowed, in accordance with policy 

and regulations. In cases where a pivot crosses public land, the lands are to remain unfarmed and 

unirrigated.

LA-CA-MA-9. Airport leases may be considered if proposals are outside ROW exclusion areas and 

consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and Federal Aviation Administration regulations.

LA-CA-MA-10. Access across non-BLM lands would be identified and obtained, where possible, through 

easements, ROWs, or acquisitions to accomplish BLM objectives. 

LA-CA-MA-11. Future access needs and priorities would be coordinated with the Shoshone-Bannock 

Tribes, Shoshone-Paiute Tribes, Idaho and Nevada State agencies, and local governments to ensure 

resource values are evaluated along with public needs.

LA-CA-MA-12. Authorizations involving water use on BLM land must comply with applicable State water 

law. Final authorization to proceed with water developments on BLM lands would be withheld until 

compliance from the appropriate authorizing agency (i.e., Idaho Department of Water Resources) is 

obtained. Any new water right established on public land would be solely in the name of the United 

States.

LA-CA-MA-13. New land use authorizations would avoid or minimize adverse effects on non-game fish, 

their habitats, and Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs). 

LA-CA-MA-14. For existing land use authorizations that prevent the achievement of the goals and 

objectives for riparian areas and wetlands, use existing authorities to redesign, modify, or apply 

mitigations to reduce impacts to non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LA-CA-MA-15. During Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensing or relicensing of 

hydroelectric projects, terms and conditions that achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and 

wetlands over the new license term should be submitted to the FERC.

LA-IV-MA-1. ROW construction and maintenance activities should avoid disturbing special status species 

during important seasonal periods, unless the disturbance can be mitigated. 

LA-IV-MA-2. Locate new transmission and phone lines, communications towers, meteorological towers, 

and wind turbines more than five miles from occupied and unknown-status sage-grouse leks. Within 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resource Uses

2-259

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

designated ROW corridors, buffer distances for sage-grouse leks would not apply. BLM may impose 

constraints on timing of construction for routine maintenance.

LA-IV-MA-3. Do not locate new communication sites in special status species habitat if the project would 

affect special status species or their habitat, unless those impacts can be mitigated.

LA-IV-MA-4. Restrict wind energy site testing and monitoring and wind energy development from 

occupied and suitable habitat for special status species, wildlife habitat, and cultural resources where 

their direct and indirect adverse effects cannot be mitigated. 

LA-IV-MA-5. Applications for solar energy developments would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

2.6.3.5 Land Tenure 

Goal

LT-CA-G-1. Manage land tenure to provide for public ownership of lands with high resource and multiple 

use values and to improve management efficiency. 

Objective

LT-CA-O-1. Improve BLM's ability to manage the land base and resource values, and help meet resource 

objectives through land tenure adjustments.

Allocations

LT-IV-A-1. Zone 1 consists of lands for retention that are not available for disposal (1,137,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 1,136,000 acres in Alternative IV-B). Zone 1 lands include: 

The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness;

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 

The Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone; 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, Inside Desert, Lower Bruneau Canyon, and Sand Point Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern (ACECs); 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area; 

 Land with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics; and 

Other consolidated public lands.

LT-IV-A-2. Zone 2 consists of lands for consolidation within the planning area (219,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 220,000 acres in Alternative IV-B); these can be exchanged for other lands adjacent to

Zone 1 or Zone 2 or offered as Recreation and Public Purposes (R&PP) leases. Zone 2 lands include: 

Selected lands near Glenns Ferry and Roseworth,

Selected lands in the northeast corner of the planning area,

Selected lands in the Jarbidge Foothills, and

Selected lands between Clover Creek and Cedar Creek Reservoir.

LT-IV-A-3. Zone 3 lands (16,000 acres) are available for Federal Land Policy and Management Act 

(FLPMA) Section 203 sales (as listed in Appendix I) subject to NEPA compliance and consistent with 

other decisions in this RMP. Zone 3 lands include:

Selected lands near Hammett, Glenns Ferry, and King Hill.

See Map 110 for locations of Land Tenure Zones 1, 2, and 3 in Alternative IV-A and Map 111 for those in 

Alternative IV-B. 
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-260

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LT-IV-A-4. Lands identified for disposal in previous RMPs prior to July 25, 2000 (3,000 acres) would

continue to be available for disposal under the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act of 2000 (FLTFA; 

Appendix I). Proceeds from the sale or exchange of these public lands may be used to purchase 

additional public lands, as provided for in FLTFA.

LT-IV-A-5. R&PP leases to State and local governments and non-profit organizations would be 

considered on a case-by-case basis on lands in Zones 2 and 3.

Management Actions

LT-CA-MA-1. Public lands, in order to be considered for any form of land tenure adjustment (including 

exchanges, R&PP, fee or easement acquisitions, etc.), except for FLPMA Section 203 sales, would be 

evaluated and must meet one or more of the land ownership adjustment criteria (described in Appendix I), 

or one or more of the following criteria:

Is in the public interest; accommodates the needs of State, local, or private entities, including for the 

economy and community growth and expansion; and is in accordance with other land use goals, 

objectives, and planning decisions; 

Results in net gain of important and manageable resource values on public lands such as crucial 

wildlife habitat, significant cultural sites, high-value recreation areas, high quality riparian areas, live 

water, special status species habitat, or areas key to maintenance of productive ecosystems; 

Ensures the accessibility of public lands in areas where access is needed and cannot otherwise be 

obtained; 

Is essential to allow effective management of public lands in areas where consolidation of ownership 

is necessary to meet resource management objectives; and/or

Results in acquisition of lands that serve a national priority as identified in national policy directives.

LT-CA-MA-2. Initiate tribal consultation early in the process for any land tenure adjustments.

LT-CA-MA-3. In general, lands with the following characteristics would be retained in Federal ownership: 

Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, and Candidate species habitat and designated critical habitat; 

Those lands specifically identified by the tribes as having special importance related to treaty and/or 

traditional uses/values; 

National Register of Historic Places eligible and listed properties; and 

Wildlife tracts.

These lands could be disposed of if the transaction helped achieve resource objectives; see the Cultural 

Resources section for additional guidance for disposal of lands containing National Register properties or 

other important cultural resources. Lands acquired under the Land and Water Conservation Fund must be 

retained.

LT-CA-MA-4. BLM’s acquisition priorities (not in priority order) would include:

Land identified by Shoshone-Paiute Tribes or Shoshone-Bannock Tribes;

Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, or Candidate species habitat; 

BLM Type 2 Sensitive species habitat; 

Lands within special designations; 

Big game winter range; 

Riparian areas; 

Lands containing known archaeological, paleontological, or historical values determined by the BLM 

to be unique or of traditional or scientific importance;

Lands that would provide public access to public lands, including but not limited to river access; 

Lands that would help consolidate public land; 

Lands that would help improve livestock grazing management; and 

Lands adjacent to Zones 1 and 2.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resource Uses

2-261

•

•

•

LT-CA-MA-5. Vegetation treatments, construction of new range infrastructure, and other public land 

improvements in areas involved in a land tenure transaction would be kept to a minimum.

LT-CA-MA-6. Disposal of public lands would be subject to all valid existing rights, including existing 

rights-of-way. Existing public access through those lands may be retained if necessary for BLM 

management or for accommodating uses.

LT-CA-MA-7. Use land acquisition, exchanges, and conservation easements to support achievement of 

the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands and facilitate restoration of native species and 

their habitat.

LT-CA-MA-8. No new Desert Land Act or Carey Act applications would be accepted for lands. The Desert 

Land Act and Carey Act applications submitted prior to 2009 (Case numbers IDD-7401, IDI-7402, IDI27888, and IDI-27889) would be processed within 10 years of the signing of the Record of Decision. 

LT-CA-MA-9. Manage newly acquired lands and lands returned to BLM the same as adjacent BLM lands 

(e.g., acquired lands within wilderness would be managed as wilderness).

LT-IV-MA-1. Sales of public lands can be made upon consideration of the following criteria:

The parcel, because of its location or other characteristics, is difficult and uneconomic to manage as 

part of the public lands, and is not suitable for management by another Federal department or 

agency; 

The parcel was acquired for a specific purpose and is no longer required for that or any other Federal 

purpose; or 

Disposal of the parcel would serve important public objectives, including but not limited to, expansion 

of communities and economic development which cannot be achieved prudently or feasibly on land 

other than public land and which outweigh other public objectives and values. These include, but are 

not limited to, wildlife, grazing, recreation, and scenic values which would be served by maintaining 

such parcel in Federal ownership.

2.6.3.6 Minerals 

Leasable Minerals

Leasable minerals include oil shale, oil and gas, phosphate, potash, sodium, geothermal resources, and 

other minerals that may be developed under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended.

Goal

LE-CA-G-1. Provide leasable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other 

resources.

Objective

LE-IV-O-1. Facilitate reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound exploration and development of 

leasable minerals where compatible with resource objectives.

Allocations

LE-IV-A-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, the Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study 

Area; eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; the Inside Desert, Lower 

Bruneau Canyon, Bruneau-Jarbidge, and Sand Point Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs); 

and Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics (242,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 210,000 acres in Alternative IV-B) would be closed to mineral leasing.

LE-IV-A-2. The majority of the planning area (1,129,000 acres in Alternative IV-A; 1,161,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B) would be open to mineral leasing, subject to laws, regulations, and formal orders; the 
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-262

•

•

•

•

•

terms and conditions of the standard lease form; and stipulations for Endangered Species Act Section 7 

Consultation and Cultural Resource Protection. Areas that would be subject to additional moderate or 

major constraints specific Alternative IV are as follows:

Moderate constraints (697,000 acres in Alternative IV-A; 729,000 acres in Alternative IV-B): Big 

game winter range, key sage-grouse habitat, and Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) in bull trout 

and redband trout spawning habitat would be open to mineral leasing with seasonal restrictions. 

RCAs would be open to mineral leasing, consistent with the goals and objectives for riparian areas 

and wetlands. 

Major constraints (25,000 acres): The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone (11,000 

acres) and the Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors (20,000 acres) would be open to 

mineral leasing with no surface occupancy (NSO). 

See Maps 119 and 120 for locations of leasable mineral allocations.

LE-IV-A-3. Areas open or closed to exploration and development of non-energy leasable minerals (e.g. 

phosphate) would follow allocations outlined above.

Management Actions

LE-C-MA-1. Geothermal exploration, drilling, utilization, and reclamation projects would incorporate 

stipulations, best management practices, and management procedures from the Record of Decision and 

Resource Management Plan Amendments for Geothermal Leasing in the Western United States 

(December 2008) found in Appendix B. 

LE-CA-MA-1. The terms and conditions of the standard lease form (Form 3100-11, Offer to Lease and 

Lease for Oil and Gas) or future versions of the form would apply to all mineral leases.

LE-CA-MA-2. The following stipulations for Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) Section 7 

Consultation and Cultural Resource Protection would be used unless new stipulations are directed by 

BLM policy:

ESA Section 7 Consultation Stipulation – The lease area may now or hereafter contain plants, 

animals, or their habitats determined to be Threatened, Endangered or other special status species. 

The BLM may recommend modifications to exploration and development proposals to further its 

conservation and management objective to avoid BLM-approved activity that would contribute to a 

need to list such a species or their habitat. The BLM may require modifications to or disapprove 

proposed activity that is likely to result in jeopardy to the continued existence of a proposed or listed 

Threatened or Endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of a 

designated or proposed critical habitat. The BLM would not approve any ground-disturbing activity 

that may affect any such species or critical habitat until it completes its obligations under applicable 

requirements of the ESA, including completion of any required procedure for conference or 

consultation.

Cultural Resource Protection Stipulation – This lease may be found to contain historic properties 

and/or resources protected under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), American Indian 

Religious Freedom Act, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, Executive Order 

13007, or other statutes and executive orders. The BLM would not approve any ground-disturbing 

activities that may affect any such properties or resources until it completes its obligations under 

applicable requirements of the NHPA and other authorities. The BLM may require modification to 

exploration or development proposals to protect such properties, or disapprove any activity that is 

likely to result in adverse effects that cannot be successfully avoided, minimized, or mitigated.

LE-CA-MA-3. Exceptions, waivers, and modifications may not be made for the following lease

stipulations:

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Special Status Species Habitat: ESA Section 7 Consultation

and
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resource Uses

2-263

•

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

o

•

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Cultural Resources: Cultural Resource Protection Stipulation.

LE-CA-MA-4. Lease stipulations, conditions of approval, and actions would be developed to achieve 

resource objectives on a site-specific basis. 

LE-CA-MA-5. Mineral leasing and development decisions also apply to geophysical exploration.

LE-CA-MA-6. Exploration and development of non-energy leasable minerals would follow standard

stipulations outlined above; additional stipulations would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

LE-CA-MA-7. Leasable mineral development activities would avoid special status species habitat if the 

activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. Permits would 

include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

LE-CA-MA-8. For those leasable mineral development activities conducted pursuant to valid existing 

rights that pose risks to achievement of management objectives, use existing authorities to mitigate 

and/or require, to the extent authorized, design features that would contribute to the maintenance of 

streambanks, shorelines, streambed configuration, water quality, amount and distribution of woody 

debris, thermal regulation, characteristic erosion rates, and amount and distribution of source habitats.

LE-CA-MA-9. Locate leasable mineral project related infrastructure outside RCAs. Where there is no 

alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. Keep the number of roads 

to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission and revegetate roads no 

longer required for mineral management and related activities.

LE-CA-MA-10. New leasable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LE-CA-MA-11. Develop inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for leasable mineral activities

within or affecting RCAs. Evaluate and apply the results of inspection and monitoring to modify mineral 

plans, leases, or permits as needed to achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

LE-IV-MA-1. Exceptions, waivers, or modifications may be made for lease stipulations as described 

below:

NSO Stipulation for Oregon NHT Protective zone – Surface occupancy is not allowed within the 

Oregon NHT protective zone. 

Exception: After coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), the BLM 

authorized officer may grant an exception if an environmental review demonstrates the action as 

proposed or conditioned would not impair the integrity of the trail.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may grant a waiver if an environmental review demonstrates

the action as proposed or conditioned would only impact non-contributing trail segments.

Modification: This stipulation may not be modified.

NSO Stipulation for Kelton and Toana Freight Roads – Surface occupancy would not be allowed 

within the Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors.

Exception: After coordination with SHPO, the BLM authorized officer may grant an exception if an 

environmental review demonstrates the action as proposed or conditioned would not impair the 

integrity of the trails.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may grant a waiver if an environmental review demonstrates

the action as proposed or conditioned would only impact non-contributing trail segments.

Modification: This stipulation may not be modified.

Seasonal Restriction Stipulation for Big Game Winter Range, Key Sage-Grouse Habitat, and 

Redband Trout Spawning Habitat – No surface use would be allowed (e.g., exploration, construction, 

and drilling) within big game winter range from December through March, key sage-grouse habitat 

from mid-February through mid-June, or RCAs in redband trout spawning habitat from May through 

June.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-264

o

o

o

•

o

o

o

•

Exception: The BLM authorized officer may grant an exception if an environmental review 

demonstrates the action as proposed or conditioned would not affect the species or habitat during 

the critical season. An exception may also be granted if the proponent, BLM, and State wildlife 

agencies negotiate compensation or mitigation that would offset the anticipated impact to the 

species or habitat.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may waive a stipulation if after discussions with State wildlife 

agencies it is determined the described lands are incapable of serving the long-term requirements 

of the species and these areas no longer warrant consideration of habitat.

Modification: The BLM authorized officer may modify the size and shape of the area under 

seasonal restrictions if an environmental analysis indicates the actual habitat suitability for the 

species is different. Time periods may be modified based on studies documenting local periods of 

actual use.

Seasonal Restriction Stipulation for Bull Trout Spawning Habitat – No surface use would be allowed 

(e.g., exploration, construction, and drilling) within RCAs in bull trout spawning habitat from August 

through November.

Exception: The BLM authorized officer may grant an exception if an environmental review 

demonstrates the action as proposed or conditioned would not affect the species or habitat during 

the critical season. An exception may also be granted if the proponent, BLM, US Fish and Wildlife 

Service (FWS), and State wildlife agencies negotiate compensation or mitigation that would offset 

the anticipated impact to the species or habitat.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may waive a stipulation if after consulting with FWS and 

discussions with State wildlife agencies it is determined the described lands are incapable of 

serving the long-term requirements of the species and these areas no longer warrant 

consideration of habitat.

Modification: The BLM authorized officer may modify the size and shape of the area under 

seasonal restrictions if an environmental analysis indicates the actual habitat suitability for the 

species is different. Time periods may be modified based on studies documenting local periods of 

actual use. 

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Riparian Areas and Wetlands – Surface use within RCAs must 

be consistent with the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. Exceptions, waivers, and 

modifications may not be made.

Salable Minerals

Salable minerals include minerals and building materials such as sand, stone, gravel, pumice, pumicite, 

cinders, and clay.

Goal

SA-CA-G-1. Provide salable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other 

resources.

Objective

SA-IV-O-1. Provide salable minerals needed for community and economic purposes and facilitate their 

reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound development where available and compatible with 

resource objectives.

Allocations

SA-CA-A-1. The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone and the Kelton and Toana Freight 

Road protective corridors (27,000 acres) would be closed to new salable mineral development. See NHTCA-MA-8 and CR-CA-MA-12. 

SA-IV-A-1. The majority of the planning area would be open to salable mineral development (1,103,000 

acres in Alternative IV-A; 1,135,000 acres in Alternative IV-B), subject to site-specific NEPA analysis, 

stipulations, and 43 CFR 3600 regulations, except for the following areas which are closed to salable 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Resource Uses

2-265 

•

•

•

•

•

•

mineral exploration and development (241,000 acres in Alternative IV-A; 209,000 acres in Alternative IVB):

The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness;

The Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, Inside Desert, Lower Bruneau Canyon, and Sand Point Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern (ACECs); 

 Playas (300-feet buffer); and 

Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics. 

See Maps 126 and 127 for locations of salable mineral allocations.

Management Actions

SA-C-MA-1. Promote the use of existing sites for mineral disposals. 

SA-C-MA-2. Exploration would be allowed where appropriate under a letter of authorization from the BLM 

authorized officer. Exploration for new sites would be the responsibility of the applicant. 

SA-CA-MA-1. Salable mineral development activities would avoid special status species habitat if the 

activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. Permits would 

include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

SA-CA-MA-2. All mineral material sites would be reclaimed in accordance with resource objectives for the 

adjacent area as specified in the permit.

SA-CA-MA-3. Site specific terms, conditions, and special considerations would be included in all 

commercial salable mineral permits to protect resource values.

SA-CA-MA-4. Stipulations for community pits would be developed on a site-specific basis. 

SA-CA-MA-5. For those salable mineral development activities conducted pursuant to valid existing rights 

that pose risks to achievement of goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands, use existing 

authorities to mitigate and/or require, to the extent authorized, design features that would contribute to the 

maintenance of streambanks, shorelines, streambed configuration, water quality, amount and distribution 

of woody debris, thermal regulation, characteristic erosion rates, and amount and distribution of source 

habitats.

SA-CA-MA-6. Locate salable mineral project related infrastructure outside Riparian Conservation Areas

(RCAs). Where there is no alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. 

Keep the number of roads to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission

and revegetate roads no longer required for mineral management and related activities.

SA-CA-MA-7. New salable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs. 

SA-IV-MA-1. New sites may be developed if it is determined by the BLM authorized officer that an 

existing site would not meet the applicant’s needs and site impacts can be sufficiently mitigated. 

Locatable Minerals

Minerals or materials subject to claim and development under the Mining Law of 1872, as amended. 

Generally includes metallic minerals such as gold and silver, and other materials not subject to lease or 

sale (some bentonites, limestone, talc, some xeolites, etc.).
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-266

•

•

•

•

•

Goal

LO-CA-G-1. Locatable mineral development would not cause unnecessary and undue degradation of 

resources. 

Objective

LO-CA-O-1. Facilitate reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound exploration and development 

of locatable minerals. 

Allocations

LO-C-A-1. The planning area, excluding the following withdrawn areas (60,000 acres), would be available 

for location of mining claims:

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and 

Designated Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridors.

LO-IV-A-1. Recommend the following areas for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable exploration and 

development (83,000 acres): 

Bruneau-Jarbidge and Sand Point Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs), 

The Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone, and 

 Eligible and suitable WSR corridors.

See Map 133 for locations of areas recommended for withdrawal and withdrawn by statute. 

Recommendations by BLM for withdrawal are subject to final consideration by the Secretary of the 

Interior.

Management Actions

LO-CA-MA-1. Determine whether locatable mineral plans of operation cause unnecessary and undue 

degradation to resources, including habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species, on a caseby-case basis and identify stipulations or mitigation measures as appropriate. 

LO-CA-MA-2. Locate mineral project related infrastructure outside Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs). 

Where there is no alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. Keep the 

number of roads to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission and 

revegetate roads no longer required for mineral management and related activities.

LO-CA-MA-3. New locatable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LO-CA-MA-4. Develop inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for locatable mineral activities

within or affecting RCAs. Evaluate and apply the results of inspection and monitoring to modify mineral 

plans, leases, or permits as needed to achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

2.6.4 Special Designations

2.6.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 

Goal

ACEC-IV-G-1. ACECs would be managed to protect the important biological, cultural, scenic, and historic 

resources that meet the criteria for relevance and importance. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Special Designations

2-267

Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC

Objective

ACEC-IV-O-1. Manage the lands within the Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC to protect their fish, wildlife, 

botanical, scenic, and cultural resource values.

Allocation

ACEC-IV-A-1. Manage 123,000 acres of public land as the Bruneau-Jarbidge ACEC (Maps 139 and 

140).

Management Actions

ACEC-IV-MA-1. Restore playas occupied by Davis peppergrass to improve natural hydrologic function 

and habitat on a case-by-case basis. Restoration activities may include filling pit reservoirs, stabilizing 

erosion areas, and planting native species with similar pollinators. 

ACEC-IV-MA-2. Monitor juniper encroachment into the riparian area, and consider juniper treatments to 

improve bull trout habitat.

ACEC-IV-MA-3. Areas within the ACEC with concentrated recreational and livestock grazing use would 

be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment with integrated weed management 

techniques for control, containment, and where practical, eradication. Special stipulations would apply for 

noxious weed and invasive plants treatments in Davis peppergrass habitat. Use of domestic sheep or 

goats to reduce noxious weeds would not be allowed within the ACEC to eliminate potential contact with 

bighorn sheep.

ACEC-IV-MA-4. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.

ACEC-IV-MA-5. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used to suppress wildland fires within the 

ACEC. Fire lines would be rehabilitated to help stabilize soils.

ACEC-IV-MA-6. Manage the portion of the Jarbidge right-of-way (ROW) corridor within the ACEC as 

Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class III; manage the remainder of the ACEC as VRM Class I.

ACEC-IV-MA-7. Adjust livestock grazing so livestock seasons of use would not overlap bighorn sheep

breeding and winter periods in those pastures that contain bighorn sheep habitat. 

ACEC-IV-MA-8. Adjust livestock seasons of use or stocking rates on a pasture-specific basis to minimize

conflicts with bull trout spawning (late August through early November) and Davis peppergrass during 

flowering and when playas are most likely to contain water (December through June). 

ACEC-IV-MA-9. Range infrastructure would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for retention, 

modification, or removal. New infrastructure would be allowed to the extent that it protects bull trout 

habitat, cultural resources, or botanical values. Prohibit placing of salt or other supplements within the 

ACEC to reduce livestock use of bighorn sheep habitat and protect big game winter range.

ACEC-IV-MA-10. Monitor recreational use within the ACEC. If this use reaches levels that impair the 

relevant and important values of the ACEC, implement protective measures appropriate to the type of 

recreational activity. Protective measures may include, but not be limited to, implementing a permit 

system for the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers in coordination with the Bruneau Field Office, requiring the 

use of certified weed-free forage and straw, and designating camping areas outside the ACEC. 

ACEC-IV-MA-11. Special Recreation Permits would be allowed within ACECs as long as the relevant and 

important values are protected. 

ACEC-IV-MA-12. Motorized vehicle use within the ACEC would be limited to designated routes. To avoid 

disturbing bighorn sheep during wintering and lambing periods or to protect other relevant and important 
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-268

values, seasonal closures of specific designated routes may be considered in the Travel Management 

Plan (TMP). 

ACEC-IV-MA-13. Continue to maintain the low level of human disturbance in bighorn sheep habitat by 

not constructing new roads or substantially improving other routes in the ACEC. Some designated routes 

within the ACEC, including the road to Indian Hot Springs, could have spot surface treatments to reduce 

resource damage due to road braiding and to improve public safety. 

ACEC-IV-MA-14. The ACEC would be a ROW avoidance area; new ROWs would be restricted to ROW 

corridors and locations of existing ROWs.

ACEC-IV-MA-15. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1; where practical, acquire 

private and/or State in holdings. The ACEC designation and management would apply to lands acquired 

within the ACEC boundary.

ACEC-IV-MA-16. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing. 

ACEC-IV-MA-17. The ACEC would be closed to salable mineral development. 

ACEC-IV-MA-18. Recommend lands within the ACEC for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable 

exploration and development. 

Inside Desert ACEC

Objective

ACEC-IV-O-2. Manage the lands within the Inside Desert ACEC to protect their botanical values.

Allocation

Alternative IV-A 

ACEC-IV-A-2. Manage 73,000 acres of public land as the Inside Desert ACEC (Map 139).

Alternative IV-B 

ACEC-IV-A-3. Manage 41,000 acres of public land as the Inside Desert ACEC (Map 140).

Management Actions

ACEC-IV-MA-19. Restore slickspot peppergrass habitat by planting native shrubs, grasses, and forbs to 

improve ecological function and increase pollinators.

ACEC-IV-MA-20. Seed only native species, with emphasis on plants with similar pollinators.

ACEC-IV-MA-21. Where practical, vegetation treatments, including drill seeding, would avoid

concentrations of slickspots. 

ACEC-IV-MA-22. The ACEC would be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment 

with integrated weed management techniques for control, containment, and where practical, eradication. 

ACEC-IV-MA-23. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.

ACEC-IV-MA-24. Staging areas for fire suppression and rehabilitation activities would be located outside 

the ACEC.

ACEC-IV-MA-25. Manage the ACEC as VRM Class III.

ACEC-IV-MA-26. The ACEC would not be available for livestock grazing.

ACEC-IV-MA-27. Remove troughs, fences, or other infrastructure within the ACEC. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Special Designations

2-269

ACEC-IV-MA-28. Camping would not be allowed within the ACEC.

ACEC-IV-MA-29. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1; where practical, acquire State 

inholdings. The ACEC designation and management would apply to lands acquired within the ACEC 

boundary.

ACEC-IV-MA-30. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing.

ACEC-IV-MA-31. The ACEC would be closed to salable mineral development.

Jarbidge Foothills ACEC

Objective

Alternative IV-A 

ACEC-IV-O-3. Manage the lands within the Jarbidge Foothills ACEC to protect their cultural, fish, wildlife, 

and botanical values.

Alternative IV-B 

ACEC-IV-O-4. Manage the lands within the Jarbidge Foothills ACEC to protect their cultural, wildlife, and 

botanical values.

Allocation

Alternative IV-A 

ACEC-IV-A-4. Manage 134,000 acres of public land as the Jarbidge Foothills ACEC (Map 139).

Alternative IV-B 

ACEC-IV-A-5. Manage 64,000 acres of public lands as the Jarbidge Foothills ACEC (Map 140).

Management Actions

Alternative IV-A 

ACEC-IV-MA-32. Improving, expanding, connecting, and restoring native plant communities would be a 

high priority within the ACEC. 

ACEC-IV-MA-33. Restore mountain shrub habitat for sage-grouse.

ACEC-IV-MA-34. Restore habitat for Columbia spotted frogs (spotted frogs) in Rocky Canyon, Timber 

Canyon, Shack, and Bear Creeks.

ACEC-IV-MA-35. Restore redband trout habitat and reduce habitat fragmentation in redband trout 

occupied watersheds.

ACEC-IV-MA-36. The ACEC would be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment 

with integrated weed management techniques for control, containment, and where practical, eradication. 

ACEC-IV-MA-37. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area. 

ACEC-IV-MA-38. Manage the majority of the ACEC as VRM Class III, where not otherwise designated as 

VRM Class I or II.

ACEC-IV-MA-39. Livestock seasons of use or stocking rates would be adjusted within the ACEC to 

minimize conflicts with redband trout, sage-grouse wintering, breeding, and nesting periods; and 

restoration projects.

ACEC-IV-MA-40. Monitor recreational use within the ACEC. If this use reaches levels that impair the 

relevant and important values of the ACEC, implement protective measures appropriate to the type of 

recreational activity. Protective measures may include but not be limited to designating camping areas 
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-270

within the ACEC; requiring the use of certified weed-free forage and straw; and installing protective 

barriers to protect relevant and important values.

ACEC-IV-MA-41. Routes would be designated through the TMP to increase core habitat size for sagegrouse.

ACEC-IV-MA-42. BLM-managed lands within the ACEC can be exchanged for non-BLM-managed lands 

within the ACEC, consistent with the Land Tenure section; where practical, acquire private and/or State in 

holdings. The ACEC designation and management would apply to lands acquired within the ACEC 

boundary.

ACEC-IV-MA-43. The ACEC would be available for salable mineral development; where practical, use 

existing mineral pits and minimize new salable mineral developments within ACEC. Seasonal closures 

that restrict use or activities at the pits during important seasonal periods for sage-grouse may be 

included when existing salable mineral permits are reauthorized and in new permits.

ACEC-IV-MA-44. Limit surface disturbing activities within the ACEC to protect cultural resources; ensure 

that authorized impacts are appropriately mitigated.

ACEC-IV-MA-45. Prevent or reduce unauthorized impacts to cultural resources through increased 

monitoring, public outreach, and law enforcement patrols.

Alternative IV-B 

ACEC-IV-MA-46. Improving, expanding, connecting, and restoring native plant communities would be a 

high priority within the ACEC. 

ACEC-IV-MA-47. Restore mountain shrub habitat for sage-grouse.

ACEC-IV-MA-48. The ACEC would be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment 

with integrated weed management techniques for control, containment, and where practical, eradication. 

ACEC-IV-MA-49. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.

ACEC-IV-MA-50. Manage the majority of the ACEC as VRM Class III, where not otherwise designated as 

VRM Class I or II. 

ACEC-IV-MA-51. Livestock seasons of use or stocking rates would be adjusted within the ACEC to 

minimize conflicts with sage-grouse wintering, breeding, and nesting periods; and restoration projects.

ACEC-IV-MA-52. Monitor recreational use within the ACEC. If this use reaches levels that impair the 

relevant and important values of the ACEC, implement protective measures appropriate to the type of 

recreational activity. Protective measures may include but not be limited to designating camping areas 

within the ACEC; requiring the use of certified weed-free forage and straw; and installing protective 

barriers to protect relevant and important values.

ACEC-IV-MA-53. Routes would be designated through the TMP to increase core habitat size for sagegrouse.

ACEC-IV-MA-54. BLM-managed lands within the ACEC can be exchanged for non-BLM-managed lands, 

consistent with the Land Tenure section; where practical, acquire private and/or State in holdings. The 

ACEC designation and management would apply to lands acquired within the ACEC boundary.

ACEC-IV-MA-55. The ACEC would be available for salable mineral development; where practical, use 

existing mineral pits and minimize new salable mineral developments within ACEC. Seasonal closures 

that restrict use or activities at the pits during important seasonal periods for sage-grouse may be 

included when existing salable mineral permits are reauthorized and in new permits.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Special Designations

2-271

ACEC-IV-MA-56. Limit surface disturbing activities within the ACEC to protect cultural resources; ensure 

that authorized impacts are appropriately mitigated.

ACEC-IV-MA-57. Prevent or reduce unauthorized impacts to cultural resources through increased 

monitoring, public outreach, and law enforcement patrols.

Lower Bruneau Canyon ACEC

Objective

ACEC-IV-O-5. Protect vertebrate and invertebrate paleontological resources; restore and protect special 

status plant habitat for Packard’s cowpie buckwheat, spine-node milkvetch, and rare desert annuals. 

Allocation

ACEC-IV-A-6. Manage 1,000 acres of public land as the Lower Bruneau Canyon ACEC (Maps 139 and 

140).

Management Actions

ACEC-IV-MA-58. Restore native upland and riparian plant communities within the ACEC to improve 

habitat for special status species.

ACEC-IV-MA-59. The ACEC would be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment 

with integrated weed management techniques for control, containment, and where practical, eradication. 

ACEC-IV-MA-60. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.

ACEC-IV-MA-61. Manage the ACEC as VRM Class III.

ACEC-IV-MA-62. The ACEC would be available for livestock grazing and new infrastructure as long as 

they are compatible with recovery of the area, including protecting seed production of special status 

plants and reducing impacts to their pollinators. 

ACEC-IV-MA-63. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1.

ACEC-IV-MA-64. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing.

ACEC-IV-MA-65. The ACEC would be closed to salable mineral development.

Sand Point ACEC

Objective

ACEC-IV-O-6. Protect the Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT), archaeological sites, vertebrate and 

invertebrate paleontological resources, and the Glenns Ferry geologic formation.

Allocation

ACEC-IV-A-7. Manage 1,000 acres of public land as the Sand Point ACEC (Maps 139 and 140).

Management Actions

ACEC-IV-MA-66. Manage paleontological resources within the ACEC in accordance with the 1988 Sand 

Point Natural History Management Plan or subsequent revision. Modify the 1988 plan to encompass the 

Morgan property extension and to be in conformance with the RMP. 

ACEC-IV-MA-67. The ACEC would be closed to fossil collecting except under permit for scientific 

research. 
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-272

ACEC-IV-MA-68. Limit BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses that may contribute 

to wind or water erosion in the ACEC.

ACEC-IV-MA-69. Work cooperatively with adjacent land owners to reduce or eliminate run-off from the 

agricultural fields that erode soils within the ACEC.

ACEC-IV-MA-70. No surface-disturbing activities would be allowed in the ACEC unless they are directly 

related to research on the ACEC’s cultural, paleontological, or geological resources or unless they can be 

mitigated.

ACEC-IV-MA-71. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used to suppress wildland fires within the 

ACEC to protect the paleontological resources. The BLM authorized officer may allow the use of bull 

dozers to construct control lines within the ACEC on a case-by-case basis. However, dozer lines would 

be rehabilitated to minimize erosion.

ACEC-IV-MA-72. Manage the ACEC as VRM Class III, except within the Oregon NHT protective zone. 

ACEC-IV-MA-73. The ACEC would be available for livestock grazing.

ACEC-IV-MA-74. New range infrastructure may be considered if it does not impair the relevant and 

important values of the ACEC. Any infrastructure would be located so that it does not increase or 

encourage livestock trailing across fossil-bearing areas, cultural resource sites, or Oregon NHT ruts. 

ACEC-IV-MA-75. Salt or other livestock supplements would not be placed within 0.25 mile of fossilbearing areas or cultural resource sites. Locations closed to salt or other livestock supplements would be 

made known to the livestock permittees.

ACEC-IV-MA-76. Motorized vehicle use within the ACEC would be limited to designated routes. 

ACEC-IV-MA-77. Consider upgrading the Wilson Grade Road if there is increased need for access for fire 

suppression activities or research.

ACEC-IV-MA-78. Structures directly related to the preservation or interpretation of the site may be 

allowed (e.g., kiosks, protective barriers). 

ACEC-IV-MA-79. The ACEC would be a ROW exclusion area.

ACEC-IV-MA-80. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1. 

ACEC-IV-MA-81. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing.

ACEC-IV-MA-82. The ACEC would be closed to salable mineral development.

ACEC-IV-MA-83. Recommend lands within the ACEC for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable 

exploration and development. 

2.6.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 

Goal

NHT-CA-G-1. The Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor would be managed to preserve and 

protect the historic, scenic, and recreational values associated with the trail. 

Objective

NHT-CA-O-1. Protect, preserve, and provide opportunities to experience the historic, scenic, and 

recreational values of the Oregon NHT.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Special Designations

2-273

•

•

•

Allocation

NHT-IV-A-1. Manage 1.5 miles on either side of the Oregon NHT as the National Trail Management 

Corridor (42,000 acres). Within the corridor, manage 0.25 mile on either side of the Oregon NHT or the 

visual horizon (whichever is narrower) as a protective zone (11,000 acres). 

See Map 143 for the location of the Oregon NHT.

Management Actions

NHT-CA-MA-1. Update the BLM’s 1984 Oregon Trail Management Plan and ensure consistency with the 

National Park Service’s 1999 Oregon NHT Comprehensive Management and Use Plan.

NHT-CA-MA-2. Until the 1984 plan is updated and unless otherwise directed in this document, continue 

to manage the Trail in accordance with the 1984 plan and BLM policy, and in cooperation with the 

National Park Service.

NHT-CA-MA-3. Manage the Oregon NHT protective zone as an avoidance area for surface-disturbing 

activities, including: 

 Placement of salting, supplemental feeding, temporary watering, and temporary holding facilities for 

livestock;

Staging areas for recreational activities and events; and

Staging areas for fire suppression and rehabilitation activities.

NHT-CA-MA-4. If use of a designated route within the Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor

is degrading the trail or its setting, the route would be modified or closed.

NHT-CA-MA-5. Design and implement restoration projects to mitigate the effects of natural and humancaused disturbances within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor. When practical, remove or 

modify visually intrusive facilities within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor. 

NHT-CA-MA-6. Lands within the Oregon NHT protective zone are not available for disposal; non-BLM 

lands within the corridor are a high priority for acquisition.

NHT-CA-MA-7. The Oregon NHT protective zone is open to leasable mineral exploration and 

development with no surface occupancy. 

NHT-CA-MA-8. The Oregon NHT protective zone is closed to new salable mineral development. Existing 

salable mineral developments could be renewed but the footprint could not be expanded.

NHT-CA-MA-9. Adverse effects to the Oregon NHT related to land use authorizations would be prevented 

through avoidance of impacting activities or through mitigation when disturbance or destruction is 

unavoidable. 

NHT-CA-MA-10. Developments such as roads, trails, pipelines, fences, and powerlines may be allowed 

to cross the Oregon NHT where the project is determined by the BLM, with the State Historic Preservation 

Officer concurrence, to not adversely affect the trail due to previous disturbance or visual intrusions. 

NHT-CA-MA-11. Surface-disturbing equipment, such as bulldozers and road graders, cannot be used on 

contributing segments of the Oregon NHT, or within the protective zone of such segments, unless to 

protect life or property.

NHT-CA-MA-12. Use techniques that minimize surface disturbance within the Oregon NHT protective 

zone during seeding projects (Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation, fuels treatments, 

or restoration). Trail remnants would not be disturbed during seeding operations.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-274

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

NHT-CA-MA-13. Use educational and public outreach programs to minimize or prevent human-caused 

damage to the Oregon NHT including vandalism, unauthorized surface collection of artifacts, and 

unintentional disturbances.

NHT-CA-MA-14. Install and maintain signs identifying the routes of the Oregon NHT.

2.6.4.3 Wilderness 

Goal and Objective

WD-C-G-1. Manage the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to protect wilderness values.

Management Action

WD-C-MA-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness was designated by Congress in 2009 with the 

Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009, Section G, P.L. 111-11. The 90,000 acre BruneauJarbidge Rivers Wilderness Area (63,000 acres within the planning area) would be managed according to 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan. 

See Map 145 for the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness location.

2.6.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 

Goal and Objective

WSR-C-G-1. Maintain or enhance the outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs), free-flowing condition, 

and water quality of designated, suitable, and eligible WSR segments.

Allocations

WSR-C-A-1. River segments designated as Wild and Scenic include: 

A 38.1-mile segment of the Bruneau River from the downstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness to the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau River, except for a 0.5-mile 

segment at the Indian Hot Springs public road access, to be administered as a wild river; 

A 0.5-mile segment of the Bruneau River at the Indian Hot Springs public road access to be 

administered as a recreational river; 

A 0.3-mile segment of the West Fork of the Bruneau River from the confluence with the Jarbidge 

River to the downstream boundary of the Bruneau Canyon Grazing Allotment to be administered as a 

wild river; and

A 27.9-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau 

River to the upstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to be administered as a 

wild river.

WSR-C-A-2. Segments recommended suitable for inclusion in the WSR system include: 

A 23.0-mile segment of the Bruneau River from Blackrock Crossing to 0.3 mile above the confluence 

of the West Fork of the Bruneau River and the Jarbidge River.

WSR-C-A-3. Segments eligible for inclusion in the WSR system include: 

A 39.0-mile segment of Salmon Falls Creek from the Nevada border to Salmon Falls Reservoir and 

from Salmon Falls Dam to Balanced Rock Park; 

 A 25.0-mile segment of the Three Island, King Hill, and Hagerman reaches of the Snake River; 

A 10.2-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the planning area boundary to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 9.6-mile segment of the Jarbidge River, East Fork from the planning area boundary to Murphy Hot 

Springs and from Murphy Hot Springs to the Jarbidge Forks; 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Special Designations

2-275

•

•

•

A 2.7-mile segment of Dave Creek from private land boundary to Jarbidge River, East Fork 

confluence;

A 1.0-mile segment of Cougar Point Creek from the planning area boundary to Jarbidge River, East 

Fork confluence; and 

A 1.5-mile segment of Rocky Canyon Creek from its headwaters to Salmon Falls Creek, North Fork 

confluence.

See Map 146 for locations of designated, suitable, and eligible river segments.

WSR-C-A-4. Wild and Scenic River corridors are designated to extend either the average distance of 

0.25 mile from the high water mark on each side of the river segment; or the distance to the nearest 

confined canyon rim, whichever is shorter. 

WSR-C-A-5. Wild and Scenic River corridors that are suitable or eligible extend outward from the ordinary 

high water mark 0.25 mile on both sides of the river.

Management Actions

WSR-C-MA-1. Manage the designated segments of the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers in accordance with 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan to maintain or 

enhance their ORVs, free-flowing condition, water quality, and classification.

WSR-C-MA-2. Manage the suitable segment of the Bruneau River to maintain or enhance its ORVs, freeflowing condition, water quality, and tentative classification until Congress acts.

WSR-C-MA-3. Protect or enhance the qualifying values of eligible river segments pending a subsequent 

suitability determination or designation decision by Congress. Their free-flowing condition cannot be 

modified, their ORVs and water quality are to be maintained or enhanced, and their tentative classification 

is to be maintained.

WSR-C-MA-4. Conduct suitability studies and make suitability determinations on eligible river segments 

entirely within the planning area; coordinate suitability studies on segments forming the boundary with the 

Burley and Shoshone Field Offices. 

WSR-C-MA-5. The existing powerline south of Murphy Hot Springs on the East Fork of the Jarbidge River 

would be retained; designated, suitable, and eligible WSR corridors would be right-of-way avoidance 

areas.

WSR-C-MA-6. If, through legislation, Congress decides not to designate a suitable segment as part of the 

Wild and Scenic River System, the protective management outlined in this section would no longer apply 

and these segments would be managed according to direction in other sections of the RMP. 

WSR-IV-MA-1. Designated, suitable, and eligible WSR corridors would be closed to exploration and 

development of leasable or salable minerals.

2.6.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs)

Goal and Objective

WSA-C-G-1. Manage and protect the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA to preserve wilderness 

characteristics so as not to impair the suitability for designation by Congress as wilderness.

Allocations

WSA-C-A-1. Manage 2,000 acres of public land as the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA. 

See Map 145 for the WSA location.
Chapter 2: Alternative IV Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Social and Economic Features

2-276

Management Actions

WSA-C-MA-1. Manage the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA according to the Management of Wilderness 

Study Areas (BLM Manual 6330) until Congress either designates the land as wilderness or releases it for 

other uses. 

WSA-C-MA-2. If the WSA is designated by Congress as Wilderness, manage it according to 

Congressional mandates and BLM’s Wilderness Manual 6340 until a Wilderness Management Plan is 

developed.

WSA-C-MA-3. If the WSA is released for other uses by Congress, manage the lands within the Area of 

Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) and Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridor according to 

management specified for that ACEC and WSR corridor.

2.6.5 Social and Economic Features

2.6.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 

Goal

SE-CA-G-1. Management of the resources and uses of public lands would provide social and economic 

benefits to residents, businesses, visitors, and future generations.

Objective

SE-CA-O-1. Provide opportunities for economic and social benefit while maintaining natural and cultural 

resource values. 

Management Actions

SE-CA-MA-1. Planning for BLM management activities and authorized uses would consider whether the 

activity or action could be designed to support the social, economic, and environmental health and 

sustainability of affected communities of place.

SE-CA-MA-2. Consider proposals from communities of place and interest that contribute to their social, 

economic, and environmental health and sustainability. 

2.6.5.2 Hazardous Materials

Goal

HM-CA-G-1. Ensure hazardous substances on public lands remain a high priority for removal or 

mitigation. 

Objective

HM-CA-O-1. Mitigate issues related to hazardous substances. 

Management Actions

HM-CA-MA-1. Storage, treatment, or disposal of hazardous materials on public lands would not be 

allowed unless otherwise permitted by law. 

HM-CA-MA-2. Use law enforcement and public outreach to discourage the disposal of hazardous 

materials on public lands. 

HM-CA-MA-3. Storage and use of hazardous materials on public lands would not be allowed without BLM 

authorization.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative IV

Social and Economic Features

2-277

•

•

•

•

HM-CA-MA-4. Responses to hazardous materials incidents and sites would be as outlined and approved 

by the latest contingency plans for hazardous materials incidents (e.g., 2013 Twin Falls District BLM 

Environmental Contingency Plan for Emergency Preparedness and Response to Oil and Hazardous 

Materials Incidents).

HM-CA-MA-5. Identify and mitigate illegal hazardous material disposal sites and hazardous materials 

spills in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations.

HM-CA-MA-6. Develop interagency agreements with local law enforcement agencies to facilitate the 

enforcement of illegal hazardous material disposal and hazardous material laws.

HM-CA-MA-7. Coordinate with local government agencies during hazardous material prevention and 

response activities.

2.6.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 

Goal and Objective

IOE-CA-G-1. Working with partners, provide interpretation, outreach, and environmental education to 

highlight the natural, cultural, and historic features of the planning area and to further resource protection 

and public safety. 

Management Actions

IOE-CA-MA-1. Focus education, interpretation, and outreach on resources and activities occurring within 

the planning area. 

IOE-CA-MA-2. Partner with the tribes and Federal, State, and local agencies to educate the public on 

resource protection through activities such as education tours; kiosks at major entrances to the planning 

area; interpretive signs at off-highway vehicle staging areas; information on the identification, control, and 

prevention of noxious weeds and invasive plants; and programs such as Tread Lightly!® and Leave No 

Trace®. 

IOE-CA-MA-3. Create displays highlighting natural, cultural, and historic features of the planning area for 

use at area fairs, schools, public lands day, and other events. 

IOE-CA-MA-4. Participate in events that educate youth about natural resources.

IOE-CA-MA-5. Minimize or prevent human-caused damage to public land resources, including vandalism, 

illegal dumping, and unauthorized surface collection of fossils and artifacts, through educational and 

interpretive outreach programs.

IOE-CA-MA-6. Foster the public's understanding of the role of fire in the ecosystem, the hazards 

associated with living in the Wildland Urban Interface, and wildland fire prevention and suppression 

activities through methods such as: 

 Using mass media, 

 Providing outreach to local groups, 

 Developing interpretive signs and kiosks, and

Participating in County Wildfire Protection Plans. 

IOE-CA-MA-7. Provide interpretation and education on unique resource areas such as the Oregon 

National Historic Trail, Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, Wilderness, Wilderness Study Areas, and 

Wild and Scenic Rivers.

IOE-CA-MA-8. Provide education and outreach on resource protection for recreational users. 
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Tribal Rights and Interests

2-278

2.7 ALTERNATIVE V

2.7.1 Tribal Rights and Interests

Goals and Objectives

TI-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to protect resources and values associated with Native American treaty 

rights. 

TI-CA-G-2. Manage natural and cultural resources of importance to the tribes in a manner that respects 

tribal beliefs, traditions, and values. 

TI-CA-G-3. Protect the physical condition of sacred sites and traditional cultural properties and preserve 

tribal access to such sites.

Management Actions

TI-CA-MA-1. Consult with the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes and Shoshone-Bannock Tribes in accordance with 

BLM policy and other authorities. Consultation would be an ongoing process between BLM and the tribes, 

within the context of general management of public lands and programs, as well as specific proposals 

that may affect natural and cultural resources of importance to the tribes.

TI-CA-MA-2. Identify the effects of decisions on vegetation, fish, wildlife, mineral, and water resources of 

importance to the tribes, through consultation, and seek ways to lessen or avoid impacts. 

TI-CA-MA-3. Work collaboratively with the tribes regarding the identification and management of 

traditional cultural properties. 

TI-CA-MA-4. Provide general information to staff and contractors regarding existing and historic uses of 

the planning area by the tribes, Federal government trust responsibilities, and the importance of Native 

American treaty rights in order to foster a greater understanding and appreciation of tribal rights and 

interests related to public land management. 

2.7.2 Resources

2.7.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 

Goal

AAV-CA-G-1. Ensure BLM management activities and authorized uses maintain the quality of the 

planning area's air resources.

Objective

AAV-CA-O-1. Maintain the quality of air resources and limit impacts to air quality to meet National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards and Idaho Department of Environmental Quality air quality standards. 

Management Actions

AAV-CA-MA-1. Manage the planning area airshed as Class II unless it is reclassified by the State 

through the process prescribed in the Clean Air Act.

AAV-CA-MA-2. Ensure BLM management activities and authorized uses, including prescribed fire, are 

designed to comply with Federal, State, and local air quality regulations, classifications, and standards.

AAV-CA-MA-3. Minimize impacts of smoke from prescribed fires to sensitive areas such as the Class I 

airshed of the Jarbidge Wilderness (on US Forest Service-managed land), non-attainment areas, and 

communities adjacent to the planning area. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resources

2-279

AAV-CA-MA-4. Coordinate with the Montana-Idaho Airshed Group Smoke Management Program or its 

equivalent for all actions related to prescribed fire. 

AAV-CA-MA-5. Develop dust abatement stipulations for BLM-authorized construction and maintenance 

activities that have the potential to exceed State of Idaho air quality standards.

AAV-CA-MA-6. Design BLM activities and authorized uses to minimize night time light intrusions (e.g., 

modifications to the structure and timing of lighting).

AAV-CA-MA-7. Design BLM activities and authorized uses to comply with State of Idaho requirements for 

noise management. 

2.7.2.2 Geologic Features 

Goal

GE-CA-G-1. Manage unique geologic features for their tribal, scientific, recreational, and educational 

values. 

Objective

GE-CA-O-1. Protect unique geologic features and provide opportunities for their use and enjoyment.

Management Actions

GE-CA-MA-1. Protect unique geologic features from human-caused damage or extraction. 

GE-CA-MA-2. Conduct and maintain a cave inventory with participation from the tribes and interested 

organizations to identify and compile quantitative and qualitative data on cave resources and to determine 

cave significance in accordance with the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988.

GE-CA-MA-3. Based on the results of the cave inventory, designate significant caves and protect their 

resources. 

GE-CA-MA-4. Set management objectives and setting prescriptions for significant caves.

2.7.2.3 Soil Resources

Goal and Objective

SR-CA-G-1. Manage resources and uses to maintain or enhance biological and physical functions and 

stability of soils. 

Management Actions

SR-CA-MA-1. Minimize soil erosion by maintaining perennial vegetation cover based on site potential.

SR-CA-MA-2. Design construction, maintenance, and land treatments to reduce impacts to soils. 

SR-CA-MA-3. Collaborate with County Highway Districts to reduce impacts from road maintenance along 

stream corridors and in areas of highly erosive soils.

SR-CA-MA-4. Reduce the erosive effects of transportation and travel by modifying routes or mitigating 

the impacts (e.g., water bars or control structures) where problems are identified. 

SR-CA-MA-5. Revegetate or stabilize areas where BLM management activities or authorized uses have 

resulted in unanticipated erosion.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-280

SR-CA-MA-6. Where new road construction or reconstruction occurs, the location and design should 

minimize soil erosion, including closure or decommissioning of the road if the need for the road is 

temporary.

SR-CA-MA-7. Soil and snow should not be side cast into surface waters during road maintenance.

SR-V-MA-1. Mitigate impacts of BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses on soils 

with moderate, severe, or very severe potential for wind erosion (1,129,000 acres; Map 4) or with medium 

or high potential for water erosion (1,296,000 acres; Map 5) for watershed and ecosystem health.

SR-V-MA-2. Develop and implement an erosion control strategy and topsoil restoration plan for new land 

use authorizations, Special Recreation Permits, and mineral exploration and development involving 

surface disturbance on slopes 20% to 40% or on soils with moderate, severe, or very severe potential for 

wind erosion or with medium or high potential for water erosion. No surface disturbance from these 

activities would be allowed on slopes greater than 40%.

2.7.2.4 Water Resources

Goal

WR-CA-G-1. Maintain or improve the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of water resources.

Objective

WR-CA-O-1. Make progress towards meeting Federal and State water quality standards. 

Management Actions

WR-CA-MA-1. Priority streams for restoration of water quality include streams containing special status 

species and their habitat (Map 24), fish-bearing streams, and water quality impaired streams (Map 6). 

Map 6 displays the location of streams meeting these criteria in 2011; this map can be updated to reflect 

changes in a stream’s status through the life of the plan.

WR-CA-MA-2. Prevent or mitigate the impacts of BLM management activities and authorized and allowed 

uses on water quality to comply with Federal, State, and local water quality regulations.

WR-CA-MA-3. Modify or suspend BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses that are 

a factor in not meeting water quality standards.

WR-CA-MA-4. Where applicable, incorporate best management practices to maintain and improve water 

quality (Appendix B). Recommendations may be implemented from State water quality plans to achieve 

the goal and objective (e.g., Idaho Agricultural Pollution Abatement Plan).

WR-CA-MA-5. Consider new water development projects and improvements to existing water 

development projects if impacts to water and riparian resources can be mitigated; see the Livestock 

Grazing section for additional guidance on water developments. See the Wildland Fire Ecology and 

Management section for guidance on water developments for fire suppression activities.

WR-CA-MA-6. Consult or coordinate with the tribes and with Federal, State, and local agencies when 

determining location and designs for water development projects.

WR-CA-MA-7. Coordinate with Idaho Department of Water Resources, Idaho Department of 

Environmental Quality, and Nevada Division of Environmental Protection to identify opportunities to 

mitigate impacts of water management on public land resources.

WR-CA-MA-8. Where total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for water quality restoration are developed, 

land management activities would be consistent with the water quality restoration plan and TMDLs.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resources

2-281

•

•

•

•

•

•

WR-CA-MA-9. Water bodies that are supporting beneficial uses (e.g., cold water biota, salmonid 

spawning, recreation, and agriculture) would be managed to meet or exceed State of Idaho and Nevada 

regulations.

WR-CA-MA-10. Consult or coordinate as appropriate with tribal, Federal, State, and local governments to 

identify and secure instream flows needed to maintain riparian resources, channel conditions, and aquatic 

habitat.

WR-CA-MA-11. Apply chemicals (i.e., herbicides, pesticides, insecticides, and other toxicants) in a 

manner that does not impair water quality or prevent attainment of objectives for riparian areas and 

wetlands and avoids adverse effects on inland non-game fish and their habitat. When applying chemicals

in a Riparian Conservation Area (RCA), a spill kit would be onsite as appropriate. Prohibit storing and 

mixing chemicals within RCAs unless there are no other practical alternatives.

WR-CA-MA-12. Prohibit storage of fuels and other toxicants and refueling within RCAs unless there are 

no other practical alternatives. Any refueling sites and/or storage areas within an RCA would have an 

approved refueling and spill containment plan.

2.7.2.5 Vegetation Communities

Upland Vegetation

The Upland Vegetation section outlines goals and objectives for vegetation treatments. Management 

actions for restoration treatments, treatments for annual communities, and treatments for perennial 

communities are described in this section. Treatments for weeds and fuels are in the Noxious Weeds and 

Invasive Plants and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

For management and analysis purposes, the 55 vegetation communities in the planning area were 

grouped into five vegetation sub-groups (VSGs; see the Upland Vegetation section in Chapter 3 for 

vegetation communities included in each VSG); Map 9 displays existing vegetation as of 2011. 

Vegetation communities were grouped into VSGs based on the dominant vegetation and community 

structure as well as similarity in management objectives:

Annual communities – dominated by invasive annual grasses; includes communities with and 

without a shrub overstory.

Non-Native Perennial communities – dominated by non-native perennial grasses; some also have 

an overstory of four-wing saltbush or rabbitbrush.

Non-Native Understory communities – dominated by non-native perennial grasses in the 

understory; have an overstory of Wyoming big sagebrush, basin big sagebrush, black sagebrush, or 

low sage.

Native Grassland communities – dominated by native perennial grasses; do not have a shrub 

overstory.

Native Shrubland communities – dominated by native perennial grasses in the understory; have a 

shrub overstory; also includes aspen, juniper, and mountain mahogany communities which are 

present in small, scattered inclusions within other native shrubland communities.

Unvegetated areas – include breaks, barren areas, and sand dunes.

The planning area was divided into Vegetation Management Areas (VMAs) A, B, C, and D, creating westeast bands across the planning area based on potential natural community, elevation, and mean annual 

precipitation (Map 8). 

Goals

UV-CA-G-1. Manage upland vegetation communities to promote soil stability, water infiltration, nutrient 

cycling, and energy flow; provide habitat for sage-grouse and other sagebrush steppe obligates; and 

provide for multiple use.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

A

VMA A

A

2-282

UV-V-G-1. Manage vegetation to move toward historic vegetation communities by sustaining, improving, 

or increasing native plant communities that provide habitat for sage-grouse and other special status 

species.

Objective

VMA A 

UV-V-O-1. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 83,000 62,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 94,000 72,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 3,000 26,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 34,000 34,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 5,000 25,000

Unvegetated Areas 2,000 2,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA A

UV-V-MA-1. Restore approximately 25% of annual communities to native shrubland. Treatments would 

focus on areas occupied by special status plants, the Middle Snake and Lower Bruneau Canyon Areas of 

Critical Environmental Concerns (ACECs), the Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone, and 

areas adjacent to native grassland and shrubland.

UV-V-MA-2. Treat approximately 25% of non-native perennial communities to introduce shrubs. 

Treatments would focus on the Middle Snake and Lower Bruneau Canyon ACECs, the Oregon NHT 

protective zone, and areas adjacent to native grassland and shrubland. Natural succession of shrubs 

would be allowed throughout non-native perennial communities.

UV-V-MA-3. Non-native understory, native grassland communities, and native shrubland communities 

would not be a focus for active restoration treatments. Natural succession of shrubs would be allowed 

throughout native grassland communities.

UV-V-MA-4. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resources

A

VMA B

A

2-283

Objective

VMA B

UV-V-O-2. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 39,000 20,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 212,000 70,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 19,000 160,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 211,000 141,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 125,000 215,000

Unvegetated Areas 24,000 24,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA B

UV-V-MA-5. Restore approximately 50% of annual communities to native shrubland, focusing on the 

Sagebrush Sea ACEC.

UV-V-MA-6. Treat approximately 67% of the non-native perennial communities to introduce shrubs, 

focusing on the Sagebrush Sea ACEC. Natural succession of shrubs would be allowed throughout nonnative perennial communities.

UV-V-MA-7. Restore approximately 33% of native grassland communities to native shrubland, focusing 

on the Sagebrush Sea ACEC. Natural succession of shrubs would be allowed throughout native 

grassland communities.

UV-V-MA-8. Non-native understory and native shrubland communities would not be a focus for active 

restoration treatments.

UV-V-MA-9. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

A

VMA C 

A

2-284

Objective

VMA C

UV-V-O-3. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 2,000 2,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 46,000 14,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 26,000 58,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 150,000 75,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 78,000 153,000

Unvegetated Areas 11,000 11,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA C

UV-V-MA-10. Treatment of annual communities would be limited due to the location of these areas at 

canyon bottoms and within wilderness. Localized treatments may be used when necessary.

UV-V-MA-11. Treat approximately 70% of non-native perennial communities to introduce shrubs, focusing 

on sage-grouse, bighorn sheep, and slickspot peppergrass habitat. Natural succession of shrubs would 

be allowed throughout non-native perennial communities.

UV-V-MA-12. Restore approximately 50% of native grassland communities to native shrubland. Natural 

succession of shrubs would be allowed throughout native grassland communities.

UV-V-MA-13. Non-native understory and native shrubland communities would not be a focus for active 

restoration treatments.

UV-V-MA-14. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resources

A

VMA D 

A

2-285

Objective

VMA D

UV-V-O-4. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 1,000 500

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 4,000 1,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 12,000 15,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 80,000 27,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 97,000 151,000

Unvegetated Areas 11,000 11,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA D

UV-V-MA-15. Restore approximately 50% of annual communities to native shrubland, focusing on Taylor 

Pocket and areas near China Creek.

UV-V-MA-16. Treat approximately 75% of non-native perennial communities to introduce shrubs; 

treatment would focus on areas adjacent to native shrubland communities. Natural succession of shrubs 

would be allowed throughout non-native perennial communities.

UV-V-MA-17. Restore approximately 67% of native grassland communities to native shrubland, focusing 

on areas that have been seeded with shrubs previously. Natural succession of shrubs would be allowed 

throughout native grassland communities.

UV-V-MA-18. Non-native understory and native shrubland communities would not be a focus for active 

restoration treatments.

UV-V-MA-19. Unvegetated areas would not be a focus for vegetation treatments.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 

Management Actions

All VMAs

UV-CA-MA-1. Design BLM management activities and authorized uses to consider plant reproductive 

and physiological needs with a focus on the critical growing season, as well as vegetation objectives; 

guidelines for specific uses are found in the appropriate sections.

UV-CA-MA-2. Implement drought management guidelines during periods of drought to maintain or 

achieve long-term resource productivity (Appendix F).

UV-CA-MA-3. Rest vegetation treatment areas from uses, including but not limited to livestock and wild 

horse grazing and recreational use, until treatment objectives are met and are predicted to be 
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-286

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

sustainable. This management action would not apply to uses that do not conflict with the treatment 

objectives.

UV-V-MA-20. The first priority for implementing vegetation treatments would be treatments identified for 

VMA A to move toward native perennial vegetation; the second priority would be treatments identified for 

VMA C to reconnect and expand habitat for sage-grouse. Opportunities for treatments outside these 

priority areas would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

UV-V-MA-21. Focus restoration treatments identified for each VMA on habitat for sage-grouse and other 

special status species.

UV-V-MA-22. The toolbox to restore or treat upland vegetation communities would include:

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; 

Removal of grazing; and 

Prescribed fire. 

Chemical treatments could only be used after all other methods have been exhausted. Targeted grazing 

would not be allowed. 

UV-V-MA-23. Limit treatments in non-native perennial communities to methods with minimal soil 

disturbance, including but not limited to:

Broadcast seeding, 

Chaining, and 

Harrowing. 

UV-V-MA-24. Use only native species or cultivars of native species in upland vegetation treatments.

UV-V-MA-25. Establish 40 ungrazed reference areas (194,000 acres total) in annual, non-native 

perennial, non-native understory, native grassland, and native shrubland communities (Map 14). Each 

reference area would consist of an entire pasture and would be paired with an adjacent grazed area in a 

similar vegetation type and condition to monitor the effects of livestock grazing on a variety of plant 

communities.

UV-V-MA-26. Reseed areas disturbed during project construction, maintenance, or removal with a 

mixture of native grasses, forbs, or shrubs that are appropriate to the ecological site.

UV-V-MA-27. Assess biological soil crusts and manage them to move toward site potential by modifying 

levels and timing of BLM management activities and authorized uses during periods when soil crusts are 

most vulnerable to damage.

Riparian Areas and Wetlands

Goal

RI-CA-G-1. Achieve healthy, functioning watersheds, riparian areas, wetlands, and associated aquatic 

habitats.

RI-CA-G-2. Provide habitat to support populations of well-distributed native and desired non-native plant, 

vertebrate, and invertebrate populations that contribute to the sustainability of riparian-dependent 

communities. 

RI-CA-G-3. Maintain or improve naturally functioning vegetation communities that include natural timing 

and variability of surface and groundwater in riparian areas and wetlands, and diversity and productivity of 

native and desired non-native plant communities. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resources

2-287

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Objectives

RI-V-O-1. Maintain 85 miles of Priority 3 streams at proper functioning condition (PFC); improve 77 miles 

of Priority 1 streams and 21 miles of Priority 2 streams to achieve PFC; and improve the remaining 42 

miles of Priority 2 streams to be moving toward PFC over the life of the plan. 

RI-V-O-2. Manage wetlands to move toward PFC.

Management Actions

RI-CA-MA-1. Identify Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) around riparian areas and wetlands that 

contain or are tributaries to streams that contain special status species or their habitat to protect riparian 

vegetation, fisheries, and water quality. RCA widths would be as follows:

Category 1 – Fish-bearing streams: The RCA consists of the stream and the area on either side of 

the stream. This area extends from the edges of the active channel to the top of the inner gorge, to 

the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, or 300 feet 

slope distance (600 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), whichever is widest.

Category 2 – Permanently flowing non-fish-bearing streams: The RCA consists of the stream and the 

area on either side of the stream. This area extends from the edges of the active channel to the top of 

the inner gorge, to the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, to the outer edges of the riparian 

vegetation, or 150 feet slope distance (300 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), 

whichever is widest.

Category 3 – Ponds, lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands greater than one acre: The RCA consists of the 

body of water or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, to the extent of 

the seasonally saturated soil, or 150 feet slope distance from the edge of the maximum pool elevation 

of constructed ponds and reservoirs, or from the edge of the wetland, pond, or lake, whichever is 

widest.

Category 4 – Seasonally flowing or intermittent streams, wetlands less than one acre, landslides, and 

landslide-prone areas: This category includes features with high variability in size and site-specific 

characteristics. The RCA includes the intermittent stream channel and the area to the top of the inner 

gorge, the intermittent stream channel or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian 

vegetation, the area from the edges of the stream channel, wetland, or slide/landslide-prone area, or 

50 feet slope distance, whichever is widest.

RI-CA-MA-2. Use adaptive management to reduce impacts on riparian areas and wetlands from uses and 

activities (see the Aquatic and Riparian Management Strategy [ARMS], Appendix D). 

RI-CA-MA-3. Riparian management priorities would include the following:

Priority 1 streams – Streams rated as functioning-at-risk (FAR) or functioning-at-risk with a 

downward trend (FAR-DN). The management emphasis for Priority 1 streams would be restoration. 

Priority 2 streams – Streams rated as functioning-at-risk with an upward trend or non-functioning 

(NF). The management emphasis for Priority 2 streams would be restoration.

Priority 3 streams – Streams rated at PFC. The management emphasis for Priority 3 streams would 

be on maintaining proper function.

Specific streams are prioritized in the ARMS (Appendix D, Tables D-3 and D-5).

RI-CA-MA-4. Assess condition of wetlands associated with ponds and springs.

RI-CA-MA-5. Survey aquatic habitat (instream, riparian, and wetland) and maintain aquatic habitat 

inventories.

RI-CA-MA-6. Consider authorizing activities or facilities where long-term benefits outweigh short-term 

impacts to riparian vegetation and fish habitat.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-288

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

RI-CA-MA-7. Remove nonessential human-made structures and objects that adversely impact the 

function of floodplains (e.g., unused bridge abutments, unused diversions, abandoned cars).

RI-CA-MA-8. Modify existing management activities and authorized uses in RCAs to attain PFC and 

ensure that habitat conditions of streams, riparian areas, and wetlands are moving toward achieving the 

goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

RI-CA-MA-9. Conduct new management activities within or affecting RCAs only if they are consistent with 

achieving the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. New management activities would 

avoid or reduce adverse effects on inland non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs. 

RI-CA-MA-10. Trees may be felled in RCAs when they pose a safety risk. Keep felled trees on-site when 

needed to maintain or improve riparian or instream conditions. 

RI-CA-MA-11. Cooperate with tribal, Federal, State, and local agencies and private landowners to 

develop watershed-based coordinated resource management plans or other cooperative agreements to 

achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

RI-V-MA-1. Within the priorities identified in the ARMS (Appendix D), stream reaches containing special 

status species or their habitat would be a high priority for restoration. Active restoration would be limited 

to FAR-DN and NF reaches.

RI-V-MA-2. The toolbox for restoration of stream reaches would include, but not be limited to: 

Road closures, 

Culvert replacements, 

Closing pastures, 

Exclosure fencing, 

Removal of water developments, 

 Planting of riparian areas, 

Active herding, 

Riparian pastures, 

Instream fish habitat improvements, and

Modification or elimination of land uses that prevent attainment of the goals and objectives for riparian 

areas and wetlands. 

The toolbox would not include:

Modification of water developments, 

Reintroduction of beaver, or 

Erosion control measures.

RI-V-MA-3. Conduct multiple indicator surveys on riparian areas according to BLM policy, with emphasis 

on those areas that are rated FAR, FAR-DN, and NF or areas containing special status species.

RI-V-MA-4. Establish six ungrazed riparian reference areas (23,000 acres total; Map 14). Each reference 

area would consist of an entire pasture and would be paired with an adjacent grazed area in a similar 

vegetation type and condition to monitor the effects of livestock grazing on a variety of plant communities.

2.7.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 

Fish

Native aquatic species in the planning area can be described in three broad categories:

Aquatic species Federally listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973,

Aquatic species identified on the BLM Sensitive species list for Idaho and Nevada, and
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resources

2-289

• Other non-game fish present in the planning area.

Aquatic species included in the first two categories are discussed in the Special Status Species section. 

The goals, objectives, and management actions for other non-game fish (i.e. sculpin, suckers, and 

minnows) are provided below. For a majority of the streams within the planning area, the habitat needs 

for non-game fish are met through goals, objectives, and management actions for special status species 

in riparian areas, wetlands, and streams. The goals, objectives, and management actions below 

encompass the streams containing only non-game fish.

Goal

FI-V-G-1. Manage public lands to promote diverse, structured, resilient, and connected habitats for fish.

Objective

FI-V-O-1. Maintain or improve streams so 70% of the miles of non-game fish-bearing streams and their 

perennial tributaries are managed for properly functioning condition. The remaining 30% of miles of nongame fish-bearing streams and their perennial tributaries would be moving toward properly functioning 

condition. 

Management Actions

FI-CA-MA-1. Maintain, improve, or restore native non-game fish habitat through actions identified for 

riparian areas, water resources, and special status species through restoration priorities in the Aquatic 

and Riparian Management Strategy (ARMS; Appendix D). Incorporate best management practices 

maintain and improve habitat for non-game fish (Appendix B).

FI-CA-MA-2. Inventory and monitor non-game fish habitat. Use adaptive management as outlined in the 

ARMS to minimize impacts to non-game fish habitat from uses and activities (Appendix D).

FI-CA-MA-3. Activities within riparian areas and wetlands would be designed to mitigate impacts to the 

riparian and aquatic habitat(s) containing non-game fish. 

FI-CA-MA-4. To avoid adverse effects on non-game fish and instream flows, locate water drafting sites in 

upland areas (e.g., stock ponds, storage tanks, hydrants). Where these water sources are not available, 

locate water drafting sites at existing stream road crossings (e.g., bridges, culverts, fords) to divert water

in a manner that does not retard or prevent achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas 

and wetlands. 

FI-CA-MA-5. Design and implement watershed restoration projects in a manner that promotes the longterm ecological integrity of ecosystems, conserves the genetic integrity of non-game fish species, and 

contributes to the achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

FI-CA-MA-6. New fisheries and instream channel restoration projects would avoid or minimize adverse 

effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and Riparian Conservation Areas. 

FI-CA-MA-7. Cooperate with Federal and State fish management agencies to identify and reduce 

adverse effects on non-game fish associated with habitat manipulation, fish stocking, fish harvest, and 

illegal harvest.

Wildlife

Goal

WI-V-G-1. Manage public lands to promote diverse, structured, resilient, and connected habitats for 

wildlife.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

•

•

•

•

2-290

Objective

WI-V-O-1. Maintain or improve wildlife habitat by managing uses and activities and actively restoring 

annual and non-native perennial communities toward historic vegetation communities.

Management Actions

WI-CA-MA-1. When making management decisions affecting big game, use the most current big game 

winter range map provided by Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) and the Nevada Department 

of Wildlife. Areas considered big game winter range as of 2011 are shown on Map 17. 

WI-CA-MA-2. Implement habitat projects to maintain or improve habitat for mule deer and pronghorn 

when and where needed. 

WI-CA-MA-3. Under Executive Order 13186, promote the maintenance and improvement of migratory 

bird habitat quantity and quality through the permitting process for all land use authorizations. Avoid, 

reduce, or mitigate adverse impacts on the habitats of migratory bird species of conservation concern to 

the extent feasible, and in a manner consistent with regional or statewide bird conservation priorities.

WI-CA-MA-4. Incorporate best management practices (BMPs) for wildlife into BLM management activities 

and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B). Specific BMPs would be applied at the project level.

WI-CA-MA-5. Install and maintain BLM approved wildlife escape devices on troughs and open tanks.

WI-CA-MA-6. Modify existing and construct new fences to comply with BLM standards for wildlife 

(Karsky, 1999). Existing fences would be modified according to the following priority order: 

Key sage-grouse habitat, 

Big game winter range, 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, and

The remainder of the planning area. 

WI-CA-MA-7. Schedule construction and maintenance activities to avoid or minimize disturbance to 

priority species and their habitat during their important seasonal periods (see WI-V-MA-1 for a list of 

priority species). 

WI-CA-MA-8. Schedule energy-related activities (e.g., exploration, development, and maintenance) to 

avoid or minimize disturbance to priority species and their habitat during important seasonal periods. 

WI-V-MA-1. Sage-grouse and other special status species are priority species for habitat management. 

Special status species management is discussed in the Special Status Species section.

WI-V-MA-2. Reconfigure wildlife tracts to reduce conflicts with uses, to improve management efficiency, 

and to increase the average size of individual tracts (from 13,000 acres to 14,000 acres; Map 18). 

Prepare a new plan for joint IDFG-BLM management of wildlife tracts through a public process and to 

obtain partners for projects to improve wildlife values. 

WI-V-MA-3. Minimize disturbance to raptors by restricting construction or other authorized human 

activities both spatially and seasonally. Restrictions would be required during courtship and nesting

(February 1 through July 31) and applied as appropriate. Buffer distances from raptor nests during 

nesting would be as follows (Whittington and Allen, 2008): 

Raptor Species Spatial Buffer

Bald eagle 0.5 to 1.0 mile

Northern goshawk 0.50 mile

Ferruginous hawk 1.00 mile

Golden eagle 0.50 mile
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resources

2-291

Raptor Species Spatial Buffer

Peregrine falcon 1.00 mile

Red-tailed hawk 0.33 mile

Prairie falcon 0.50 mile

Swainson’s hawk 0.25 mile

Burrowing owl 0.25 mile

2.7.2.7 Special Status Species 

Goal

SS-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to contribute to the conservation and recovery of sage-grouse and 

other special status species. 

Objective

SS-V-O-1. Maintain or improve the quality and quantity of habitat for sage-grouse and other special status 

species by managing public land activities to sustain or benefit those species.

Management Actions

SS-C-MA-1. Follow conservation measures in relevant biological opinions and letters of concurrence, as 

appropriate. Conservation measures in place as of 2012 can be found in Appendix E; conservation 

measures can be updated, revised, or replaced through future consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife 

Service (FWS).

SS-CA-MA-1. Special status species management would apply to Endangered, Threatened, Candidate, 

and Proposed species (Type 1 BLM Sensitive); other BLM Sensitive species (Types 2 through 4); and 

proposed or designated critical habitat; this includes plants, fish and other aquatic species, and wildlife. 

SS-CA-MA-2. Special status species management would not apply to species that are removed from the 

BLM Sensitive species list. Those species would be managed according to applicable delisting 

requirements, conservation strategies, BLM guidance, and Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) 

or Nevada Department of Wildlife management guidance.

SS-CA-MA-3. Management of one special status species would take into account the needs of other 

special status species.

SS-CA-MA-4. Follow applicable conservation plans, strategies, and agreements for special status 

species (Appendix E). 

SS-CA-MA-5. Monitor special status species and their habitats, and maintain data on their populations, 

distribution, and habitats. Use adaptive management or mitigation to reduce impacts on special status 

species and their habitats from uses and activities.

SS-CA-MA-6. Work cooperatively with tribes, Federal and State agencies, private landowners, and 

companies to identify and mitigate threats to special status species and habitat on BLM-managed lands. 

SS-V-MA-1. Where alternative management strategies would result in the same relative effect to a 

species, implement the most passive strategies, where practical.

SS-V-MA-2. Support projects to identify and monitor pollinators of special status plants.

SS-V-MA-3. Evaluate special status plant habitat, and where it has been historically occupied, 

reintroduce special status plant species where practical.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-292

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

SS-V-MA-4. Conduct habitat suitability evaluations for potential reintroductions of special status wildlife, 

fish, and aquatic invertebrates in cooperation with FWS, IDFG, NDOW, and other interested and affected 

parties. Work with FWS, IDFG, and NDOW on reintroductions as appropriate.

Management Related to Resource Uses

SS-CA-MA-7. Leasable and salable mineral development activities should avoid special status species 

habitat if the activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. 

Permits would include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

SS-CA-MA-8. Promote conservation and recovery of special status species through land actions such as:

Conservation easements that protect or conserve special status species habitat,

Land acquisitions or exchanges that improve management of special status species, and

Acquisition of lands with a high value for special status species.

SS-CA-MA-9. New communication sites would avoid special status species habitat if the project would 

have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be reduced. 

SS-CA-MA-10. Right-of-way construction and maintenance activities should avoid disturbing special 

status species during important seasonal periods, unless the disturbance can be mitigated.

SS-V-MA-5. Adjust livestock use levels, season of use, or other management techniques to maintain or 

enhance special status species and their habitat.

SS-V-MA-6. Remove or modify range infrastructure and other facilities as necessary to maintain or 

enhance special status species and their habitat.

Management for Special Status Species in Upland Areas

SS-CA-MA-11. Manage native shrubland communities in a landscape context to ensure that the seasonal 

habitat needs of sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate species are met across the planning area, 

where site conditions are suitable.

SS-CA-MA-12. Mark fences that have been identified as a collision risk to improve fence visibility for 

sage-grouse, using appropriate collision diverters or other reasonable approaches. Fences posing higher 

risks to sage-grouse are generally within 1.25 miles of a lek and are:

On flat topography,

Where spans exceed 12 feet between T-posts,

Without wooden posts, or

Where fence densities exceed 1.6 miles of fence per section (640 acres) (Stevens et al., 2011). 

SS-CA-MA-13. Maintain or improve the habitat for special status species by protecting and restoring their 

habitat, controlling noxious weeds and invasive plants, and minimizing direct habitat disturbance.

SS-CA-MA-14. When designing seed mixes for vegetation treatments and surface-disturbing projects, 

consider the needs of special status species and their habitat in the project area.

SS-CA-MA-15. Use seeding methods that minimize impacts to special status species populations.

SS-CA-MA-16. If a conflict between authorized uses and bighorn sheep is identified, schedule authorized 

uses to avoid pastures that contain bighorn sheep habitat during breeding, wintering, and lambing periods 

to minimize disturbance during these important seasonal periods.

SS-CA-MA-17. Avoid locating new transmission lines, phone lines, or communication towers/facilities in 

native shrubland and native grassland communities to minimize impacts to sage-grouse. If a transmission 

or phone line project must be located in sage-grouse habitat, the project should incorporate measures to 

reduce impacts to sage-grouse such as: 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resources

2-293

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Burying lines;

Using devices or structure design to deter raptor and raven perching and nesting; 

Avoiding construction and maintenance during important seasonal periods for sage-grouse; 

 Restoring or improving sage-grouse habitat outside the project area; 

Constructing lines, towers, and related facilities in lower quality habitats; and

Clustering or co-locating facilities.

SS-V-MA-7. Implement management actions described in the Upland Vegetation section to maintain or 

improve habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species. Upland vegetation management to 

benefit sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate special status species includes, but is not limited to:

Restoring annual communities toward native and 

Introducing shrubs to non-native perennial communities and native grassland communities.

See the Upland Vegetation section for more details.

SS-V-MA-8. BLM management activities and authorized uses within one mile of known ferruginous hawk 

or prairie falcon nests would be designed to minimize impacts to their prey base and availability of nesting 

material from February through July.

SS-V-MA-9. Remove troughs and reservoirs within one mile of bighorn sheep habitat; relocate troughs 

and reservoirs more than one mile from bighorn sheep habitat if the watering site is needed for livestock 

grazing.

SS-V-MA-10. Remove fences and corrals within one mile of bighorn sheep habitat, except fences for 

pasture and allotment boundaries or for other resource protection.

SS-V-MA-11. New troughs, reservoirs, permanent fences, and corrals would be located at least one mile 

from bighorn sheep habitat.

SS-V-MA-12. Fences identified to protect resources would be allowed and would be designed to meet the 

needs of bighorn sheep.

SS-V-MA-13. Minimize the transmission of disease by maintaining a nine-mile separation between 

domestic sheep/goats and bighorn sheep. The separation would be accomplished by:

Not converting cattle animal unit months (AUMs) to domestic sheep or goat AUMs, 

Not allowing trailing of domestic sheep or goats within that separation distance, and

Requiring a herder to be present during trailing of domestic sheep or goats.

Management for Special Status Species in Riparian Areas, Wetlands, and Streams

SS-CA-MA-18. Incorporate best management practices as appropriate to maintain and improve habitat 

for special status fish and aquatic invertebrates (Appendix B).

SS-CA-MA-19. Identify and eliminate, where feasible, migration barriers to special status fish species 

movement.

SS-CA-MA-20. Identify and implement specific habitat improvement projects in redband trout habitat to 

reduce habitat fragmentation and promote their long-term recovery. Projects may include, but not be 

limited to:

Replacing culverts,

Working with private landowners so diversions are not a barrier,

Screening diversions, and

Planting riparian vegetation.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-294

•

•

•

•

SS-CA-MA-21. Implement specific habitat improvement projects for Jarbidge River bull trout (bull trout) as 

identified in the Recovery Plan for the Jarbidge River Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout.

Additional management direction for BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses in 

special status species habitat can be found in the Resource Uses sections. 

2.7.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 

Goal

NW-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to prevent, eliminate, or control noxious weeds and invasive plants.

Objectives

Noxious Weeds

NW-V-O-1. Reduce the number of acres containing noxious weeds by at least 20%; reduce the number of 

noxious weed species present. 

Invasive Plants

NW-V-O-2. Reduce cover of invasive plants in native communities to less than 5%; reduce cover of 

invasive plants in non-native perennial and non-native understory communities to less than 10%.

Management Actions

NW-CA-MA-1. Apply herbicides consistent with BLM policy. 

NW-CA-MA-2. Inventory noxious weeds and invasive plants. 

NW-CA-MA-3. Consult with the tribes on herbicide use to consider timing of projects and impacts to 

plants of importance to the tribes.

NW-CA-MA-4. Formulate methods of control in or near special status species habitat on a site-specific

and species-specific basis to minimize impacts to special status species. 

NW-CA-MA-5. Incorporate best management practices for noxious weeds and invasive plants into BLM 

management activities and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B).

NW-CA-MA-6. Include site-specific stipulations in land use authorizations, permits, and leases to limit 

introduction and spread of noxious weeds.

NW-CA-MA-7. Collaborate with Federal agencies, State and County governments, non-governmental 

organizations, and individuals to establish a Jarbidge Cooperative Weed Management Area or other 

cooperative agreements for noxious weed and invasive plants management. 

NW-CA-MA-8. Use of certified weed-free forage, seed, straw, and mulch (as defined in the Idaho Noxious 

Weed Free Forage and Straw Certification Rules [IAC 02.06.31]) would be required for all BLM 

management activities and authorized and allowed uses.

NW-V-MA-1. Treat areas containing noxious weeds and invasive plants. Priority areas would include (not 

in priority order): 

Special designations, 

Riparian areas, 

Special status species habitat, and 

Native plant communities.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resources

2-295

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

NW-V-MA-2. Focus control efforts on species with new or small infestations and species that have higher 

potential for resource impacts. Eradicate noxious weeds and invasive plants where practical. Focus 

treatment for large infestations on reducing the size of the infestation.

NW-V-MA-3. The toolbox for treating noxious weeds and invasive plants would include: 

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; 

Removal of grazing; and 

Prescribed fire.

Chemical treatments could only be used after other methods have been exhausted. Target grazing would 

not be allowed.

NW-V-MA-4. Develop and implement activities to prevent the introduction and spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants on public lands. The toolbox for preventing introduction and spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants would include: 

Public outreach (e.g., kiosks, media, mailings, publications, brochures) and 

Modifying uses to minimize new introductions and spread (e.g., quarantining livestock, closing 

pastures, closing roads).

2.7.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Wildland Fire Management

Goal

WFM-CA-G-1. Fire management strategies would result in firefighter and public safety and protection of 

property and natural and cultural resources, while considering suppression and rehabilitation costs.

Objectives

WFM-V-O-1. Strive to reduce average wildland fire size and number of human-caused fire starts within 

the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). 

WFM-V-O-2. Reduce acres burned in vegetation types outside the WUI where more wildland fires have 

burned than in the historic fire regime.

Allocations

WFM-CA-A-1. The planning area would not be available for Wildland Fire Use (1,371,000 acres).

WFM-V-A-1. Critical suppression areas within the planning area would be (1,041,000 acres): 

WUI;

Lower Bruneau Canyon, Middle Snake, and Sagebrush Sea Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 

(ACECs); and 

Key sage-grouse habitat.

The types of critical suppression areas would remain the same throughout the life of the plan; however, 

the acres and specific locations for the WUI and key sage-grouse habitat can be updated to reflect 

changing conditions. See Map 35 for the locations of these areas in 2011. 

WFM-V-A-2. The remainder of the planning area would be a conditional suppression area (331,000 

acres). 
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-296

•

•

•

•

Management Actions

WFM-C-MA-1. Fire management within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness is addressed in the 

Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan.

WFM-CA-MA-1. All wildland fires in critical or conditional suppression areas would receive an Appropriate 

Management Response (AMR). AMR includes any action taken to meet resource objectives identified in 

RMPs and Fire Management Plans (FMPs). AMR ranges across a spectrum of tactical operations (from 

monitoring to aggressive/intensive suppression actions). 

WFM-CA-MA-2. Critical suppression areas represent highest suppression priority. The AMR in critical 

suppression areas assumes suppression actions would be taken to reduce fire size and acres burned 

unless safety warrants alternative strategies. Wildland fire is generally not desired in these areas, with the 

exception of prescribed fire to be used for site preparation as described in the RMP. 

WFM-CA-MA-3. Conditional suppression areas represent areas of lower suppression priority where 

suppression efforts would be adjusted based on resource values and fire’s desired role in the ecosystem. 

The AMR in conditional suppression areas assumes suppression actions would be taken commensurate 

with the values at risk and considering suppression costs. Wildland fire management strategies may be 

changed if fire danger is high or there would likely be undesired fire effects. Conditional suppression 

areas also represent areas where cost of suppression may exceed the value of resources to be protected 

as identified in the RMP.

WFM-CA-MA-4. Areas for Wildland Fire for Resource Benefit would be determined by the BLM after the 

wildland fire has been contained or controlled. Areas where vegetation treatments were planned and 

analyzed in the NEPA process or those ecosystems found to “need more disturbance” through the Fire 

Regime Condition Class process would be candidates for “benefit” fires. Post-fire site visits would be 

required to determine if fire effects actually resulted in conditions that moved the area toward resource 

objectives. 

WFM-CA-MA-5. Revise the FMP as required to incorporate updated fire, vegetation, resource value, 

WUI, and fuels data. The FMP would be used to refine suppression, fuels treatment, community 

assistance, and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation priorities. 

WFM-CA-MA-6. In addition to safety and resource concerns, consider fire suppression and rehabilitation 

costs when evaluating fire suppression techniques.

WFM-CA-MA-7. Work collaboratively with the military to reduce the risk of wildland fire, improve 

suppression logistics on military lands adjacent to public lands, and protect public lands from wildland 

fires originating on military lands. 

WFM-CA-MA-8. Incorporate best management practices for wildland and prescribed fire into BLM 

management activities and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B).

WFM-CA-MA-9. Foster the public's understanding of the role of fire in the ecosystem, hazards associated 

with living in the WUI, and wildland fire prevention and suppression activities through methods such as: 

 Using mass media, 

 Providing outreach to local groups, 

 Developing interpretive signs and kiosks, and 

 Participating in the County Wildfire Protection Plan process.

WFM-CA-MA-10. Fire suppression strategies, practices, and actions in Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs) should be designed to minimize disturbance to riparian vegetation. 

WFM-CA-MA-11. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used within RCAs unless safety to 

human life or property is an issue. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resources

2-297

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

WFM-CA-MA-12. Incident bases, camps, helibases, staging areas, helispots, and other centers for 

incident activities would be located outside of RCAs. If the only suitable location for these activities is 

within the RCA, an exemption may be granted by the BLM authorized officer. 

WFM-CA-MA-13. Avoid delivery of chemical retardant, foam, or additives into surface waters. An 

exception is warranted where overriding immediate safety imperatives exist or when the BLM determines 

a fire would cause more long-term damage to fish habitats than chemical delivery to surface waters.

WFM-V-MA-1. When multiple wildland fire ignitions occur in critical suppression areas, based on the 

management priorities of Alternative V, the suppression priorities would be (in order of importance):

Vegetation Management Area (VMA) C,

VMA B,

VMA D, and

VMA A.

These priorities would also be used for general fire suppression management planning.

WFM-V-MA-2. Within the perimeter of a contained wildland fire, protect unburned patches of native 

grassland and native shrubland communities from fire during wildland fire suppression activities. 

Unburned islands of annual and non-native perennial communities within the perimeter of a contained fire 

may be allowed to burn.

WFM-V-MA-3. Use minimum impact suppression tactics in:

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, 

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area, 

Oregon National Historic Trail, 

Sand Point ACEC,

Bull trout habitat,

Slickspot peppergrass habitat, and 

Other areas where appropriate to mitigate potential impacts of fire suppression. 

WFM-V-MA-4. Maintain water availability for fire suppression at 2009 levels.

WFM-V-MA-5. Consistent with other resource objectives, implement measures to reduce response time 

for fire suppression activities including, but not limited to: 

Improving roads, 

Improving stream crossings, and 

Developing better signage. 

Tools to improve access do not include building new guard stations, building new or improving existing 

airstrips, building helipads, or building new roads in areas with limited access.

WFM-V-MA-6. Transportation and travel restrictions may be imposed to reduce risk of wildland fire during 

times of fire restrictions, as determined by an authorized officer; restrictions may include, but not be 

limited to closing primitive roads, trails, and areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use. Travel 

related to administrative uses and emergency services may continue during fire restrictions.

WFM-V-MA-7. Authorized uses may be limited or prohibited to reduce risk of wildland fire as determined 

by the BLM authorized officer. 

WFM-V-MA-8. Dozer blading should not occur within 300 feet of playas to protect associated cultural 

resources.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-298

•

•

•

Fuels and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation (ES&BAR)

Goals

FE-CA-G-1. Reduce fire hazard within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). 

FE-V-G-1. Manage vegetation communities outside the WUI to maintain or restore their fire regimes and 

mosaic of successional classes to within their historic range.

Objectives

Fuels

FE-CA-O-1. Manage plant communities within the WUI to reduce relative risk rating. 

FE-V-O-1. Manage plant communities outside the WUI to move toward Fire Regime Condition Class

(FRCC) 1.

FE-V-O-2. Implement fuels treatments to protect critical suppression areas; limit the spread, size, and 

intensity of wildland fire; and maintain or improve vegetation.

ES&BAR

FE-V-O-3. Rehabilitate and stabilize areas to help stabilize soils, promote natural recovery, and establish 

pre-fire or historic vegetation communities.

Management Actions

Fuels

FE-CA-MA-1. Update the FRCC analysis for the planning area when 20% of the planning area has been 

disturbed by wildland fires or treated by fuels projects since the previous FRCC analysis was completed. 

FE-CA-MA-2. Progress towards FRCC objectives would be achieved through actions and guidelines 

specified in the Upland Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants, 

and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

FE-CA-MA-3. Coordinate fuels treatments with adjacent landowners and agencies through County 

Wildfire Protection Plans or other methods.

FE-CA-MA-4. Rest fuels treatment areas from uses until treatment objectives are met and are predicted 

to be sustainable or if the treatment is determined by the BLM to be unsuccessful. This would not apply to 

uses that do not conflict with the treatment objectives.

FE-CA-MA-5. Fuels treatments in Riparian Conservation Areas would be designed to maintain or improve 

riparian vegetation. 

FE-V-MA-1. Implement fuels treatments to reduce fuel loads with consideration for other resource 

objectives.

FE-V-MA-2. Fuels treatments in the WUI would include fuels reduction treatments and fuel breaks. Fuels 

treatments in the WUI would focus on areas with high relative risk ratings in the northern portion of the 

planning area.

FE-V-MA-3. Fuels treatments outside the WUI would include: 

Restoration, 

Fuel breaks, and 

Noxious weed and invasive plant treatments. 

FE-V-MA-4. The toolbox for fuels treatments would include:
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resources

2-299

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; 

Removal of grazing; and 

Prescribed fire. 

Chemical treatments could only be used after all other methods have been exhausted. Targeted grazing

would not be allowed. 

FE-V-MA-5. Fuels treatments would use native species.

FE-V-MA-6. Upland vegetation management related to fuels treatments includes, but is not limited to:

Restoring annual communities toward native and 

Introducing shrubs to non-native perennial communities and native grassland communities to break 

up the continuity of fuel.

See the Upland Vegetation section for more details.

FE-V-MA-7. Fuel breaks would only follow designated roads and designated primitive roads. Construct 

fuel breaks consistent with objectives in the Upland Vegetation section.

FE-V-MA-8. Noxious weed and invasive plants management related to fuels treatments includes 

measures for treating and preventing noxious weeds and invasive plants; see the Noxious Weeds and 

Invasive Plants section for more details. Construct fuel breaks consistent with objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation section.

ES&BAR

FE-CA-MA-6. Use the full range of treatment options available to meet ES&BAR objectives, including:

Mechanical treatments,

Drill or broadcast seeding treatments,

Chemical treatments,

Seedling transplants, and

Erosion control structures.

FE-CA-MA-7. Implement the Programmatic ES&BAR Plan and update as needed. Individual ES&BAR 

plans would be completed through the interdisciplinary process to reduce impacts of wildland fire and 

suppression and to achieve resource objectives.

FE-CA-MA-8. Use seed mixes that would help stabilize soils and achieve objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Fish and Wildlife, and Special Status Species sections.

FE-CA-MA-9. Use seed drilling equipment, tools, or techniques that minimize soil disturbance and place 

seed at the correct depth.

FE-CA-MA-10. Rest burned areas from uses, including livestock and wild horse grazing and recreational 

use, until ES&BAR objectives are met and are predicted to be sustainable or if the treatment is 

determined by the BLM to be unsuccessful. This would not apply to uses that do not conflict with the 

treatment objectives.

FE-CA-MA-11. Consider emergency closures to motorized vehicle use when necessary for ES&BAR 

efforts.

FE-V-MA-9. Temporary fences would not be used. Livestock grazing would be pulled back to pasture 

fences. Reconstruction of fire-damaged permanent facilities on BLM-managed lands would follow BLM 

policy.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-300

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2.7.2.10 Wild Horses 

Goal

WH-V-G-1. The Saylor Creek Wild Horse Herd Management Area (HMA) would be managed for a thriving 

natural ecological balance.

Objective

WH-V-O-1. Manage a non-reproducing herd with an appropriate management level (AML) range of 200 to 

500 wild horses in the Saylor Creek Wild Horse HMA.

Allocations

WH-V-A-1. Manage the entire Saylor Creek Wild Horse Herd Area as an HMA (95,000 acres). 

WH-V-A-2. Manage the Saylor Creek HMA for a non-reproducing population of wild horses. The 

estimated herd size would be 200 to 500 non-reproducing wild horses.

WH-V-A-3. Allocate forage sufficient to maintain the wild horse population within the HMA (6,000 animal 

unit months). 

Management Actions

WH-V-MA-1. Develop a Herd Management Area Plan.

WH-V-MA-2. The HMA would remain open to livestock grazing, although grazing levels would be 

adjusted on allotment-specific basis to accommodate wild horse numbers.

WH-V-MA-3. Reduce fences within the HMA to facilitate access to forage and water, wild horse social 

interactions, and free-roaming characteristics.

WH-V-MA-4. Increase the reliability of artificial water sources for wild horses within the HMA.

WH-V-MA-5. Commercial Special Recreation Permits would not be allowed in the HMA.

WH-V-MA-6. The toolbox for managing a non-reproducing, free-roaming herd in the Saylor Creek HMA 

would include, but not be limited to: 

Gathering all wild horses in the HMA and returning only those horses that meet the population 

criteria,

Placing in the HMA excess wild horses removed from other HMAs within Idaho that meet the 

population criteria until the high end of AML is reached,

Placing wild horses gathered from other states that meet the population criteria in the HMA if wild 

horses from other Idaho HMAs do not place enough horses on the HMA to reach the midpoint of AML 

after ten years, and

Placing additional wild horses that meet the population criteria in the HMA up to the high end of AML 

as the HMA population decreases due to death of horses from natural causes.

WH-V-MA-7. The population criteria for managing a non-reproducing, free-roaming herd in the Saylor 

Creek HMA would include, but not be limited to: 

Treating all wild horses surgically or chemically to eliminate reproduction capability,

Placing wild horses at least five years of age and older in the HMA to allow for the adoption of 

younger wild horses, and

Freeze marking all wild horses on the neck and/or hip to identify each wild horse within the HMA.

WH-V-MA-8. No gathers would be conducted in the Saylor Creek HMA after the initial gather, except 

under the following circumstances: 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resources

2-301

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Emergency situations (i.e., wildland fires) and

Removal of untreated horses unlawfully released in the HMA.

Wild horses would be returned to the HMA once rehabilitation objectives or other criteria outlined in the 

Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation Plan were met.

2.7.2.11 Paleontological Resources 

Goal

PR-CA-G-1. Identify, manage, and protect paleontological resources for scientific research, educational 

purposes, and public use.

Objective

PR-CA-O-1. Identify, manage, and protect important paleontological sites.

Management Actions

PR-CA-MA-1. Implement measures to protect paleontological resources. Measures may include:

Avoidance,

Fencing, 

Stabilization, 

Data recovery through collection or excavation,

Interpretation, or

Administrative closure.

PR-CA-MA-2. Identify areas at risk of damage from illegal activities and implement management to 

discourage those activities.

PR-CA-MA-3. Minimize or prevent human-caused damage to paleontological resources through 

educational and interpretive outreach programs.

PR-CA-MA-4. Analyze effects of surface-disturbing activities on fossil-bearing geologic units (Potential 

Fossil Yield Classification Class 5) and mitigate potential impacts to paleontological resources. 

PR-CA-MA-5. The collection of paleontological resources would be managed in accordance with the 

Paleontological Resources Preservation Act and 43 CFR 8365. In general, reasonable amounts of 

common invertebrate and plant fossils may be collected for non-commercial personal use without a 

permit. The collection of vertebrate fossils and rare or unusual invertebrate and plant fossils requires a 

permit under the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act.

PR-V-MA-1. Issue permits for paleontological research to qualified paleontologists if proposed research is 

compatible with Upland Vegetation objectives. 

2.7.2.12 Cultural Resources 

Goals

Management

CR-CA-G-1. Identify, preserve, and protect important cultural resources and ensure they are available for 

appropriate uses by present and future generations.

Protection

CR-CA-G-2. Seek to reduce imminent threats and resolve potential conflicts from natural or humancaused deterioration or potential conflict with other resource uses by ensuring all authorizations for land 
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-302

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

use and resource use complies with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), as amended,

Section 106. 

Objectives

Management 

CR-CA-O-1. Manage and protect cultural resources according to their potential traditional, scientific, 

conservation, public, or experimental value. 

Protection

CR-CA-O-2. Strive to limit the adverse effects of BLM decisions on important cultural resources.

Allocations

CR-CA-A-1. Cultural resources would be allocated as described in Appendix G. 

CR-CA-A-2. The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors include 0.25 mile on either side of 

the trail segments or the visual horizon of those segments, whichever is narrower.

Management Actions

Management

CR-CA-MA-1. Maintain on-going cultural resource inventory information in geographic information system

format in accordance with confidentiality mandates.

CR-CA-MA-2. Identify priority geographic areas for future inventory based on the probability of 

unrecorded cultural resources, and conduct inventories independent of specific land use actions.

CR-CA-MA-3. Implement measures to minimize or prevent damage to cultural resources due to BLM 

management activities, authorized and allowed uses, and human-caused damage such as vandalism, 

unauthorized surface collection of artifacts, and unintentional disturbances. Measures may include:

Avoidance,

Fencing, 

Stabilization, 

Data recovery through collection or excavation,

Interpretation, 

Administrative closure, or

Proactive law enforcement patrols.

CR-CA-MA-4. Develop cultural resource project plans as needed to address preservation actions for 

cultural resource complexes or individual sites identified as high risk for adverse impacts.

CR-CA-MA-5. Avoid placement of salting, supplemental feeding, watering, and holding facilities for 

livestock that adversely affect the Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors. 

CR-CA-MA-6. Developments such as roads, trails, pipelines, fences, and powerlines may be allowed, 

after consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), to cross segments of the Kelton 

and Toana Freight Roads in areas where previous disturbance has occurred. On occasions where 

adverse impacts are unavoidable, the BLM would require mitigation commensurate with the impacts as a 

condition of authorization.

CR-CA-MA-7. Surface-disturbing equipment, such as bulldozers and road graders, cannot be used on 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligible or contributing segments of the Kelton or Toana 

Freight Roads or within their protective corridors without prior management approval, unless to protect life 

or property.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resources

2-303

CR-V-MA-1. Actively solicit researchers to identify, monitor, and gather data on cultural resources, 

including archaeological, historic, ethnographic, and non-intrusive research. Develop cooperative 

agreements and partnerships with tribes, historical societies, and colleges to encourage research and 

assist with monitoring.

CR-V-MA-2. Important cultural resources, as determined by the BLM through consultation with tribes 

and/or SHPO, would generally be retained in Federal ownership. Under limited circumstances, after 

appropriate consultation and mitigation, lands containing important cultural resources may be exchanged 

for lands containing resources of greater or equal value.

CR-V-MA-3. Avoid new ground disturbance within 300 feet of playas to protect associated cultural 

resources.

Protection

CR-CA-MA-8. Authorizations for land and resource use would not be approved until compliance with 

Section 106 of the NHPA has been completed and documented, including, where applicable, consultation 

with the SHPO and Federally recognized Indian tribes.

CR-CA-MA-9. Nominate eligible sites for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) on a case-bycase basis.

CR-CA-MA-10. Manage sites that are eligible for the NRHP for their local, regional, or national 

significance. If natural or human-caused deterioration cannot be prevented, BLM would consult with the 

tribes and SHPO, as appropriate, to mitigate the adverse effects.

CR-CA-MA-11. Consider all prudent and feasible alternatives to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on 

cultural resources and their uses when resolving site-specific conflicts between cultural resource use 

allocations and competing land use allocations.

CR-CA-MA-12. The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors are closed to new salable 

mineral development. Existing salable mineral developments could be renewed but the footprint could not 

be expanded.

2.7.2.13 Visual Resources 

Visual Resource Management (VRM) classes identify the degree of acceptable visual change within a 

characteristic landscape. A classification is assigned to public lands based on the guidelines established 

for scenic quality, visual sensitivity, and visibility.

Class I - Provides primarily for natural ecological changes only. It is applied to wilderness areas, some 

natural areas, and similar situations where management activities are to be restricted.

Class II - Changes in the basic elements caused by a management activity may be evident in the 

characteristic landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate to the visual strength of the existing 

character. 

Class III - Contrasts to the basic elements caused by management activity may be evident and begin to 

attract attention in the landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate in the existing landscape.

Class IV - Contrasts may attract attention and be a dominant feature in the landscape in terms of scale, 

but the change should repeat the basic element of the characteristic landscape.

Class V - Applies to areas where the characteristic landscape has been so disturbed that rehabilitation is 

needed. Generally considered an interim short-term classification until rehabilitation or enhancement is 

completed.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-304

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Goal and Objective

VR-CA-G-1. Maintain visual resource characteristics and values of public lands according to VRM

classes.

Allocations

VR-V-A-1. Areas to be managed as VRM Class I (70,000 acres) include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; and

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors with scenic outstandingly 

remarkable values (i.e., lower Salmon Falls Creek, Cougar Point Creek, Bruneau River, and Jarbidge 

River). 

VR-V-A-2. Areas to be managed as VRM Class II (301,000 acres) include: 

The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone, 

 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics,

The Jarbidge Foothills, and 

Portions of the Diamond A Desert not otherwise managed as VRM Class I.

VR-V-A-3. Areas to be managed as VRM Class III (649,000 acres) include: 

Portions of the Sagebrush Sea Area of Critical Environmental Concern not otherwise managed as 

VRM Class I or II,

The Snake River corridor (from the planning area boundary to 0.25 mile above the breaks),

 The Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor, 

The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors,

Lands between the Balanced Rock right-of-way (ROW) Corridor and Lower Salmon Falls Creek, and 

ROW corridors through areas otherwise managed as VRM Class I or II.

VR-V-A-4. The remainder of the planning area would be managed as VRM Class IV (352,000 acres). 

See Map 47 for locations of areas allocated to VRM Class I, II, III, and IV.

Management Action

VR-CA-MA-1. BLM management activities and authorized uses would be compatible with VRM class 

objectives as follows:

VRM Class I areas are managed to preserve the existing character of the landscape. The level of 

change to the landscape should be very low and must not attract attention.

VRM Class II areas are managed to retain the existing character of the landscape. The level of 

change to the landscape should be low and repeat the basic elements of form, line, color, and texture 

found in the natural features of the landscape.

VRM Class III areas are managed to partially retain the existing character of the landscape. The level 

of change to the landscape can be moderate and should repeat the basic elements found in the 

natural landscape. Management activities may attract attention, but should not dominate the view of 

the casual observer.

VRM Class IV areas are managed to provide for activities that require major modification of the 

landscape. The level of change to the landscape can be high, and management activities may 

dominate the view and be the major focus of attention. Impacts can still be minimized through location 

and design by repeating the basic elements found in the natural landscape.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resource Uses

2-305

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2.7.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 

Goal and Objective

WC-V-G-1. Protect wilderness characteristics of Lands with Wilderness Characteristics as a priority over 

other multiple uses.

Management Actions

WC-V-MA-1. Manage Lands with Wilderness Characteristics in the planning area to maintain their 

wilderness characteristics (104,000 acres). These lands include: 

Antelope Canyon, 

Antelope Pocket 1, 

Antelope Pocket 2, 

Black Canyon 2011, 

Browns Bench, 

China Creek, 

Columbet Table, 

Crater Hole, 

East Fork Jarbidge, 

Hole in the Ground, 

Indian Hot Springs, 

Inside Lakes, 

Jasper, 

Larios Camp, 

Long Draw, 

Robeson Trail, 

Sheepshead, 

Twin Lakes, and

Winter Camp. 

See Map 49 for locations.

WC-V-MA-2. Management for these lands would be as follows:

Retain in Federal ownership (Land Tenure Zone 1),

Manage as Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class II, with the exception of the existing utility 

corridor managed as VRM III,

Close to motorized vehicle use (See the Transportation and Travel section for more details), 

Close to leasable mineral exploration and development,

Close to salable mineral development,

Allow new range infrastructure if the infrastructure would help enhance wilderness characteristics,

Existing range infrastructure may be maintained, and

Manage as right-of-way exclusion areas. 

2.7.3 Resource Uses

2.7.3.1 Livestock Grazing

Goals

LG-CA-G-1. Manage livestock grazing to ensure achievement of or movement towards meeting Idaho 

Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-306

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

o

•

o

•

o

LG-V-G-1. Provide for livestock grazing through proper grazing management to move vegetation toward 

historic plant communities that provide habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species.

Objectives

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-CA-O-1. Manage livestock grazing in annual communities to achieve objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

LG-V-O-1. In native plant communities including the Sandberg/non-native areas, manage livestock 

grazing to help maintain and improve native plant species diversity and abundance, focusing on plant 

reproductive and physiological needs.

LG-V-O-2. In non-native perennial communities, manage livestock grazing to maintain and improve shrub 

cover for sage-grouse.

Range Infrastructure

LG-V-O-3. Manage (e.g., maintain, improve, build, realign, remove) range infrastructure at levels 

appropriate to the amount of livestock use to provide for efficient management of livestock grazing 

allotments and support resource objectives.

Allocations

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-V-A-1. The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing (1,160,000 acres). 

The following areas would be not available for livestock grazing (303,000 acres):

Canyons or riparian corridors associated with the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers and the following 

creeks: Upper Cedar, Deer (ID), Deer (NV), Clover, Rocky Canyon, Flat, Shack, Dave, China, and 

Salmon Falls; 

Middle Snake, Sand Point, and Lower Bruneau Canyon Areas of Critical Environmental Concern; 

The Brown's Bench/China Mountain area; 

Wildlife tracts; 

Reference areas; and

Areas not contained within grazing allotments.

See Map 58 for locations.

LG-V-A-2. Allocate vegetation production as follows:

Native perennial grass production: 

80% to 90% to watershed and wildlife, 

Less than1% to wild horses, and

10% to 20% to livestock. 

Non-native perennial grass production: 

80% to 90% to watershed and wildlife, 

Less than 1% to wild horses, and

10% to 20% to livestock. 

Annual grass production: 

100% to watershed and wildlife. 

Shrub and forb production: 

100% to watershed and wildlife. 

Allocate approximately 46,000 to 93,000 animal unit months (AUMs) for livestock at initial implementation 

and approximately 42,000 to 85,000 at full implementation. The purpose of allocating vegetation is to 

determine the total AUMs available for livestock grazing in the planning area. AUMs for livestock grazing 

are an estimate based on 2006 production data collected while conducting ecological site inventories. At 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resource Uses

2-307

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

the time of permit renewal, additional production data may be considered when determining the 

appropriate allocation for a specific allotment. 

These vegetation allocations would be implemented during the permit renewal process. Allocation 

percentages are not the same as utilization, as the allocation is used to identify the total number of AUMs 

for livestock, while utilization identifies the amount of vegetation used by livestock in a specific area. 

Allocation is not intended to prescribe what livestock actually consume. Livestock use of specific 

vegetation types would be managed through the implementation of grazing use indicators developed on 

an allotment-specific basis. 

LG-V-A-3. The amount of forage available for livestock use would likely change as the RMP is 

implemented, although allocation percentages would remain the same. Changes to AUMs in the future 

would be determined by the BLM after monitoring and site-specific NEPA analysis.

Management Actions

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-CA-MA-1. Implement adaptive management using grazing use indicators to meet resource and 

special designation area objectives. Grazing use indicators include:

 Utilization for upland vegetation and riparian areas, 

 Bank and soil surface alteration, and

 Other indicators identified on an allotment-specific basis depending on the resources present.

LG-CA-MA-2. The grazing permit renewal process, following the approval of the RMP, would be in 

conformance with BLM policy and guidance current at the time of renewal. 

LG-CA-MA-3. The toolbox for managing livestock grazing would include, but not be limited to: 

Rest rotation, 

Deferred rotation, 

Seasons of use, 

Stocking rates, 

Class and kind of livestock, 

Herding, 

Frequency of grazing, 

Closure for resource protection,

Location and types of range infrastructure, and 

Location and types of supplements.

Specific tools to be used would be identified on an allotment-specific basis through the permit renewal 

process, depending on the resources present.

LG-CA-MA-4. Seasons of use and changes in class and kind of livestock would be consistent with 

resource objectives and analyzed in site-specific NEPA analysis.

LG-CA-MA-5. Identify and implement measures to prevent livestock from entering areas closed to 

grazing, such as: 

 Fencing, 

Using natural barriers, 

Active herding, 

Water placement, and 

Salt/supplement placement.

LG-CA-MA-6. Implement drought management guidelines during periods of drought to maintain or 

achieve long-term resource productivity (Appendix F).
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-308

LG-CA-MA-7. Allow spring and early summer livestock grazing periodically in big game winter range to 

improve browse production.

LG-CA-MA-8. Manage livestock grazing to move riparian and wetland conditions toward goals and 

objectives in the Riparian Areas and Wetlands section. 

LG-CA-MA-9. Livestock trailing may be allowed consistent with other resource objectives. Trailing must 

be supervised by the permittee to ensure active movement of livestock. Terms and conditions would be 

added to permits to ensure compliance.

LG-CA-MA-10. When livestock are moved between pastures or allotments through riparian areas, stream 

crossings would be perpendicular to the riparian area where practical.

LG-CA-MA-11. Grazing management activities (e.g., grazing, trailing, bedding, watering, salting, loading, 

other handling efforts) would be modified, discontinued, or relocated if they are not maintaining aquatic 

and riparian conditions. 

LG-CA-MA-12. In areas that are readily accessible to cattle and known or suspected special status fish 

spawning habitat, develop and implement grazing practices to avoid or restrict trampling of redds (eggs) 

and other direct and indirect effects that may result in adverse impacts to the species.

LG-V-MA-1. Utilization would be determined on a case-by-case basis to meet objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Fish and Wildlife, and Special Status Species sections.

LG-V-MA-2. Forage on acquired lands and in allotments where permits are relinquished, transferred, or 

cancelled would be held for the life of the plan for wildlife habitat and watershed protection. Reserve 

common allotments would not be established and new grazing permits would not be issued for these 

lands for the life of the plan.

LG-V-MA-3. Temporary Non-Renewable permits would not be issued.

LG-V-MA-4. Manage livestock grazing to provide a variety of residual cover heights to meet the needs of 

the ground-nesting birds present in an allotment.

LG-V-MA-5. Follow BLM guidelines for livestock grazing management in sage-grouse habitat.

LG-V-MA-6. Livestock grazing would not be allowed in big game winter range during the winter 

(November 15 through April 30).

LG-V-MA-7. Adjust livestock grazing so livestock seasons of use would not overlap bighorn sheep 

breeding and winter periods in those pastures that contain bighorn sheep habitat.

LG-V-MA-8. In aspen groves, grazing management would allow for natural regeneration with a diversity 

of vegetation species and age class.

LG-V-MA-9. Even though livestock grazing would not be authorized in the Jarbidge Canyons, trailing to 

the Wilkins Island Allotment would be permitted on existing roads using riders to herd livestock.

LG-V-MA-10. Targeted grazing would not be allowed as a tool to meet objectives in the Vegetation 

Communities, Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants, and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management

sections. 

Range Infrastructure

LG-C-MA-1. Management actions for range infrastructure apply to watering sites, fences, and corrals 

within wilderness, consistent with the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Management Plan. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resource Uses

2-309

•

•

•

•

LG-CA-MA-13. Follow BLM-approved design features and construction and maintenance practices for 

range infrastructure.

LG-CA-MA-14. Grazing facilities and infrastructure (e.g., livestock handling and management facilities, 

fences, watering facilities) would be modified, discontinued, or relocated if they are not maintaining 

aquatic and riparian conditions. 

LG-CA-MA-15. To protect associated resources, minimize disturbance at developed springs by using 

existing routes for access, redesigning the spring development, or limiting maintenance or reconstruction 

activities to areas disturbed during previous construction or to areas outside the wetland.

LG-CA-MA-16. Modify existing and construct new fences to comply with BLM standards for wildlife 

(Karsky, 1999). Existing fences would be modified according to the following priority order: 

Key sage-grouse habitat, 

Big game winter range, 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, and

The remainder of the planning area. 

LG-CA-MA-17. If a reservoir is fenced, where practical, provide water for livestock use outside the fence.

LG-CA-MA-18. For permittee-maintained projects, the BLM authorized officer would be notified prior to 

initiating work that requires the use of heavy equipment so that appropriate measures are adopted to 

protect resources. 

LG-V-MA-11. New pipelines would not be authorized. 

LG-V-MA-12. Maintain existing pipelines for livestock or wild horse use. Modify any pipeline where 

monitoring determines the pipeline is preventing attainment of resource objectives.

LG-V-MA-13. Consider installing or constructing new reservoirs or wells on a case-by-case basis where 

they would help meet resource objectives.

LG-V-MA-14. Maintain existing reservoirs or wells for livestock, wildlife, or wild horse use. Modify 

reservoirs or wells preventing attainment of resource objectives, as identified through monitoring.

LG-V-MA-15. New spring developments would not be authorized.

LG-V-MA-16. Modify spring developments with wetlands rated as non-functioning, functioning-at-risk 

downward trend, functioning-at-risk to improve wetland areas by protecting the spring source and 

ensuring adequate water to support spring hydrology and associated riparian vegetation.

LG-V-MA-17. Place salt, minerals, supplements, new holding facilities, or new troughs or reservoirs more 

than 300 feet away from playas, canyon rims, the Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone, and the 

Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors. Ensure salt, minerals, supplements, new troughs, 

new reservoirs, and new holding facilities in other areas are located to avoid conflicts with other cultural 

resources as well.

LG-V-MA-18. Adjust locations of livestock watering facilities and salting/supplements in sage-grouse and 

other upland game bird habitat on a case-by-case basis to provide adequate nesting and winter cover.

LG-V-MA-19. Avoid placing new water developments in sage-grouse habitat unless they would contribute 

to meeting resource objectives for sage-grouse. If a new water development is necessary, it should be 

located in a previously disturbed area.

LG-V-MA-20. Consider installing or constructing fences on a case-by-case basis to meet resource 

objectives.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-310

•

•

•

•

•

•

LG-V-MA-21. Remove fences that are not needed. Maintain fences to BLM specifications; the amount of 

fence in an allotment would be appropriate to objectives for livestock grazing and resource management. 

Modify, remove, or relocate fences contributing to not meeting resource objective, as identified through 

monitoring.

2.7.3.2 Recreation

Goal

REC-CA-G-1. Provide and sustain a variety of dispersed and developed recreational opportunities and 

experiences while avoiding or minimizing resource impacts.

Objectives

REC-CA-O-1. Provide basic information on recreational opportunities on public lands not designated as 

Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) or Extensive Recreation Management Areas. Provide

access and minimal facilities (e.g., signs, protective fences) as needed to ensure visitor health and safety, 

reduce user conflict, and protect resources. 

REC-V-O-1. Manage 5,000 acres as SRMAs to protect and enhance recreation settings, activities, 

experiences, and benefits. 

Allocations

REC-V-A-1. Designate the following SRMAs:

Yahoo SRMA (3,000 acres) and

Jarbidge Forks SRMA (2,000 acres). 

See Map 65 for locations. 

REC-V-A-2. All lands not established as a SRMA would be managed to meet basic recreation and visitor 

services needs and resource objectives. Recreation would not be emphasized; however, recreation 

activities may occur to the extent that they are consistent with other resource uses. 

Management Actions

REC-CA-MA-1. Develop implementation and monitoring plans for SRMAs to address the purpose specific 

to the SRMA.

REC-CA-MA-2. Where appropriate, implement management methods to protect riparian resources, 

special status species, and wildlife habitat while enhancing recreation opportunities. Management 

methods may include: 

 Limiting visitor numbers, 

Adopting camping and travel controls, 

 Implementing fees, and 

Imposing scheduling restrictions to minimize impacts to fish and wildlife during important seasonal 

periods.

REC-CA-MA-3. New and existing recreation-related activities and facilities within or affecting Riparian 

Conservation Areas would be designed, modified, relocated, or discontinued if they are not maintaining 

aquatic and riparian conditions. 

REC-CA-MA-4. Dispersed camping would be allowed. Dispersed camping may be closed or limited 

seasonally if resource objectives are impacted. 

REC-CA-MA-5. If campground fees are implemented, they would not apply to Federally recognized tribes 

exercising treaty rights or engaging in traditional cultural practices.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resource Uses

2-311

REC-CA-MA-6. Consider Special Recreation Permits (SRPs) within Areas of Environmental Concern with 

mitigation for impacts to relevant and important values. 

REC-V-MA-1. Manage the Yahoo SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in all-terrain 

vehicle and motorcycle riding.

REC-V-MA-2. Manage the Jarbidge Forks SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing, 

rafting, picnicking, camping, and viewing wildlife and natural scenery.

See Appendix H for more information on the management and settings prescribed for each SRMA.

REC-V-MA-3. Give priority to SRP applicants proposing to make use of less-crowded weekdays, utilize 

facilities off public lands for overnight accommodation of guests, and focus on visitation on sites and 

areas resilient to repeated use.

REC-V-MA-4. Place increased emphasis in SRPs on mitigating the impacts of recreation uses in order to 

support conservation of natural and cultural resource values.

REC-V-MA-5. Commercial SRPs would not be allowed in the Herd Management Area. 

REC-V-MA-6. Require organized group permits for groups with 20 or more people.

2.7.3.3 Transportation and Travel 

Goal

TR-CA-G-1. Manage and provide for motorized, non-motorized, and non-mechanized access that would

balance resource protection and use.

Objective

TR-V-O-1. Provide a transportation and travel system to facilitate multiple use and resource protection 

with an emphasis on meeting native vegetation and special status species goals. 

Allocations

TR-C-A-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized and mechanized 

vehicle use (60,000 acres). The Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area would be closed to 

motorized vehicle use (2,000 acres).

TR-V-A-1. Designated areas in the Yahoo Special Recreation Management Area would be open to crosscountry motorized vehicle use (1,000 acres).

TR-V-A-2. Land with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics would be 

closed to motorized vehicle use (104,000 acres).

TR-V-A-3. Travel would be limited to designated routes in the remainder of the planning (1,204,000 

acres). Specific route designations would be made in an implementation-level travel and transportation 

management planning process following the completion of the RMP. Until route designation occurs, areas 

limited to designated routes would be managed as limited to existing routes as depicted on Map 71. A 

more thorough review of the existing transportation routes would be performed as part of the travel 

management planning process, which may include additional on-the-ground data collection and 

verification.

See Map 77 for locations of transportation and travel allocations.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-312

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Management Actions

TR-CA-MA-1. Area designations apply to all off-highway vehicles, which include any motorized vehicle 

capable of, or designed for, travel on or immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain, excluding: 

Any non-amphibious registered motorboat; 

Any military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle while being used for emergency purposes;

Any vehicle whose use is expressly authorized by the BLM authorized officer or otherwise officially 

approved; 

Vehicles in official use; and

Any combat or combat support vehicle when used in times of national defense emergencies (43 CFR 

8340.0-5[a]).

Area and route designations, with the exception of designated wilderness areas, also do not apply to 

vehicles being used by members of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes or the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to 

access traditional use areas of importance to the tribes or to vehicles being used by members of the 

Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to exercise their tribally reserved treaty rights.

TR-CA-MA-2. Where motorized, non-motorized, mechanized, or non-mechanized use would cause or is 

causing considerable adverse effects on soil, vegetation, wildlife, wildlife habitat, cultural resources, 

historical resources, threatened or endangered species, wilderness suitability, other authorized uses, or 

other resources, the BLM authorized officer may close the affected areas to the type(s) of use causing the 

adverse effect until the adverse effects are reduced and measures implemented to prevent reoccurrence.

TR-CA-MA-3. Minimize construction and maintenance of roads within or adjacent to special status wildlife 

and fish habitat and big game winter range during important seasonal periods.

TR-CA-MA-4. Continue to recognize and update agreements and Memoranda of Understanding with 

local highway districts for road maintenance.

TR-CA-MA-5. Complete a Travel Management Plan (TMP) within five years of the signing of the Record 

of Decision. The TMP would be developed through a public process to determine the transportation and 

travel system for the planning area. The TMP would determine the routes and trails to be designated, 

modified, closed, or rehabilitated as well as the maintenance level, modes of travel, and seasonal and 

access restrictions for designated routes. During the TMP process, additional data needs and a strategy 

to collect information will be identified. Decisions made in the TMP would be limited to management of 

BLM roads. 

A TMP is not intended to provide evidence bearing on or addressing the validity of any R.S. 2477 

assertions. R.S. 2477 rights are determined through a process that is entirely independent of the BLM's 

planning process. Consequently, travel management planning should not take into consideration R.S. 

2477 assertions or evidence. Travel management planning should be founded on an independently 

determined purpose and need that is based on resource uses and associated access to public lands and 

waters. At such time as a decision is made on R.S. 2477 assertions, the BLM would adjust its travel 

routes accordingly.

TR-CA-MA-6. Route designation would, at a minimum, follow criterion in 43 CFR 8342.1 and BLM 

Manual 1626.

TR-CA-MA-7. Route designation would also adhere to the following: 

Conflict with cultural and paleontological resources would be minimized when designating routes.

Designated routes may follow or cross the Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) and National Register 

of Historic Places-eligible and -listed segments of the Kelton and Toana Freight Roads in areas 

where previous disturbance has occurred, and after consultation with the State Historic Preservation 

Officer. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resource Uses

2-313

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Where motorized vehicle use is allowed within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor, travel 

would not degrade the Oregon NHT or its setting. 

Designated routes within suitable and eligible Wild and Scenic River corridors must maintain/enhance 

their outstandingly remarkable values, free-flowing condition, water quality, and tentative classification 

until Congress acts. 

Loop routes are preferred to dead end routes.

Parking areas and turnouts would be considered under the same criteria used for routes.

Provide access to private lands or other agency lands (e.g., State, Forest Service, other BLM field 

offices).

Provide access for authorized activities, including livestock grazing, energy development, and 

recreation.

TR-CA-MA-8. As part of the travel management planning process, the BLM would identify any easements 

and rights-of-way (to be issued to the BLM or others) needed to maintain the preliminary or existing road 

and trail network.

TR-CA-MA-9. Cooperate with tribes, Federal, State, and county agencies to reduce adverse effects and 

support the achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands in the long term.

TR-CA-MA-10. Minimize locating new roads or road-related facilities in Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs). Before building new roads or other road-related facilities in RCAs, complete a watershed or sitespecific analysis. The level of analysis should be commensurate with the scope and issues of the project 

and related aquatic resources. Analysis should identify how road design features would minimize or avoid 

adverse effects to aquatic and riparian resources at site-specific, reach, and watershed scales. 

TR-CA-MA-11. Temporary roads within or affecting RCAs would be fully decommissioned and 

rehabilitated once the road is no longer needed to meet the intended purpose. 

TR-CA-MA-12. Avoid or minimize sediment delivery to streams from the road surface to allow the 

achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

TR-CA-MA-13. Avoid sidecasting road surface material into areas where it may reach RCAs. 

TR-CA-MA-14. Design new, replacement, and reconstructed stream crossings (culverts, bridges, and 

other stream crossings) to: 

Accommodate a 100-year flood, including associated bedload and debris in bull trout occupied 

watersheds. In watersheds containing other non-game fish, design new, replacement, and 

reconstructed stream crossings to accommodate a 100-year flood event, unless a site-specific 

analysis determines the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands could be achieved with 

fewer impacts to the RCA; 

Provide and maintain fish passage at all road crossings of existing and potential fish bearing streams; 

and

Accommodate mean bankfull channel widths to maintain channel integrity.

TR-V-MA-1. Motorized vehicle restrictions apply to everyone including lessees, BLM permit holders, and 

right-of-way holders, with no exceptions.

TR-V-MA-2. Other activities in areas limited or closed to motorized travel may be allowed on a case-bycase basis, but would require prior written permission of an authorized officer. These activities may 

include but not be limited to: 

Motorized cross-country travel for non-BLM government entities on official administrative business 

(e.g., noxious weed control, surveying, and animal damage control efforts).

Motorized cross-country travel by entities requiring access to private lands, resources, or legal 

improvements within or adjacent to closed or limited areas.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-314

•

•

•

•

•

TR-V-MA-3. Access and use restrictions may be imposed to reduce risk of wildland fire during fire 

restrictions, as determined by an authorized officer; restrictions may include, but not be limited to, closing

primitive roads, trails, and areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use. Travel related to 

administrative uses and emergency services may continue during fire restrictions.

TR-V-MA-4. Game retrieval using motorized vehicles would not be allowed off designated routes.

TR-V-MA-5. Motorized cross-country travel to a camp site would be allowed within 25 feet of designated 

routes, but would not be allowed within areas closed to motorized vehicle use or in riparian areas. 

Motorized cross-country travel to a camp site may be closed or limited seasonally or as impacts or 

environmental conditions warrant.

TR-V-MA-6. Identify locations for and install gates and cattle guards along designated routes to minimize 

conflicts between motorized recreation activities and livestock grazing operations.

TR-V-MA-7. Travel Management Areas (TMAs) are delineated areas where travel management (either 

motorized or non-motorized) needs particular focus. These areas would have a designated network of 

roads, trails, ways, and other routes that provide for public access and travel. The priority emphasis for 

each TMA is based on resource management, wildland fire suppression, and use objectives outlined in 

the RMP. The TMAs and their travel and transportation planning focus would be as follows:

Snake River TMA (343,000 acres): Focus on accommodating habitat restoration activities.

Yahoo TMA (3,000 acres): Focus on facilitating motorized recreation activities, including open play 

areas and a designated trail system.

Devil Creek TMA (485,000 acres): Focus on increasing core habitat size for sage-grouse and other 

special status species and accommodating habitat restoration activities.

West Side TMA (405,000 acres): Focus on increasing core habitat size for sage-grouse and other 

special status species and accommodating habitat restoration activities.

Jarbidge Foothills TMA (135,000 acres): Focus on increasing core habitat size for sage-grouse and

other special status species and accommodating habitat restoration activities.

See Map 83 for locations of TMAs. 

TR-V-MA-8. The BLM authorized officer has the authority to adjust TMA boundaries and their focus, 

consistent with objectives in the RMP.

2.7.3.4 Land Use Authorizations

Goal

LA-CA-G-1. Public needs for land use authorizations would be met with consideration for other resource 

values. 

Objective

LA-V-O-1. Provide for the development of renewable energy resources, transportation routes, utility 

corridors, transmission lines, communication sites and other uses with consideration for resource 

objectives.

Allocations

LA-CA-A-1. Retain existing withdrawals, with the option of a Section 24 restoration for power site 

classifications and power site reserves if needed, as provided for in the Federal Power Act of 1920.

LA-V-A-1. The following areas would be avoidance areas for rights-of-way (ROWs; 1,227,000 acres); 

ROWs would be allowed in these areas only if the avoidance stipulations are met and if the area is not 

identified for ROW exclusion: 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resource Uses

2-315

•

o

•

o

•

o

•

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Areas within US Air Force (USAF) Military Operating Areas (983,000 acres): 

New ROWs must be consistent with USAF airspace restrictions. 

Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone (11,000 acres): 

 New surface or overhead ROWs would follow existing corridors, underground ROWs would be 

allowed with mitigation for disturbance within the protective zone. 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors (30,000 acres): 

ROWs must maintain/enhance the river segment's outstandingly remarkable values, free-flowing 

condition, water quality, and tentative classification. 

Sagebrush Sea Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) (956,000 acres): 

 New ROWs would be restricted to ROW corridors and locations of existing ROWs. 

Several ROW avoidance areas overlap; where this occurs, all avoidance stipulations must be met. In 

addition, some ROW avoidance areas overlap with ROW exclusion areas; where this occurs, the more 

restrictive exclusion management applies. 

See Map 91 for locations of ROW avoidance areas.

LA-V-A-2. The following areas would be exclusion areas for ROW (167,000 acres); they would not be 

available for ROWs under any conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, 

 Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area, 

Sand Point ACEC, and

 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics.

See Map 96 for locations of ROW exclusion areas.

LA-V-A-3. Designate the following ROW corridors for utilities ((i.e., corridors for oil, gas, and hydrogen 

pipelines, electricity transmission, phone lines, and distribution facilities), all of which are 1-mile wide: 

Pilgrim Gulch (Section 368 energy corridor) (4,000 acres), 

Shoestring (Section 368 energy corridor) (5,000 acres), 

Saylor Creek (Section 368 energy corridor) (11,000 acres), 

Balanced Rock (Section 368 energy corridor) (10,000 acres),and

Jarbidge (24,000 acres). 

See Map 97 for locations of ROW corridors. Section 368 energy corridors were designated in the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005.

LA-V-A-4. Wind energy development can be considered in areas with annual or non-native perennial 

vegetation, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and outside ROW exclusion areas and 

utility ROW corridors. Map 104 displays areas meeting these criteria in 2011; the map can be updated as 

vegetation conditions change on the ground.

Management Actions

LA-C-MA-1. Implement the Programmatic Policies and Design Features in the Record of Decision on 

Wind Energy Development on BLM-Administered Lands in the Western United States (2005) (Appendix 

B).

LA-C-MA-2. Interagency Operating Procedures, located in Appendix B, would be implemented for 

projects proposed within the Section 368 corridors.

LA-C-MA-3. The BLM would review all withdrawals on and classifications of public lands to eliminate all 

unnecessary withdrawals and classifications. Reviews would consider:

For what purposes were the lands withdrawn? 
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-316

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Are these purposes still being served? 

Are the lands suitable for return to the public domain?

LA-CA-MA-1. Place new ROWs for oil and gas pipelines and overhead lines within ROW corridors where 

practical; other locations would be considered in areas not identified for ROW avoidance or exclusion, 

consistent with allocations listed above.

LA-CA-MA-2. New ROWs would be located in areas of previous disturbance where practical.

LA-CA-MA-3. New ROWs would meet Visual Resource Management class objectives.

LA-CA-MA-4. Co-locate new communication sites with existing sites where practical; communication 

sites present in 2011 are located at:

Black Mesa, 

Blue Butte, 

Frog Hollow,

Indian Butte, 

Lower Salmon Falls, 

Signal Butte, and

Yahoo Creek. 

See Map 85. Other locations would be considered, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas 

and outside ROW exclusion areas.

LA-CA-MA-5. BLM management activities and authorized uses on lands with existing withdrawals would 

be consistent with the purposes of the withdrawal. Proposed BLM management activities and authorized 

uses that are not consistent with the purposes of the withdrawal would be evaluated to determine whether 

the proposal can be modified or whether the withdrawal is still necessary.

LA-CA-MA-6. Land use permits may be considered, on a case-by-case basis, consistent with resource 

objectives. 

LA-CA-MA-7. Trespass resolution would be limited to removal of facilities and/or restoration of the area 

as determined by the BLM authorized officer. Trespass resolution, as determined by the BLM authorized 

officer, may include:

 Removal (depending on the nature of the trespass), 

 Restoration, 

 Authorization of a ROW grant or land use permit, or 

 Disposal of the affected land through sale or exchange.

LA-CA-MA-8. Land use permits for irrigation pivot crossings may be allowed, in accordance with policy 

and regulations. In cases where a pivot crosses public land, the lands are to remain unfarmed and 

unirrigated.

LA-CA-MA-9. Airport leases may be considered if proposals are outside ROW exclusion areas and 

consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and Federal Aviation Administration regulations. 

LA-CA-MA-10. Access across non-BLM lands would be identified and obtained, where possible, through 

easements, ROWs, or acquisitions to accomplish BLM objectives. 

LA-CA-MA-11. Future access needs and priorities would be coordinated with the Shoshone-Bannock 

Tribes, Shoshone-Paiute Tribes, Idaho and Nevada State agencies, and local governments to ensure 

resource values are evaluated along with public needs.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resource Uses

2-317

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LA-CA-MA-12. Authorizations involving water use on BLM land must comply with applicable State water 

law. Final authorization to proceed with water developments on BLM lands would be withheld until 

compliance from the appropriate authorizing agency (i.e., Idaho Department of Water Resources) is 

obtained. Any new water right established on public land would be solely in the name of the United 

States.

LA-CA-MA-13. New land use authorizations would avoid or minimize adverse effects on non-game fish, 

their habitats, and Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs). 

LA-CA-MA-14. For existing land use authorizations that prevent the achievement of the goals and 

objectives for riparian areas and wetlands, use existing authorities to redesign, modify, or apply 

mitigations to reduce impacts to non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LA-CA-MA-15. During Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensing or relicensing of 

hydroelectric projects, terms and conditions that achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and 

wetlands over the new license term should be submitted to the FERC.

LA-V-MA-1. ROW construction and maintenance activities should avoid disturbing special status species 

during important seasonal periods, unless the disturbance can be mitigated.

LA-V-MA-2. Locate new transmission and phone lines, communications towers, meteorological towers, 

and wind turbines more than five miles from occupied and unknown-status sage-grouse leks. Within 

designated ROW corridors, buffer distances for sage-grouse leks would not apply. BLM may impose 

constraints on timing of construction for routine maintenance.

LA-V-MA-3. Do not locate new communication sites in special status species habitat if the project would 

affect special status species or their habitat.

LA-V-MA-4. Restrict wind energy site testing and monitoring and wind energy development from 

occupied and suitable habitat for special status species, wildlife habitat, and cultural resources where 

their direct and indirect adverse effects cannot be mitigated. 

LA-V-MA-5. Applications for solar energy developments would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

2.7.3.5 Land Tenure 

Goal

LT-CA-G-1. Manage land tenure to provide for public ownership of lands with high resource and multiple 

use values and to improve management efficiency. 

Objective

LT-CA-O-1. Improve BLM's ability to manage the land base and resource values, and help meet resource 

objectives through land tenure adjustments.

Allocation

LT-V-A-1. Zone 1 consists of lands for retention that are not available for disposal (1,282,000 acres). 

Zone 1 lands include: 

The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 

The Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone; 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; 

Sand Point, Lower Bruneau Canyon, and Sagebrush Sea Areas of Critical Environmental Concern;

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area; 

 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics; and
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-318

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Other consolidated public lands. 

LT-V-A-2. Zone 2 consists of lands for consolidation within the planning area (89,000 acres); these can 

be exchanged for other lands adjacent to Zone 1 or Zone 2 or offered as Recreation and Public Purposes 

(R&PP) leases. Zone 2 lands include: 

Selected lands near Hammett, Glenns Ferry, and King Hill and

Selected lands in the northeast corner of the planning area.

LT-V-A-3. Zone 3 lands are available for Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) Section 203 

sales subject to NEPA compliance and consistent with other decisions in this RMP. No lands are 

identified for inclusion in Zone 3.

See Map 112 for locations of Land Tenure Zones 1, 2, and 3.

LT-V-A-4. R&PP leases to State and local governments and non-profit organizations would be 

considered on a case-by-case basis on lands in Zone 2.

Management Actions

LT-CA-MA-1. Public lands, in order to be considered for any form of land tenure adjustment (including 

exchanges, R&PP, fee or easement acquisitions, etc.), except for FLPMA Section 203 sales, would be 

evaluated and must meet one or more of the land ownership adjustment criteria (described in Appendix I), 

or one or more of the following criteria:

Is in the public interest; accommodates the needs of State, local, or private entities, including for the 

economy and community growth and expansion; and is in accordance with other land use goals, 

objectives, and planning decisions; 

Results in net gain of important and manageable resource values on public lands such as crucial 

wildlife habitat, significant cultural sites, high-value recreation areas, high quality riparian areas, live 

water, special status species habitat, or areas key to maintenance of productive ecosystems; 

Ensures the accessibility of public lands in areas where access is needed and cannot otherwise be 

obtained; 

Is essential to allow effective management of public lands in areas where consolidation of ownership 

is necessary to meet resource management objectives; and/or

Results in acquisition of lands that serve a national priority as identified in national policy directives.

LT-CA-MA-2. Initiate tribal consultation early in the process for any land tenure adjustments.

LT-CA-MA-3. In general, lands with the following characteristics would be retained in Federal ownership: 

Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, and Candidate species habitat and designated critical habitat; 

Those lands specifically identified by the tribes as having special importance related to treaty and/or 

traditional uses/values; 

National Register of Historic Places eligible and listed properties; and 

Wildlife tracts.

These lands could be disposed of if the transaction helped achieve resource objectives; see the Cultural 

Resources section for additional guidance for disposal of lands containing National Register properties or 

other important cultural resources. Lands acquired under the Land and Water Conservation Fund must be 

retained.

LT-CA-MA-4. BLM’s acquisition priorities (not in priority order) would include:

Land identified by Shoshone-Paiute Tribes or Shoshone-Bannock Tribes;

Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, or Candidate species habitat; 

BLM Type 2 Sensitive species habitat; 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resource Uses

2-319

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Lands within special designations; 

Big game winter range; 

Riparian areas; 

Lands containing known archaeological, paleontological, or historical values determined by the BLM 

to be unique or of traditional or scientific importance;

Lands that would provide public access to public lands, including but not limited to river access; 

Lands that would help consolidate public land; 

Lands that would help improve livestock grazing management; and

Lands adjacent to Zones 1 and 2.

LT-CA-MA-5. Vegetation treatments, construction of new range infrastructure, and other public land 

improvements in areas involved in a land tenure transaction would be kept to a minimum.

LT-CA-MA-6. Disposal of public lands would be subject to all valid existing rights, including existing 

rights-of-way. Existing public access through those lands may be retained if necessary for BLM 

management or for accommodating uses.

LT-CA-MA-7. Use land acquisition, exchanges, and conservation easements to support achievement of 

the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands and facilitate restoration of native species and 

their habitat.

LT-CA-MA-8. No new Desert Land Act or Carey Act applications would be accepted for lands. The Desert 

Land Act and Carey Act applications submitted prior to 2009 (Case numbers IDD-7401, IDI-7402, IDI27888, and IDI-27889) would be processed within 10 years of the signing of the Record of Decision. 

LT-CA-MA-9. Manage newly acquired lands and lands returned to BLM the same as adjacent BLM lands 

(e.g., acquired lands within wilderness would be managed as wilderness).

2.7.3.6 Minerals 

Leasable Minerals

Leasable minerals include oil shale, oil and gas, phosphate, potash, sodium, geothermal resources, and 

other minerals that may be developed under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended.

Goal

LE-CA-G-1. Provide leasable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other 

resources.

Objective

LE-V-O-1. Facilitate reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound exploration and development of 

leasable minerals where compatible with resource objectives.

Allocations

LE-V-A-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness; the Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study 

Area; eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; the Lower Bruneau Canyon, 

Middle Snake, and Sand Point Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs); and Lands with 

Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics (183,000 acres) would be closed 

to mineral leasing.

LE-V-A-2. The majority of the planning area (1,188,000 acres) would be open to mineral leasing, subject 

to laws, regulations, and formal orders; the terms and conditions of the standard lease form; and 

stipulations for Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation and Cultural Resource Protection. Areas 

that would be subject to additional moderate or major constraints specific to Alternative V are as follows:
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-320

•

•

•

•

•

•

Moderate constraints (229,000 acres): Key sage-grouse habitat and Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs) in bull trout and redband trout spawning habitat would be open to mineral leasing with 

seasonal restrictions. RCAs would be open to mineral leasing, consistent with goals and objectives 

for riparian areas and wetlands. 

Major constraints (25,000 acres): The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone and the 

Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors would be open to mineral leasing with no surface 

occupancy (NSO). 

See Map 121 for locations of leasable mineral allocations.

LE-V-A-3. Areas open or closed to exploration and development of non-energy leasable minerals (e.g. 

phosphate) would follow allocations outlined above.

Management Actions

LE-C-MA-1. Geothermal exploration, drilling, utilization, and reclamation projects would incorporate 

stipulations, best management practices, and management procedures from the Record of Decision and 

Resource Management Plan Amendments for Geothermal Leasing in the Western United States 

(December 2008) found in Appendix B. 

LE-CA-MA-1. The terms and conditions of the standard lease form (Form 3100-11, Offer to Lease and 

Lease for Oil and Gas) or future versions of the form would apply to all mineral leases.

LE-CA-MA-2. The following stipulations for Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) Section 7 

Consultation and Cultural Resource Protection would be used unless new stipulations are directed by 

BLM policy:

ESA Section 7 Consultation Stipulation – The lease area may now or hereafter contain plants, 

animals, or their habitats determined to be Threatened, Endangered or other special status species. 

The BLM may recommend modifications to exploration and development proposals to further its 

conservation and management objective to avoid BLM-approved activity that would contribute to a 

need to list such a species or their habitat. The BLM may require modifications to or disapprove 

proposed activity that is likely to result in jeopardy to the continued existence of a proposed or listed 

Threatened or Endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of a 

designated or proposed critical habitat. The BLM would not approve any ground-disturbing activity 

that may affect any such species or critical habitat until it completes its obligations under applicable 

requirements of the ESA, including completion of any required procedure for conference or 

consultation.

Cultural Resource Protection Stipulation – This lease may be found to contain historic properties 

and/or resources protected under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), American Indian 

Religious Freedom Act, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, Executive Order 

13007, or other statutes and executive orders. The BLM would not approve any ground-disturbing 

activities that may affect any such properties or resources until it completes its obligations under 

applicable requirements of the NHPA and other authorities. The BLM may require modification to 

exploration or development proposals to protect such properties, or disapprove any activity that is 

likely to result in adverse effects that cannot be successfully avoided, minimized, or mitigated.

LE-CA-MA-3. Exceptions, waivers, and modifications may not be made for the following lease

stipulations:

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Special Status Species Habitat: ESA Section 7 Consultation

and

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Cultural Resources: Cultural Resource Protection Stipulation.

LE-CA-MA-4. Lease stipulations, conditions of approval, and actions would be developed to achieve 

resource objectives on a site-specific basis. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resource Uses

2-321

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

o

•

o

LE-CA-MA-5. Mineral leasing and development decisions also apply to geophysical exploration.

LE-CA-MA-6. Exploration and development of non-energy leasable minerals would follow standard

stipulations outlined above; additional stipulations would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

LE-CA-MA-7. Leasable mineral development activities would avoid special status species habitat if the 

activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. Permits would 

include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

LE-CA-MA-8. For those leasable mineral development activities conducted pursuant to valid existing 

rights that pose risks to achievement of management objectives, use existing authorities to mitigate 

and/or require, to the extent authorized, design features that would contribute to the maintenance of 

streambanks, shorelines, streambed configuration, water quality, amount and distribution of woody 

debris, thermal regulation, characteristic erosion rates, and amount and distribution of source habitats.

LE-CA-MA-9. Locate leasable mineral project related infrastructure outside RCAs. Where there is no 

alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. Keep the number of roads 

to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission and revegetate roads no 

longer required for mineral management and related activities.

LE-CA-MA-10. New leasable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LE-CA-MA-11. Develop inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for leasable mineral activities

within or affecting RCAs. Evaluate and apply the results of inspection and monitoring to modify mineral 

plans, leases, or permits as needed to achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

LE-V-MA-1. Exceptions, waivers, or modifications may be made for lease stipulations as described 

below:

NSO Stipulation for Oregon NHT Protective zone – Surface occupancy is not allowed within the 

Oregon NHT protective zone. 

Exception: After coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), the BLM 

authorized officer may grant an exception if an environmental review demonstrates the action as 

proposed or conditioned would not impair the integrity of the trail.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may grant a waiver if an environmental review demonstrates

the action as proposed or conditioned would only impact non-contributing trail segments.

Modification: This stipulation may not be modified.

NSO Stipulation for Kelton and Toana Freight Roads – Surface occupancy would not be allowed 

within the Kelton and Toana Freight Road corridors.

Exception: After coordination with SHPO, the BLM authorized officer may grant an exception if an 

environmental review demonstrates the action as proposed or conditioned would not impair the 

integrity of the trails.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may grant a waiver if an environmental review demonstrates

the action as proposed or conditioned would only impact non-contributing trail segments.

Modification: This stipulation may not be modified.

Seasonal Restriction Stipulation for Key Sage-Grouse Habitat and Redband Trout Spawning Habitat

– No surface use is allowed (e.g., exploration, construction, and drilling) within key sage-grouse 

habitat from mid-February through mid-June, or RCAs in redband trout spawning habitat from May 

through June.

Exception: The BLM authorized officer may grant an exception if an environmental review 

demonstrates the action as proposed or conditioned would not affect the species or habitat during 

the critical season. An exception may also be granted if the proponent, BLM, US Fish and Wildlife 

Service (FWS), and State wildlife agencies negotiate compensation or mitigation that would offset 

the anticipated impact to the species or habitat.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-322

o

o

•

o

o

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may waive a stipulation if after discussions with State wildlife 

agencies it is determined the described lands are incapable of serving the long-term requirements 

of the species and these areas no longer warrant consideration of habitat.

Modification: The BLM authorized officer may modify the size and shape of the area under 

seasonal restrictions if an environmental analysis indicates the actual habitat suitability for the 

species is different. Time periods may be modified based on studies documenting local periods of 

actual use.

Seasonal Restriction Stipulation for Bull Trout Spawning Habitat – No surface use would be allowed 

(e.g., exploration, construction, and drilling) within RCAs in bull trout spawning habitat from August 

through November.

Exception: The BLM authorized officer may grant an exception if an environmental review 

demonstrates the action as proposed or conditioned would not affect the species or habitat during 

the critical season. An exception may also be granted if the proponent, BLM, FWS, and State 

wildlife agencies negotiate compensation or mitigation that would offset the anticipated impact to 

the species or habitat.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may waive a stipulation if after consulting with FWS and 

State wildlife agencies it is determined the described lands are incapable of serving the long-term 

requirements of the species and these areas no longer warrant consideration of habitat.

Modification: The BLM authorized officer may modify the size and shape of the area under 

seasonal restrictions if an environmental analysis indicates the actual habitat suitability for the 

species is different. Time periods may be modified based on studies documenting local periods of 

actual use.

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Riparian Areas and Wetlands – Surface use within RCAs must 

be consistent with the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. Exceptions, waivers, and 

modifications may not be made.

Salable Minerals

Salable minerals include minerals and building materials such as sand, stone, gravel, pumice, pumicite, 

cinders, and clay.

Goal

SA-CA-G-1. Provide salable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other 

resources.

Objective

SA-V-O-1. Provide salable minerals needed for community and economic purposes and facilitate their 

reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound development where available and compatible with 

resource objectives.

Allocations

SA-CA-A-1. The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone and the Kelton and Toana Freight 

Road protective corridors (27,000 acres) would be closed to new salable mineral development. See NHTCA-MA-8 and CR-CA-MA-12. 

SA-V-A-1. The majority of the planning area would be open to salable mineral development (1,162,000 

acres), subject to site-specific NEPA analysis, stipulations, and 43 CFR 3600 regulations, except for the 

following areas which are closed to salable mineral exploration and development (182,000 acres):

The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness;

The Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; 

Lower Bruneau Canyon, Middle Snake, and Sand Point Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 

(ACECs); 

Playas (300-feet buffer); and 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Resource Uses

2-323

• Lands with Wilderness Characteristics managed for their wilderness characteristics.

See Map 128 for locations of salable mineral allocations.

Management Actions

SA-C-MA-1. Promote the use of existing sites for mineral disposals. 

SA-C-MA-2. Exploration would be allowed where appropriate under a letter of authorization from the BLM 

authorized officer. Exploration for new sites would be the responsibility of the applicant. 

SA-CA-MA-1. Salable mineral development activities would avoid special status species habitat if the 

activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. Permits would 

include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

SA-CA-MA-2. All mineral material sites would be reclaimed in accordance with resource objectives for the 

adjacent area as specified in the permit.

SA-CA-MA-3. Site specific terms, conditions, and special considerations would be included in all 

commercial salable mineral permits to protect resource values.

SA-CA-MA-4. Stipulations for community pits would be developed on a site-specific basis. 

SA-CA-MA-5. For those salable mineral development activities conducted pursuant to valid existing rights 

that pose risks to achievement of goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands, use existing 

authorities to mitigate and/or require, to the extent authorized, design features that would contribute to the 

maintenance of streambanks, shorelines, streambed configuration, water quality, amount and distribution 

of woody debris, thermal regulation, characteristic erosion rates, and amount and distribution of source 

habitats.

SA-CA-MA-6. Locate salable mineral project related infrastructure outside Riparian Conservation Areas

(RCAs). Where there is no alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. 

Keep the number of roads to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission

and revegetate roads no longer required for mineral management and related activities.

SA-CA-MA-7. New salable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs. 

SA-V-MA-1. New sites may be developed if it is determined by the BLM authorized officer that an existing 

site would not meet the applicant’s needs and site impacts can be sufficiently mitigated.

Locatable Minerals

Minerals or materials subject to claim and development under the Mining Law of 1872, as amended. 

Generally includes metallic minerals such as gold and silver, and other materials not subject to lease or 

sale (some bentonites, limestone, talc, some xeolites, etc.).

Goal

LO-CA-G-1. Locatable mineral development would not cause unnecessary and undue degradation of 

resources. 

Objective

LO-CA-O-1. Facilitate reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound exploration and development 

of locatable minerals. 
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-324

•

•

•

•

•

Allocations

LO-C-A-1. The planning area, excluding the following withdrawn areas (60,000 acres), would be available 

for location of mining claims: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and 

Designated Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridors.

LO-V-A-1. Recommend the following areas for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable exploration and 

development (33,000 acres): 

Middle Snake and Sand Point Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs), 

The Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone, and 

Eligible and suitable WSR corridors.

See Map 134 for locations of areas recommended for withdrawal and withdrawn by statute. 

Recommendations by BLM for withdrawal are subject to final consideration by the Secretary of the 

Interior.

Management Actions

LO-CA-MA-1. Determine whether locatable mineral plans of operation cause unnecessary and undue 

degradation to resources, including habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species, on a caseby-case basis and identify stipulations or mitigation measures as appropriate. 

LO-CA-MA-2. Locate mineral project related infrastructure outside Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs). 

Where there is no alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. Keep the 

number of roads to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission and 

revegetate roads no longer required for mineral management and related activities.

LO-CA-MA-3. New locatable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LO-CA-MA-4. Develop inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for locatable mineral activities

within or affecting RCAs. Evaluate and apply the results of inspection and monitoring to modify mineral 

plans, leases, or permits as needed to achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

2.7.4 Special Designations

2.7.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 

Goal

ACEC-V-G-1. ACECs would be managed to protect the important biological, cultural, scenic, and historic 

resources that meet the criteria for relevance and importance. 

Lower Bruneau Canyon ACEC

Objective

ACEC-V-O-1. Protect vertebrate and invertebrate paleontological resources; restore and protect special 

status plant habitat for Packard’s cowpie buckwheat, spine-node milkvetch, and rare desert annuals.

Allocation

ACEC-V-A-1. Manage 1,000 acres of public lands as the Lower Bruneau Canyon ACEC (Map 141).
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Special Designations

2-325

Management Actions

ACEC-V-MA-1. Restore native upland and riparian plant communities within the ACEC to improve habitat 

for special status species.

ACEC-V-MA 2. The ACEC would be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment with 

integrated weed management techniques for control, containment, and where practical, eradication.

ACEC-V-MA-3. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.

ACEC-V-MA-4. Manage the ACEC as Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class III.

ACEC-V-MA-5. The ACEC would not be available for livestock grazing.

ACEC-V-MA-6. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1. 

ACEC-V-MA-7. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing.

ACEC-V-MA-8. The ACEC would be closed to salable mineral development.

Middle Snake ACEC

Objective

ACEC-V-O-2. Manage the lands within the Middle Snake ACEC to protect their fish and botanical values.

Allocation

ACEC-V-A-2. Manage 7,000 acres of public lands as the Middle Snake ACEC (Map 141).

Management Actions

ACEC-V-MA-9. Restore habitat for special status plants within the ACEC. Maintain existing high-quality 

special status plant habitat.

ACEC-V-MA-10. Where habitat is suitable, transplant or seed special status plants within the ACEC.

ACEC-V-MA-11. The ACEC would be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment with 

integrated weed management techniques for control, containment, and where practical, eradication. 

Special conditions would apply in habitat occupied by special status plant species.

ACEC-V-MA-12. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.

ACEC-V-MA-13. Mitigate the effects of surface-disturbing activities in the ACEC, such as recreation and 

transportation.

ACEC-V-MA-14. Implement use restrictions within the ACEC in areas with slopes greater than 20%, or in 

areas where soils are rated severe or very severe for wind erosion or high for water erosion.

ACEC-V-MA-15. Manage the ACEC as VRM Class III.

ACEC-V-MA-16. The ACEC would not be available for livestock grazing. 

ACEC-V-MA-17. Livestock trailing through the ACEC would be allowed in the designated trailing corridor, 

but livestock would not be allowed to remain in the ACEC overnight.

ACEC-V-MA-18. Monitor recreational use within the ACEC. If this use reaches levels that impair the 

relevant and important values of the ACEC, implement protective measures appropriate to the type of 

recreational activity. Protective measures may include, but not be limited to, improving access routes to 
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-326

recreational sites along the Snake River, installing barriers to protect relevant and important values, and 

implementing measures to address water quality and public health concerns.

ACEC-V-MA-19. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing.

ACEC-V-MA-20. BLM-managed lands within the ACEC can be exchanged for non-BLM-managed lands, 

consistent with the Land Tenure section, in order to obtain lands with relevant and important values or to 

improve management. Where practical, acquire private or State inholdings. The ACEC designation and 

management would apply to lands acquired within the ACEC boundary.

ACEC-V-MA-21. The ACEC would be closed to salable mineral development.

ACEC-V-MA-22. Recommend lands within the ACEC for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable 

exploration and development.

Sagebrush Sea ACEC

Objective

ACEC-V-O-3. Manage the lands within the Sagebrush Sea ACEC to protect their cultural, fish, wildlife, 

and botanical values.

Allocation

ACEC-V-A-3. Manage 956,000 acres of public land as the Sagebrush Sea ACEC (Map 141).

Management Actions

ACEC-V-MA-23. All actions within the portions of the ACEC that are also within wilderness or the 

Wilderness Study Area (WSA) must be consistent with the Wilderness Act and the Omnibus Public Lands 

Management Act of 2009 or the Management of Wilderness Study Areas (BLM Manual 6330) and with 

allocations and management actions made for wilderness or WSAs. 

ACEC-V-MA-24. Improving, expanding, connecting, and restoring native plant communities through 

active and passive treatments for fuels, noxious weeds, invasive plants, and non-native perennial plant 

communities would be a high priority within the ACEC. 

ACEC-V-MA-25. Implement management actions that improve riparian condition and reduce habitat 

fragmentation in redband trout occupied streams. 

ACEC-V-MA-26. Within nine miles of bighorn sheep habitat, use of domestic sheep or goats to reduce 

noxious weeds would not be allowed to eliminate potential contact of domestic sheep or goats with 

bighorn sheep.

ACEC-V-MA-27. Treatments would include only native plants. Special stipulations would apply for 

treatments in occupied slickspot and Davis peppergrass habitats, such as establishing buffer areas and 

not allowing aerial spraying in occupied habitat.

ACEC-V-MA-28. Restore playas occupied by Davis peppergrass to improve natural hydrologic function 

and habitat on a case-by-case basis. Restoration activities may include filling pit reservoirs, stabilizing 

erosion areas, and planting native species with similar pollinators.

ACEC-V-MA-29. BLM management activities and authorized uses would result in no net loss of native 

vegetation; this restriction would not apply to fire suppression activities.

ACEC-V-MA-30. Manage the majority of the ACEC as VRM Class III, where not otherwise designated as 

VRM Class I or II.

ACEC-V-MA-31. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Special Designations

2-327

ACEC-V-MA-32. Livestock seasons of use or stocking rates would be adjusted within the ACEC on a 

pasture-specific basis to minimize conflicts with bighorn sheep lambing and sage-grouse breeding and 

nesting periods and the active growing period of native grasses.

ACEC-V-MA-33. Reduce livestock infrastructure and associated routes to amounts appropriate to ACEC 

objectives and the levels of livestock grazing within the ACEC. Livestock water troughs, corrals, or other 

related livestock facilities in reference areas within the ACEC would be removed. Pipelines would remain 

in the ground to minimize disturbance.

ACEC-V-MA-34. Monitor recreational use within the ACEC. If this use reaches levels that impair the 

relevant and important values of the ACEC, implement protective measures appropriate to the type of 

recreational activity. Protective measures may include but not be limited to designating camping areas 

within the ACEC; requiring the use of certified weed-free forage and straw; and installing protective 

barriers to protect relevant and important values.

ACEC-V-MA-35. Routes would be designated through the Travel Management Plan to increase core 

habitat size for sage-grouse.

ACEC-V-MA-36. The ACEC would be a right-of-way (ROW) avoidance area; new ROWs would be 

restricted to ROW corridors and locations of existing ROWs.

ACEC-V-MA-37. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1; where practical, private and/or 

State inholdings would be acquired. Lands acquired within the ACEC would become part of the ACEC

and be managed accordingly. 

ACEC-V-MA-38. The ACEC would be available for salable mineral development. Where practical, use 

existing mineral pits and minimize new salable mineral developments within the ACEC. Seasonal 

closures that restrict use or activities at the pits during important seasonal periods for fish and wildlife may 

be included when existing salable mineral permits are reauthorized and in new permits.

ACEC-V-MA-39. Limit surface disturbing activities within and adjacent to the Bruneau and Jarbidge 

Rivers, Devil Creek, Browns Bench and the Jarbidge Foothills to protect cultural resources; ensure that 

authorized impacts are appropriately mitigated.

Sand Point ACEC

Objective

ACEC-V-O-4. Protect the Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT), archaeological sites, vertebrate and 

invertebrate paleontological resources, and the Glenns Ferry geologic formation.

Allocation

ACEC-V-A-4. Manage 1,000 acres of public land as the Sand Point ACEC (Map 141).

Management Actions

ACEC-V-MA-40. Manage paleontological resources within the ACEC in accordance with the 1988 Sand 

Point Natural History Management Plan or subsequent revision. Modify the 1988 plan to encompass the 

Morgan property extension and to be in conformance with the RMP.

ACEC-V-MA-41. The ACEC would be closed to fossil collecting except under permit for scientific 

research. 

ACEC-V-MA-42. Limit BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses that may contribute 

to wind or water erosion in the ACEC.

ACEC-V-MA-43. Work cooperatively with adjacent land owners to reduce or eliminate run-off from the 

agricultural fields that erode soils within the ACEC.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-328

ACEC-V-MA-44. No surface-disturbing activities would be allowed unless they are directly related to 

studies or research on the cultural, paleontological, or geological resources present or unless they can be 

mitigated.

ACEC-V-MA-45. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used to suppress wildland fires within the 

ACEC to protect the paleontological resources. The BLM authorized officer may allow the use of bull 

dozers to construct control lines within the ACEC on a case-by-case basis. However, dozer lines would 

be rehabilitated to minimize erosion.

ACEC-V-MA-46. Manage the ACEC as VRM Class III, except within the Oregon NHT protective zone, 

which would be managed as VRM Class II.

ACEC-V-MA-47. The ACEC would not be available for livestock grazing.

ACEC-V-MA-48. Motorized vehicle use within the ACEC would be limited to designated routes. 

ACEC-V-MA-49. Consider upgrading the Wilson Grade Road if there is increased need for access for fire 

suppression activities or research.

ACEC-V-MA-50. Structures directly related to the preservation or interpretation of the site may be allowed 

(e.g., kiosks, protective barriers).

ACEC-V-MA-51. The ACEC would be a ROW exclusion area.

ACEC-V-MA-52. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1.

ACEC-V-MA-53. The ACEC would be closed to mineral leasing.

ACEC-V-MA-54. The ACEC would be closed to salable mineral development.

ACEC-V-MA-55. Recommend lands within the ACEC for withdrawal from mining laws for locatable 

exploration and development.

2.7.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 

Goal

NHT-CA-G-1. The Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor would be managed to preserve and 

protect the historic, scenic, and recreational values associated with the trail. 

Objective

NHT-CA-O-1. Protect, preserve, and provide opportunities to experience the historic, scenic, and 

recreational values of the Oregon NHT.

Allocation

NHT-V-A-1. Manage 1.5 miles on either side of the Oregon NHT as the National Trail Management 

Corridor (42,000 acres). Within the corridor, manage 0.25 mile on either side of the Oregon NHT or the 

visual horizon (whichever is narrower) as a protective zone (11,000 acres). 

See Map 143 for the location of the Oregon NHT.

Management Actions

NHT-CA-MA-1. Update the BLM’s 1984 Oregon Trail Management Plan and ensure consistency with the 

National Park Service’s 1999 Oregon NHT Comprehensive Management and Use Plan.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Special Designations

2-329

•

•

•

NHT-CA-MA-2. Until the 1984 plan is updated and unless otherwise directed in this document, continue 

to manage the Trail in accordance with the 1984 plan and BLM policy, and in cooperation with the 

National Park Service.

NHT-CA-MA-3. Manage the Oregon NHT protective zone as an avoidance area for surface-disturbing 

activities, including: 

 Placement of salting, supplemental feeding, temporary watering, and temporary holding facilities for 

livestock;

Staging areas for recreational activities and events; and

Staging areas for fire suppression and rehabilitation activities.

NHT-CA-MA-4. If use of a designated route within the Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor

is degrading the trail or its setting, the route would be modified or closed.

NHT-CA-MA-5. Design and implement restoration projects to mitigate the effects of natural and humancaused disturbances within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor. When practical, remove or 

modify visually intrusive facilities within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor. 

NHT-CA-MA-6. Lands within the Oregon NHT protective zone are not available for disposal; non-BLM 

lands within the corridor are a high priority for acquisition.

NHT-CA-MA-7. The Oregon NHT protective zone is open to leasable mineral exploration and 

development with no surface occupancy. 

NHT-CA-MA-8. The Oregon NHT protective zone is closed to new salable mineral development. Existing 

salable mineral developments could be renewed but the footprint could not be expanded.

NHT-CA-MA-9. Adverse effects to the Oregon NHT related to land use authorizations would be prevented 

through avoidance of impacting activities or through mitigation when disturbance or destruction is 

unavoidable. 

NHT-CA-MA-10. Developments such as roads, trails, pipelines, fences, and powerlines may be allowed 

to cross the Oregon NHT where the project is determined by the BLM, with the State Historic Preservation 

Officer concurrence, to not adversely affect the trail due to previous disturbance or visual intrusions. 

NHT-CA-MA-11. Surface-disturbing equipment, such as bulldozers and road graders, cannot be used on 

contributing segments of the Oregon NHT, or within the protective zone of such segments, unless to 

protect life or property.

NHT-CA-MA-12. Use techniques that minimize surface disturbance within the Oregon NHT protective 

zone during seeding projects (Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation, fuels treatments, 

or restoration). Trail remnants would not be disturbed during seeding operations.

NHT-CA-MA-13. Use educational and public outreach programs to minimize or prevent human-caused 

damage to the Oregon NHT including vandalism, unauthorized surface collection of artifacts, and 

unintentional disturbances.

NHT-CA-MA-14. Install and maintain signs identifying the routes of the Oregon NHT.

2.7.4.3 Wilderness 

Goal and Objective

WD-C-G-1. Manage the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to protect wilderness values.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-330

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Management Action

WD-C-MA-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness was designated by Congress in 2009 with the 

Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009, Section G, P.L. 111-11. The 90,000 acre BruneauJarbidge Rivers Wilderness Area (63,000 acres within the planning area) would be managed according to 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan. 

See Map 145 for the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness location.

2.7.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 

Goal and Objective

WSR-C-G-1. Maintain or enhance the outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs), free-flowing condition, 

and water quality of designated, suitable, and eligible WSR segments.

Allocations

WSR-C-A-1. River segments designated as Wild and Scenic include:

A 38.1-mile segment of the Bruneau River from the downstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness to the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau River, except for a 0.5-mile 

segment at the Indian Hot Springs public road access, to be administered as a wild river; 

A 0.5-mile segment of the Bruneau River at the Indian Hot Springs public road access to be 

administered as a recreational river; 

A 0.3-mile segment of the West Fork of the Bruneau River from the confluence with the Jarbidge 

River to the downstream boundary of the Bruneau Canyon Grazing Allotment to be administered as a 

wild river; and

A 27.9-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau 

River to the upstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to be administered as a 

wild river.

WSR-C-A-2. Segments recommended suitable for inclusion in the WSR system include:

A 23.0-mile segment of the Bruneau River from Blackrock Crossing to 0.3 mile above the confluence 

of the West Fork of the Bruneau River and the Jarbidge River.

WSR-C-A-3. Segments eligible for inclusion in the WSR system include: 

A 39.0-mile segment of Salmon Falls Creek from the Nevada border to Salmon Falls Reservoir and 

from Salmon Falls Dam to Balanced Rock Park; 

 A 25.0-mile segment of the Three Island, King Hill, and Hagerman reaches of the Snake River; 

A 10.2-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the planning area boundary to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 9.6-mile segment of the Jarbidge River, East Fork from the planning area boundary to Murphy Hot 

Springs and from Murphy Hot Springs to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 2.7-mile segment of Dave Creek from private land boundary to Jarbidge River, East Fork 

confluence;

A 1.0-mile segment of Cougar Point Creek from the planning area boundary to Jarbidge River, East 

Fork confluence; and 

A 1.5-mile segment of Rocky Canyon Creek from its headwaters to Salmon Falls Creek, North Fork 

confluence.

See Map 146 for locations of designated, suitable, and eligible river segments.

WSR-C-A-4. Wild and Scenic River corridors are designated to extend either the average distance of 

0.25 mile from the high water mark on each side of the river segment; or the distance to the nearest 

confined canyon rim, whichever is shorter. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Special Designations

2-331

WSR-C-A-5. Wild and Scenic River corridors that are suitable or eligible extend outward from the ordinary 

high water mark 0.25 mile on both sides of the river.

Management Actions

WSR-C-MA-1. Manage the designated segments of the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers in accordance with 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan to maintain or 

enhance their ORVs, free-flowing condition, water quality, and classification.

WSR-C-MA-2. Manage the suitable segment of the Bruneau River to maintain or enhance its ORVs, freeflowing condition, water quality, and tentative classification until Congress acts.

WSR-C-MA-3. Protect or enhance the qualifying values of eligible river segments pending a subsequent 

suitability determination or designation decision by Congress. Their free-flowing condition cannot be 

modified, their ORVs and water quality are to be maintained or enhanced, and their tentative classification 

is to be maintained.

WSR-C-MA-4. Conduct suitability studies and make suitability determinations on eligible river segments 

entirely within the planning area; coordinate suitability studies on segments forming the boundary with the 

Burley and Shoshone Field Offices. 

WSR-C-MA-5. The existing powerline south of Murphy Hot Springs on the East Fork of the Jarbidge River 

would be retained; designated, suitable, and eligible WSR corridors would be right-of-way avoidance 

areas. 

WSR-C-MA-6. If, through legislation, Congress decides not to designate a suitable segment as part of the 

Wild and Scenic River System, the protective management outlined in this section would no longer apply 

and these segments would be managed according to direction in other sections of the RMP. 

WSR-V-MA-1. Designated, suitable, and eligible WSR corridors would be closed to exploration and 

development of leasable or salable minerals.

2.7.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs)

Goal and Objective

WSA-C-G-1. Manage and protect the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA to preserve wilderness 

characteristics so as not to impair the suitability for designation by Congress as wilderness.

Allocation

WSA-C-A-1. Manage 2,000 acres of public land as the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA. 

See Map 145 for the WSA location.

Management Actions

WSA-C-MA-1. Manage the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA according to the Management of Wilderness 

Study Areas (BLM Manual 6330) until Congress either designates the land as wilderness or releases it for 

other uses. 

WSA-C-MA-2. If the WSA is designated by Congress as Wilderness, manage it according to 

Congressional mandates and BLM’s Wilderness Manual 6340 until a Wilderness Management Plan is 

developed.

WSA-C-MA-3. If the WSA is released for other uses by Congress, manage the lands within the Area of 

Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) and Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridor according to 

management specified for that ACEC and WSR corridor.
Chapter 2: Alternative V Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Social and Economic Features

2-332

2.7.5 Social and Economic Features

2.7.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 

Goal

SE-CA-G-1. Management of the resources and uses of public lands would provide social and economic 

benefits to residents, businesses, visitors, and future generations.

Objective

SE-CA-O-1. Provide opportunities for economic and social benefit while maintaining natural and cultural 

resource values. 

Management Actions

SE-CA-MA-1. Planning for BLM management activities and authorized uses would consider whether the 

activity or action could be designed to support the social, economic, and environmental health and 

sustainability of affected communities of place.

SE-CA-MA-2. Consider proposals from communities of place and interest that contribute to their social, 

economic, and environmental health and sustainability. 

2.7.5.2 Hazardous Materials

Goal

HM-CA-G-1. Ensure hazardous substances on public lands remain a high priority for removal or 

mitigation. 

Objective

HM-CA-O-1. Mitigate issues related to hazardous substances. 

Management Actions

HM-CA-MA-1. Storage, treatment, or disposal of hazardous materials on public lands would not be 

allowed unless otherwise permitted by law. 

HM-CA-MA-2. Use law enforcement and public outreach to discourage the disposal of hazardous 

materials on public lands. 

HM-CA-MA-3. Storage and use of hazardous materials on public lands would not be allowed without BLM 

authorization.

HM-CA-MA-4. Responses to hazardous materials incidents and sites would be as outlined and approved 

by the latest contingency plans for hazardous materials incidents (e.g., 2013 Twin Falls District BLM 

Environmental Contingency Plan for Emergency Preparedness and Response to Oil and Hazardous 

Materials Incidents).

HM-CA-MA-5. Identify and mitigate illegal hazardous material disposal sites and hazardous materials 

spills in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations.

HM-CA-MA-6. Develop interagency agreements with local law enforcement agencies to facilitate the 

enforcement of illegal hazardous material disposal and hazardous material laws.

HM-CA-MA-7. Coordinate with local government agencies during hazardous material prevention and 

response activities.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative V

Social and Economic Features

2-333

•

•

•

•

2.7.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 

Goal and Objective

IOE-CA-G-1. Working with partners, provide interpretation, outreach, and environmental education to 

highlight the natural, cultural, and historic features of the planning area and to further resource protection 

and public safety. 

Management Actions

IOE-CA-MA-1. Focus education, interpretation, and outreach on resources and activities occurring within 

the planning area. 

IOE-CA-MA-2. Partner with the tribes and Federal, State, and local agencies to educate the public on 

resource protection through activities such as education tours; kiosks at major entrances to the planning 

area; interpretive signs at off-highway vehicle staging areas; information on the identification, control, and 

prevention of noxious weeds and invasive plants; and programs such as Tread Lightly!® and Leave No 

Trace®. 

IOE-CA-MA-3. Create displays highlighting natural, cultural, and historic features of the planning area for 

use at area fairs, schools, public lands day, and other events. 

IOE-CA-MA-4. Participate in events that educate youth about natural resources.

IOE-CA-MA-5. Minimize or prevent human-caused damage to public land resources, including vandalism, 

illegal dumping, and unauthorized surface collection of fossils and artifacts, through educational and 

interpretive outreach programs.

IOE-CA-MA-6. Foster the public's understanding of the role of fire in the ecosystem, the hazards 

associated with living in the Wildland Urban Interface, and wildland fire prevention and suppression 

activities through methods such as: 

 Using mass media, 

 Providing outreach to local groups, 

 Developing interpretive signs and kiosks, and

Participating in County Wildfire Protection Plans. 

IOE-CA-MA-7. Provide interpretation and education on unique resource areas such as the Oregon 

National Historic Trail, Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, Wilderness, Wilderness Study Areas, and 

Wild and Scenic Rivers.

IOE-CA-MA-8. Provide education and outreach on resource protection for recreational users. 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Tribal Rights and Interests

2-334

2.8 ALTERNATIVE VI (PROPOSED RMP)

2.8.1 Tribal Rights and Interests

Goals and Objectives

TI-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to protect resources and values associated with Native American treaty 

rights. 

TI-CA-G-2. Manage natural and cultural resources of importance to the tribes in a manner that respects 

tribal beliefs, traditions, and values. 

TI-CA-G-3. Protect the physical condition of sacred sites and traditional cultural properties and preserve 

tribal access to such sites.

Management Actions

TI-CA-MA-1. Consult with the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes and Shoshone-Bannock Tribes in accordance with 

BLM policy and other authorities. Consultation would be an ongoing process between BLM and the tribes, 

within the context of general management of public lands and programs, as well as specific proposals 

that may affect natural and cultural resources of importance to the tribes.

TI-CA-MA-2. Identify the effects of decisions on vegetation, fish, wildlife, mineral, and water resources of 

importance to the tribes, through consultation, and seek ways to lessen or avoid impacts. 

TI-CA-MA-3. Work collaboratively with the tribes regarding the identification and management of 

traditional cultural properties. 

TI-CA-MA-4. Provide general information to staff and contractors regarding existing and historic uses of 

the planning area by the tribes, Federal government trust responsibilities, and the importance of Native 

American treaty rights in order to foster a greater understanding and appreciation of tribal rights and 

interests related to public land management. 

2.8.2 Resources

2.8.2.1 Air and Atmospheric Values 

Goal

AAV-CA-G-1. Ensure BLM management activities and authorized uses maintain the quality of the 

planning area's air resources.

Objective

AAV-CA-O-1. Maintain the quality of air resources and limit impacts to air quality to meet National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards and Idaho Department of Environmental Quality air quality standards. 

Management Actions

AAV-CA-MA-1. Manage the planning area airshed as Class II unless it is reclassified by the State 

through the process prescribed in the Clean Air Act.

AAV-CA-MA-2. Ensure BLM management activities and authorized uses, including prescribed fire, are 

designed to comply with Federal, State, and local air quality regulations, classifications, and standards.

AAV-CA-MA-3. Minimize impacts of smoke from prescribed fires to sensitive areas such as the Class I 

airshed of the Jarbidge Wilderness (on US Forest Service-managed land), non-attainment areas, and 

communities adjacent to the planning area. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

2-335

AAV-CA-MA-4. Coordinate with the Montana-Idaho Airshed Group Smoke Management Program or its 

equivalent for all actions related to prescribed fire. 

AAV-CA-MA-5. Develop dust abatement stipulations for BLM-authorized construction and maintenance 

activities that have the potential to exceed State of Idaho air quality standards.

AAV-CA-MA-6. Design BLM activities and authorized uses to minimize night time light intrusions (e.g., 

modifications to the structure and timing of lighting).

AAV-CA-MA-7. Design BLM activities and authorized uses to comply with State of Idaho requirements for 

noise management. 

2.8.2.2 Geologic Features 

Goal

GE-CA-G-1. Manage unique geologic features for their tribal, scientific, recreational, and educational 

values. 

Objective

GE-CA-O-1. Protect unique geologic features and provide opportunities for their use and enjoyment.

Management Actions

GE-CA-MA-1. Protect unique geologic features from human-caused damage or extraction. 

GE-CA-MA-2. Conduct and maintain a cave inventory with participation from the tribes and interested 

organizations to identify and compile quantitative and qualitative data on cave resources and to determine 

cave significance in accordance with the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988.

GE-CA-MA-3. Based on the results of the cave inventory, designate significant caves and protect their 

resources. 

GE-CA-MA-4. Set management objectives and setting prescriptions for significant caves.

2.8.2.3 Soil Resources 

Goal and Objective

SR-CA-G-1. Manage resources and uses to maintain or enhance biological and physical functions and 

stability of soils. 

Management Actions

SR-CA-MA-1. Minimize soil erosion by maintaining perennial vegetation cover based on site potential.

SR-CA-MA-2. Design construction, maintenance, and land treatments to reduce impacts to soils. 

SR-CA-MA-3. Collaborate with County Highway Districts to reduce impacts from road maintenance along 

stream corridors and in areas of highly erosive soils.

SR-CA-MA-4. Reduce the erosive effects of transportation and travel by modifying routes or mitigating 

the impacts (e.g., water bars or control structures) where problems are identified. 

SR-CA-MA-5. Revegetate or stabilize areas where BLM management activities or authorized uses have 

resulted in unanticipated erosion.
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-336

SR-CA-MA-6. Where new road construction or reconstruction occurs, the location and design should 

minimize soil erosion, including closure or decommissioning of the road if the need for the road is 

temporary.

SR-CA-MA-7. Soil and snow should not be side cast into surface waters during road maintenance.

SR-VI-MA-1. Mitigate impacts of BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses on soils 

with moderate, severe, or very severe potential for wind erosion (1,129,000 acres; Map 4) or with medium 

or high potential for water erosion (1,296,000 acres; Map 5) for watershed and ecosystem health.

SR-VI-MA-2. Develop and implement an erosion control strategy and topsoil storage or restoration plan 

for new land use authorizations, Special Recreation Permits, and mineral exploration and development 

involving surface disturbance on slopes 20% to 40% or on soils with moderate, severe, or very severe 

potential for wind erosion or with medium or high potential for water erosion. No surface disturbance from 

these activities would be allowed on slopes greater than 40%.

2.8.2.4 Water Resources

Goal

WR-CA-G-1. Maintain or improve the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of water resources.

Objective

WR-CA-O-1. Make progress towards meeting Federal and State water quality standards. 

Management Actions

WR-CA-MA-1. Priority streams for restoration of water quality include streams containing special status 

species and their habitat (Map 24), fish-bearing streams, and water quality impaired streams (Map 6). 

Map 6 displays the location of streams meeting these criteria in 2011; this map can be updated to reflect 

changes in a stream’s status through the life of the plan.

WR-CA-MA-2. Prevent or mitigate the impacts of BLM management activities and authorized and allowed 

uses on water quality to comply with Federal, State, and local water quality regulations.

WR-CA-MA-3. Modify or suspend BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses that are 

a factor in not meeting water quality standards.

WR-CA-MA-4. Where applicable, incorporate best management practices to maintain and improve water 

quality (Appendix B). Recommendations may be implemented from State water quality plans to achieve 

the goal and objective (e.g., Idaho Agricultural Pollution Abatement Plan).

WR-CA-MA-5. Consider new water development projects and improvements to existing water 

development projects if impacts to water and riparian resources can be mitigated; see the Livestock 

Grazing section for additional guidance on water developments. See the Wildland Fire Ecology and 

Management section for guidance on water developments for fire suppression activities.

WR-CA-MA-6. Consult or coordinate with the tribes and with Federal, State, and local agencies when 

determining location and designs for water development projects.

WR-CA-MA-7. Coordinate with Idaho Department of Water Resources, Idaho Department of 

Environmental Quality, and Nevada Division of Environmental Protection to identify opportunities to 

mitigate impacts of water management on public land resources.

WR-CA-MA-8. Where total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for water quality restoration are developed, 

land management activities would be consistent with the water quality restoration plan and TMDLs.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

2-337

•

•

•

•

•

•

WR-CA-MA-9. Water bodies that are supporting beneficial uses (e.g., cold water biota, salmonid 

spawning, recreation, and agriculture) would be managed to meet or exceed State of Idaho and Nevada 

regulations.

WR-CA-MA-10. Consult or coordinate as appropriate with tribal, Federal, State, and local governments to 

identify and secure instream flows needed to maintain riparian resources, channel conditions, and aquatic 

habitat.

WR-CA-MA-11. Apply chemicals (i.e., herbicides, pesticides, insecticides, and other toxicants) in a 

manner that does not impair water quality or prevent attainment of objectives for riparian areas and 

wetlands and avoids adverse effects on inland non-game fish and their habitat. When applying chemicals

in a Riparian Conservation Area (RCA), a spill kit would be onsite as appropriate. Prohibit storing and 

mixing chemicals within RCAs unless there are no other practical alternatives.

WR-CA-MA-12. Prohibit storage of fuels and other toxicants and refueling within RCAs unless there are 

no other practical alternatives. Any refueling sites and/or storage areas within an RCA would have an 

approved refueling and spill containment plan.

2.8.2.5 Vegetation Communities

Upland Vegetation

The Upland Vegetation section outlines goals and objectives for vegetation treatments. Management 

actions for restoration treatments, treatments for annual communities, and treatments for perennial 

communities are described in this section. Treatments for weeds and fuels are in the Noxious Weeds and 

Invasive Plants and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

For management and analysis purposes, the 55 vegetation communities in the planning area were 

grouped into five vegetation sub-groups (VSGs; see the Upland Vegetation section in Chapter 3 for 

vegetation communities included in each VSG); Map 9 displays existing vegetation as of 2011. 

Vegetation communities were grouped into VSGs based on the dominant vegetation and community 

structure as well as similarity in management objectives:

Annual communities – dominated by invasive annual grasses; includes communities with and 

without a shrub overstory.

Non-Native Perennial communities – dominated by non-native perennial grasses; some also have 

an overstory of four-wing saltbush or rabbitbrush.

Non-Native Understory communities – dominated by non-native perennial grasses in the 

understory; have an overstory of Wyoming big sagebrush, basin big sagebrush, black sagebrush, or 

low sage.

Native Grassland communities – dominated by native perennial grasses; do not have a shrub 

overstory.

Native Shrubland communities – dominated by native perennial grasses in the understory; have a 

shrub overstory; also includes aspen, juniper, and mountain mahogany communities which are 

present in small, scattered inclusions within other native shrubland communities.

Unvegetated areas – include breaks, barren areas, and sand dunes.

The planning area was divided into Vegetation Management Areas (VMAs) A, B, C, and D, creating westeast bands across the planning area based on potential natural community, elevation, and mean annual 

precipitation (Map 8). 

Goals

UV-CA-G-1. Manage upland vegetation communities to promote soil stability, water infiltration, nutrient 

cycling, and energy flow; provide habitat for sage-grouse and other sagebrush steppe obligates; and 

provide for multiple use.
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

A

VMA A

A

2-338

UV-VI-G-1. Manage vegetation to restore the ability of the ecosystem to recover following a disturbance

and reduce fragmentation of habitat for sage-grouse and other native species. 

Objective

VMA A

UV-VI-O-1. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below: 

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 83,000 56,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 94,000 96,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 3,000 3,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 34,000 42,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 5,000 22,000

Unvegetated Areas 2,000 2,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA A

UV-VI-MA-1. Treat approximately 33% of annual communities. Annual communities would be restored to 

native shrubland in wildlife tracts, the Lower Bruneau Canyon Area of Critical Environmental Concern 

(ACEC), and the Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone. Half of the annual communities 

within the Deadman and Yahoo Special Recreation Management Areas would be treated using firetolerant native and non-native species.

UV-VI-MA-2. Restore approximately 5% of non-native perennial communities to native shrubland. 

Treatments would focus on the wildlife tracts, the Oregon NHT, and the Lower Bruneau Canyon ACEC. 

Actively maintain the remainder of the non-native perennial communities for livestock. Within the Saylor 

Creek Herd Management Area, the perennial community would be maintained for wild horses and 

livestock.

UV-VI-MA-3. Unburned non-native understory and native shrubland communities would not be a focus for 

active restoration treatments. Non-native understory and native shrubland communities would be a 

priority for post-fire treatment. 

UV-VI-MA-4. Unburned native grassland communities would not be a focus for active restoration 

treatments. Native grassland communities would be a priority for post-fire treatment. Natural succession 

of shrubs would be allowed throughout native grassland communities.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

A

VMA B

A

2-339

Objective

VMA B

UV-VI-O-2. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 39,000 10,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 212,000 73,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 19,000 76,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 211,000 106,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 125,000 341,000

Unvegetated Areas 24,000 24,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA B

UV-VI-MA-5. Treat approximately 75% of annual communities. Areas adjacent to native grassland and 

shrubland communities would be restored to native shrubland; areas adjacent to non-native perennial 

communities would be treated with non-native species.

UV-VI-MA-6. Restore approximately 20% of non-native perennial communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on areas adjacent to native communities. Introduce shrubs into approximately 30% of non-native 

perennial communities, focusing on areas adjacent to native communities. Natural succession of shrubs 

would be allowed in the remainder of the non-native perennial communities.

UV-VI-MA-7. Restore approximately 33% of non-native understory communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on areas adjacent to native communities. The remainder of the non-native understory 

communities may be treated to introduce forbs to the understory for sage-grouse and pollinators.

UV-VI-MA-8. Restore approximately 33% of non-native understory communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on areas adjacent to native communities. The remainder of the non-native understory 

communities may be treated to introduce forbs to the understory.

UV-VI-MA-9. Restore approximately 50% of native grassland communities to native shrubland. 

Treatments would focus on areas that would expand or connect native shrubland communities. Natural 

succession of shrubs would be allowed throughout native grassland communities.

UV-VI-MA-10. Native shrubland communities may be treated to introduce forbs and late-seral grasses to 

the understory. 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

A

VMA C 

A

2-340

Objective

VMA C

UV-VI-O-3. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 2,000 2,000

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 46,000 30,000

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 26,000 17,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 150,000 37,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 78,000 216,000

Unvegetated Areas 11,000 11,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

VMA C

UV-VI-MA-11. Treatment of annual communities would be limited due to the location of these areas at 

canyon bottoms and within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and Lower Salmon Falls Creek 

Wilderness Study Area (WSA). Localized treatments may be used when necessary.

UV-VI-MA-12. Restore approximately 33% of non-native perennial communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on sage-grouse habitat, big game winter range, and areas adjacent to native communities. Treat 

the remaining non-native perennial communities to introduce shrubs focusing on sage-grouse, bighorn 

sheep, and slickspot peppergrass habitat; natural succession of shrubs would also be allowed in nonnative perennial communities.

UV-VI-MA-13. Restore approximately 50% of non-native understory communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on areas adjacent to native communities. The remainder of the non-native understory 

communities may be treated to introduce forbs to the understory. 

UV-VI-MA-14. Restore approximately 75% of native grassland communities to native shrubland. 

Treatments would focus on areas that would expand or connect native shrubland communities. Natural 

succession of shrubs would be allowed throughout native grassland communities.

UV-VI-MA-15. Native shrubland communities may be treated to introduce forbs and late-seral grasses to 

the understory.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

A

VMA D 

A

2-341

Objective

VMA D

UV-VI-O-4. Manage vegetation to achieve the VSG acres (+/- 5%) described below:

Vegetation Sub-Group 

(VSG)

Current 

Number of 

Acres

Desired 

Number of 

Acres

Annual Communities 1,000 500

Non-Native Perennial 

Communities 4,000 0 

Non-Native Understory 

Communities 12,000 5,000

Native Grassland 

Communities 80,000 40,000

Native Shrubland 

Communities 97,000 149,000

Unvegetated Areas 11,000 11,000

Acres are based on 2011 vegetation data, are rounded to the nearest 1,000 

(or to the nearest 50 if under 1,000) and represent BLM-managed lands only.

Management Actions

UV-VI-MA-16. Restore approximately 50% of annual communities to native shrubland, focusing on Taylor 

Pocket and areas near China Creek.

UV-VI-MA-17. Restore approximately 75% of non-native perennial communities to native shrubland; 

treatment would focus on areas adjacent to native shrubland communities. The remaining non-native 

perennial communities would be treated to introduce shrubs; natural succession of shrubs would be 

allowed throughout non-native perennial communities.

UV-VI-MA-18. Restore approximately 67% of non-native understory communities to native shrubland, 

focusing on areas adjacent to native shrubland communities. The remainder of the non-native understory 

communities may be treated to introduce forbs to the understory.

UV-VI-MA-19. Restore approximately 50% of native grassland communities to native shrubland, focusing 

on sage-grouse habitat. Natural succession of shrubs would be allowed throughout native grassland 

communities.

UV-VI-MA-20. Native shrubland communities may be treated to introduce forbs and late-seral grasses to 

the understory.

Management Actions

All VMAs

UV-CA-MA-1. Design BLM management activities and authorized uses to consider plant reproductive 

and physiological needs with a focus on the critical growing season, as well as vegetation objectives; 

guidelines for specific uses are found in the appropriate sections.

UV-CA-MA-2. Implement drought management guidelines during periods of drought to maintain or 

achieve long-term resource productivity (Appendix F).

UV-CA-MA-3. Rest vegetation treatment areas from uses, including but not limited to livestock and wild 

horse grazing and recreational use, until treatment objectives are met and are predicted to be 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-342

•

•

•

•

sustainable. This management action would not apply to uses that do not conflict with the treatment 

objectives.

UV-VI-MA-21. The first priority for implementing vegetation treatments would be treatments identified for 

VMA D to improve sage-grouse habitat; the second priority would be treatments identified for VMA C to 

reconnect and expand habitat for sage-grouse. Opportunities for treatments outside these priority areas 

would also be considered.

UV-VI-MA-22. Focus restoration treatments identified for each VMA on habitat for sage-grouse, slickspot 

peppergrass, other special status species, mule deer, and pronghorn.

UV-VI-MA-23. The toolbox to restore or treat upland vegetation communities would include: 

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments;

Seeding and planting; 

Targeted grazing; and 

Prescribed fire. 

See the Glossary for definition of targeted grazing.

UV-VI-MA-24. Upland vegetation treatments may use native species, including cultivars of native species, 

and non-native species, consistent with management actions to achieve vegetation objectives. Native 

species would be used in vegetation treatments when practical, with special emphasis on species of 

importance to the tribes. Desirable non-native species may be used on harsh or degraded sites, when 

native seed is not available, or where they would structurally mimic the natural plant community and 

prevent soil loss and invasion by noxious weeds and invasive plants. The non-native species used would 

be those that have the highest probability of establishment on these sites. Native seed would be used 

more frequently and at larger scales as species adapted to local areas become more available.

UV-VI-MA-25. Establish up to 52 ungrazed upland reference areas in annual, non-native perennial, nonnative understory, native grassland, and native shrubland communities (Map 15). Each upland reference 

area could be up to 40 acres in size and would be paired with an adjacent grazed area in a similar 

vegetation type and condition to monitor the effects of livestock grazing on a variety of plant communities.

UV-VI-MA-26. Develop an implementation and monitoring plan for both upland and riparian reference 

areas to include methods, schedules, and reporting protocols. 

UV-VI-MA-27. Reseed areas disturbed during project construction, maintenance, or removal with a 

mixture of grasses, forbs, or shrubs appropriate to surrounding vegetation.

UV-VI-MA-28. Assess biological soil crusts and manage them to move toward site potential by modifying 

levels and timing of BLM management activities and authorized uses during periods when soil crusts are 

most vulnerable to damage.

UV-VI-MA-29. Commercial and non-commercial collection of seed and other plant material may be 

allowed by permit. Collection would not be allowed in wilderness, WSAs, and recently burned areas.

UV-VI-MA-30. Except in the wilderness, WSA, and within 300 feet of fish-bearing streams, commercial

and non-commercial harvest of dead juniper trees may be allowed by permit subject to seasonal 

restrictions for wildlife.

Additional vegetation treatments are discussed in the Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants and Wildland 

Fire Ecology and Management sections. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

2-343

•

•

•

•

•

Riparian Areas and Wetlands

Goal

RI-CA-G-1. Achieve healthy, functioning watersheds, riparian areas, wetlands, and associated aquatic 

habitats.

RI-CA-G-2. Provide habitat to support populations of well-distributed native and desired non-native plant, 

vertebrate, and invertebrate populations that contribute to the sustainability of riparian-dependent 

communities. 

RI-CA-G-3. Maintain or improve naturally functioning vegetation communities that include natural timing 

and variability of surface and groundwater in riparian areas and wetlands, and diversity and productivity of 

native and desired non-native plant communities. 

Objectives

RI-VI-O-1. Maintain 85 miles of Priority 3 streams at proper functioning condition (PFC); improve 77 miles 

of Priority 1 streams and 21 miles of Priority 2 streams to achieve PFC; and improve the remaining 42 

miles of Priority 2 streams to be moving toward PFC over the life of the plan. 

RI-VI-O-2. Manage wetlands not associated with streams (springs, seeps, playas) to achieve PFC. 

Management Actions

RI-CA-MA-1. Identify Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) around riparian areas and wetlands that 

contain or are tributaries to streams that contain special status species or their habitat to protect riparian 

vegetation, fisheries, and water quality. RCA widths would be as follows:

Category 1 – Fish-bearing streams: The RCA consists of the stream and the area on either side of 

the stream. This area extends from the edges of the active channel to the top of the inner gorge, to 

the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, or 300 feet 

slope distance (600 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), whichever is widest.

Category 2 – Permanently flowing non-fish-bearing streams: The RCA consists of the stream and the 

area on either side of the stream. This area extends from the edges of the active channel to the top of 

the inner gorge, to the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, to the outer edges of the riparian 

vegetation, or 150 feet slope distance (300 feet, including both sides of the stream channel), 

whichever is widest.

Category 3 – Ponds, lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands greater than one acre: The RCA consists of the 

body of water or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, to the extent of 

the seasonally saturated soil, or 150 feet slope distance from the edge of the maximum pool elevation 

of constructed ponds and reservoirs, or from the edge of the wetland, pond, or lake, whichever is 

widest.

Category 4 – Seasonally flowing or intermittent streams, wetlands less than one acre, landslides, and 

landslide-prone areas: This category includes features with high variability in size and site-specific 

characteristics. The RCA includes the intermittent stream channel and the area to the top of the inner 

gorge, the intermittent stream channel or wetland and the area to the outer edges of the riparian 

vegetation, the area from the edges of the stream channel, wetland, or slide/landslide-prone area, or 

50 feet slope distance, whichever is widest.

RI-CA-MA-2. Use adaptive management to reduce impacts on riparian areas and wetlands from uses and 

activities (see the Aquatic and Riparian Management Strategy [ARMS], Appendix D). 

RI-CA-MA-3. Riparian management priorities would include the following:

Priority 1 streams – Streams rated as functioning-at-risk or functioning-at-risk with a downward 

trend. The management emphasis for Priority 1 streams would be restoration. 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-344

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Priority 2 streams – Streams rated as functioning-at-risk with an upward trend or non-functioning. 

The management emphasis for Priority 2 streams would be restoration.

Priority 3 streams – Streams rated at PFC. The management emphasis for Priority 3 streams would 

be on maintaining proper function.

Specific streams are prioritized in the ARMS (Appendix D, Tables D-3 and D-5).

RI-CA-MA-4. Assess condition of wetlands associated with ponds and springs.

RI-CA-MA-5. Survey aquatic habitat (instream, riparian, and wetland) and maintain aquatic habitat 

inventories.

RI-CA-MA-6. Consider authorizing activities or facilities where long-term benefits outweigh short-term 

impacts to riparian vegetation and fish habitat.

RI-CA-MA-7. Remove nonessential human-made structures and objects that adversely impact the 

function of floodplains (e.g., unused bridge abutments, unused diversions, abandoned cars).

RI-CA-MA-8. Modify existing management activities and authorized uses in RCAs to attain PFC and 

ensure that habitat conditions of streams, riparian areas, and wetlands are moving toward achieving the 

goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

RI-CA-MA-9. Conduct new management activities within or affecting RCAs only if they are consistent with 

achieving the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. New management activities would 

avoid or reduce adverse effects on inland non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs. 

RI-CA-MA-10. Trees may be felled in RCAs when they pose a safety risk. Keep felled trees on-site when 

needed to maintain or improve riparian or instream conditions. 

RI-CA-MA-11. Cooperate with tribal, Federal, State, and local agencies and private landowners to 

develop watershed-based coordinated resource management plans or other cooperative agreements to 

achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands.

RI-VI-MA-1. Focus restoration on fish- bearing streams containing special status species (Appendix D). 

RI-VI-MA-2. The toolbox for restoration of stream reaches would include: 

Modification, realignment, and closure of roads and trails;

Culvert replacements;

Active herding;

Exclosure fencing;

Riparian pastures;

Closing pastures;

Modification or removal of water developments;

 Planting of riparian areas;

Reintroduction of beaver;

Erosion control measures;

Instream fish habitat improvements; and

Modification or elimination of land uses that prevent attainment of the goals and objectives for riparian 

areas and wetlands.

RI-VI-MA-3. Priorities for inventory and monitoring would be riparian areas with Special Status Species, 

fish-bearing streams, and non-fish bearing streams. 

RI-VI-MA-4. Establish up to 10 ungrazed riparian reference areas (up to 3,000 acres total; Map 15). Each 

riparian reference area would be paired with an adjacent grazed area in a similar vegetation type and 

condition to monitor the effects of livestock grazing on a variety of plant communities.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

2-345

•

•

•

2.8.2.6 Fish and Wildlife 

Fish

Native aquatic species in the planning area can be described in three broad categories:

Aquatic species Federally listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973,

Aquatic species identified on the BLM Sensitive species list for Idaho and Nevada, and

Other non-game fish present in the planning area.

Aquatic species included in the first two categories are discussed in the Special Status Species section. 

The goals, objectives, and management actions for other non-game fish (i.e. sculpin, suckers, and 

minnows) are provided below. For a majority of the streams within the planning area, the habitat needs 

for non-game fish are met through goals, objectives, and management actions for special status species 

in riparian areas, wetlands, and streams. The goals, objectives, and management actions below 

encompass the streams containing only non-game fish.

Goal

FI-VI-G-1. Manage public lands to promote diverse, structured, resilient, and connected habitats for nongame fish. 

Objectives

FI-VI-O-1. Maintain 85 miles of Priority 3 streams at proper functioning condition (PFC); improve 77 miles 

of Priority 1 streams and 21 miles of Priority 2 streams to achieve PFC; and improve the remaining 42 

miles of Priority 2 streams and 20 miles of streams with unknown PFC rating to move towards PFC over

the life of the plan.

FI-VI-O-2. Manage the 72 miles of stream containing only native non-game fish (as identified in Appendix 

D, page A-112, Management for Non-Special Status Aquatic Species) to maintain or improve habitat 

condition. 

Management Actions

FI-CA-MA-1. Maintain, improve, or restore native non-game fish habitat through actions identified for 

riparian areas, water resources, and special status species through restoration priorities in the Aquatic 

and Riparian Management Strategy (ARMS; Appendix D). Incorporate best management practices to 

maintain and improve habitat for non-game fish (Appendix B).

FI-CA-MA-2. Inventory and monitor non-game fish habitat. Use adaptive management as outlined in the 

ARMS to minimize impacts to non-game fish habitat from uses and activities (Appendix D).

FI-CA-MA-3. Activities within riparian areas and wetlands would be designed to mitigate impacts to the 

riparian and aquatic habitat(s) containing non-game fish. 

FI-CA-MA-4. To avoid adverse effects on non-game fish and instream flows, locate water drafting sites in 

upland areas (e.g., stock ponds, storage tanks, hydrants). Where these water sources are not available, 

locate water drafting sites at existing stream road crossings (e.g., bridges, culverts, fords) to divert water

in a manner that does not retard or prevent achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas 

and wetlands. 

FI-CA-MA-5. Design and implement watershed restoration projects in a manner that promotes the longterm ecological integrity of ecosystems, conserves the genetic integrity of non-game fish species, and 

contributes to the achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

FI-CA-MA-6. New fisheries and instream channel restoration projects would avoid or minimize adverse 

effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and Riparian Conservation Areas. 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-346

•

•

•

•

FI-CA-MA-7. Cooperate with Federal and State fish management agencies to identify and reduce 

adverse effects on non-game fish associated with habitat manipulation, fish stocking, fish harvest, and 

illegal harvest.

Wildlife

Goal

WI-VI-G-1. Manage public lands to promote diverse, structured, resilient, and connected habitats for 

wildlife.

Objective

WI-VI-O-1. Maintain or improve wildlife habitat by managing uses and activities and actively restoring 

annual, non-native perennial, and native communities.

Management Actions

WI-CA-MA-1. When making management decisions affecting big game, use the most current big game 

winter range map provided by Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) and the Nevada Department 

of Wildlife. Areas considered big game winter range as of 2011 are shown on Map 17. 

WI-CA-MA-2. Implement habitat projects to maintain or improve habitat for mule deer and pronghorn 

when and where needed. 

WI-CA-MA-3. Under Executive Order 13186, promote the maintenance and improvement of migratory 

bird habitat quantity and quality through the permitting process for all land use authorizations. Avoid, 

reduce, or mitigate adverse impacts on the habitats of migratory bird species of conservation concern to 

the extent feasible, and in a manner consistent with regional or statewide bird conservation priorities.

WI-CA-MA-4. Incorporate best management practices (BMPs) for wildlife into BLM management activities 

and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B). Specific BMPs would be applied at the project level.

WI-CA-MA-5. Install and maintain BLM approved wildlife escape devices on troughs and open tanks.

WI-CA-MA-6. Modify existing and construct new fences to comply with BLM standards for wildlife 

(Karsky, 1999). Existing fences would be modified according to the following priority order: 

Key sage-grouse habitat, 

Big game winter range, 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, and

The remainder of the planning area. 

WI-CA-MA-7. Schedule construction and maintenance activities to avoid or minimize disturbance to 

priority species and their habitat during their important seasonal periods (see WI-VI-MA-1 for a list of 

priority species). 

WI-CA-MA-8. Schedule energy-related activities (e.g., exploration, development, and maintenance) to 

avoid or minimize disturbance to priority species and their habitat during important seasonal periods. 

WI-VI-MA-1. Sage-grouse, other special status species, mule deer, and pronghorn are priority species for 

habitat management.

Special status species management is discussed in the Special Status Species section.

WI-VI-MA-2. Focus vegetation treatments for mule deer and pronghorn in winter range and migration 

corridors in areas shown on Map 17. Plant desirable browse species on big game winter range where 

browse has been reduced.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

2-347

WI-VI-MA-3. Reconfigure wildlife tracts to reduce conflicts with uses, to improve management efficiency, 

and to increase total acres from 13,000 to 14,000 (Map 19).

WI-VI-MA-4. Upland game species (pheasant, gray partridge, chukar, mourning dove, California quail and 

cottontail rabbit) would be the primary focus for habitat management on the wildlife tracts. All new 

authorizations and renewals would have to be consistent with improving habitat or reducing conflicts on 

wildlife tracts.

WI-VI-MA-5. Prepare a new Wildlife Tract management plan with IDFG which includes habitat 

improvement projects for specific tracts and prioritizes tracts for treatment(s). Examples of projects may

include habitat restoration, fencing to reduce conflicts with adjacent land uses, guzzlers or ponds, signs, 

fence walkthroughs, etc. 

WI-VI-MA-6. Establish desirable perennial grasses, forbs, and shrubs to improve habitat for upland game 

on wildlife tracts. Desirable shrubs may include primarily native species conducive to the site. Grasses 

and forbs may include native or non-native species to meet habitat management objectives (e.g. nesting 

cover and winter cover). 

WI-VI-MA-7. Wildlife tracts would be a high priority for treatment to reduce or eliminate noxious weeds 

and invasive plants. 

WI-VI-MA-8. Improve habitat for mule deer, pronghorn, and sage-grouse by increasing desirable 

perennial forbs appropriate to site potential where, based on monitoring, desirable perennial forbs have 

been found to be limited. 

WI-VI-MA-9. Minimize disturbance to raptors by restricting construction or other authorized human 

activities both spatially and seasonally. Restrictions would be required during courtship and nesting 

(February 1 through July 31) and applied as appropriate. Buffer distances from raptor nests during 

nesting would be as follows (Whittington and Allen, 2008): 

Raptor Species Spatial Buffer

Bald eagle 0.5 to 1.0 mile

Northern goshawk 0.50 mile

Ferruginous hawk 1.00 mile

Golden eagle 0.50 mile

Peregrine falcon 1.00 mile

Red-tailed hawk 0.33 mile

Prairie falcon 0.50 mile

Swainson’s hawk 0.25 mile

Burrowing owl 0.25 mile

2.8.2.7 Special Status Species

Goal

SS-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to contribute to the conservation and recovery of sage-grouse and 

other special status species. 

Objective

SS-VI-O-1. Maintain or improve the quality and quantity of habitat for sage-grouse and other special 

status species by managing public land activities to sustain or benefit those species. 

Management Actions

SS-C-MA-1. Follow conservation measures in relevant biological opinions and letters of concurrence, as 

appropriate. Conservation measures in place as of 2012 can be found in Appendix E; conservation 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-348

•

•

•

measures can be updated, revised, or replaced through future consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife 

Service (FWS).

SS-CA-MA-1. Special status species management would apply to Endangered, Threatened, Candidate, 

and Proposed species (Type 1 BLM Sensitive); other BLM Sensitive species (Types 2 through 4); and 

proposed or designated critical habitat; this includes plants, fish and other aquatic species, and wildlife. 

SS-CA-MA-2. Special status species management would not apply to species that are removed from the 

BLM Sensitive species list. Those species would be managed according to applicable delisting 

requirements, conservation strategies, BLM guidance, and Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) 

or Nevada Department of Wildlife management guidance.

SS-CA-MA-3. Management of one special status species would take into account the needs of other 

special status species.

SS-CA-MA-4. Follow applicable conservation plans, strategies, and agreements for special status 

species (Appendix E).

SS-CA-MA-5. Monitor special status species and their habitats, and maintain data on their populations, 

distribution, and habitats. Use adaptive management or mitigation to reduce impacts on special status 

species and their habitats from uses and activities.

SS-CA-MA-6. Work cooperatively with tribes, Federal and State agencies, private landowners, and 

companies to identify and mitigate threats to special status species and habitat on BLM-managed lands. 

SS-VI-MA-1. Where alternative management strategies would result in the same relative effect to a 

species, implement those strategies most beneficial to other resources.

SS-VI-MA-2. Support projects to identify and monitor pollinators of special status plants.

SS-VI-MA-3. Evaluate special status plant habitat, and where suitable habitat exists, consider 

reintroducing special status plant species.

SS-VI-MA-4. In cooperation with FWS, IDFG, NDOW, and other interested and affected parties, conduct 

habitat suitability evaluations for potential reintroductions of special status wildlife, fish, and aquatic 

invertebrates.

Management Related to Resource Uses

SS-CA-MA-7. Leasable and salable mineral development activities should avoid special status species 

habitat if the activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. 

Permits would include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

SS-CA-MA-8. Promote conservation and recovery of special status species through land actions such as:

Conservation easements that protect or conserve special status species habitat,

Land acquisitions or exchanges that improve management of special status species, and

Acquisition of lands with a high value for special status species.

SS-CA-MA-9. New communication sites would avoid special status species habitat if the project would 

have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be reduced. 

SS-CA-MA-10. Right-of-way construction and maintenance activities should avoid disturbing special 

status species during important seasonal periods, unless the disturbance can be mitigated. 

SS-VI-MA-5. Construct, maintain, modify, or remove range infrastructure and other facilities as necessary 

to maintain or enhance special status species and their habitat.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

2-349

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Management for Special Status Species in Upland Areas

SS-CA-MA-11. Manage native shrubland communities in a landscape context to ensure that the seasonal 

habitat needs of sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate species are met across the planning area, 

where site conditions are suitable.

SS-CA-MA-12. Mark fences that have been identified as a collision risk to improve fence visibility for 

sage-grouse, using appropriate collision diverters or other reasonable approaches. Fences posing higher 

risks to sage-grouse are generally within 1.25 miles of a lek and are:

On flat topography,

Where spans exceed 12 feet between T-posts,

Without wooden posts, or 

Where fence densities exceed 1.6 miles of fence per section (640 acres) (Stevens et al., 2011). 

SS-CA-MA-13. Maintain or improve the habitat for special status species by protecting and restoring their 

habitat, controlling noxious weeds and invasive plants, and minimizing direct habitat disturbance.

SS-CA-MA-14. When designing seed mixes for vegetation treatments and surface-disturbing projects, 

consider the needs of special status species and their habitat in the project area.

SS-CA-MA-15. Use seeding methods that minimize impacts to special status species populations.

SS-CA-MA-16. If a conflict between authorized uses and bighorn sheep is identified, schedule authorized 

uses to avoid pastures that contain bighorn sheep habitat during breeding, wintering, and lambing periods 

to minimize disturbance during these important seasonal periods.

SS-CA-MA-17. Avoid locating new transmission lines, phone lines, or communication towers/facilities in 

native shrubland and native grassland communities to minimize impacts to sage-grouse. If a transmission 

or phone line project must be located in the sage-grouse management area, the project should 

incorporate measures to reduce impacts to sage-grouse such as: 

Burying lines;

Using devices or structures to deter raptor and raven perching and nesting; 

Avoiding construction and maintenance during important seasonal periods for sage-grouse; 

 Restoring or improving sage-grouse habitat outside the project area; 

Constructing lines, towers, and related facilities in lower quality habitats; and

Clustering or co-locating facilities.

SS-VI-MA-6. Implement management actions described in the Upland Vegetation section to maintain or 

improve habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species. Upland vegetation management to 

benefit sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate special status species includes:

Restoring annual, non-native perennial, and non-native understory communities toward native;

Restoring native grassland communities to native shrublands; and

Introducing forbs and late-seral grasses to native shrubland communities.

See the Upland Vegetation section for more details.

SS-VI-MA-7. BLM management activities and authorized uses within one mile of known ferruginous hawk 

and peregrine falcon nests and 0.5 mile from prairie falcon and northern goshawk nests would be 

designed to minimize impacts to their prey base and availability of nesting material from February through 

July.

SS-VI-MA-8. New troughs, reservoirs, permanent fences, and corrals would be located at least one mile 

from bighorn sheep habitat.
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-350

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

SS-VI-MA-9. Design, construct and maintain water developments and facilities in a manner that 

minimizes potential for production of mosquitoes which may carry West Nile virus.

SS-VI-MA-10. Minimize the transmission of disease by maintaining a nine-mile separation between 

domestic sheep/goats and bighorn sheep. The separation would be accomplished by:

Not converting cattle animal unit months (AUMs) to domestic sheep or goat AUMs, 

Not allowing trailing of domestic sheep or goats within that separation distance, 

Requiring a herder to be present during trailing of domestic sheep or goats, and

Removing any domestic sheep found in bighorn sheep habitat as soon as practicable. 

Management for Special Status Species in Riparian Areas, Wetlands, and Streams

SS-CA-MA-18. Incorporate best management practices as appropriate to maintain and improve habitat 

for special status fish and aquatic invertebrates (Appendix B).

SS-CA-MA-19. Identify and eliminate, where feasible, migration barriers to special status fish species 

movement.

SS-CA-MA-20. Identify and implement specific habitat improvement projects in redband trout habitat to 

reduce habitat fragmentation and promote their long-term recovery. Projects may include, but not be 

limited to:

Replacing culverts,

Working with private landowners so diversions are not a barrier,

Screening diversions, and

Planting riparian vegetation.

SS-CA-MA-21. Implement specific habitat improvement projects for Jarbidge River bull trout (bull trout) as 

identified in the Recovery Plan for the Jarbidge River Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout.

Additional management direction for BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses in 

special status species habitat can be found in the Resource Uses sections.

2.8.2.8 Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants 

Goal

NW-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to prevent, eliminate, or control noxious weeds and invasive plants.

Objectives

Noxious Weeds

NW-VI-O-1. Manage uses and treat noxious weeds such that there is no net increase in the number of 

acres containing noxious weeds; reduce the number of noxious weed species present.

Invasive Plants

NW-VI-O-2. Reduce cover of invasive plants in native, non-native perennial, and non-native understory 

communities to less than 5%.

Management Actions

NW-CA-MA-1. Apply herbicides consistent with BLM policy.

NW-CA-MA-2. Inventory noxious weeds and invasive plants.

NW-CA-MA-3. Consult with the tribes on herbicide use to consider timing of projects and impacts to 

plants of importance to the tribes.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

2-351

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

NW-CA-MA-4. Formulate methods of control in or near special status species habitat on a site-specific

and species-specific basis to minimize impacts to special status species. 

NW-CA-MA-5. Incorporate best management practices for noxious weeds and invasive plants into BLM 

management activities and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B).

NW-CA-MA-6. Include site-specific stipulations in land use authorizations, permits, and leases to limit 

introduction and spread of noxious weeds.

NW-CA-MA-7. Collaborate with Federal agencies, State and County governments, non-governmental 

organizations, and individuals to establish a Jarbidge Cooperative Weed Management Area or other 

cooperative agreements for noxious weed and invasive plants management. 

NW-CA-MA-8. Use of certified weed-free forage, seed, straw, and mulch (as defined in the Idaho Noxious 

Weed Free Forage and Straw Certification Rules [IAC 02.06.31]) would be required for all BLM 

management activities and authorized and allowed uses.

NW-VI-MA-1. Treat areas containing noxious weeds and invasive plants. Priority areas would include (not 

in priority order): 

Special designations,

Motorized and recreational access points,

Riparian areas,

Special status species habitat,

Roadsides and recreation areas, and

Native plant communities.

NW-VI-MA-2. Focus control efforts on species with new or small infestations and species that have higher 

potential for resource impacts. Eradicate noxious weeds and invasive plants where practical. Focus 

treatments for large infestations on reducing the size of the infestation.

NW-VI-MA-3. The toolbox for treating noxious weeds and invasive plants would include:

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; 

Targeted grazing; and

Prescribed fire. 

NW-VI-MA-4. Develop and implement activities to prevent the introduction and spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants on public lands. The toolbox for preventing introduction and spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants could include:

Public outreach (e.g., kiosks, media, mailings, publications, social media, brochures); 

Wash stations; and

Modifying uses to minimize new introductions and spread.

2.8.2.9 Wildland Fire Ecology and Management 

Wildland Fire Management

Goal

WFM-CA-G-1. Fire management strategies would result in firefighter and public safety and protection of 

property and natural and cultural resources, while considering suppression and rehabilitation costs.
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-352

•

•

•

•

•

•

Objective

WFM-VI-O-1. Strive to reduce average wildland fire size, number of human-caused fire starts, and 

number of acres burned within and outside the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) throughout the planning 

area.

Allocations

WFM-CA-A-1. The planning area would not be available for Wildland Fire Use (1,371,000 acres).

WFM-VI-A-1. Critical suppression areas within the planning area would be (597,000 acres): 

WUI, 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs), 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, 

 Occupied habitat and designated critical habitat for slickspot peppergrass, 

 Designated critical habitat for bull trout, and

 Key sage-grouse habitat.

The types of critical suppression areas would remain the same throughout the life of the plan; however, 

acres and specific locations for the WUI, slickspot peppergrass habitat, and key sage-grouse habitat can 

be updated to reflect changing conditions. See Map 36 for the locations of these areas.

WFM-VI-A-2. The remainder of the planning area would be a conditional suppression area (774,000 

acres). 

Management Actions

WFM-C-MA-1. Fire management within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness is addressed in the 

Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan.

WFM-CA-MA-1. All wildland fires in critical or conditional suppression areas would receive an Appropriate 

Management Response (AMR). AMR includes any action taken to meet resource objectives identified in 

RMPs and Fire Management Plans (FMPs). AMR ranges across a spectrum of tactical operations (from 

monitoring to aggressive/intensive suppression actions). 

WFM-CA-MA-2. Critical suppression areas represent highest suppression priority. The AMR in critical 

suppression areas assumes suppression actions would be taken to reduce fire size and acres burned 

unless safety warrants alternative strategies. Wildland fire is generally not desired in these areas, with the 

exception of prescribed fire to be used for site preparation as described in the RMP. 

WFM-CA-MA-3. Conditional suppression areas represent areas of lower suppression priority where 

suppression efforts would be adjusted based on resource values and fire’s desired role in the ecosystem. 

The AMR in conditional suppression areas assumes suppression actions would be taken commensurate 

with the values at risk and considering suppression costs. Wildland fire management strategies may be 

changed if fire danger is high or there would likely be undesired fire effects. Conditional suppression 

areas also represent areas where cost of suppression may exceed the value of resources to be protected 

as identified in the RMP.

WFM-CA-MA-4. Areas for Wildland Fire for Resource Benefit would be determined by the BLM after the 

wildland fire has been contained or controlled. Areas where vegetation treatments were planned and 

analyzed in the NEPA process or those ecosystems found to “need more disturbance” through the Fire 

Regime Condition Class process would be candidates for “benefit” fires. Post-fire site visits would be 

required to determine if fire effects actually resulted in conditions that moved the area toward resource 

objectives. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

2-353

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

WFM-CA-MA-5. Revise the FMP as required to incorporate updated fire, vegetation, resource value, 

WUI, and fuels data. The FMP would be used to refine suppression, fuels treatment, community 

assistance, and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation priorities. 

WFM-CA-MA-6. In addition to safety and resource concerns, consider fire suppression and rehabilitation 

costs when evaluating fire suppression techniques.

WFM-CA-MA-7. Work collaboratively with the military to reduce the risk of wildland fire, improve 

suppression logistics on military lands adjacent to public lands, and protect public lands from wildland 

fires originating on military lands. 

WFM-CA-MA-8. Incorporate best management practices for wildland and prescribed fire into BLM 

management activities and authorized uses as appropriate (Appendix B).

WFM-CA-MA-9. Foster the public's understanding of the role of fire in the ecosystem, hazards associated 

with living in the WUI, and wildland fire prevention and suppression activities through methods such as: 

 Using mass media, 

 Providing outreach to local groups, 

 Developing interpretive signs and kiosks, and 

 Participating in the County Wildfire Protection Plan process.

WFM-CA-MA-10. Fire suppression strategies, practices, and actions in Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs) should be designed to minimize disturbance to riparian vegetation. 

WFM-CA-MA-11. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used within RCAs unless safety to 

human life or property is an issue. 

WFM-CA-MA-12. Incident bases, camps, helibases, staging areas, helispots, and other centers for 

incident activities would be located outside of RCAs. If the only suitable location for these activities is 

within the RCA, an exemption may be granted by the BLM authorized officer. 

WFM-CA-MA-13. Avoid delivery of chemical retardant, foam, or additives into surface waters. An 

exception is warranted where overriding immediate safety imperatives exist or when the BLM determines 

a fire would cause more long-term damage to fish habitats than chemical delivery to surface waters.

WFM-VI-MA-1. When multiple wildland fire ignitions occur in critical suppression areas, the suppression 

priority order would be (from most important to least important): 

Vegetation Management Area (VMA) C,

VMA B,

VMA D, and

VMA A.

These priorities would also be used for general fire suppression management planning.

WFM-VI-MA-2. Within the perimeter of a contained fire, protect unburned islands of native grassland and 

native shrubland communities. Unburned islands of annual and non-native perennial communities within 

the perimeter of a contained fire may be allowed to burn.

WFM-VI-MA-3. Use minimum impact suppression tactics in:

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, 

Lower Salmon Creek Falls Wilderness Study Area, 

Oregon National Historic Trail, 

ACECs, 

Designated critical habitat for bull trout, 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-354

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

 Occupied habitat and designated critical habitat for slickspot peppergrass, and

Other areas where appropriate to mitigate potential impacts of fire suppression.

WFM-VI-MA-4. Improve water availability for fire suppression throughout the planning area, in 

accordance with Idaho and Nevada State Law regarding the appropriation and use of water.

WFM-VI-MA-5. Design water developments for fire suppression to mitigate impacts to water resources. 

Water developments may include:

Pipelines,

Water storage tanks,

Draft sites,

Hydrants off pipelines. 

Water storage may also be increased by enlarging and filling existing stock and storage ponds.

WFM-VI-MA-6. Implement measures to reduce response time for fire suppression activities including:

Building new guard stations,

Building new or improving existing airstrips,

Building helipads,

Improving roads,

Building new roads, 

Improving stream crossings, and

Developing better signage. 

WFM-VI-MA-7. Transportation and travel restrictions may be imposed to reduce risk of wildland fire 

during times of fire restrictions. Restrictions may include closing primitive roads, trails, and areas open to 

cross-country motorized vehicle use. Travel related to administrative uses and emergency services may 

continue during fire restrictions.

WFM-VI-MA-8. Authorized uses may be limited or prohibited to reduce risk of wildland fire.

WFM-VI-MA-9. Dozer blading should be avoided within 300 feet of playas to protect associated cultural 

resources. Dozer blading should avoid running parallel to canyons within 300 feet of canyon rims. 

Fuels and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation (ES&BAR)

Goals

FE-CA-G-1. Reduce fire hazard within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). 

FE-VI-G-1. Manage vegetation communities outside the WUI to maintain or restore their fire regimes and

mosaic of successional classes to within their historic range. 

Objectives

Fuels

FE-CA-O-1. Manage plant communities within the WUI to reduce relative risk rating. 

FE-VI-O-1. Manage native plant communities outside the WUI to move toward Fire Regime Condition 

Class (FRCC) 1. Manage non-native plant communities to reduce wildland fire size and intensity.

FE-VI-O-2. Implement fuels treatments to protect critical suppression areas; limit the spread, size, and 

intensity of wildland fire; and maintain or improve vegetation. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

2-355

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

ES&BAR

FE-VI-O-3. Rehabilitate and stabilize areas to help stabilize soils, promote natural recovery, and establish 

pre-fire or historic vegetation communities.

Management Actions

Fuels

FE-CA-MA-1. Update the FRCC analysis for the planning area when 20% of the planning area has been 

disturbed by wildland fires or treated by fuels projects since the previous FRCC analysis was completed.

FE-CA-MA-2. Progress towards FRCC objectives would be achieved through actions and guidelines 

specified in the Upland Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants, 

and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

FE-CA-MA-3. Coordinate fuels treatments with adjacent landowners and agencies through County 

Wildfire Protection Plans or other methods.

FE-CA-MA-4. Rest fuels treatment areas from uses until treatment objectives are met and are predicted 

to be sustainable or if the treatment is determined by the BLM to be unsuccessful. This would not apply to 

uses that do not conflict with the treatment objectives.

FE-CA-MA-5. Fuels treatments in Riparian Conservation Areas would be designed to maintain or improve 

riparian vegetation. 

FE-VI-MA-1. Implement fuels treatments to reduce fuel loads with consideration for other resource 

objectives.

FE-VI-MA-2. Fuels treatments in the WUI may include fuels reduction treatments and fuel breaks. Fuels 

treatments in the WUI would focus on areas with high, high/moderate, and moderate relative risk ratings 

in the northern portion of the planning area and near Roseworth and Three Creek.

FE-VI-MA-3. Fuels treatments outside the WUI and within the sage-grouse management area would 

include:

Restoration,

Fuel breaks, 

Landscape-scale fuels reduction, and 

Noxious weed and invasive plant treatments.

FE-VI-MA-4. The toolbox of fuels treatment methods would include:

Chemical, mechanical, and biological treatments; 

Seeding and planting; 

Targeted grazing; and

Prescribed fire. 

FE-VI-MA-5. Fuels treatments would use native and non-native species.

FE-VI-MA-6. Upland vegetation management related to fuels treatments includes:

Converting annual communities to native or non-native perennial, 

Restoring non-native perennial and non-native understory communities toward native,

Restoring native grassland communities to native shrublands, and 

Introducing forbs and late-seral grasses to native shrubland communities. 

See the Upland Vegetation section for more details.
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-356

•

•

•

•

•

FE-VI-MA-7. Fuel breaks would focus on strategic locations to disrupt the continuity of fuels and to 

protect structures and important resources such as habitat for sage-grouse and slickspot peppergrass. 

Construct fuel breaks consistent with objectives in the Upland Vegetation section.

FE-VI-MA-8. Noxious weed and invasive plants management related to fuels treatments includes 

measures for treating and preventing noxious weeds and invasive plants; see the Noxious Weeds and 

Invasive Plants section for more details.

ES&BAR

FE-CA-MA-6. Use the full range of treatment options available to meet ES&BAR objectives, including:

Mechanical treatments,

Drill or broadcast seeding treatments,

Chemical treatments,

Seedling transplants, and

Erosion control structures.

FE-CA-MA-7. Implement the Programmatic ES&BAR Plan and update as needed. Individual ES&BAR 

plans would be completed through the interdisciplinary process to reduce impacts of wildland fire and 

suppression and to achieve resource objectives.

FE-CA-MA-8. Use seed mixes that would help stabilize soils and achieve objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Fish and Wildlife, and Special Status Species sections.

FE-CA-MA-9. Use seed drilling equipment, tools, or techniques that minimize soil disturbance and place 

seed at the correct depth.

FE-CA-MA-10. Rest burned areas from uses, including livestock and wild horse grazing and recreational 

use, until ES&BAR objectives are met and are predicted to be sustainable or if the treatment is 

determined by the BLM to be unsuccessful. This would not apply to uses that do not conflict with the 

treatment objectives.

FE-CA-MA-11. Consider emergency closures to motorized vehicle use when necessary for ES&BAR 

efforts.

FE-VI-MA-9. Consider using temporary fences to protect burned plant communities. When planning 

temporary fences, consider resource concerns, the size of the pasture, the amount burned, the amount of 

pasture unaffected by rehabilitation, location of water, grazing management efficiency, and expense.

FE-VI-MA-10. Temporary fences may become permanent if they enhance the management of the burned 

area; these would be considered on a case-by-case basis through site-specific analysis. 

2.8.2.10 Wild Horses 

Goal

WH-VI-G-1. The Saylor Creek Wild Horse Herd Management Area (HMA) would be managed for a 

thriving natural ecological balance.

Objective

WH-VI-O-1. Manage a non-reproducing herd with an appropriate management level (AML) range of 50 to 

200 wild horses in the Saylor Creek Wild Horse HMA.

Allocations

WH-VI-A-1. Manage the Saylor Creek Wild Horse Herd Area as a HMA (95,000 acres).
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

2-357

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

WH-VI-A-2. Manage the Saylor Creek HMA for a non-reproducing population of wild horses. The 

estimated herd size for a population of wild horses would be approximately 50 to 200 head. 

WH-VI-A-3. Allocate forage sufficient to maintain the wild horse population within the HMA (2,400 animal 

unit months). 

Management Actions

WH-VI-MA-1. Develop a Herd Management Area Plan, including guidelines and criteria for adjusting herd 

size and management tools to control population size within the AML and to extend (reduce) gather 

frequency.

WH-VI-MA-2. The HMA would remain open to livestock grazing, although grazing levels on an allotmentspecific basis would be adjusted to maintain sustainable forage for the wild horse herd. 

WH-VI-MA-3. Redesign pasture configurations and fences within the HMA to facilitate wild horse social 

interactions and free-roaming characteristics if the Herd Management Area Plan and other site specific 

NEPA demonstrates that adjustments are necessary.. 

WH-VI-MA-4. Increase the reliability of artificial water sources for wild horses within the HMA.

WH-VI-MA-5. If a conflict between motorized travel and wild horses is identified, seasonal restrictions 

may be placed on motorized travel within the HMA during foaling (from March through July).

WH-VI-MA-6. Seasonal restrictions may be placed on authorized uses within the HMA to avoid disturbing 

wild horses during foaling (March through July). 

WH-VI-MA-7. Commercial Special Recreation Permits that are not compatible with management of the 

HMA would not be allowed.

WH-VI-MA-8. The toolbox for managing a non-reproducing, free-roaming herd in the Saylor Creek HMA 

would include, but not be limited to: 

Gathering all wild horses in the HMA and returning only those horses that meet the population 

criteria,

Placing in the HMA excess wild horses removed from other HMAs within Idaho that meet the 

population criteria until the high end of AML is reached,

Placing wild horses gathered from other states that meet the population criteria in the HMA if wild 

horses from other Idaho HMAs do not place enough horses on the HMA to reach the midpoint of AML 

after ten years, and

Placing additional wild horses that meet the population criteria in the HMA up to the high end of AML 

as the HMA population decreases due to death of horses from natural causes.

WH-VI-MA-9. The population criteria for managing a non-reproducing, free-roaming herd in the Saylor 

Creek HMA would include, but not be limited to: 

Treating all wild horses surgically or chemically to eliminate reproduction capability,

Placing wild horses at least five years of age and older in the HMA to allow for the adoption of 

younger wild horses, and

Freeze marking all wild horses on the neck and/or hip to identify each wild horse within the HMA.

WH-VI-MA-10. No gathers would be conducted in the Saylor Creek HMA after the initial gather, except 

under the following circumstances: 

Emergency situations (i.e. wildland fires) and

Removal of untreated horses unlawfully released in the HMA.
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-358

•

•

•

•

•

•

Wild horses would be returned to the HMA once rehabilitation objectives or other criteria outlined in the 

Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation Plan were met.

2.8.2.11 Paleontological Resources 

Goal

PR-CA-G-1. Identify, manage, and protect paleontological resources for scientific research, educational 

purposes, and public use.

Objective

PR-CA-O-1. Identify, manage, and protect important paleontological sites.

Management Actions

PR-CA-MA-1. Implement measures to protect paleontological resources. Measures may include:

Avoidance,

Fencing, 

Stabilization, 

Data recovery through collection or excavation,

Interpretation, or

Administrative closure.

PR-CA-MA-2. Identify areas at risk of damage from illegal activities and implement management to 

discourage those activities.

PR-CA-MA-3. Minimize or prevent human-caused damage to paleontological resources through 

educational and interpretive outreach programs.

PR-CA-MA-4. Analyze effects of surface-disturbing activities on fossil-bearing geologic units (Potential 

Fossil Yield Classification Class 5) and mitigate potential impacts to paleontological resources. 

PR-CA-MA-5. The collection of paleontological resources would be managed in accordance with the 

Paleontological Resources Preservation Act and 43 CFR 8365. In general, reasonable amounts of 

common invertebrate and plant fossils may be collected for non-commercial personal use without a 

permit. The collection of vertebrate fossils and rare or unusual invertebrate and plant fossils requires a 

permit under the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act. 

PR-VI-MA-1. Issue permits for paleontological research to qualified paleontologists.

2.8.2.12 Cultural Resources 

Goals

Management

CR-CA-G-1. Identify, preserve, and protect important cultural resources and ensure they are available for 

appropriate uses by present and future generations.

Protection

CR-CA-G-2. Seek to reduce imminent threats and resolve potential conflicts from natural or humancaused deterioration or potential conflict with other resource uses by ensuring all authorizations for land 

use and resource use complies with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), as amended,

Section 106. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

2-359

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Objectives

Management 

CR-CA-O-1. Manage and protect cultural resources according to their potential traditional, scientific, 

conservation, public, or experimental value. 

Protection

CR-CA-O-2. Strive to limit the adverse effects of BLM decisions on important cultural resources.

Allocations

CR-CA-A-1. Cultural resources would be allocated as described in Appendix G. 

CR-CA-A-2. The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors include 0.25 mile on either side of 

the trail segments or the visual horizon of those segments, whichever is narrower.

Management Actions

Management

CR-CA-MA-1. Maintain on-going cultural resource inventory information in geographic information system

format in accordance with confidentiality mandates.

CR-CA-MA-2. Identify priority geographic areas for future inventory based on the probability of 

unrecorded cultural resources, and conduct inventories independent of specific land use actions.

CR-CA-MA-3. Implement measures to minimize or prevent damage to cultural resources due to BLM 

management activities, authorized and allowed uses, and human-caused damage such as vandalism, 

unauthorized surface collection of artifacts, and unintentional disturbances. Measures may include:

Avoidance,

Fencing,

Stabilization,

Data recovery through collection or excavation,

Interpretation, 

Administrative closure, or

Proactive law enforcement patrols.

CR-CA-MA-4. Develop cultural resource project plans as needed to address preservation actions for 

cultural resource complexes or individual sites identified as high risk for adverse impacts.

CR-CA-MA-5. Avoid placement of salting, supplemental feeding, watering, and holding facilities for 

livestock that adversely affect the Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors. 

CR-CA-MA-6. Developments such as roads, trails, pipelines, fences, and powerlines may be allowed, 

after consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), to cross segments of the Kelton 

and Toana Freight Roads in areas where previous disturbance has occurred. On occasions where 

adverse impacts are unavoidable, the BLM would require mitigation commensurate with the impacts as a 

condition of authorization.

CR-CA-MA-7. Surface-disturbing equipment, such as bulldozers and road graders, cannot be used on 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligible or contributing segments of the Kelton or Toana 

Freight Roads or within their protective corridors without prior management approval, unless to protect life 

or property.

Protection

CR-CA-MA-8. Authorizations for land and resource use would not be approved until compliance with 

Section 106 of the NHPA has been completed and documented, including, where applicable, consultation 

with the SHPO and Federally recognized Indian tribes.
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resources

2-360

CR-CA-MA-9. Nominate eligible sites for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) on a case-bycase basis.

CR-CA-MA-10. Manage sites that are eligible for the NRHP for their local, regional, or national 

significance. If natural or human-caused deterioration cannot be prevented, BLM would consult with the 

tribes and SHPO, as appropriate, to mitigate the adverse effects.

CR-CA-MA-11. Consider all prudent and feasible alternatives to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on 

cultural resources and their uses when resolving site-specific conflicts between cultural resource use 

allocations and competing land use allocations. 

CR-CA-MA-12. The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors are closed to new salable 

mineral development. Existing salable mineral developments could be renewed but the footprint could not 

be expanded.

CR-VI-MA-1. Allow research, including archaeological, historic, and ethnographic, to better define the 

extent, nature, and value of cultural resources in the planning area. Develop cooperative agreements and

partnerships with tribes, historical societies, and colleges to encourage research and assist with 

monitoring.

CR-VI-MA-2. Lands containing important cultural resources, as determined by the BLM through 

consultation with tribes and/or SHPO, would generally be retained in Federal ownership. Under limited 

circumstances, after appropriate consultation and mitigation, lands containing important cultural 

resources may be exchanged for lands containing resources of greater or equal value.

CR-VI-MA-3. Avoid or minimize new ground disturbance within 300 feet of playas and undeveloped 

springs to protect associated cultural resources. When springs are developed, follow management action 

LG-VI-MA-12. 

2.8.2.13 Visual Resources 

Visual Resource Management (VRM) classes identify the degree of acceptable visual change within a 

characteristic landscape. A classification is assigned to public lands based on the guidelines established 

for scenic quality, visual sensitivity, and visibility.

Class I - Provides primarily for natural ecological changes only. It is applied to wilderness areas, some 

natural areas, and similar situations where management activities are to be restricted.

Class II - Changes in the basic elements caused by a management activity may be evident in the 

characteristic landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate to the visual strength of the existing 

character. 

Class III - Contrasts to the basic elements caused by management activity may be evident and begin to 

attract attention in the landscape, but the changes should remain subordinate in the existing landscape.

Class IV - Contrasts may attract attention and be a dominant feature in the landscape in terms of scale, 

but the change should repeat the basic element of the characteristic landscape.

Class V - Applies to areas where the characteristic landscape has been so disturbed that rehabilitation is 

needed. Generally considered an interim short-term classification until rehabilitation or enhancement is 

completed.

Goal and Objective

VR-CA-G-1. Maintain visual resource characteristics and values of public lands according to VRM

classes.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resources

2-361

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Allocations

VR-VI-A-1. Areas to be managed as VRM Class I (86,000 acres) include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area (WSA); 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors with scenic outstandingly 

remarkable values (i.e., lower Salmon Falls Creek, Cougar Point Creek, Bruneau River, and Jarbidge 

River); and

Upper Bruneau Canyon and Salmon Falls Creek Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs). 

VR-VI-A-2. Areas to be managed as VRM Class II (79,000 acres) include: 

The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) visual corridor (two miles on either side of the trail with the 

trail as the key observation point for visual contrast analyses related to new developments) excluding 

the areas in the Deadman and Yahoo Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) open to 

cross-country motorized vehicle use,

Sand Point ACEC, 

Browns Bench,

Wilkins Island, 

The Jarbidge River corridor between Murphy Hot Springs and the Jarbidge Forks, and

Areas near Buck Creek.

VR-VI-A-3. Areas to be managed as VRM Class III (248,000 acres) include: 

The Snake River corridor (from the planning area boundary to 0.25 mile above the breaks); 

Areas in the Deadman and Yahoo SRMAs open to cross-country motorized vehicle use that are in the 

Oregon NHT visual corridor; 

Overhead right-of-way corridors through areas otherwise managed as VRM Class I or II, excluding 

Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA; 

Portions of the Jarbidge Foothills and Diamond A Desert not otherwise managed as VRM Class I or 

II; 

Lower Bruneau Canyon ACEC; and

The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors. 

VR-VI-A-4. The remainder of the planning area would be managed as VRM Class IV (958,000 acres).

See Map 48 for locations of areas allocated to VRM Class I, II, III, and IV.

Management Action

VR-CA-MA-1. BLM management activities and authorized uses would be compatible with VRM class 

objectives as follows:

VRM Class I areas are managed to preserve the existing character of the landscape. The level of 

change to the landscape should be very low and must not attract attention.

VRM Class II areas are managed to retain the existing character of the landscape. The level of 

change to the landscape should be low and repeat the basic elements of form, line, color, and texture 

found in the natural features of the landscape.

VRM Class III areas are managed to partially retain the existing character of the landscape. The level 

of change to the landscape can be moderate and should repeat the basic elements found in the 

natural landscape. Management activities may attract attention, but should not dominate the view of 

the casual observer.

VRM Class IV areas are managed to provide for activities that require major modification of the 

landscape. The level of change to the landscape can be high, and management activities may 

dominate the view and be the major focus of attention. Impacts can still be minimized through location 

and design by repeating the basic elements found in the natural landscape.
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-362

•

•

•

•

•

2.8.2.14 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 

Goal and Objective

WC-VI-G-1. Lands with Wilderness Characteristics would not be managed to maintain wilderness 

characteristics. Lands with Wilderness Characteristics would be managed for multiple use consistent with 

resource objectives and designations.

Management Action

No management action stated.

2.8.3 Resource Uses

2.8.3.1 Livestock Grazing

Goals

LG-CA-G-1. Manage livestock grazing to ensure achievement of or movement towards meeting Idaho 

Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management.

LG-VI-G-1. Allocate a stable level of available forage for livestock grazing through proper grazing and 

adaptive management to support maintenance and restoration of resilient ecosystem structure and 

function. 

Objectives

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-CA-O-1. Manage livestock grazing in annual communities to achieve objectives in the Upland 

Vegetation and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management sections.

LG-VI-O-1. In native plant communities including the Sandberg/non-native areas, manage livestock 

grazing to help maintain and improve native plant species diversity and abundance, focusing on plant 

reproductive and physiological needs.

LG-VI-O-2. In non-native perennial communities, manage livestock grazing to achieve restoration 

objectives outlined in the Upland Vegetation section.

Range Infrastructure

LG-VI-O-3. Manage (e.g., maintain, improve, build, realign, remove) range infrastructure at levels 

appropriate to the amount of livestock use to provide for efficient management of livestock grazing 

allotments and support fire suppression and resource objectives.

Allocations

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-VI-A-1. The majority of the planning area would be available for livestock grazing (1,406,000 acres). 

The following areas would not be available for livestock grazing (57,000 acres): 

Canyons associated with the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers and Salmon Falls Creek (below the dam), 

Reference areas,

Salmon Falls Creek Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), 

Wildlife tracts, and 

Areas not contained within grazing allotments. 

See Map 59 for locations. 

LG-VI-A-2. Allocate vegetation production as follows:
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resource Uses

2-363

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

•

o

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Native perennial grass production: 

60% or greater to watershed and wildlife, 

Less than 1% to wild horses, and

Up to 40% to livestock. 

Non-native perennial grass production: 

Up to 70% to watershed and wildlife, 

Less than 1% to wild horses, and

Up to 45% to livestock. 

Annual grass production: 

Up to 60% to watershed and wildlife and

Up to 50% to livestock. 

Shrub and forb production: 

Up to 89% to watershed and wildlife and

Up to 14% to livestock. 

Allocate approximately 216,000 to 326,000 animal unit months (AUMs) for livestock at initial 

implementation and approximately 186,000 to 279,000 at full implementation. The purpose of allocating 

vegetation is to determine the total AUMs available for livestock grazing in the planning area. AUMs for

livestock grazing are an estimate based on 2006 production data collected while conducting ecological 

site inventories. At the time of permit renewal, additional production data may be considered when 

determining the appropriate allocation for a specific allotment. 

These vegetation allocations would be implemented during the permit renewal process. Allocation 

percentages are not the same as utilization. Allocation is used to identify the total number of AUMs for 

livestock, while utilization identifies the amount of vegetation used by livestock in a specific area.

Livestock use of specific vegetation types would be managed through the implementation of grazing use 

indicators developed on an allotment-specific basis.

LG-VI-A-3. The amount of forage available for livestock use would likely change as the RMP is 

implemented, although allocation percentages would remain the same. Changes to AUMs in the future 

would be determined by the BLM after monitoring and site-specific NEPA analysis.

Management Actions

Forage and Grazing Management Practices

LG-CA-MA-1. Implement adaptive management using grazing use indicators to meet resource and 

special designation area objectives. Grazing use indicators include:

 Utilization for upland vegetation and riparian areas, 

 Bank and soil surface alteration, and

 Other indicators identified on an allotment-specific basis depending on the resources present.

LG-CA-MA-2. The grazing permit renewal process, following the approval of the RMP, would be in

conformance with BLM policy and guidance current at the time of renewal. 

LG-CA-MA-3. The toolbox for managing livestock grazing would include, but not be limited to: 

Rest rotation, 

Deferred rotation, 

Seasons of use, 

Stocking rates, 

Class and kind of livestock, 

Herding, 

Frequency of grazing, 

Closure for resource protection,

Location and types of range infrastructure, and 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-364

•

•

•

•

•

•

Location and types of supplements.

Specific tools to be used would be identified on an allotment-specific basis through the permit renewal 

process, depending on the resources present.

LG-CA-MA-4. Seasons of use and changes in class and kind of livestock would be consistent with 

resource objectives and analyzed in site-specific NEPA analysis.

LG-CA-MA-5. Identify and implement measures to prevent livestock from entering areas closed to 

grazing, such as: 

 Fencing, 

Using natural barriers, 

Active herding, 

Water placement, and 

Salt/supplement placement.

LG-CA-MA-6. Implement drought management guidelines during periods of drought to maintain or 

achieve long-term resource productivity (Appendix F).

LG-CA-MA-7. Allow spring and early summer livestock grazing periodically in big game winter range to 

improve browse production.

LG-CA-MA-8. Manage livestock grazing to move riparian and wetland conditions toward goals and 

objectives in the Riparian Areas and Wetlands section. 

LG-CA-MA-9. Livestock trailing may be allowed consistent with other resource objectives. Trailing must 

be supervised by the permittee to ensure active movement of livestock. Terms and conditions would be 

added to permits to ensure compliance.

LG-CA-MA-10. When livestock are moved between pastures or allotments through riparian areas, stream 

crossings would be perpendicular to the riparian area where practical. 

LG-CA-MA-11. Grazing management activities (e.g., grazing, trailing, bedding, watering, salting, loading, 

other handling efforts) would be modified, discontinued, or relocated if they are not maintaining aquatic 

and riparian conditions. 

LG-CA-MA-12. In areas that are readily accessible to cattle and known or suspected special status fish 

spawning habitat, develop and implement grazing practices to avoid or restrict trampling of redds (eggs) 

and other direct and indirect effects that may result in adverse impacts to the species.

LG-VI-MA-1. Allotment and pasture boundaries may be modified to facilitate the use of permitted 

livestock grazing to achieve fuels reduction objectives. Modifications may include aggregating allotments 

into larger allotments and realigning pasture boundary fences to concentrate livestock use for fuels 

reduction.

LG-VI-MA-2. Utilization limits would be determined on an allotment specific basis to meet objectives in 

the Upland Vegetation, Riparian Areas and Wetlands, Fish and Wildlife, and Special Status Species

sections.

LG-VI-MA-3. Reserve common allotments may be established to facilitate vegetation treatment projects 

and to provide livestock grazing management flexibility. Reserve common allotments may be established 

on acquired lands; in allotments where permits are relinquished, transferred, expired, or cancelled; or by 

agreement with a permittee. However, permits would not be cancelled for the purpose of establishing a 

reserve common allotment. Reserve common allotments may be created from whole or partial allotments 

and can be permanent or temporary. Reserve common allotments would not be allowed within the 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resource Uses

2-365

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LG-VI-MA-4. Priority order for using reserve common allotments would be as follows:

Permittees and lessees whose normally permitted allotments are under an approved vegetation 

treatment project (e.g., restoration, fuels treatments); 

Permittees and lessees whose normally permitted allotments are temporarily unavailable due to 

wildland fire; and 

Permittees and lessees whose normally permitted allotments are temporarily unavailable due to 

insect outbreaks.

Permittees within the planning area would have the highest priority for using reserve common allotments; 

permittees within the Twin Falls District would have second priority.

LG-VI-MA-5. When a reserve common allotment is established, a management plan would be developed 

concurrent with the creation of the reserve common allotment to ensure maintenance of or movement 

towards meeting Idaho Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing 

Management. 

LG-VI-MA-6. Temporary Non-Renewable (TNR) permits would be considered in the Jarbidge Field Office. 

However, TNR permits would not be allowed in the following areas: 

Pastures containing areas within the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and

The riparian pasture of the Lower Saylor Creek Allotment in the Sand Point ACEC. 

LG-VI-MA-7. Criteria for issuing TNR permits in a particular pasture would include:

TNR may be allowed in years where additional forage for livestock is temporarily available, as 

determined by utilization levels; 

TNR must be consistent with the drought management guidelines; 

TNR may not be allowed within the operation of the applicant if grazing use criteria are exceeded in 

any pasture in planning area controlled by the applicant; and

TNR must be consistent with other resource objectives.

LG-VI-MA-8. Follow BLM guidelines for livestock grazing management in sage-grouse habitat. 

LG-VI-MA-9. In aspen stands, grazing would be managed to allow for natural regeneration of aspen with 

a diversity of vegetation species and age class.

Range Infrastructure

LG-C-MA-1. Management actions for range infrastructure apply to watering sites, fences, and corrals 

within wilderness, consistent with the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers 

Management Plan. 

LG-CA-MA-13. Follow BLM-approved design features and construction and maintenance practices for 

range infrastructure.

LG-CA-MA-14. Grazing facilities and infrastructure (e.g., livestock handling and management facilities, 

fences, watering facilities) would be modified, discontinued, or relocated if they are not maintaining 

aquatic and riparian conditions. 

LG-CA-MA-15. To protect associated resources, minimize disturbance at developed springs by using 

existing routes for access, redesigning the spring development, or limiting maintenance or reconstruction 

activities to areas disturbed during previous construction or to areas outside the wetland.

LG-CA-MA-16. Modify existing and construct new fences to comply with BLM standards for wildlife 

(Karsky, 1999). Existing fences would be modified according to the following priority order: 

Key sage-grouse habitat, 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-366

•

•

•

Big game winter range, 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, and

The remainder of the planning area. 

LG-CA-MA-17. If a reservoir is fenced, where practical, provide water for livestock use outside the fence.

LG-CA-MA-18. For permittee-maintained projects, the BLM authorized officer would be notified prior to 

initiating work that requires the use of heavy equipment so that appropriate measures are adopted to 

protect resources. 

LG-VI-MA-10. Consider installing or constructing new pipelines, reservoirs, or wells where they would 

help meet resource objectives. New pipelines, reservoirs, or wells would not be authorized within 

Wilderness; eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; or ACECs.

LG-VI-MA-11. New spring developments and modifications of existing spring developments must be 

consistent with resource objectives, avoid or minimize ground disturbance, protect the spring source, and 

ensure adequate water to maintain associated wetlands. 

LG-VI-MA-12. When grazing management changes (such as season of use, duration of grazing, etc. .) 

wouldn’t be sufficient to improve riparian conditions, modify or remove spring developments associated 

with wetlands rated as non-functioning, functioning-at-risk with a downward trend, or functioning-at-risk to 

improve wetland areas. Modify spring developments by protecting the spring source and ensuring 

adequate water to support spring hydrology and associated riparian vegetation.

LG-VI-MA-13. Place salting, minerals, supplements, new troughs, new reservoirs, and new holding 

facilities more than 300 feet from canyon rims and playas. Place salting, minerals, supplements, troughs, 

reservoirs, and holding facilities outside of the protective zone of the Oregon National Historic Trail and 

the Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors. Ensure salting, minerals, supplements, new 

troughs, new reservoirs, and new holding facilities in other areas are located to avoid conflicts with other 

cultural resources.

LG-VI-MA-14. Where needed to provide adequate nesting and winter cover, adjust locations of livestock 

watering facilities and salting/supplements in sagebrush steppe habitat and other intact sagebrush 

stands. 

LG-VI-MA-15. Avoid placing new water developments in sagebrush steppe habitat unless they would 

contribute to meeting resource objectives. If a new water development is necessary, it should be located 

in a previously disturbed area.

LG-VI-MA-16. New fences may be constructed to meet livestock management and resource objectives.

2.8.3.2 Recreation

Goal

REC-CA-G-1. Provide and sustain a variety of dispersed and developed recreational opportunities and 

experiences while avoiding or minimizing resource impacts.

Objectives

REC-CA-O-1. Provide basic information on recreational opportunities on public lands not designated as 

Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) or Extensive Recreation Management Areas (ERMAs). 

Provide access and minimal facilities (e.g., signs, protective fences) as needed to ensure visitor health 

and safety, reduce user conflict, and protect resources. 

REC-VI-O-1. Manage 20,000 acres as SRMAs to protect and enhance recreation settings, activities, 

experiences, and benefits. Manage 304,000 acres as ERMAs to support and sustain recreation activities 

and the associated quality and condition of the ERMA. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resource Uses

2-367

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Allocations

REC-VI-A-1. Designate the following SRMAs: 

Yahoo SRMA (3,000 acres),

Deadman SRMA (13,000 acres),

Jarbidge Forks SRMA (2,000 acres),

Balanced Rock SRMA (500 acres),

Little Pilgrim SRMA (300 acres), and

Salmon Falls Reservoir SRMA (1,000 acres).

REC-VI-A-2. Designate the following ERMAs: 

Jarbidge Foothills ERMA (133,000 acres),

Canyonlands ERMA (149,000 acres),

Rosevear ERMA (19,000 acres), and

Luds Point ERMA (3,000 acres).

REC-VI-A-3. The Salmon Falls Reservoir SRMA would consist of two Recreation Management Zones 

(RMZs): 

Antelope Bay RMZ (1,000 acres) and

Cedar Creek RMZ (100 acres). 

REC-VI-A-4. All lands not established as an SRMA or ERMA would be managed to meet basic recreation 

and visitor services needs and resource objectives. Recreation would not be emphasized; however, 

recreation activities may occur to the extent that they are consistent with other resource uses. 

See Map 66 for locations of SRMAs and ERMAs, and Map 70 for RMZs. 

Management Actions

REC-CA-MA-1. Develop implementation and monitoring plans for SRMAs to address the purpose specific 

to the SRMA.

REC-CA-MA-2. Where appropriate, implement management methods to protect riparian resources, 

special status species, and wildlife habitat while enhancing recreation opportunities. Management 

methods may include: 

 Limiting visitor numbers, 

Adopting camping and travel controls, 

 Implementing fees, and 

Imposing scheduling restrictions to minimize impacts to fish and wildlife during important seasonal 

periods.

REC-CA-MA-3. New and existing recreation-related activities and facilities within or affecting Riparian 

Conservation Areas would be designed, modified, relocated, or discontinued if they are not maintaining 

aquatic and riparian conditions. 

REC-CA-MA-4. Dispersed camping would be allowed. Dispersed camping may be closed or limited 

seasonally if resource objectives are impacted. 

REC-CA-MA-5. If campground fees are implemented, they would not apply to Federally recognized tribes 

exercising treaty rights or engaging in traditional cultural practices.

REC-CA-MA-6. Consider Special Recreation Permits (SRPs) within Areas of Environmental Concern with 

mitigation for impacts to relevant and important values. 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-368

•

•

•

•

•

•

REC-VI-MA-1. Manage the Deadman and Yahoo SRMAs to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in

off-highway vehicle activities.

REC-VI-MA-2. Manage the Jarbidge Forks SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing, 

rafting, picnicking, camping, and viewing wildlife and natural scenery.

REC-VI-MA-3. Manage the Balanced Rock SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in hiking, 

viewing wildlife and natural scenery, and non-motorized boating.

REC-VI-MA-4. Manage the Little Pilgrim SRMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing 

and bird hunting.

REC-VI-MA-5. Manage the RMZs in the Salmon Falls Reservoir SRMA (see Map 70) with the following 

management: 

Manage the Antelope Bay RMZ to provide opportunities to engage in hunting, fishing, camping, 

boating, water sports, and motorized and non-motorized trail riding on a series of designated routes.

Manage the Cedar Creek RMZ to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in fishing, camping, and 

boating.

REC-VI-MA-6. Manage the Jarbidge Foothills ERMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in 

motorized and non-motorized recreation experiences including hunting, mountain biking, hiking, 

equestrian activities, and viewing wildlife and natural scenery.

REC-VI-MA-7. Manage the Canyonlands ERMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in 

motorized and non-motorized recreation experiences including hunting, fishing, hiking, equestrian 

activities, and viewing wildlife and natural scenery.

REC-VI-MA-8. Manage the Rosevear ERMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in motorized 

trail riding opportunities on a series of designated routes.

REC-VI-MA-9. Manage the Luds Point ERMA to provide opportunities for visitors to engage in hunting, 

fishing, primitive camping, and viewing wildlife and natural scenery.

REC-VI-MA-10. Authorize SRPs for commercial use or competitive events. Encourage events that occur 

outside fire season (October through May), utilize facilities off public lands for overnight accommodation 

of guests, and focus visitation on sites and areas resilient to repeated use.

REC-VI-MA-11. Issue and manage SRPs for a wide variety of uses to enhance outdoor recreational 

opportunities, manage user-group interaction, and limit the impacts of such uses upon natural and cultural 

resources, with emphasis on realizing positive economic and community benefits through SRP 

management.

REC-VI-MA-12. Commercial SRPs that are not compatible with management of the Herd Management 

Area would not be allowed.

REC-VI-MA-13. Organized group/event permits may be required for group outdoor recreation activities or 

events which are neither commercial nor competitive at the discretion of the BLM authorized officer. The 

determination as to when a permit may be required would take into account the nature, location, size, and 

intent of the organized group and proposed event activity. Thresholds to be considered in permit 

requirements are: 

The activity is publicly advertised,

The activity poses an appreciable risk for resource damage,

The activity requires specific management or monitoring, or 

 There is a request for a specific site or campground.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resource Uses

2-369

•

•

•

•

•

A letter of agreement from the Jarbidge Field Office may be required for certain group activities that do 

not require a permit. This letter would outline stipulations for the group activity including, but not limited to, 

protection of natural resource values, cultural, and historic sites and sanitation requirements. 

2.8.3.3 Transportation and Travel 

Goal

TR-CA-G-1. Manage and provide for motorized, non-motorized, and non-mechanized access that would

balance resource protection and use.

Objective

TR-VI-O-1. Provide a transportation and travel system to facilitate habitat restoration, resource protection, 

and multiple use. 

Allocations

TR-C-A-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized and mechanized 

vehicle use (60,000 acres). The Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area would be closed to 

motorized vehicle use (2,000 acres).

TR-VI-A-1. Designated areas of the Deadman and Yahoo Special Recreation Management Areas 

(SRMAs; 4,000 acres) would be open to cross-country motorized vehicle use.

TR-VI-A-2. The Rosevear Extensive Recreation Management Area (19,000 acres) would provide a series 

of designated motorized routes that link the Deadman and Yahoo SRMAs.

TR-VI-A-3. Salmon Falls Creek Area of Critical Environmental Concern north and south of Lilly Grade 

crossing would be closed to motorized vehicle use (3,000 acres). 

TR-VI-A-4. Travel would be limited to designated routes in the remainder of the planning area (1,304,000 

acres). Specific route designations would be made in an implementation-level travel and transportation 

management planning process following the completion of the RMP. Until route designation occurs, areas 

limited to designated routes would be managed as limited to existing routes as depicted on Map 71. A 

more thorough review of the existing transportation routes would be performed as part of the travel 

management planning process, which may include additional on-the-ground data collection and 

verification.

See Map 78 for locations of transportation and travel allocations.

Management Actions

TR-CA-MA-1. Area designations apply to all off-highway vehicles, which include any motorized vehicle 

capable of, or designed for, travel on or immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain, excluding: 

Any non-amphibious registered motorboat; 

Any military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle while being used for emergency purposes;

Any vehicle whose use is expressly authorized by the BLM authorized officer or otherwise officially 

approved; 

Vehicles in official use; and

Any combat or combat support vehicle when used in times of national defense emergencies (43 CFR 

8340.0-5[a]).

Area and route designations, with the exception of designated wilderness areas, also do not apply to 

vehicles being used by members of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes or the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to 

access traditional use areas of importance to the tribes or to vehicles being used by members of the 

Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to exercise their tribally reserved treaty rights.
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-370

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

TR-CA-MA-2. Where motorized, non-motorized, mechanized, or non-mechanized use would cause or is 

causing considerable adverse effects on soil, vegetation, wildlife, wildlife habitat, cultural resources, 

historical resources, threatened or endangered species, wilderness suitability, other authorized uses, or 

other resources, the BLM authorized officer may close the affected areas to the type(s) of use causing the 

adverse effect until the adverse effects are reduced and measures implemented to prevent reoccurrence.

TR-CA-MA-3. Minimize construction and maintenance of roads within or adjacent to special status wildlife 

and fish habitat and big game winter range during important seasonal periods.

TR-CA-MA-4. Continue to recognize and update agreements and Memoranda of Understanding with 

local highway districts for road maintenance.

TR-CA-MA-5. Complete a Travel Management Plan (TMP) within five years of the signing of the Record 

of Decision. The TMP would be developed through a public process to determine the transportation and 

travel system for the planning area. The TMP would determine the routes and trails to be designated, 

modified, closed, or rehabilitated as well as the maintenance level, modes of travel, and seasonal and 

access restrictions for designated routes. During the TMP process, additional data needs and a strategy 

to collect information will be identified. Decisions made in the TMP would be limited to management of 

BLM roads. 

A TMP is not intended to provide evidence bearing on or addressing the validity of any R.S. 2477 

assertions. R.S. 2477 rights are determined through a process that is entirely independent of the BLM's 

planning process. Consequently, travel management planning should not take into consideration R.S. 

2477 assertions or evidence. Travel management planning should be founded on an independently 

determined purpose and need that is based on resource uses and associated access to public lands and 

waters. At such time as a decision is made on R.S. 2477 assertions, the BLM would adjust its travel 

routes accordingly.

TR-CA-MA-6. Route designation would, at a minimum, follow criterion in 43 CFR 8342.1 and BLM 

Manual 1626.

TR-CA-MA-7. Route designation would also adhere to the following: 

Conflict with cultural and paleontological resources would be minimized when designating routes.

Designated routes may follow or cross the Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) and National Register 

of Historic Places-eligible and -listed segments of the Kelton and Toana Freight Roads in areas 

where previous disturbance has occurred, and after consultation with the State Historic Preservation 

Officer. 

Where motorized vehicle use is allowed within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor, travel 

would not degrade the Oregon NHT or its setting. 

Designated routes within suitable and eligible Wild and Scenic River corridors must maintain/enhance 

their outstandingly remarkable values, free-flowing condition, water quality, and tentative classification 

until Congress acts. 

Loop routes are preferred to dead end routes.

Parking areas and turnouts would be considered under the same criteria used for routes.

Provide access to private lands or other agency lands (e.g., State, Forest Service, other BLM field 

offices).

Provide access for authorized activities, including livestock grazing, energy development, and 

recreation.

TR-CA-MA-8. As part of the travel management planning process, the BLM would identify any easements 

and rights-of-way (to be issued to the BLM or others) needed to maintain the preliminary or existing road 

and trail network.

TR-CA-MA-9. Cooperate with tribes, Federal, State, and county agencies to reduce adverse effects and 

support the achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands in the long term.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resource Uses

2-371

•

•

•

•

•

TR-CA-MA-10. Minimize locating new roads or road-related facilities in Riparian Conservation Areas 

(RCAs). Before building new roads or other road-related facilities in RCAs, complete a watershed or sitespecific analysis. The level of analysis should be commensurate with the scope and issues of the project 

and related aquatic resources. Analysis should identify how road design features would minimize or avoid 

adverse effects to aquatic and riparian resources at site-specific, reach, and watershed scales. 

TR-CA-MA-11. Temporary roads within or affecting RCAs would be fully decommissioned and 

rehabilitated once the road is no longer needed to meet the intended purpose. 

TR-CA-MA-12. Avoid or minimize sediment delivery to streams from the road surface to allow the 

achievement of the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

TR-CA-MA-13. Avoid sidecasting road surface material into areas where it may reach RCAs. 

TR-CA-MA-14. Design new, replacement, and reconstructed stream crossings (culverts, bridges, and 

other stream crossings) to: 

Accommodate a 100-year flood, including associated bedload and debris in bull trout occupied 

watersheds. In watersheds containing other non-game fish, design new, replacement, and 

reconstructed stream crossings to accommodate a 100-year flood event, unless a site-specific 

analysis determines the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands could be achieved with 

fewer impacts to the RCA; 

Provide and maintain fish passage at all road crossings of existing and potential fish bearing streams; 

and

Accommodate mean bankfull channel widths to maintain channel integrity. 

TR-VI-MA-1. Motorized vehicle restrictions would apply to everyone including lessees, BLM permit 

holders, and right-of-way (ROW) holders, unless specifically authorized in the lease, permits, or ROW

grant or with written permission from the BLM authorized officer.

TR-VI-MA-2. Motorized activities in areas limited or closed to motorized travel would only be allowed with

prior written permission of a BLM authorized officer. These activities may include: 

Motorized cross-country travel for non-BLM government entities on official administrative business 

(e.g., noxious weed control, surveying, or animal damage control efforts).

Motorized cross-country travel by entities requiring access to private lands, resources, or legal 

improvements within or adjacent to closed or limited areas.

TR-VI-MA-3. Access and use restrictions may be imposed to reduce risk of wildland fire during fire 

restrictions, as determined by a BLM authorized officer. Restrictions may include, but not be limited to, 

closing primitive roads, trails, areas open to cross-country motorized vehicle use, and roads. Travel 

related to administrative uses and emergency services may continue during fire restrictions.

TR-VI-MA-4. Game retrieval using motorized vehicles would not be allowed off designated routes.

TR-VI-MA-5. Dispersed camping would be allowed in any of the existing dispersed campsites adjacent to, 

or at the end of existing roads and motorized routes. Dispersed camping up to 100 feet from center line of 

existing roads or trails would be allowed if site is accessed by the most direct route possible. Dispersed 

camping may be closed or limited seasonally or as impacts or environmental conditions warrant. Future 

area-specific planning (i.e. travel management planning) and rulemaking may also identify areas where 

this policy may be modified in order to adapt to emerging resource issues.

TR-VI-MA-6. Install gates and cattle guards along designated routes to minimize conflicts between 

transportation-related activities and livestock grazing operations.

TR-VI-MA-7. Travel Management Areas (TMAs) are delineated areas where travel management (either 

motorized or non-motorized) needs particular focus. These areas would have a designated network of 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-372

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

•

roads, trails, ways, and other routes that provide for public access and travel. The priority emphasis for 

each TMA is based on resource management, wildland fire suppression, and use objectives outlined in 

the RMP. The TMAs and their travel and transportation planning focus would be as follows: 

Snake River TMA (332,000 acres): Focus on balancing the needs for public access with resource 

objectives. 

Deadman/Yahoo TMA (35,000 acres): Focus on facilitating motorized recreation activities, including 

open play areas and a designated trail system. 

 Devil Creek TMA (682,000 acres): Focus on increasing core habitat size for sage-grouse and big 

game and accommodating habitat restoration activities, while providing for public access. 

Canyonlands TMA (188,000 acres): Focus on increasing core habitat size for sage-grouse and big 

game and providing opportunities for motorized and non-motorized recreation experiences. 

Jarbidge Foothills TMA (135,000 acres): Focus on increasing core habitat size for sage-grouse and 

big game, while providing for motorized and non-motorized recreation experiences. 

See Map 84 for locations of TMAs.

TR-VI-MA-8. The BLM authorized officer has the authority to adjust TMA boundaries and their focus, 

consistent with objectives in the RMP.

TR-VI-MA-9. If a conflict between motorized travel and wild horses is identified, seasonal restrictions may 

be placed on motorized travel within the Herd Management Area during foaling (from March through 

July).

2.8.3.4 Land Use Authorizations

Goal

LA-CA-G-1. Public needs for land use authorizations would be met with consideration for other resource 

values. 

Objective

LA-VI-O-1. Provide for the development of renewable energy resources, transportation routes, utility 

corridors, transmission lines, communication sites and other uses with consideration for resource 

objectives.

Allocations

LA-CA-A-1. Retain existing withdrawals, with the option of a Section 24 restoration for power site 

classifications and power site reserves if needed, as provided for in the Federal Power Act of 1920.

LA-VI-A-1. The following areas would be exclusion areas for rights-of way (ROWs) (63,000 acres); they 

would not be available for ROWs under any conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, 

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area, and

Sand Point Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC). 

See Map 94 for locations of ROW exclusion areas.

LA-VI-A-2. The following areas would be avoidance areas for ROWs (1,234,000 acres); ROWs could be 

allowed in accordance with the corresponding stipulations:

Areas within US Air Force (USAF) Military Operating Areas (983,000 acres): 

New ROWs must be consistent with USAF airspace restrictions.

Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone and Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective 

corridors (31,000 acres): 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resource Uses

2-373

o

•

o

•

o

•

o

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

 New surface or overhead ROWs would follow existing ROW or disturbance corridors,

underground ROWs would be allowed with mitigation for disturbance within the protective zone 

and corridors. Where the alignment of a new large-scale linear ROW with multi-jurisdictional 

impacts is constrained or determined by external factors which make avoidance impractical or 

infeasible, the ROW grant would require mitigation commensurate with impacts.

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors (30,000 acres): 

ROWs must maintain/enhance the river segment's outstandingly remarkable values, free-flowing 

condition, water quality, and tentative classification. 

Upper Bruneau Canyon and Salmon Falls Creek ACECs (21,000 acres): 

 New ROWs would be restricted to ROW corridors and locations of existing ROWs. 

 Sage-grouse management area (990,000 acres): 

New tall structures (e.g., overhead power and phone lines, meteorological towers, communication 

towers) would be located more than four miles from occupied and unknown-status sage-grouse 

leks. In some cases, topographic screening may allow infrastructure to be placed at less than four

miles from leks. 

Where the alignment of a new large-scale linear ROW with multi-jurisdictional impacts is

constrained or determined by external factors which make avoidance impractical or infeasible, the 

ROW grant would require mitigation commensurate with impacts.

Several ROW avoidance areas overlap; where this occurs, all avoidance stipulations must be met. In 

addition, some ROW avoidance areas overlap with ROW exclusion areas; where this occurs, the more 

restrictive exclusion management applies. 

See Map 92 for location of ROW avoidance areas.

LA-VI-A-3. Designate the following ROW corridors for utilities (i.e., corridors for oil, gas, and hydrogen 

pipelines, electricity transmission, phone lines, and distribution facilities), all of which are one-mile wide: 

Pilgrim Gulch (Section 368 energy corridor) (4,000 acres), 

Shoestring (Section 368 energy corridor) (5,000 acres), 

Saylor Creek (Section 368 energy corridor) (11,000 acres), 

Balanced Rock (Section 368 energy corridor) (10,000 acres), 

Roseworth (2,000 acres), and

 Oil/gas pipelines (11,000 acres). 

Roseworth ROW corridor has a limited capacity due to topographic features where it crosses Lilly Grade.

See Map 97 for locations of ROW corridors. Section 368 energy corridors were designated in the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005.

LA-VI-A-4. Commercial wind and solar energy developments would not be permitted inside the sagegrouse management area or within utility ROW corridors. 

Management Actions

LA-C-MA-1. Implement the Programmatic Policies and Design Features in the Record of Decision on 

Wind Energy Development on BLM-Administered Lands in the Western United States (2005) (Appendix 

B).

LA-C-MA-2. Interagency Operating Procedures, located in Appendix B, would be implemented for 

projects proposed within the Section 368 corridors.

LA-C-MA-3. The BLM would review all withdrawals on and classifications of public lands to eliminate all 

unnecessary withdrawals and classifications. Reviews would consider: 

For what purposes were the lands withdrawn? 

Are these purposes still being served? 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-374

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Are the lands suitable for return to the public domain?

LA-CA-MA-1. Place new ROWs for oil and gas pipelines and overhead lines within ROW corridors where 

practical; other locations would be considered in areas not identified for ROW avoidance or exclusion, 

consistent with allocations listed above.

LA-CA-MA-2. New ROWs would be located in areas of previous disturbance where practical.

LA-CA-MA-3. New ROWs would meet Visual Resource Management class objectives.

LA-CA-MA-4. Co-locate new communication sites with existing sites where practical; communication 

sites present in 2011 are located at:

Black Mesa, 

Blue Butte, 

Frog Hollow,

Indian Butte, 

Lower Salmon Falls, 

Signal Butte, and

Yahoo Creek. 

See Map 85. Other locations would be considered, consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas 

and outside ROW exclusion areas.

LA-CA-MA-5. BLM management activities and authorized uses on lands with existing withdrawals would 

be consistent with the purposes of the withdrawal. Proposed BLM management activities and authorized 

uses that are not consistent with the purposes of the withdrawal would be evaluated to determine whether 

the proposal can be modified or whether the withdrawal is still necessary.

LA-CA-MA-6. Land use permits may be considered, on a case-by-case basis, consistent with resource 

objectives. 

LA-CA-MA-7. Trespass resolution would be limited to removal of facilities and/or restoration of the area 

as determined by the BLM authorized officer. Trespass resolution, as determined by the BLM authorized 

officer, may include:

 Removal (depending on the nature of the trespass), 

 Restoration, 

 Authorization of a ROW grant or land use permit, or 

 Disposal of the affected land through sale or exchange.

LA-CA-MA-8. Land use permits for irrigation pivot crossings may be allowed, in accordance with policy 

and regulations. In cases where a pivot crosses public land, the lands are to remain unfarmed and 

unirrigated.

LA-CA-MA-9. Airport leases may be considered if proposals are outside ROW exclusion areas and 

consistent with stipulations for ROW avoidance areas and Federal Aviation Administration regulations. 

LA-CA-MA-10. Access across non-BLM lands would be identified and obtained, where possible, through 

easements, ROWs, or acquisitions to accomplish BLM objectives. 

LA-CA-MA-11. Future access needs and priorities would be coordinated with the Shoshone-Bannock 

Tribes, Shoshone-Paiute Tribes, Idaho and Nevada State agencies, and local governments to ensure 

resource values are evaluated along with public needs.

LA-CA-MA-12. Authorizations involving water use on BLM land must comply with applicable State water 

law. Final authorization to proceed with water developments on BLM lands would be withheld until 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resource Uses

2-375

•

•

compliance from the appropriate authorizing agency (i.e., Idaho Department of Water Resources) is 

obtained. Any new water right established on public land would be solely in the name of the United 

States.

LA-CA-MA-13. New land use authorizations would avoid or minimize adverse effects on non-game fish, 

their habitats, and Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs). 

LA-CA-MA-14. For existing land use authorizations that prevent the achievement of the goals and 

objectives for riparian areas and wetlands, use existing authorities to redesign, modify, or apply 

mitigations to reduce impacts to non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LA-CA-MA-15. During Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensing or relicensing of 

hydroelectric projects, terms and conditions that achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and 

wetlands over the new license term should be submitted to the FERC.

LA-VI-MA-1. Restrict ROW construction and maintenance activities to avoid disturbing special status 

species during important seasonal periods. 

LA-VI-MA-2. Outside the sage-grouse management area, locate new tall structures (e.g. overhead power 

and phone lines, communications towers, meteorological towers, and wind turbines) more than four miles 

from occupied and unknown-status sage-grouse leks. In some cases topographic screening may allow 

infrastructure to be placed at less than four miles from leks. Within designated ROW corridors, buffer 

distances for sage-grouse leks would not apply. BLM may impose constraints on timing of construction for 

routine maintenance.

LA-VI-MA-3. New communication sites would avoid special status species habitat if the project would 

have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated.

LA-VI-MA-4. Outside the sage-grouse management area, renewable energy site testing, monitoring, and 

development should avoid special status species habitat unless unavoidable adverse effects can be 

mitigated.

LA-VI-MA-5. Implement the policies and relevant design features in the Record of Decision for Solar 

Energy Development in Six Southwestern States (2012; Appendix B).

LA-VI-MA-6. New road ROWs across public land for private purposes would be considered only after all 

other access possibilities have been exhausted. 

2.8.3.5 Land Tenure 

Goal

LT-CA-G-1. Manage land tenure to provide for public ownership of lands with high resource and multiple 

use values and to improve management efficiency. 

Objective

LT-CA-O-1. Improve BLM's ability to manage the land base and resource values, and help meet resource 

objectives through land tenure adjustments.

Allocations

LT-VI-A-1. Zone 1 consists of lands for retention that are not available for disposal (1,326,000 acres). 

Zone 1 lands include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness;

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-376

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

The Oregon National Historic Trail protective zone and Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective 

corridors; 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern; 

Saylor Creek Herd Management Area; and 

Other consolidated public lands.

See Map 113, Land Tenure Zones in Alternative VI (Proposed RMP).

LT-VI-A-2. Zone 2 consists of lands for consolidation within the planning area (32,000 acres). Zone 2 

lands include: 

Selected lands near Glenns Ferry and Roseworth, 

Selected lands in the northeast corner of the planning area, 

Selected lands in the Jarbidge Foothills, and 

Selected lands between Clover Creek and Cedar Creek Reservoir.

See Map 113, Land Tenure Zones in Alternative VI (Proposed RMP), and Appendix I for legal 

descriptions.

LT-VI-A-3. Zone 3 lands (13,000 acres) are available for Federal Land Policy and Management Act 

(FLPMA) Section 203 sales (as listed in Appendix I) subject to NEPA compliance and consistent with 

other decisions in this RMP. Zone 3 lands include:

Selected lands near Blue Gulch, Glenns Ferry, Grindstone, Magic Waters, Bliss Dam, and Pasadena 

Valley.

See Map 113, Land Tenure Zones in Alternative VI (Proposed RMP), and Appendix I for legal 

descriptions.

LT-VI-A-4. Lands identified for disposal in previous RMPs prior to July 25, 2000 (3,000 acres) would

continue to be available for disposal under the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act of 2000 (FLTFA; 

Appendix I). Proceeds from the sale or exchange of these public lands may be used to purchase 

additional public lands, as provided for in FLTFA.

LT-VI-A-5. Recreation and Public Purposes (R&PP) leases would be considered on lands in Zones 2 and 

3.

Management Actions

LT-CA-MA-1. Public lands, in order to be considered for any form of land tenure adjustment (including 

exchanges, R&PP, fee or easement acquisitions, etc.), except for FLPMA Section 203 sales, would be 

evaluated and must meet one or more of the land ownership adjustment criteria (described in Appendix I), 

or one or more of the following criteria:

Is in the public interest; accommodates the needs of State, local, or private entities, including for the 

economy and community growth and expansion; and is in accordance with other land use goals, 

objectives, and planning decisions; 

Results in net gain of important and manageable resource values on public lands such as crucial 

wildlife habitat, significant cultural sites, high-value recreation areas, high quality riparian areas, live 

water, special status species habitat, or areas key to maintenance of productive ecosystems; 

Ensures the accessibility of public lands in areas where access is needed and cannot otherwise be 

obtained; 

Is essential to allow effective management of public lands in areas where consolidation of ownership 

is necessary to meet resource management objectives; and/or

Results in acquisition of lands that serve a national priority as identified in national policy directives.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resource Uses

2-377

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

LT-CA-MA-2. Initiate tribal consultation early in the process for any land tenure adjustments.

LT-CA-MA-3. In general, lands with the following characteristics would be retained in Federal ownership: 

Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, and Candidate species habitat and designated critical habitat; 

Those lands specifically identified by the tribes as having special importance related to treaty and/or 

traditional uses/values; 

National Register of Historic Places eligible and listed properties; and 

Wildlife tracts. 

These lands could be disposed of if the transaction helped achieve resource objectives; see the Cultural 

Resources section for additional guidance for disposal of lands containing National Register properties or 

other important cultural resources. Lands acquired under the Land and Water Conservation Fund must be 

retained.

LT-CA-MA-4. BLM’s acquisition priorities (not in priority order) would include:

Land identified by Shoshone-Paiute Tribes or Shoshone-Bannock Tribes;

Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, or Candidate species habitat; 

BLM Type 2 Sensitive species habitat; 

Lands within special designations; 

Big game winter range; 

Riparian areas; 

Lands containing known archaeological, paleontological, or historical values determined by the BLM 

to be unique or of traditional or scientific importance;

Lands that would provide public access to public lands, including but not limited to river access; 

Lands that would help consolidate public land; 

 Lands that would help improve livestock grazing management; and 

Lands adjacent to Zones 1 and 2.

LT-CA-MA-5. Vegetation treatments, construction of new range infrastructure, and other public land 

improvements in areas involved in a land tenure transaction would be kept to a minimum.

LT-CA-MA-6. Disposal of public lands would be subject to all valid existing rights, including existing 

rights-of-way. Existing public access through those lands may be retained if necessary for BLM 

management or for accommodating uses.

LT-CA-MA-7. Use land acquisition, exchanges, and conservation easements to support achievement of 

the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands and facilitate restoration of native species and 

their habitat.

LT-CA-MA-8. No new Desert Land Act or Carey Act applications would be accepted for lands. The Desert 

Land Act and Carey Act applications submitted prior to 2009 (Case numbers IDD-7401, IDI-7402, IDI27888, and IDI-27889) would be processed within 10 years of the signing of the Record of Decision. 

LT-CA-MA-9. Manage newly acquired lands and lands returned to BLM the same as adjacent BLM lands 

(e.g., acquired lands within wilderness would be managed as wilderness). 

LT-VI-MA-1. In general, lands with the following characteristics would be retained in Federal ownership: 

 Sage-grouse habitat,

 Extensive Recreation Management Areas,

Lands along the Snake River, and

Upland and Riparian Reference Areas.
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-378

•

•

•

•

•

Under limited circumstances, lands containing important resources may be exchanged for lands 

containing resources of equal or greater value within the planning area. 

LT-VI-MA-2. Sales of public lands can be made upon consideration of the following criteria:

The parcel, because of its location or other characteristics, is difficult and uneconomic to manage as 

part of the public lands, and is not suitable for management by another Federal department or 

agency; 

The parcel was acquired for a specific purpose and is no longer required for that or any other Federal 

purpose; or 

Disposal of the parcel would serve important public objectives, including but not limited to, expansion 

of communities and economic development which cannot be achieved prudently or feasibly on land 

other than public land and which outweigh other public objectives and values. These include, but are 

not limited to, wildlife, grazing, recreation, and scenic values which would be served by maintaining 

such parcel in Federal ownership.

2.8.3.6 Minerals

Leasable Minerals

Leasable minerals include oil shale, oil and gas, phosphate, potash, sodium, geothermal resources, and 

other minerals that may be developed under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended.

Goal

LE-CA-G-1. Provide leasable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other 

resources.

Objective

LE-VI-O-1. Facilitate reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound exploration and development of 

leasable minerals where compatible with resource objectives.

Allocations

LE-VI-A-1. The majority of the planning area (1,276,000 acres) would be open to mineral leasing, subject 

to laws, regulations, and formal orders; the terms and conditions of the standard lease form; and 

stipulations for Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation and Cultural Resource Protection. Areas 

that would be subject to additional moderate or major constraints specific to Alternative VI are as follows:

Moderate constraints (915,000 acres): Big game winter range, sage-grouse management area, and 

Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) in bull trout spawning habitat and redband trout spawning 

habitat would be open to mineral leasing with seasonal restrictions. RCAs would be open to mineral 

leasing, consistent with goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

Major constraints (26,000 acres): The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone and the 

Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors would be open to mineral leasing with no surface 

occupancy.

LE-VI-A-2. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, the Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study 

Area, eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; and the Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern (ACECs) would be closed to mineral leasing (95,000 acres). 

See Map 122 for locations of leasable mineral allocations.

LE-VI-A-3. Exploration and development of non-energy leasable minerals (e.g. phosphate) would follow 

allocations outlined above. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resource Uses

2-379

•

•

•

•

Management Actions

LE-C-MA-1. Geothermal exploration, drilling, utilization, and reclamation projects would incorporate 

stipulations, best management practices, and management procedures from the Record of Decision and 

Resource Management Plan Amendments for Geothermal Leasing in the Western United States 

(December 2008) found in Appendix B. 

LE-CA-MA-1. The terms and conditions of the standard lease form (Form 3100-11, Offer to Lease and 

Lease for Oil and Gas) or future versions of the form would apply to all mineral leases.

LE-CA-MA-2. The following stipulations for Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) Section 7 

Consultation and Cultural Resource Protection would be used unless new stipulations are directed by 

BLM policy:

ESA Section 7 Consultation Stipulation – The lease area may now or hereafter contain plants, 

animals, or their habitats determined to be Threatened, Endangered or other special status species. 

The BLM may recommend modifications to exploration and development proposals to further its 

conservation and management objective to avoid BLM-approved activity that would contribute to a 

need to list such a species or their habitat. The BLM may require modifications to or disapprove 

proposed activity that is likely to result in jeopardy to the continued existence of a proposed or listed 

Threatened or Endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of a 

designated or proposed critical habitat. The BLM would not approve any ground-disturbing activity 

that may affect any such species or critical habitat until it completes its obligations under applicable 

requirements of the ESA, including completion of any required procedure for conference or 

consultation.

Cultural Resource Protection Stipulation – This lease may be found to contain historic properties 

and/or resources protected under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), American Indian 

Religious Freedom Act, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, Executive Order 

13007, or other statutes and executive orders. The BLM would not approve any ground-disturbing 

activities that may affect any such properties or resources until it completes its obligations under 

applicable requirements of the NHPA and other authorities. The BLM may require modification to 

exploration or development proposals to protect such properties, or disapprove any activity that is 

likely to result in adverse effects that cannot be successfully avoided, minimized, or mitigated.

LE-CA-MA-3. Exceptions, waivers, and modifications may not be made for the following lease

stipulations:

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Special Status Species Habitat: ESA Section 7 Consultation

and

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Cultural Resources: Cultural Resource Protection Stipulation.

LE-CA-MA-4. Lease stipulations, conditions of approval, and actions would be developed to achieve 

resource objectives on a site-specific basis. 

LE-CA-MA-5. Mineral leasing and development decisions also apply to geophysical exploration.

LE-CA-MA-6. Exploration and development of non-energy leasable minerals would follow standard

stipulations outlined above; additional stipulations would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

LE-CA-MA-7. Leasable mineral development activities would avoid special status species habitat if the 

activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. Permits would 

include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

LE-CA-MA-8. For those leasable mineral development activities conducted pursuant to valid existing 

rights that pose risks to achievement of management objectives, use existing authorities to mitigate 

and/or require, to the extent authorized, design features that would contribute to the maintenance of 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-380

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

streambanks, shorelines, streambed configuration, water quality, amount and distribution of woody 

debris, thermal regulation, characteristic erosion rates, and amount and distribution of source habitats.

LE-CA-MA-9. Locate leasable mineral project related infrastructure outside RCAs. Where there is no 

alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. Keep the number of roads 

to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission and revegetate roads no 

longer required for mineral management and related activities.

LE-CA-MA-10. New leasable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.

LE-CA-MA-11. Develop inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for leasable mineral activities

within or affecting RCAs. Evaluate and apply the results of inspection and monitoring to modify mineral 

plans, leases, or permits as needed to achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

LE-VI-MA-1. Exceptions, waivers, or modifications may be made for lease stipulations as described 

below:

No Surface Occupancy Stipulation for Oregon NHT protective zone and Kelton and Toana Freight 

Road Protective Corridors– Surface occupancy is not allowed within the Oregon NHT protective zone 

and Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors.

Exception: After consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer, the BLM authorized 

officer may grant an exception if an environmental review demonstrates the action as proposed or 

conditioned would not impair the integrity of the trail.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may grant a waiver if an environmental review demonstrates 

the action as proposed or conditioned would only impact non-contributing trail segments.

Modification: This stipulation may not be modified.

Seasonal Restriction Stipulation for Big Game Winter Range, the Sage-Grouse Management Area, 

and Redband Trout Spawning Habitat– No surface use would be allowed (e.g., exploration, 

construction, and drilling) within big game winter range from December through March, the sagegrouse management area from March through June, or RCAs within redband trout spawning habitat 

from May through June.

Exception: The BLM authorized officer may grant an exception if an environmental review 

demonstrates the action as proposed or conditioned would not affect the species or habitat during 

the critical season. An exception may also be granted if the proponent, BLM, and State wildlife 

agencies negotiate compensation or mitigation that would offset the anticipated impact to the 

species or habitat.

Waiver: The BLM authorized officer may waive a stipulation if after discussions with State wildlife 

agencies it is determined the described lands are incapable of serving the long-term requirements 

of the species and these areas no longer warrant consideration of habitat.

Modification: The BLM authorized officer may modify the size and shape of the area under 

seasonal restrictions if an environmental analysis indicates the actual habitat suitability for the 

species is different. Time periods may be modified based on studies documenting local periods of 

actual use.

Seasonal Restriction Stipulation for Bull Trout Spawning Habitat – No surface use would be allowed 

(e.g., exploration, construction, and drilling) within RCAs with bull trout spawning habitat from August 

through November.

Exception: The BLM authorized officer may grant an exception if an environmental review 

demonstrates the action as proposed or conditioned would not affect the species or habitat during 

the critical season. An exception may also be granted if the proponent, BLM, US Fish and Wildlife 

Service (FWS), and State wildlife agencies negotiate compensation or mitigation that would offset 

the anticipated impact to the species or habitat.

Waiver: The authorized officer may waive a stipulation if after consulting with FWS and 

discussions with State wildlife agencies it is determined the described lands are incapable of 

serving the long-term requirements of the species and these areas no longer warrant 

consideration of habitat.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Resource Uses

2-381

o

•

•

•

•

•

•

Modification: The BLM authorized officer may modify the size and shape of the area under 

seasonal restrictions if an environmental analysis indicates the actual habitat suitability for the 

species is different. Time periods may be modified based on studies documenting local periods of 

actual use. 

Controlled Surface Use Stipulation for Riparian Areas and Wetlands – Surface use within RCAs must 

maintain or improve riparian and wetland conditions consistent with the goals and objectives for 

riparian areas and wetlands. 

Salable Minerals

Salable minerals include minerals and building materials such as sand, stone, gravel, pumice, pumicite, 

cinders, and clay.

Goal

SA-CA-G-1. Provide salable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other 

resources.

Objective

SA-VI-O-1. Provide salable minerals needed for community and economic purposes and facilitate their 

reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound development where available and compatible with 

resource objectives.

Allocations

SA-CA-A-1. The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone and the Kelton and Toana Freight 

Road protective corridors (27,000 acres) would be closed to new salable mineral development. See NHTCA-MA-8 and CR-CA-MA-12. 

SA-VI-A-1. The majority of the planning area would be open to salable mineral development (1,250,000 

acres), subject to site-specific NEPA analysis, stipulations, and 43 CFR 3600 regulations, except for the 

following areas which are closed to salable mineral exploration and development (94,000 acres): 

The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness;

Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study Area; 

Eligible, suitable, and designated Wild and Scenic River corridors; 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs); and 

Playas (300-foot buffer).

See Map 129 for locations of salable mineral allocations.

Management Actions

SA-C-MA-1. Promote the use of existing sites for mineral disposals. 

SA-C-MA-2. Exploration would be allowed where appropriate under a letter of authorization from the BLM 

authorized officer. Exploration for new sites would be the responsibility of the applicant. 

SA-CA-MA-1. Salable mineral development activities would avoid special status species habitat if the 

activity would have an adverse effect, unless those adverse effects can be mitigated. Permits would 

include mitigation for adverse effects on special status species and their habitats. 

SA-CA-MA-2. All mineral material sites would be reclaimed in accordance with resource objectives for the 

adjacent area as specified in the permit.

SA-CA-MA-3. Site specific terms, conditions, and special considerations would be included in all 

commercial salable mineral permits to protect resource values.
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Resource Uses

2-382

•

•

SA-CA-MA-4. Stipulations for community pits would be developed on a site-specific basis. 

SA-CA-MA-5. For those salable mineral development activities conducted pursuant to valid existing rights 

that pose risks to achievement of goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands, use existing 

authorities to mitigate and/or require, to the extent authorized, design features that would contribute to the 

maintenance of streambanks, shorelines, streambed configuration, water quality, amount and distribution 

of woody debris, thermal regulation, characteristic erosion rates, and amount and distribution of source 

habitats.

SA-CA-MA-6. Locate salable mineral project related infrastructure outside Riparian Conservation Areas

(RCAs). Where there is no alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. 

Keep the number of roads to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission

and revegetate roads no longer required for mineral management and related activities.

SA-CA-MA-7. New salable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs. 

SA-VI-MA-1. New sites may be developed if it is determined by the BLM authorized officer that an 

existing site would not meet the applicant’s needs and site impacts can be sufficiently mitigated.

Locatable Minerals

Minerals or materials subject to claim and development under the Mining Law of 1872, as amended. 

Generally includes metallic minerals such as gold and silver, and other materials not subject to lease or 

sale (some bentonites, limestone, talc, some xeolites, etc.).

Goal

LO-CA-G-1. Locatable mineral development would not cause unnecessary and undue degradation of 

resources. 

Objective

LO-CA-O-1. Facilitate reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound exploration and development 

of locatable minerals. 

Allocations

LO-C-A-1. The planning area, excluding the following withdrawn areas (60,000 acres), would be available 

for location of mining claims: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and 

 Designated Wild and Scenic River corridors.

See Map 135 for locations of areas withdrawn by statute.

Management Actions

LO-CA-MA-1. Determine whether locatable mineral plans of operation cause unnecessary and undue 

degradation to resources, including habitat for sage-grouse and other special status species, on a caseby-case basis and identify stipulations or mitigation measures as appropriate. 

LO-CA-MA-2. Locate mineral project related infrastructure outside Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs). 

Where there is no alternative, locate and construct the infrastructure to avoid impacts on RCAs. Keep the 

number of roads to the minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Decommission and 

revegetate roads no longer required for mineral management and related activities.

LO-CA-MA-3. New locatable mineral management projects and operations would avoid or minimize 

adverse effects on non-game fish, their habitats, and RCAs.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Special Designations

2-383

LO-CA-MA-4. Develop inspection, monitoring, and reporting requirements for locatable mineral activities

within or affecting RCAs. Evaluate and apply the results of inspection and monitoring to modify mineral 

plans, leases, or permits as needed to achieve the goals and objectives for riparian areas and wetlands. 

2.8.4 Special Designations

2.8.4.1 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 

Goal

ACEC-VI-G-1. ACECs would be managed to protect the important biological, cultural, scenic, and historic 

resources that meet the criteria for relevance and importance.

Upper Bruneau Canyon ACEC

Objective

ACEC-VI-O-1. Protect and maintain habitat for California bighorn sheep, other special status wildlife, 

interior redband trout and non-game fishery, special status plants including Davis peppergrass, scenic, 

and cultural resource values.

Allocation

ACEC-VI-A-1. Manage 18,000 acres of public land as the Upper Bruneau Canyon ACEC (Map 142). 

Management Actions

ACEC-VI-MA-1. New developments would not be allowed within 300 feet of playas within the ACEC. 

ACEC-VI-MA-2. Areas within the ACEC with concentrated recreational use and livestock grazing would 

be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment with integrated weed management 

techniques for control, containment, and where practical, eradication. Special stipulations would apply for 

noxious weed and invasive plants treatments in Davis peppergrass habitat. Use of domestic sheep or 

goats to reduce noxious weeds would not be allowed within the ACEC to eliminate potential contact with 

bighorn sheep.

ACEC-VI-MA-3. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.

ACEC-VI-MA-4. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used to suppress wildland fires within the 

ACEC. Fire lines would be rehabilitated to help stabilize soils.

ACEC-VI-MA-5. Manage the ACEC as Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class I.

ACEC-VI-MA-6. If a conflict between authorized uses and bighorn sheep is identified, schedule 

authorized uses to avoid pastures that contain bighorn sheep habitat during breeding, wintering, and 

lambing periods to minimize disturbance during these important seasonal periods.

ACEC-VI-MA-7. Adjust livestock seasons of use or stocking rates on a pasture-specific basis to minimize 

conflicts with Davis peppergrass during flowering and when playas are most likely to contain water 

(December through June).

ACEC-VI-MA-8. Range infrastructure would be evaluated for retention, modification, or removal. New 

infrastructure would be allowed to the extent that it protects riparian habitat, cultural resources, botanical 

values, bighorn sheep, or other resource values. Prohibit placement of salt or other supplements within 

the ACEC to reduce livestock use of bighorn sheep habitat and protect big game winter range.

ACEC-VI-MA-9. Monitor recreational use within the ACEC. If recreational use impairs the relevant and 

important values of the ACEC, implement protective measures appropriate to the type of recreational 

activity. Protective measures may include: 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-384

•

•

 Seasonal restrictions for motorized use and 

 Designating camping areas outside the ACEC.

ACEC-VI-MA-10. Special Recreation Permits would be allowed within ACECs as long as the relevant and 

important values are protected. 

ACEC-VI-MA-11. No new roads would be constructed and existing routes would not be substantially 

improved to minimize the level of human disturbance in bighorn sheep habitat. Some designated routes 

within the ACEC could have spot surface treatments to reduce resource damage and to improve public 

safety. 

ACEC-VI-MA-12. The ACEC would be a right-of-way (ROW) avoidance area.

ACEC-VI-MA-13. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1; where practical, acquire 

private and/or State in holdings. The ACEC designation and management would apply to lands acquired 

within the ACEC boundary.

ACEC-VI-MA-14. The ACEC would be closed to exploration and development of leasable or salable 

minerals.

Lower Bruneau Canyon ACEC

Objective

ACEC-VI-O-2. Protect vertebrate and invertebrate paleontological resources; restore and protect special 

status plant habitat for Packard’s cowpie buckwheat, spine-node milkvetch, and rare desert annuals.

Allocation

ACEC-VI-A-2. Manage 1,000 acres of public lands as the Lower Bruneau Canyon ACEC (Map 142). 

Management Actions

ACEC-VI-MA-15. Restore native upland plant communities within the ACEC to improve habitat for special 

status species.

ACEC-VI-MA-16. The ACEC would be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment 

with integrated weed management techniques for control, containment, and where practical, eradication.

ACEC-VI-MA-17. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.

ACEC-VI-MA-18. Manage the ACEC as VRM Class III.

ACEC-VI-MA-19. No surface-disturbing activities would be allowed in the ACEC unless they are directly 

related to restoration.

ACEC-VI-MA-20. New infrastructure may be considered if it would not impair the relevant and important 

values of the ACEC. Any infrastructure would be located so that it does not increase or encourage 

impacts to fossil-bearing areas and special status plants. 

ACEC-VI-MA-21. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1.

ACEC-VI-MA-22. The ACEC would be closed to exploration and development of leasable or salable 

minerals to protect vertebrate and invertebrate fossils.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Special Designations

2-385

Salmon Falls Creek ACEC

Objective

ACEC-VI-O-3. Protect scenic values, redband trout habitat, golden eagle nests, special status wildlife 

including prairie falcons and spotted bats, and native vegetation communities.

Allocation

ACEC-VI-A-3. Manage 3,000 acres of public land as the Salmon Falls Creek ACEC (Map 142). 

Management Actions

ACEC-VI-MA-23. All actions within the portion of the ACEC that is also a Wilderness Study Area must be 

consistent with Management of Wilderness Study Areas (BLM Manual 6330). 

ACEC-VI-MA-24. Restore vegetation within the riparian area to benefit redband trout habitat (e.g. 

increasing shade in the riparian area).

ACEC-VI-MA-25. Use native species for any vegetation treatments within the ACEC, including for 

Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation. 

ACEC-VI-MA-26. The ACEC would be a high priority for noxious weeds and invasive plants treatment 

with integrated weed management techniques for control, containment, and where practical eradication.

ACEC-VI-MA-27. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.

ACEC-VI-MA-28. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used to suppress wildland fires within the 

ACEC.

ACEC-VI-MA-29. Manage the portion of the Roseworth ROW corridor within the ACEC as VRM Class III; 

manage the remainder of the ACEC as VRM Class I.

ACEC-VI-MA-30. The ACEC would remain closed to livestock grazing.

ACEC-VI-MA-31. Monitor recreational use within the ACEC. If recreational use impairs the relevant and 

important values of the ACEC, implement protective measures appropriate to the type of recreational 

activity.

ACEC-VI-MA-32. The ACEC north and south of Lilly Grade crossing would remain closed to motorized 

vehicle use.

ACEC-VI-MA-33. The ACEC would remain a ROW avoidance area; new ROWs would be restricted to the 

Roseworth ROW corridor or other existing ROWs.

ACEC-VI-MA-34. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1.

ACEC-VI-MA-35. The ACEC would be closed to exploration and development of leasable or salable 

minerals. 

Sand Point ACEC

Objective

ACEC-VI-O-4. Protect the Oregon National Historic Trail, archaeological sites, vertebrate and invertebrate 

paleontological resources, and the Glenns Ferry geologic formation.

Allocation

ACEC-VI-A-4. Manage 1,000 acres of public land as the Sand Point ACEC (Map 142). 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-386

Management Actions

ACEC-VI-MA-36. Manage paleontological resources within the ACEC in accordance with the 1988 Sand 

Point Natural History Management Plan or subsequent revision. Modify the 1988 plan to encompass the 

Morgan property extension and to be in conformance with the RMP. 

ACEC-VI-MA-37. The ACEC would be closed to fossil collecting except under permit for scientific 

research.

ACEC-VI-MA-38. Limit BLM management activities and authorized and allowed uses that may contribute 

to wind or water erosion in the ACEC.

ACEC-VI-MA-39. No surface-disturbing activities would be allowed in the ACEC unless they are directly 

related to research on the ACEC’s cultural, paleontological, or geological resources or unless they can be 

mitigated.

ACEC-VI-MA-40. The ACEC would be a critical suppression area.

ACEC-VI-MA-41. Minimum impact suppression tactics would be used to suppress wildland fires to protect 

relevant and important values of the ACEC.

ACEC-VI-MA-42. Manage the ACEC as VRM Class II.

ACEC-VI-MA-43. New range infrastructure may be considered if it would not impair the relevant and 

important values of the ACEC. Any infrastructure would be located so that it does not increase or 

encourage livestock trailing across fossil-bearing areas, cultural resource sites, or Oregon National 

Historic Trail (NHT) ruts.

ACEC-VI-MA-44. Salt or other livestock supplements would not be placed within 0.25 mile of fossilbearing areas, cultural resource sites, or the Oregon NHT protective zone. Coordinate with permittees to

identify appropriate salt and supplement sites.

ACEC-VI-MA-45. Consider upgrading the Wilson Grade Road if there is increased need for access for fire 

suppression activities or research.

ACEC-VI-MA-46. Structures directly related to the preservation or interpretation of the ACEC may be 

allowed (e.g., kiosks, protective barriers).

ACEC-VI-MA-47. The ACEC would be a ROW exclusion area.

ACEC-VI-MA-48. Lands within the ACEC would be in Land Tenure Zone 1.

ACEC-VI-MA-49. The ACEC would be closed to exploration and development of leasable or salable 

minerals.

2.8.4.2 National Historic Trails (NHTs) 

Goal

NHT-CA-G-1. The Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor would be managed to preserve and 

protect the historic, scenic, and recreational values associated with the trail. 

Objective

NHT-CA-O-1. Protect, preserve, and provide opportunities to experience the historic, scenic, and 

recreational values of the Oregon NHT.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Special Designations

2-387

•

•

•

Allocation

NHT-VI-A-1. Manage two miles on either side of the Oregon NHT as the National Trail Management 

Corridor (52,000 acres). Within the corridor, manage 0.25 mile on either side of the Oregon NHT or the 

visual horizon (whichever is narrower) as a protective zone (11,000 acres). 

See Map 143 for the location of the Oregon NHT.

Management Actions

NHT-CA-MA-1. Update the BLM’s 1984 Oregon Trail Management Plan and ensure consistency with the 

National Park Service’s 1999 Oregon NHT Comprehensive Management and Use Plan.

NHT-CA-MA-2. Until the 1984 plan is updated and unless otherwise directed in this document, continue 

to manage the Trail in accordance with the 1984 plan and BLM policy, and in cooperation with the 

National Park Service.

NHT-CA-MA-3. Manage the Oregon NHT protective zone as an avoidance area for surface-disturbing 

activities, including: 

 Placement of salting, supplemental feeding, temporary watering, and temporary holding facilities for 

livestock;

Staging areas for recreational activities and events; and

Staging areas for fire suppression and rehabilitation activities.

NHT-CA-MA-4. If use of a designated route within the Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor

is degrading the trail or its setting, the route would be modified or closed.

NHT-CA-MA-5. Design and implement restoration projects to mitigate the effects of natural and humancaused disturbances within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor. When practical, remove or 

modify visually intrusive facilities within the Oregon National Trail Management Corridor. 

NHT-CA-MA-6. Lands within the Oregon NHT protective zone are not available for disposal; non-BLM 

lands within the corridor are a high priority for acquisition.

NHT-CA-MA-7. The Oregon NHT protective zone is open to leasable mineral exploration and 

development with no surface occupancy. 

NHT-CA-MA-8. The Oregon NHT protective zone is closed to new salable mineral development. Existing 

salable mineral developments could be renewed but the footprint could not be expanded. 

NHT-CA-MA-9. Adverse effects to the Oregon NHT related to land use authorizations would be prevented 

through avoidance of impacting activities or through mitigation when disturbance or destruction is 

unavoidable. 

NHT-CA-MA-10. Developments such as roads, trails, pipelines, fences, and powerlines may be allowed 

to cross the Oregon NHT where the project is determined by the BLM, with the State Historic Preservation 

Officer concurrence, to not adversely affect the trail due to previous disturbance or visual intrusions. 

NHT-CA-MA-11. Surface-disturbing equipment, such as bulldozers and road graders, cannot be used on 

contributing segments of the Oregon NHT, or within the protective zone of such segments, unless to 

protect life or property. 

NHT-CA-MA-12. Use techniques that minimize surface disturbance within the Oregon NHT protective 

zone during seeding projects (Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation, fuels treatments, 

or restoration). Trail remnants would not be disturbed during seeding operations.
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Special Designations

2-388

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

NHT-CA-MA-13. Use educational and public outreach programs to minimize or prevent human-caused 

damage to the Oregon NHT including vandalism, unauthorized surface collection of artifacts, and 

unintentional disturbances.

NHT-CA-MA-14. Install and maintain signs identifying the routes of the Oregon NHT.

NHT-VI-MA-1. Manage the visual corridor (two miles on either side of the trail) as Visual Resource 

Management (VRM) Class II, with the trail as the key observation point for visual contrast analyses 

related to new developments. Manage the existing right-of-way corridors as VRM Class III.

2.8.4.3 Wilderness 

Goal and Objective

WD-C-G-1. Manage the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to protect wilderness values. 

Management Action

WD-C-MA-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness was designated by Congress in 2009 with the 

Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009, Section G, P.L. 111-11. The 90,000 acre BruneauJarbidge Rivers Wilderness Area (63,000 acres within the planning area) would be managed according to 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan. 

See Map 145 for the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness location. 

2.8.4.4 Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 

Goal and Objective

WSR-C-G-1. Maintain or enhance the outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs), free-flowing condition, 

and water quality of designated, suitable, and eligible WSR segments.

Allocations

WSR-C-A-1. River segments designated as Wild and Scenic include:

A 38.1-mile segment of the Bruneau River from the downstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness to the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau River, except for a 0.5-mile 

segment at the Indian Hot Springs public road access, to be administered as a wild river;

A 0.5-mile segment of the Bruneau River at the Indian Hot Springs public road access to be 

administered as a recreational river;

A 0.3-mile segment of the West Fork of the Bruneau River from the confluence with the Jarbidge 

River to the downstream boundary of the Bruneau Canyon Grazing Allotment to be administered as a 

wild river; and

A 27.9-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau 

River to the upstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to be administered as a 

wild river.

WSR-C-A-2. Segments recommended suitable for inclusion in the WSR system include: 

A 23.0-mile segment of the Bruneau River from Blackrock Crossing to 0.3 mile above the confluence 

of the West Fork of the Bruneau River and the Jarbidge River.

WSR-C-A-3. Segments eligible for inclusion in the WSR system include: 

A 39.0-mile segment of Salmon Falls Creek from the Nevada border to Salmon Falls Reservoir and 

from Salmon Falls Dam to Balanced Rock Park; 

 A 25.0-mile segment of the Three Island, King Hill, and Hagerman reaches of the Snake River; 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Special Designations

2-389

•

•

•

•

•

A 10.2-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the planning area boundary to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 9.6-mile segment of the Jarbidge River, East Fork from the planning area boundary to Murphy Hot 

Springs and from Murphy Hot Springs to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 2.7-mile segment of Dave Creek from private land boundary to Jarbidge River, East Fork 

confluence;

A 1.0-mile segment of Cougar Point Creek from the planning area boundary to Jarbidge River, East 

Fork confluence; and 

A 1.5-mile segment of Rocky Canyon Creek from its headwaters to Salmon Falls Creek, North Fork 

confluence.

See Map 146 for locations of designated, suitable, and eligible river segments.

WSR-C-A-4. Wild and Scenic River corridors are designated to extend either the average distance of 

0.25 mile from the high water mark on each side of the river segment; or the distance to the nearest 

confined canyon rim, whichever is shorter. 

WSR-C-A-5. Wild and Scenic River corridors that are suitable or eligible extend outward from the ordinary 

high water mark 0.25 mile on both sides of the river.

Management Actions

WSR-C-MA-1. Manage the designated segments of the Bruneau and Jarbidge Rivers in accordance with 

the Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan to maintain or 

enhance their ORVs, free-flowing condition, water quality, and classification.

WSR-C-MA-2. Manage the suitable segment of the Bruneau River to maintain or enhance its ORVs, freeflowing condition, water quality, and tentative classification until Congress acts.

WSR-C-MA-3. Protect or enhance the qualifying values of eligible river segments pending a subsequent 

suitability determination or designation decision by Congress. Their free-flowing condition cannot be 

modified, their ORVs and water quality are to be maintained or enhanced, and their tentative classification 

is to be maintained.

WSR-C-MA-4. Conduct suitability studies and make suitability determinations on eligible river segments 

entirely within the planning area; coordinate suitability studies on segments forming the boundary with the 

Burley and Shoshone Field Offices. 

WSR-C-MA-5. The existing powerline south of Murphy Hot Springs on the East Fork of the Jarbidge River 

would be retained; designated, suitable, and eligible WSR corridors would be right-of-way avoidance 

areas.

WSR-C-MA-6. If, through legislation, Congress decides not to designate a suitable segment as part of the 

Wild and Scenic River System, the protective management outlined in this section would no longer apply 

and these segments would be managed according to direction in other sections of the RMP. 

WSR-VI-MA-1. Designated, suitable, and eligible WSR corridors would be closed to exploration and 

development of leasable or salable minerals.

2.8.4.5 Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs)

Goal and Objective

WSA-C-G-1. Manage and protect the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA to preserve wilderness 

characteristics so as not to impair the suitability for designation by Congress as wilderness.

Allocation

WSA-C-A-1. Manage 2,000 acres of public land as the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA. 
Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP) Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Social and Economic Features

2-390

See Map 145 for the WSA location.

Management Actions

WSA-C-MA-1. Manage the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA according to the Management of Wilderness 

Study Areas (BLM Manual 6330) until Congress either designates the land as wilderness or releases it for 

other uses. 

WSA-C-MA-2. If the WSA is designated by Congress as Wilderness, manage it according to 

Congressional mandates and BLM’s Wilderness Manual 6340 until a Wilderness Management Plan is 

developed.

WSA-C-MA-3. If the WSA is released for other uses by Congress, manage the lands within the Area of 

Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) and Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridor according to 

management specified for that ACEC and WSR corridor.

2.8.5 Social and Economic Features

2.8.5.1 Social and Economic Conditions 

Goal

SE-CA-G-1. Management of the resources and uses of public lands would provide social and economic 

benefits to residents, businesses, visitors, and future generations.

Objective

SE-CA-O-1. Provide opportunities for economic and social benefit while maintaining natural and cultural 

resource values. 

Management Actions

SE-CA-MA-1. Planning for BLM management activities and authorized uses would consider whether the 

activity or action could be designed to support the social, economic, and environmental health and 

sustainability of affected communities of place.

SE-CA-MA-2. Consider proposals from communities of place and interest that contribute to their social, 

economic, and environmental health and sustainability. 

2.8.5.2 Hazardous Materials

Goal

HM-CA-G-1. Ensure hazardous substances on public lands remain a high priority for removal or 

mitigation. 

Objective

HM-CA-O-1. Mitigate issues related to hazardous substances. 

Management Actions

HM-CA-MA-1. Storage, treatment, or disposal of hazardous materials on public lands would not be 

allowed unless otherwise permitted by law. 

HM-CA-MA-2. Use law enforcement and public outreach to discourage the disposal of hazardous 

materials on public lands. 

HM-CA-MA-3. Storage and use of hazardous materials on public lands would not be allowed without BLM 

authorization.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Alternative VI (Proposed RMP)

Social and Economic Features

2-391

•

•

•

•

HM-CA-MA-4. Responses to hazardous materials incidents and sites would be as outlined and approved 

by the latest contingency plans for hazardous materials incidents (e.g., 2013 Twin Falls District BLM 

Environmental Contingency Plan for Emergency Preparedness and Response to Oil and Hazardous 

Materials Incidents).

HM-CA-MA-5. Identify and mitigate illegal hazardous material disposal sites and hazardous materials 

spills in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations.

HM-CA-MA-6. Develop interagency agreements with local law enforcement agencies to facilitate the 

enforcement of illegal hazardous material disposal and hazardous material laws.

HM-CA-MA-7. Coordinate with local government agencies during hazardous material prevention and 

response activities.

2.8.5.3 Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education 

Goal and Objective

IOE-CA-G-1. Working with partners, provide interpretation, outreach, and environmental education to 

highlight the natural, cultural, and historic features of the planning area and to further resource protection 

and public safety. 

Management Actions

IOE-CA-MA-1. Focus education, interpretation, and outreach on resources and activities occurring within 

the planning area. 

IOE-CA-MA-2. Partner with the tribes and Federal, State, and local agencies to educate the public on 

resource protection through activities such as education tours; kiosks at major entrances to the planning 

area; interpretive signs at off-highway vehicle staging areas; information on the identification, control, and 

prevention of noxious weeds and invasive plants; and programs such as Tread Lightly!® and Leave No 

Trace®. 

IOE-CA-MA-3. Create displays highlighting natural, cultural, and historic features of the planning area for 

use at area fairs, schools, public lands day, and other events. 

IOE-CA-MA-4. Participate in events that educate youth about natural resources.

IOE-CA-MA-5. Minimize or prevent human-caused damage to public land resources, including vandalism, 

illegal dumping, and unauthorized surface collection of fossils and artifacts, through educational and 

interpretive outreach programs.

IOE-CA-MA-6. Foster the public's understanding of the role of fire in the ecosystem, the hazards 

associated with living in the Wildland Urban Interface, and wildland fire prevention and suppression 

activities through methods such as: 

 Using mass media, 

 Providing outreach to local groups, 

 Developing interpretive signs and kiosks, and

Participating in County Wildfire Protection Plans. 

IOE-CA-MA-7. Provide interpretation and education on unique resource areas such as the Oregon 

National Historic Trail, Saylor Creek Herd Management Area, Wilderness, Wilderness Study Areas, and 

Wild and Scenic Rivers.

IOE-CA-MA-8. Provide education and outreach on resource protection for recreational users. 
Chapter 2: Monitoring Implementation and Effectiveness of RMP Decisions Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Implementation Monitoring

2-392

2.9 MONITORING IMPLEMENTATION AND 

EFFECTIVENESS OF RMP DECISIONS

The regulations in 43 CFR 1610.4-9 require that land use plans establish intervals and standards for 

monitoring, based on the sensitivity of the resource decisions. Land use plan monitoring is the process of 

tracking the implementation of land use plan decisions (implementation monitoring) and collecting 

data/information necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of land use plan decisions (effectiveness 

monitoring). This section describes the process to be used for monitoring the implementation and 

effectiveness of the resource management plan (RMP) decisions; other monitoring BLM conducts for 

other purposes are not described in this section. The monitoring activities described in this section are not 

RMP decisions themselves; rather, they are activities intended to assist BLM monitor implementation and 

effectiveness of RMP decisions.

2.9.1 Implementation Monitoring

Implementation monitoring is the process of tracking and documenting the implementation, or the 

progress toward implementation, of RMP decisions. Instruction Memorandum 2013-014, Revised 

Guidance for Establishing Implementation Priorities for Land Use Plans, contains the BLM policy for 

implementation monitoring. This policy directs offices to identify land use plan implementation priorities 

within one year of signing the Record of Decision. This policy improves consistency in Land Use Plan 

implementation; tracks and measures the progress of implementing plans by connecting workload 

accomplishments to Land Use Plans; provides stable and attainable targets; and provides a valuable tool 

for prioritization and workload planning. This policy would be used to monitor implementation of the 

revised Jarbidge RMP unless directed otherwise by new guidance in the future.

“Establishing Implementation Priorities for Land Use Plans” involves is a three-step process. The first step 

is identifying the work associated with implementing the Land Use Plan, the geographic location of work 

in the planning area, and the accompanying program elements that measure that work. During the 

second step, the priority of the work identified in Step 1 is recorded in a plan implementation worksheet, 

which is updated annually. In step three, the field office schedules work into the out-years in the relevant 

columns of the plan implementation worksheet.

2.9.2 Effectiveness Monitoring

Effectiveness monitoring is the process of collecting data and information as the plan is being 

implemented in order to determine whether or not desired outcomes, expressed as goals and objectives 

in the RMP, are being met or whether progress is being made toward meeting them. This information is 

used during the land use plan evaluation process, which typically occurs every five years following the 

Record of Decision.

The effectiveness of the Jarbidge RMP in meeting its desired outcomes would be assessed by collecting 

on a periodic basis data and information relevant to specific objectives in the plan. To obtain data in a 

cost-effective manner; existing and ongoing monitoring activities would be used to the extent the data 

collected are pertinent to a plan objective. In most cases, effectiveness monitoring would be an annual 

effort, with a portion of the planning area being monitored each year in order to have sufficient monitoring 

data to use for each land use plan evaluation. 

The remainder of this section briefly outlines a monitoring strategy to evaluate whether desired outcomes 

are being achieved, including data to be collected and the methods and timeframes for collecting that 

data (Table 2-5). The strategy would be refined following the Record of Decision to be most relevant to 

the desired outcomes contained in the approved plan as well as the budget and personnel constraints 

existing at that time. The strategy is subject to change if BLM later determines different data, methods, or 

timeframes would provide more useful information for assessing the effectiveness of RMP decisions; the 

strategy may also be modified as necessary to be consistent with changes in law, regulation, or policy. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Monitoring Implementation and Effectiveness of RMP Decisions

Effectiveness Monitoring

•

•

•

•

•

•

2-393

The nature of some of the goals and objectives do not lend themselves to effectiveness monitoring. 

Monitoring of the management direction contained in the following sections of Chapter 2 would be limited 

to implementation monitoring:

Land Use Authorizations; 

 Land Tenure; 

Minerals; 

Social and Economic Conditions; 

Hazardous Materials; and

Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education. 

Table 2-5. Monitoring Strategy for Assessing Effectiveness of RMP Decisions

Section Strategy for Determining Whether RMP Objectives are Being Met

Tribal Rights and 

Interests

Every five years, assemble and assess monitoring data for natural and 

cultural resources listed below. 

Air and Atmospheric 

Values

Every five years, assemble and assess monitoring data collected by the Idaho 

Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) in or near the planning area.

Geologic Features

Monitor visitor impacts to unique geologic formations in conjunction with 

recreation, cultural resource, Wilderness Study Area, and Wild and Scenic 

River monitoring listed below.

Soil Resources

Evaluate soil and vegetation conditions in allotments at ten-year intervals or 

when appropriate prior to grazing permit renewal for compliance with Idaho 

Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing 

Management. Use methods such as those described in Technical Reference 

1734-6, Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health. 

Water Resources

Coordinate with the DEQ, Idaho Department of Water Resources, and 

Nevada Division of Environmental Protection to monitor water quality impaired 

streams or other priority streams as resource conditions warrant.

Upland Vegetation

Annually update the planning area vegetation map with new data resulting 

from fire or vegetation treatments; evaluate burned areas two years following 

fire. Annually evaluate up to 10% of the planning area to document vegetation 

changes due to natural succession.

Riparian Areas and 

Wetlands

Annually evaluate up to 20% of stream reaches with riparian vegetation and 

up to 10% of areas with wetland vegetation. Use methods described in 

Technical Reference 1737-15, A User Guide to Assessing Proper Functioning 

Condition and the Supporting Science for Lotic Areas, and Technical 

Reference 1737-16, A User Guide to Assessing Proper Functioning Condition 

and the Supporting Science for Lentic Areas. As available, use Multiple 

Indicator Monitoring (MIM) as described in Technical Reference 1737-23, 

Riparian Area Management Multiple Indicator Monitoring (MIM) of Stream 

Channels and Streamside Vegetation, to support Proper Functioning 

Condition assessments on perennial streams.

Fish

Use riparian area monitoring described above to determine changes to habitat 

quantity and quality for native non-game fish. Annually monitor aquatic habitat 

condition in conjunction with riparian Proper Functioning Condition monitoring.

Wildlife

Use monitoring and assessments for riparian and wetland areas, upland 

vegetation, and Idaho Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for 

Livestock Grazing Management to determine changes to habitat quantity and 

quality for wildlife. 
Chapter 2: Monitoring Implementation and Effectiveness of RMP Decisions Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Effectiveness Monitoring

2-394

Section Strategy for Determining Whether RMP Objectives are Being Met

Special Status Species

Use monitoring and assessments for riparian and wetland areas, upland 

vegetation, and Idaho Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for 

Livestock Grazing Management to determine changes to habitat quantity and 

quality for special status species. Monitor Type 1 and priority special status 

species according to current protocols, conservation agreements, and 

Endangered Species Act consultation requirements. Annually monitor aquatic 

habitat condition in conjunction with riparian Proper Functioning Condition

monitoring.

Noxious Weeds and 

Invasive Plants

Evaluate vegetation conditions relative to presence of noxious weeds and 

invasive plants in allotments at ten-year intervals prior to grazing permit 

renewal for compliance with Idaho Standards for Rangeland Health and 

Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management. Use methods described in 

Technical Reference 1734-6, Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health. 

Monitor areas treated in previous years to evaluate treatment effectiveness; 

prioritize areas monitored based on resource issues. 

Wildland Fire Ecology 

and Management

Every five years, evaluate wildland fire size, the number of human-caused 

fires, and the number of acres burned within and outside the wildland-urban 

interface. Update Fire Regime Condition Class analysis when 20% of the 

planning area has been disturbed by wildland fire or treated by fuels projects 

or every 5 years. Every five years, evaluate acres of fuels treatments and fire 

size in critical suppression areas to determine fuels treatment effectiveness.

Wild Horses Monitor population trends in accordance with BLM Handbook H-4700-1.

Paleontological 

Resources

Annually evaluate condition of up to five vertebrate fossil localities or 

scientifically important invertebrate or plant fossil localities based on level of 

threat; determine if localities are stable or deteriorating. Monitoring would be 

recorded through written and photographic documentation.

Cultural Resources

Annually evaluate the condition of up to 30 sites based on type of site and 

level of threat; determine if sites are stable or deteriorating. Monitoring would 

focus on National Register eligible and listed properties and Native American 

traditional cultural properties. Monitoring would be recorded through written 

and photographic documentation.

Visual Resources

Annually evaluate if preservation or retention of the existing character of 

landscapes on BLM-managed lands allocated for Visual Resource 

Management (VRM) Class I and II management have been met; partial 

retention of the existing character on lands allocated for VRM Class III 

management and major modification of the existing character of some lands 

allocated for VRM Class IV management.

Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics

The BLM must maintain and update as necessary, its inventory of wilderness 

resources on public lands. An adequate record of the inventory and 

subsequent updates would be maintained to ensure proper documentation of 

inventory findings, including relevant narratives, maps, photographs, new 

information, and any other relevant information. 

Livestock Grazing

Evaluate soil and vegetation conditions in allotments at ten-year intervals prior 

to grazing permit renewal for compliance with Idaho Standards for Rangeland 

Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management. Use methods 

described in Technical Reference 1734-6, Interpreting Indicators of 

Rangeland Health. Use MIM as described in Idaho Technical Bulletin 2011-01 

to evaluate livestock use on riparian areas that are not at Proper Functioning 

Condition. Monitor livestock use according to allotment-specific grazing use 

indicators and criteria. Update geospatial data for range infrastructure as 

changes occur. Annually monitor 20% of reference areas to evaluate fence 

and vegetation condition; use methods appropriate to reference area 

resources.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Monitoring Implementation and Effectiveness of RMP Decisions

Effectiveness Monitoring

2-395

•

•

•

•

•

•

Section Strategy for Determining Whether RMP Objectives are Being Met

Recreation

Annually monitor visitor use in Special Recreation Management Areas 

including type of use, group size, visitor satisfaction, recreation caused 

resource effects or impacts, and facility and setting condition; monitor 

Extensive Recreation Management Areas to evaluate user health and safety, 

user conflicts, and resource protection.

Transportation and 

Travel Management

Following the signing of the Record of Decision for the RMP, the Travel 

Management Plan (TMP) should be completed within five years. A monitoring 

plan would be developed in the TMP which would include monitoring needs 

related to a designated transportation and travel system:

Unauthorized route development, 

Identification of maintenance needs, 

Fence and barrier conditions, 

Safety issues, 

Impacts to sensitive resources, and

Sign and information kiosk condition and placement.

Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern 

(ACECs)

Every five years, evaluate condition of relevant and important values within 

designated ACECs using monitoring data described above for natural and 

cultural resources.

National Historic Trails 

(NHTs)

Annually monitor segments of the Oregon NHT to assess the physical 

condition of the trail and its historic and recreational setting. Monitoring would 

be recorded through written and photographic documentation. Incorporate 

soil, vegetation, visual resource, and other pertinent resource monitoring data 

as appropriate.

Wilderness

Monitor wilderness character and ensure that all activities within the BruneauJarbidge Rivers Wilderness are in conformance with BLM Manual 6340, 

Management of Designated Wilderness Areas, the Owyhee Canyonlands 

Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Plan, and Measuring 

Attributes of Wilderness Character: BLM Implementation Guide. 

Wild and Scenic Rivers 

(WSRs)

Annually monitor eligible and suitable (WSR) segments to evaluate whether 

the free-flowing condition, water quality and outstandingly remarkable values 

are being maintained. Designated WSR segments would conform to the 

monitoring strategy to maintain desired conditions contained within the 

Owyhee Canyonlands Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Management 

Plan.

Wilderness Study Area 

(WSA)

Monitor the WSA monthly in accordance with BLM Manual 6330, 

Management of BLM Wilderness Study Areas.

Note: Where specific protocols, technical references, manuals, and handbooks are noted, updated versions would be 

used as they become available.
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

2-396

2.10 SUMMARY TABLES

2.10.1 Comparison of Alternatives

Table 2-6 provides a summary of the primary differences among the seven alternatives; differences between the two sub-alternatives of Alternative IV are 

described only where they occur. In general, only those resources and uses that have been identified as being a planning issue or are related to a planning issue 

have differences among the action alternatives.

Differences relating to the wording of goals, objectives, allocations, and management actions in the main text of Chapter 2 and the wording in the summary table 

should not be construed to confine or redefine management contained within alternatives. Some wording was modified to be more concise in the summary table. 

Sections are summarized in the order in which they appear in Chapter 2.

Table 2-6. Summary Comparison of Alternatives

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

TRIBAL RIGHTS AND INTERESTS (TI)

Goals and Objectives 

No goal or objective 

stated.

TI-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to protect resources and values associated with Native American treaty rights. 

TI-CA-G-2. Manage natural and cultural resources of importance to the tribes in a manner that respects tribal beliefs, traditions, and values.

TI-CA-G-3. Protect the physical condition of sacred sites and traditional cultural properties and preserve tribal access to such sites.

RESOURCES

Air and Atmospheric Values (AAV)

Goals and Objectives 

No goal or objective 

stated.

AAV-CA-G-1. Ensure BLM management activities and authorized uses maintain the quality of the planning area's air resources.

AAV-CA-O-1. Maintain the quality of air resources and limit impacts to air quality to meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Idaho Department of 

Environmental Quality air quality standards.

Geologic Features (GE)

Goals and Objectives

No goal or objective 

stated.

GE-CA-G-1. Manage unique geologic features for their tribal, scientific, recreational, and educational values.

GE-CA-O-1. Protect unique geologic features and provide opportunities for their use and enjoyment.

Soil Resources (SR)

Goals and Objectives

SR-NA-O-1. Manage 

soils to maintain 

productivity and to 

minimize erosion.

SR-CA-G-1. Manage resources and uses to maintain or enhance biological and physical functions and stability of soils.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

2-397

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Water Resources (WR)

Goals and Objectives 

WR-NA-O-1. Maintain 

or improve water 

quality in accordance 

with Federal and State 

standards.

WR-CA-G-1. Maintain or improve the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of water resources.

WR-CA-O-1. Make progress towards meeting Federal and State water quality standards.

Vegetation Communities

Upland Vegetation (UV)

Goals and Objectives 

UV-NA-O-1. Improve 

lands in poor 

ecological condition 

across all Multiple Use 

Areas (MUAs). 

Improve lands in MUA 

14 through natural 

plant succession and 

removal of livestock. 

Maintain lands that are 

in good and excellent 

ecological condition in 

MUA 10.

UV-NA-O-2. Maintain 

non-native perennial 

communities.

UV-CA-G-1. Manage upland vegetation communities to promote soil stability, water infiltration, nutrient cycling, and energy flow; provide habitat for sagegrouse and other sagebrush steppe obligates; and provide for multiple use.

UV-I-G-1. Manage 

vegetation to enhance 

and sustain existing 

and historic uses and 

to improve big game 

winter range and 

habitat for sagegrouse.

UV-I-O-1 to 4. Manage 

vegetation to achieve 

the vegetation subgroup (VSG) acres (+/- 

5%) described below:

Vegetation 

Management Area 

(VMA) A 

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 56,000

Non-Native

Perennial 96,000

Non-Native

Understory 3,000

Native

Grassland 42,000

Native

UV-II-G-1. Manage 

vegetation to increase 

commercial uses while 

maintaining native 

plant communities and 

habitat for sagegrouse.

UV-II-O-1 to 4.

Manage vegetation to 

achieve the VSG acres 

(+/- 5%) described 

below:

VMA A

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 33,000

Non-Native

Perennial 144,000

Non-Native

Understory 3,000

Native

Grassland 34,000

Native

Shrubland 5,000

Unvegetated

Areas 2,000

UV-III-G-1. Manage 

vegetation to reduce 

wildland fire size and 

intensity while 

maintaining habitat for 

sage-grouse.

UV-III-O-1 to 4.

Manage vegetation to 

achieve the VSG acres 

(+/- 5%) described 

below:

VMA A

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 42,000

Non-Native

Perennial 128,000

Non-Native

Understory 3,000

Native

Grassland 37,000

Native

Shrubland 5,000

Unvegetated

Areas 6,000

UV-IV-G-1. Manage 

vegetation to restore 

the resiliency of 

ecosystem structure 

and function and 

reduce fragmentation 

of habitat for sagegrouse and other 

native species.

UV-IV-O-1 to 4.

Manage vegetation to 

achieve the VSG acres 

(+/- 5%) described 

below:

VMA A

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 33,000

Non-Native

Perennial 88,000

Non-Native

Understory 3,000

Native

Grassland 17,000

Native

Shrubland 78,000

UV-V-G-1. Manage 

vegetation to move 

toward historic 

vegetation 

communities by 

sustaining, improving, 

or increasing native 

plant communities that 

provide habitat for 

sage-grouse and other 

special status species.

UV-V-O-1 to 4.

Manage vegetation to 

achieve the VSG acres 

(+/- 5%) described 

below:

VMA A

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 62,000

Non-Native

Perennial 72,000

Non-Native

Understory 26,000

Native

Grassland 34,000

UV-VI-G-1. Manage 

vegetation to restore 

the ability of the 

ecosystem to recover 

following a disturbance 

and reduce 

fragmentation of 

habitat for sagegrouse and other 

native species.

UV-VI-O-1 to 4.

Manage vegetation to 

achieve the VSG acres 

(+/- 5%) described 

below:

VMA A

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 56,000

Non-Native

Perennial 96,000

Non-Native

Understory 3,000

Native

Grassland 42,000

Native
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

2-398

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Shrubland 22,000

Unvegetated

Areas 2,000

VMA B

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 20,000

Non-Native

Perennial 169,000

Non-Native

Understory 13,000

Native

Grassland 106,000

Native

Shrubland 298,000

Unvegetated

Areas 24,000

VMA C

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 2,000

Non-Native

Perennial 30,000

Non-Native

Understory 7,000

Native

Grassland 75,000

Native

Shrubland 188,000

Unvegetated

Areas 11,000

VMA B

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 10,000

Non-Native

Perennial 247,000

Non-Native

Understory 13,000

Native

Grassland 211,000

Native

Shrubland 125,000

Unvegetated

Areas 24,000

VMA C

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 2,000

Non-Native

Perennial 59,000

Non-Native

Understory 13,000

Native

Grassland 150,000

Native

Shrubland 78,000

Unvegetated

Areas 11,000

VMA D

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 500

Non-Native

VMA B

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 10,000

Non-Native

Perennial 242,000

Non-Native

Understory 19,000

Native

Grassland 96,000

Native

Shrubland 230,000

Unvegetated

Areas 33,000

VMA C

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 2,000

Non-Native

Perennial 49,000

Non-Native

Understory 26,000

Native

Grassland 68,000

Native

Shrubland 152,000

Unvegetated

Areas 16,000

VMA D

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 250

Non-Native

Unvegetated

Areas 2,000

VMA B

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 10,000

Non-Native

Perennial 73,000

Non-Native

Understory 76,000

Native

Grassland 106,000

Native

Shrubland 341,000

Unvegetated

Areas 24,000

VMA C

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 2,000

Non-Native

Perennial 0 

Non-Native

Understory 48,000

Native

Grassland 37,000

Native

Shrubland 215,000

Unvegetated

Areas 11,000

VMA D

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 500

Native

Shrubland 25,000

Unvegetated

Areas 2,000

VMA B

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 20,000

Non-Native

Perennial 70,000

Non-Native

Understory 160,000

Native

Grassland 141,000

Native

Shrubland 215,000

Unvegetated

Areas 24,000

VMA C

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 2,000

Non-Native

Perennial 14,000

Non-Native

Understory 58,000

Native

Grassland 75,000

Native

Shrubland 153,000

Unvegetated

Areas 11,000

Shrubland 22,000

Unvegetated

Areas 2,000

VMA B

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 10,000

Non-Native

Perennial 73,000

Non-Native

Understory 76,000

Native

Grassland 106,000

Native

Shrubland 341,000

Unvegetated

Areas 24,000

VMA C

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 2,000

Non-Native

Perennial 30,000

Non-Native

Understory 17,000

Native

Grassland 37,000

Native

Shrubland 216,000

Unvegetated

Areas 11,000
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

2-399

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

VMA D

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 500

Non-Native

Perennial 13,000

Non-Native

Understory 12,000

Native

Grassland 19,000

Native

Shrubland 150,000

Unvegetated

Areas 11,000

Perennial 5,000

Non-Native

Understory 12,000

Native

Grassland 80,000

Native

Shrubland 97,000

Unvegetated

Areas 11,000

Perennial 6,000

Non-Native

Understory 11,000

Native

Grassland 57,000

Native

Shrubland 119,000

Unvegetated

Areas 12,000

Non-Native

Perennial 0 

Non-Native

Understory 5,000

Native

Grassland 8,000

Native

Shrubland 181,000

Unvegetated

Areas 11,000

VMA D

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 500

Non-Native

Perennial 1,000

Non-Native

Understory 15,000

Native

Grassland 27,000

Native

Shrubland 151,000

Unvegetated

Areas 11,000

VMA D

VSG Desired Acres

Annual 500 

Non-Native

Perennial 0 

Non-Native

Understory 5,000

Native

Grassland 40,000

Native

Shrubland 149,000

Unvegetated

Areas 11,000

Riparian Areas and Wetlands (RI)

Goal and Objectives 

RI-NA-O-1. Maintain 

1987 condition of 

riparian habitat in 

Multiple Use Areas 

(MUAs) 4, 6, 7, 12, 13, 

and 16; improve 44.4 

miles of riparian 

habitat in MUAs 10, 

11, 14, and 15.

RI-CA-G-1. Achieve healthy, functioning watersheds, riparian areas, wetlands, and associated aquatic habitats.

RI-CA-G-2. Provide habitat to support populations of well-distributed native and desired non-native plant, vertebrate, and invertebrate populations that 

contribute to the sustainability of riparian-dependent communities. 

RI-CA-G-3. Maintain or improve naturally functioning vegetation communities that include natural timing and variability of surface and groundwater in 

riparian areas and wetlands, and diversity and productivity of native and desired non-native plant communities.

RI-I-O-1. Maintain 85 

miles of Priority 3 

streams at proper 

functioning condition 

(PFC); improve 60 

miles of Priority 1 

streams to achieve 

PFC; and improve the 

remaining 17 miles of 

Priority 1 streams and 

63 miles of Priority 2 

streams to be moving 

toward PFC over the 

life of the plan. 

RI-I-O-2. Manage 

wetlands to move 

toward PFC.

RI-II-O-1. Maintain 85 

miles of Priority 3 

streams at PFC and 

improve the Priority 1 

and 2 streams to be 

moving toward PFC 

over the life of the 

plan. 

RI-II-O-2. Manage 

wetlands to move 

toward PFC.

RI-III-O-1. Maintain 85 

miles of Priority 3 

streams at PFC; 

improve 77 miles of 

Priority 1 streams and 

21 miles of Priority 2 

streams to achieve 

PFC; and improve the 

remaining 42 miles of 

Priority 2 streams to be 

moving toward PFC 

over the life of the 

plan. 

RI-III-O-2. Manage 

wetlands to move 

toward PFC.

RI-IV-O-1. Maintain 85 

miles of Priority 3 

streams at PFC; 

improve 77 miles of 

Priority 1 streams and 

21 miles of Priority 2 

streams to achieve 

PFC; and improve the 

remaining 42 miles of 

Priority 2 streams to be 

moving toward PFC 

over the life of the 

plan.

RI-IV-O-2. Manage 

wetlands to move 

toward PFC.

RI-V-O-1. Maintain 85 

miles of Priority 3 

streams at PFC; 

improve 77 miles of 

Priority 1 streams and 

21 miles of Priority 2 

streams to achieve 

PFC; and improve the 

remaining 42 miles of 

Priority 2 streams to be 

moving toward PFC 

over the life of the 

plan.

RI-V-O-2. Manage 

wetlands to move 

toward PFC.

RI-VI-O-1. Maintain 85 

miles of Priority 3 

streams at PFC; 

improve 77 miles of 

Priority 1 streams and 

21 miles of Priority 2 

streams to achieve 

PFC; and improve the 

remaining 42 miles of 

Priority 2 streams to 

move towards PFC 

over the life of the 

plan.

RI-VI-O-2 Manage 

wetlands not 

associated with 

streams (springs, 

seeps, playas) to 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

2-400

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

achieve PFC.

Fish and Wildlife

Fish (FI)

Goals and Objectives 

FI-NA-O-1. Maintain 

1987 condition of fish 

habitat in Multiple Use 

Areas (MUAs) 7 and 

13; improve 39.4 miles 

of fisheries habitat in 

MUAs 10, 11, 12, and 

15. 

FI-I-G-1. Manage 

public lands to 

promote diverse, 

structured, resilient, 

and connected 

habitats for fish. 

FI-I-O-1. Maintain or 

improve streams so 

70% of the miles of 

non-game fish-bearing 

streams are managed 

for properly functioning 

condition. The 

remaining 30% of nongame fish-bearing 

streams would be 

moving toward 

properly functioning 

condition. 

FI-II-G-1. Manage 

public lands to 

maintain or improve 

habitat for fish.

FI-II-O-1. Maintain or 

improve all non-game 

fish-bearing streams 

so they remain or are 

moving toward 

properly functioning 

condition.

FI-III-G-1. Manage 

public lands to 

maintain habitat for 

fish while reducing 

wildland fire size and 

intensity.

FI-III-O-1. Maintain or 

improve all non-game 

fish-bearing streams 

so they remain or are 

moving toward 

properly functioning 

condition.

FI-IV-G-1. Manage 

public lands to 

promote diverse, 

structured, resilient, 

and connected 

habitats for non-game 

fish. 

FI-IV-O-1. Maintain or 

improve streams so 

70% of the miles of 

non-game fish-bearing 

streams and their 

perennial tributaries

are managed for 

properly functioning 

condition. The 

remaining 30% of 

miles of non-game 

fish-bearing streams 

and their perennial 

tributaries would be 

moving toward 

properly functioning 

condition.

FI-V-G-1. Manage 

public lands to 

promote diverse, 

structured, resilient, 

and connected 

habitats for fish.

FI-V-O-1. Maintain or 

improve streams so 

70% of the miles of 

non-game fish-bearing 

streams and their 

perennial tributaries 

are managed for 

properly functioning 

condition. The 

remaining 30% of 

miles of non-game 

fish-bearing streams 

and their perennial 

tributaries would be 

moving toward 

properly functioning 

condition.

FI-VI-G-1. Manage 

public lands to 

promote diverse, 

structured, resilient, 

and connected 

habitats for non-game 

fish. 

FI-VI-O-1. Maintain 85 

miles of Priority 3 

streams at proper 

functioning condition 

(PFC); improve 77 

miles of Priority 1 

streams and 21 miles 

of Priority 2 streams to 

achieve PFC; and 

improve the remaining 

42 miles of Priority 2 

streams and 20 miles 

of streams with 

unknown PFC rating to 

move towards PFC 

over the life of the 

plan.

FI-VI-O-2. Manage the 

72 miles of stream 

containing only native 

non-game fish (as 

identified in Appendix 

D, page A-112) to 

maintain or improve 

habitat condition.

Wildlife (WI)

Goals and Objectives

WI-NA-O-1. Maintain 

present levels of 

upland game nesting 

WI-I-G-1. Manage 

public lands to 

promote diverse, 

WI-II-G-1. Manage 

public lands to 

maintain or improve 

WI-III-G-1. Manage 

public lands to 

maintain habitat for 

WI-IV-G-1. Manage 

public lands to 

promote diverse, 

WI-V-G-1. Manage 

public lands to 

promote diverse, 

WI-VI-G-1. Manage 

public lands to 

promote diverse, 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

2-401

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

and cover habitat in 

Multiple Use Areas 

(MUAs) 6, 7, and 10

(Map 3).

WI-NA-O-2. Manage 

3,990 acres of the 

cheatgrass study area 

for curlews (MUA 7; 

Map 3). 

WI-NA-O-3. Manage 

all wildlife habitat 

within the planning

area to provide a 

diversity of vegetation 

and habitats. 

WI-NA-O-4. Manage 

big game habitat to 

support 7,360 winter 

mule deer and 2,565 

mule deer year-round 

across all MUAs; 1,932 

pronghorn in MUAs 7, 

10, 11, 12, 13, 15, and 

16; and 364 bighorn 

sheep in MUAs 10, 15, 

and 16 (Map 3).

WI-NA-O-5. Protect 

crucial winter big game 

habitat and bighorn 

sheep habitat in MUAs 

10 and 15, and 

improve 8,750 acres of 

bighorn sheep and big 

game habitat in MUAs 

11, 15, and 16 (Map 

3). 

structured, resilient, 

and connected 

habitats for wildlife.

WI-I-O-1. Maintain or 

improve habitat for big 

game species by 

managing uses and 

activities and actively 

restoring annual, nonnative perennial, and 

native communities.

habitat for wildlife.

WI-II-O-1. Maintain or 

improve wildlife habitat 

in native communities 

while promoting 

commercial uses 

throughout the 

planning area.

wildlife while reducing 

wildland fire size and 

intensity.

WI-III-O-1. Maintain 

wildlife habitat in native 

communities while 

reducing wildland fire 

size and intensity 

throughout the 

planning area.

structured, resilient, 

and connected 

habitats for wildlife.

WI-IV-O-1. Maintain or 

improve wildlife habitat 

by managing uses and 

activities and actively 

restoring annual, nonnative perennial, and 

native communities.

structured, resilient, 

and connected 

habitats for wildlife.

WI-V-O-1. Maintain or 

improve wildlife habitat 

by managing uses and 

activities and actively 

restoring annual and 

non-native perennial 

communities toward 

historic vegetation 

communities.

structured, resilient, 

and connected 

habitats for wildlife.

WI-VI-O-1. Maintain or 

improve wildlife habitat 

by managing uses and 

activities and actively 

restoring annual, nonnative perennial, and 

native communities.

Special Status Species (SS)

Goals and Objectives 

SS-NA-O-1. Protect 

and enhance 

Endangered, 

SS-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to contribute to the conservation and recovery of sage-grouse and other special status species.

SS-I-O-1. Maintain or SS-II-O-1. Maintain or SS-III-O-1. Maintain or SS-IV-O-1. Maintain or SS-V-O-1. Maintain or SS-VI-O-1. Maintain or 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

2-402

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Threatened, and 

Sensitive species’ 

habitats in order to 

maintain or enhance 

populations within the 

planning area. 

Enhance, restore 

and/or maintain habitat 

conditions and 

availability for special 

status species and

prevent all avoidable 

loss of habitat.

improve the quality 

and quantity of habitat 

for sage-grouse and 

other special status 

species by managing 

public land activities to 

sustain or benefit 

those species.

improve the quality of 

habitat for sage-grouse 

and other special 

status species by 

managing public land 

activities to sustain or 

benefit those species.

improve the quality of 

habitat for sage-grouse 

and other special 

status species by 

managing public land 

activities to sustain or 

benefit those species. 

improve the quality 

and quantity of habitat 

for sage-grouse and 

other special status 

species by managing 

public land activities to 

sustain or benefit 

those species.

improve the quality 

and quantity of habitat 

for sage-grouse and 

other special status 

species by managing 

public land activities to 

sustain or benefit 

those species.

improve the quality 

and quantity of habitat 

for sage-grouse and 

other special status 

species by managing 

public land activities to 

sustain or benefit 

those species.

Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants (NW)

Goals and Objectives 

No goal or objective 

stated.

NW-CA-G-1. Manage public lands to prevent, eliminate, or control noxious weeds and invasive plants.

NW-I-O-1. Reduce the 

number of acres 

containing noxious 

weeds by at least 10%; 

reduce the number of 

noxious weed species 

present.

NW-I-O-2. Reduce 

cover of invasive 

plants in native 

communities to less 

than 5%; reduce cover 

of invasive plants in 

non-native perennial 

and non-native 

understory 

communities to less 

than10%.

NW-II-O-1. Reduce the 

number of acres 

containing noxious 

weeds by at least 10%; 

reduce the number of 

noxious weed species 

present.

NW-II-O-2. Reduce 

cover of invasive 

plants in native 

communities to less 

than 10%; reduce 

cover of invasive 

plants in non-native 

perennial and nonnative understory 

communities to less 

than 15%.

NW-III-O-1. Manage 

uses and treat noxious 

weeds such that there 

is no net increase in 

the number of acres 

containing noxious 

weeds; reduce the 

number of noxious 

weed species present.

NW-III-O-2. Reduce 

cover of invasive 

plants in native 

communities to less 

than 5%; reduce cover 

of invasive plants in 

non-native perennial 

and non-native 

understory 

communities to less 

than 5%.

NW-IV-O-1. Reduce 

the number of acres 

containing noxious 

weeds by at least 50%; 

reduce the number of 

noxious weed species 

present.

NW-IV-O-2. Reduce 

cover of invasive 

plants in native 

communities to less 

than 5%; reduce cover 

of invasive plants in 

non-native perennial 

and non-native 

understory 

communities to less 

than 10%.

NW-V-O-1. Reduce 

the number of acres 

containing noxious 

weeds by at least 20%; 

reduce the number of 

noxious weed species 

present. 

NW-V-O-2. Reduce 

cover of invasive 

plants in native 

communities to less 

than 5%; reduce cover 

of invasive plants in 

non-native perennial 

and non-native 

understory 

communities to less 

than 10%.

NW-VI-O-1. Manage 

uses and treat noxious 

weeds such that there 

is no net increase in 

the number of acres 

containing noxious 

weeds; reduce the 

number of noxious 

weed species present.

NW-VI-O-2. Reduce 

cover of invasive 

plants in native , nonnative perennial, and 

non-native understory 

communities to less 

than 5%.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2-403

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Wildland Fire Ecology and Management

Wildland Fire Management (WFM)

Goals and Objectives 

No goal or objective 

stated.

WFM-CA-G-1. Fire management strategies would result in firefighter and public safety and protection of property and natural and cultural resources, while 

considering suppression and rehabilitation costs.

WFM-I-O-1. Strive to 

reduce average 

wildland fire size and 

number of humancaused fire starts 

within the Wildland 

Urban Interface (WUI). 

WFM-I-O-2. Reduce 

acres burned in 

vegetation types 

outside the WUI where 

more wildland fires 

have burned than 

desired/historic levels

to enhance and 

sustain existing and 

historic uses of the 

planning area.

WFM-II-O-1. Strive to 

reduce average 

wildland fire size and 

number of humancaused fire starts 

within the WUI. 

WFM-II-O-2. Reduce 

acres burned in 

vegetation types 

outside the WUI where 

more wildland fires 

have burned than 

desired/historic levels

to facilitate commercial 

use of the planning 

area.

WFM-III-O-1. Strive to 

reduce average 

wildland fire size, 

number of humancaused fire starts, and 

number of acres 

burned within and 

outside the WUI 

throughout the 

planning area.

WFM-IV-O-1. Strive to 

reduce average 

wildland fire size and 

number of humancaused fire starts 

within the WUI.

WFM-IV-O-2. Reduce 

acres burned in 

vegetation types 

outside the WUI where 

more wildland fires 

have burned than 

desired/historic levels

to achieve resilient 

ecosystem structure 

and function.

WFM-V-O-1. Strive to 

reduce average 

wildland fire size and 

number of humancaused fire starts 

within the WUI. 

WFM-V-O-2. Reduce 

acres burned in 

vegetation types 

outside the WUI where 

more wildland fires 

have burned than in 

the historic fire regime.

WFM-VI-O-1. Strive to 

reduce average 

wildland fire size, 

number of humancaused fire starts, and 

number of acres 

burned within and 

outside the WUI 

throughout the 

planning area.

Allocation

WFM-NA-A-1. Manage 

1,371,000 acres for full 

suppression. 

Aggressively suppress 

all fires on or 

threatening public 

lands.

WFM-CA-A-1. The planning area would not be available for Wildland Fire Use (1,371,000 acres).

WFM-I-A-1. Critical 

suppression areas 

within the planning 

area would be

(491,000 acres): 

WUI; 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, 

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon, Middle 

Snake, and 

Salmon Falls 

Creek Areas of 

Critical 

Environmental 

Concerns

WFM-II-A-1. Critical 

suppression areas 

within the planning 

area would be 

(170,000 acres):

WUI.

The acres and specific 

locations for the WUI 

can be updated to 

reflect changing 

conditions. 

WFM-II-A-2. The 

remainder of the 

planning area would 

WFM-III-A-1. Critical 

suppression areas 

within the planning 

area would be

(476,000 acres): 

WUI,

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

and Salmon Falls 

Creek ACECs, 

and 

Key sage-grouse 

habitat.

The types of critical 

suppression areas 

WFM-IV-A-1. Critical 

suppression areas 

within the planning 

area would be

(594,000 acres in 

Alternative VI-A; 

552,000 acres in 

Alternative VI-B): 

WUI; 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, 

Inside Desert, 

Jarbidge Foothills, 

and Lower 

Bruneau Canyon 

ACECs; and 

WFM-V-A-1. Critical 

suppression areas 

within the planning 

area would be

(1,041,000 acres): 

WUI; 

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon, Middle 

Snake, and 

Sagebrush Sea 

ACECs; and 

Key sage-grouse 

habitat.

The types of critical 

suppression areas 

WFM-VI-A-1. Critical 

suppression areas 

within the planning 

area would be 

(597,000 acres):

WUI,

ACECs,

Saylor Creek Herd 

Management 

Area, 

 Occupied habitat 

and designated 

critical habitat for 

slickspot 

peppergrass, 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

•

• •

•

2-404

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

(ACECs); and 

Key sage-grouse 

habitat.

The types of critical 

suppression areas 

would remain the 

same throughout the 

life of the plan; 

however, the acres 

and specific locations 

for the WUI and key 

sage-grouse habitat 

can be updated to 

reflect changing 

conditions. 

WFM-I-A-2. The 

remainder of the 

planning area would 

be a conditional 

suppression area

(880,000 acres).

be a conditional 

suppression area 

(1,201,000 acres).

would remain the 

same throughout the 

life of the plan; 

however, the acres 

and specific locations 

for the WUI and key 

sage-grouse habitat 

can be updated to 

reflect changing 

conditions. 

WFM-III-A-2. The 

remainder of the 

planning area would 

be a conditional 

suppression area

(895,000 acres). 

Key sage-grouse 

habitat.

The types of critical 

suppression areas 

would remain the 

same throughout the 

life of the plan; 

however, the acres 

and specific locations 

for the WUI and key 

sage-grouse habitat 

can be updated to 

reflect changing 

conditions. 

WFM-IV-A-2. The 

remainder of the 

planning area would 

be a conditional 

suppression area

(778,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 

819,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B). 

would remain the 

same throughout the 

life of the plan; 

however, the acres 

and specific locations 

for the WUI and key 

sage-grouse habitat 

can be updated to 

reflect changing 

conditions. 

WFM-V-A-2. The 

remainder of the 

planning area would 

be a conditional 

suppression area

(331,000 acres). 

 Designated critical 

habitat for bull 

trout, and

 Key sage-grouse 

habitat.

The types of critical 

suppression areas 

would remain the 

same throughout the 

life of the plan; 

however, acres and 

specific locations for 

the WUI, slickspot 

peppergrass habitat, 

and key sage-grouse 

habitat can be updated 

to reflect changing 

conditions. See Map 

36 for the locations of 

these areas.

WFM-VI-A-2. The 

remainder of the 

planning area would 

be a conditional 

suppression area 

(774,000 acres). 

Fuels and Emergency Stabilization and Burned Area Rehabilitation (ES&BAR) (FE)

Goals and Objectives 

FE-NA-O-1.

Rehabilitate public 

lands affected by 

wildland fires to 

accomplish multiple 

use objectives and 

designed to reduce fire 

size.

FE-CA-G-1. Reduce fire hazard within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). 

FE-CA-O-1. Manage plant communities within the WUI to reduce relative risk rating.

FE-I-O-1. Manage 

plant communities 

outside the WUI to 

move toward Fire 

Regime Condition 

Class (FRCC) 1.

FE-I-O-2. Implement 

fuels treatments to 

protect critical 

suppression areas; 

FE-II-G-1. Manage 

vegetation 

communities outside 

the WUI to maintain or 

restore their fire 

regimes and mosaic of 

successional classes 

to within their historic 

range.

FE-II-O-1. Manage 

FE-III-G-1. Manage 

vegetation 

communities to 

lengthen the fire return 

interval.

FE-III-O-1. Manage 

native plant 

communities outside 

the WUI to move 

toward FRCC 1. 

FE-IV-G-1. Manage 

vegetation 

communities outside 

the WUI to maintain or 

restore their fire 

regimes and mosaic of 

successional classes 

to within their historic 

range.

FE-IV-O-1. Manage 

FE-V-G-1. Manage 

vegetation 

communities outside 

the WUI to maintain or 

restore their fire 

regimes and mosaic of 

successional classes 

to within their historic 

range.

FE-V-O-1. Manage 

FE-VI-G-1. Manage 

vegetation 

communities outside 

the WUI to maintain or 

restore their fire 

regimes and mosaic of 

successional classes 

to within their historic 

range.

FE-VI-O-1. Manage 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

2-405

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

limit the spread, size, 

and intensity of 

wildland fire; and 

maintain or improve 

vegetation.

FE-I-O-3. Rehabilitate 

and stabilize areas to 

help stabilize soils, 

promote natural 

recovery, and establish 

pre-fire or historic 

vegetation 

communities.

native plant 

communities outside 

the WUI, excluding 

Sandberg/non-native 

areas, to move toward 

FRCC 1. Manage nonnative plant 

communities and 

Sandberg/non-native 

areas for commodity 

use, which may not be 

toward FRCC 1. 

FE-II-O-2. Implement 

fuels treatments to 

protect critical 

suppression areas; 

limit the spread, size, 

and intensity of 

wildland fire; and 

maintain or improve

vegetation.

FE-II-O-3. Rehabilitate 

and stabilize areas to 

help stabilize soils, 

promote natural 

recovery, and establish 

pre-fire or historic 

vegetation 

communities.

Manage non-native 

plant communities to 

reduce wildland fire 

size and intensity, 

which may not be 

toward FRCC 1.

FE-III-O-2. Implement 

fuels treatments to 

protect critical 

suppression areas and 

limit the spread, size, 

and intensity of 

wildland fire.

FE-III-O-3. Rehabilitate 

and stabilize areas to 

help stabilize soils, 

promote natural 

recovery, and establish 

fire-tolerant vegetation 

communities.

plant communities 

outside the WUI to 

move toward FRCC 1.

FE-IV-O-2. Implement 

fuels treatments to 

protect critical 

suppression areas; 

limit the spread, size, 

and intensity of 

wildland fire; and 

maintain or improve 

vegetation.

FE-IV-O-3.

Rehabilitate and 

stabilize areas to help 

stabilize soils, promote 

natural recovery, and 

establish pre-fire or 

historic vegetation 

communities.

plant communities 

outside the WUI to 

move toward FRCC 1.

FE-V-O-2. Implement 

fuels treatments to 

protect critical 

suppression areas; 

limit the spread, size, 

and intensity of 

wildland fire; and 

maintain or improve 

vegetation.

FE-V-O-3. Rehabilitate 

and stabilize areas to 

help stabilize soils, 

promote natural 

recovery, and establish 

pre-fire or historic 

vegetation 

communities.

native plant 

communities outside 

the WUI to move 

toward FRCC 1. 

Manage non-native 

plant communities to 

reduce wildland fire 

size and intensity.

FE-VI-O-2. Implement 

fuels treatments to 

protect critical 

suppression areas; 

limit the spread, size, 

and intensity of 

wildland fire; and 

maintain or improve 

vegetation.

FE-VI-O-3.

Rehabilitate and 

stabilize areas to help 

stabilize soils, promote 

natural recovery, and 

establish pre-fire or 

historic vegetation 

communities.

Wild Horses (WH)

Goals and Objectives

WH-NA-G-1. A viable, 

healthy population of 

wild horses will be 

maintained in 

accordance with 

Federal law.

WH-NA-O-1. Provide 

forage to support a 

herd of 50 wild horses 

in the Saylor Creek 

WH-I-G-1. The Saylor 

Creek Wild Horse 

HMA would be 

managed for a thriving 

natural ecological 

balance.

WH-I-O-1. Manage a 

reproducing herd with 

an appropriate 

management level 

WH-II-G-1. Manage 

the Saylor Creek Wild 

Horse Herd Area as an 

unpopulated herd area 

for a population of zero 

wild horses.

WH-III-G-1. The Saylor 

Creek Wild Horse 

HMA would be 

managed for a thriving 

natural ecological 

balance.

WH-III-O-1. Manage a 

reproducing herd with 

an AML range of 200 

to 600 wild horses in 

WH-IV-G-1. The 

Saylor Creek Wild 

Horse HMA would be 

managed for a thriving 

natural ecological 

balance.

WH-IV-O-1. Manage a 

non-reproducing herd 

with an AML range of 

100 to 200 wild horses 

WH-V-G-1. The Saylor 

Creek Wild Horse 

HMA would be 

managed for a thriving 

natural ecological 

balance.

WH-V-O-1. Manage a 

non-reproducing herd 

with an AML range of 

200 to 500 wild horses 

WH-VI-G-1. The 

Saylor Creek Wild 

Horse HMA would be 

managed for a thriving 

natural ecological 

balance.

WH-VI-O-1. Manage a 

non-reproducing herd 

with an AML range of 

50 to 200 wild horses 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

2-406

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Wild Horse Herd 

Management Area 

(HMA). 

(AML) range of 100 to 

200 wild horses in the 

Saylor Creek Wild 

Horse HMA.

the Saylor Creek Wild 

Horse HMA.

in the Saylor Creek 

Wild Horse HMA.

in the Saylor Creek 

Wild Horse HMA.

in the Saylor Creek 

Wild Horse HMA.

Allocations

WH-NA-A-1. Manage 

the entire Saylor Creek 

Wild Horse Herd Area 

as an HMA (95,000 

acres). 

WH-NA-A-2. No wild 

horse ranges are 

identified.

WH-NA-A-3. Allocate 

600 animal unit 

months (AUMs) for 

wild horses in Multiple 

Use Area 7.

WH-I-A-1. Manage the 

entire Saylor Creek 

Wild Horse Herd Area 

as an HMA (95,000 

acres). 

WH-I-A-2.The 

estimated herd size for 

a reproducing 

population of wild 

horses would be 

approximately 100 to 

200 head.

WH-I-A-3. Allocate 

forage sufficient to 

maintain the wild horse 

population within the 

HMA (2,400 AUMs). .

WH-II-A-1. Return the 

Saylor Creek HMA to 

Herd Area status. 

WH-II-A-2. The 

estimated herd size 

would be zero.

WH-II-A-3. No forage 

would be allocated for 

wild horses.

WH-III-A-1. Manage 

the entire Saylor Creek 

Wild Horse Herd Area 

as an HMA (95,000 

acres). 

WH-III-A-2. The 

estimated herd size for 

a reproducing 

population of wild 

horses would be 

approximately 200 to 

600 head.

WH-III-A-3. Allocate 

forage sufficient to 

maintain the wild horse 

population within the 

HMA (7,200 AUMs).

WH-IV-A-1. Manage 

the entire Saylor Creek 

Wild Horse Herd Area 

as an HMA (95,000 

acres). 

WH-IV-A-2. Manage 

the Saylor Creek HMA 

for a non-reproducing 

population of wild 

horses. The estimated 

herd size would be 100 

to 200 nonreproducing wild 

horses.

WH-IV-A-3. Allocate 

forage sufficient to 

maintain the wild horse 

population within the 

HMA (2,400 AUMs). 

WH-V-A-1. Manage 

the entire Saylor Creek 

Wild Horse Herd Area 

as an HMA (95,000

acres). 

WH-V-A-2. Manage 

the Saylor Creek HMA 

for a non-reproducing 

population of wild 

horses. The estimated 

herd size would be 200 

to 500 nonreproducing wild 

horses.

WH-V-A-3. Allocate 

forage sufficient to 

maintain the wild horse 

population within the 

HMA (6,000 AUMs).

WH-VI-A-1. Manage 

the Saylor Creek Wild 

Horse Herd Area as a 

HMA (95,000 acres).

WH-VI-A-2. The 

estimated herd size for 

a population of wild 

horses would be 

approximately 50 to 

200 head. 

WH-VI-A-3. Allocate 

forage sufficient to 

maintain the wild horse 

population within the 

HMA (2,400 AUMs).

Paleontological Resources (PR)

Goals and Objectives 

PR-NA-O-1. Protect 

and manage 

paleontological sites in 

major paleontological

areas in Multiple Use 

Areas (MUAs) 4, 6, 

and 7 (Map 3), 

including Sand Point, 

Pasadena Valley, 

Rosevear Creek and 

Gulch, Dove Springs, 

Deer Gulch, Pilgrim 

Spring and Stage, and 

Glenns Ferry.

PR-CA-G-1. Identify, manage, and protect paleontological resources for scientific research, educational purposes, and public use.

PR-CA-O-1. Identify, manage, and protect important paleontological sites.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

• • • • •

• • • • •

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

2-407

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Cultural Resources (CR)

Goals and Objectives 

CR-NA-O-1. Protect 

the cultural values of 

the Dry Lake/Bruneau 

River Complex, Arch 

Canyon, the Dove 

Spring complex, and 

additional significant 

cultural resource 

complexes through 

special designation 

and management. 

CR-CA-G-1. Identify, preserve, and protect important cultural resources and ensure they are available for appropriate uses by present and future 

generations.

CR-CA-G-2. Seek to reduce imminent threats and resolve potential conflicts from natural or human-caused deterioration or potential conflict with other 

resource uses by ensuring all authorizations for land use and resource use complies with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, 

Section 106.

CR-CA-O-1. Manage and protect cultural resources according to their potential traditional, scientific, conservation, public, or experimental value.

CR-CA-O-2. Strive to limit the adverse effects of BLM decisions on important cultural resources.

Allocations

No allocation stated. CR-CA-A-1. Cultural resources would be allocated as described in Appendix G. 

CR-CA-A-2. The Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors include 0.25 mile on either side of the trail segments or the visual horizon of those 

segments, whichever is narrower.

Visual Resources (VR)

Goals and Objectives 

No goal or objective 

stated.

VR-CA-G-1. Maintain visual resource characteristics and values of public lands according to Visual Resource Management (VRM) classes.

Allocations

VR-NA-A-1. Areas 

managed as VRM 

Class I (129,000 

acres) would include:

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness,

Designated Wild 

and Scenic River 

(WSR) corridors, 

The Oregon 

National Historic 

Trail (NHT) 

protective zone, 

and

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Area of Critical 

Environmental

VR-I-A-1. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class I (106,000 

acres) include:

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek 

Wilderness Study 

Area (WSA); 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors 

with scenic

outstandingly

scenic values (i.e., 

lower Salmon 

VR-II-A-1. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class I (70,000 acres) 

include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

and 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors 

with scenic 

outstandingly 

scenic values (i.e., 

lower Salmon 

Falls Creek, 

VR-III-A-1. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class I (71,000 acres) 

include:

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors 

with scenic 

outstandingly

scenic values (i.e.

lower Salmon 

Falls Creek, 

Cougar Point 

VR-IV-A-1. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class I (126,000 

acres) include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors 

with scenic 

outstandingly 

scenic values

(lower Salmon 

Falls Creek, 

Cougar Point 

VR-V-A-1. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class I (70,000 acres) 

include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

and

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors 

with scenic 

outstandingly 

scenic values (i.e., 

lower Salmon 

Falls Creek, 

VR-VI-A-1. Areas to 

be managed as VRM 

Class I (86,000 acres) 

include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors 

with scenic 

outstandingly 

scenic values (i.e., 

lower Salmon 

Falls Creek, 

Cougar Point 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

• •

•

•

•

• •

• •

•

•

•

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• •

2-408

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Concern (ACEC). 

VR-NA-A-2. Areas 

managed as VRM 

Class II (111,000 

acres) would include:

Corridors along 

the Snake River, 

Salmon Falls 

Creek, Devil 

Creek, and Lower 

Cedar Creek; 

Portions of 

Browns Bench 

and China 

Mountain; and 

Portions of the 

Jarbidge Foothills 

and Diamond A 

Desert.

VR-NA-A-3. Areas 

managed as VRM 

Class III (284,000 

acres) would include:

Corridors along 

Clover Creek, 

Clover-Three 

Creek Road, and 

17-Mile Road; 

An area between 

Lower Cedar 

Creek and Salmon 

Falls Creek; and 

Portions of the 

Jarbidge Foothills 

and Diamond A 

Desert.

VR-NA-A-4. The 

remainder of the 

planning area would 

be managed as VRM 

Class IV (847,000 

Falls Creek, 

Cougar Point 

Creek, Bruneau 

River, and 

Jarbidge River); 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC; and

Salmon Falls 

Creek ACEC.

VR-I-A-2. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class II (191,000 

acres) include:

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone;

Lands with 

wilderness 

Characteristics

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics;

Jarbidge Foothills 

and Salmon Falls 

Reservoir Special 

Recreation 

Management 

Areas (SRMAs); 

Wilkins Island;

The Jarbidge 

River corridor 

between Murphy 

Hot Springs and 

the Jarbidge 

Forks; and

Areas near Buck 

Creek. 

VR-I-A-3. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class III (142,000 

acres) include: 

The Snake River 

Cougar Point 

Creek, Bruneau 

River, and 

Jarbidge River).

VR-II-A-2. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class II (10,000 acres) 

would include: 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone

and 

The Jarbidge 

River corridor 

between Murphy 

Hot Springs and 

the Jarbidge 

Forks.

VR-II-A-3. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class III (25,000 

acres) include:

Right-of-way

(ROW) corridors 

through areas 

otherwise 

managed as VRM 

Class I or II, 

The Kelton and 

Toana Freight 

Road protective 

corridors, and 

Salmon Falls 

Reservoir SRMA.

VR-II-A-4. The 

remainder of the 

planning area would 

be managed as VRM 

Class IV (1,266,000 

acres). 

Creek, Bruneau 

River, and 

Jarbidge River); 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC; and

Salmon Falls 

Creek ACEC.

VR-III-A-2. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class II (10,000 acres) 

include: 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone

and 

The Jarbidge 

River corridor 

between Murphy 

Hot Springs and 

the Jarbidge 

Forks.

VR-III-A-3. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class III (345,000 

acres) include: 

The Snake River 

corridor (from the

planning area

boundary to 0.25 

mile above the 

breaks), 

The Oregon NHT 

National Trail 

Management 

Corridor, 

ROW corridors 

through areas 

otherwise 

managed as VRM 

Class I or II, 

Portions of the 

Jarbidge Foothills 

Creek, Bruneau 

River, and 

Jarbidge River); 

and

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC.

VR-IV-A-2. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class II (69,000 acres) 

include: 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone, 

Browns Bench,

Wilkins Island, 

Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics,

The Jarbidge 

River corridor 

between Murphy 

Hot Springs and 

the Jarbidge 

Forks, and 

Areas near Buck 

Creek.

VR-IV-A-3. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class III (374,000 

acres in Alternative IVA; 342,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B) 

include: 

The Snake River 

corridor (from the 

planning area

boundary to 0.25 

mile above the 

breaks), 

Cougar Point 

Creek, Bruneau 

River, and 

Jarbidge River). 

VR-V-A-2. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class II (301,000 

acres) include: 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone, 

Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics,

The Jarbidge 

Foothills, and 

Portions of the 

Diamond A Desert 

not otherwise 

managed as VRM 

Class I.

VR-V-A-3. Areas to be 

managed as VRM 

Class III (649,000 

acres) would include: 

Portions of the 

Sagebrush Sea 

ACEC not 

otherwise 

managed as VRM 

Class I or II, 

The Snake River 

corridor (from the

planning area

boundary to 0.25 

mile above the 

breaks), 

 The Oregon NHT 

National Trail 

Creek, Bruneau 

River, and 

Jarbidge River); 

and

Upper Bruneau 

Canyon and 

Salmon Falls 

Creek ACECs. 

VR-VI-A-2. Areas to 

be managed as VRM 

Class II (79,000 acres) 

include: 

The Oregon NHT 

visual corridor (2 

miles on either 

side of the trail 

with the trail as 

the key 

observation point 

for visual contrast 

analyses related 

to new 

developments) 

excluding the 

areas in the 

Deadman and 

Yahoo SRMAs 

open to crosscountry motorized 

vehicle use, 

Sand Point ACEC,

Browns Bench,

Wilkins Island,

The Jarbidge 

River corridor 

between Murphy 

Hot Springs and 

the Jarbidge 

Forks, and

Areas near Buck 

Creek.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2-409

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

acres). corridor (from the 

planning area

boundary to 0.25 

mile above the 

breaks), 

 The Oregon NHT 

National Trail 

Management 

Corridor, 

 Right-of-way

corridors through 

areas otherwise 

managed as VRM 

Class I or II, 

 Portions of the 

Diamond A Desert 

not otherwise 

managed as VRM 

Class I or II, 

Deadman/Yahoo 

SRMA, and 

 The Kelton and 

Toana Freight 

Road protective 

corridors.

VR-I-A-4. The 

remainder of the 

planning area would 

be managed as VRM 

Class IV (932,000 

acres). 

and Diamond A 

Desert not 

otherwise 

managed as VRM 

Class I or II, 

Wilkins Island, 

Deadman/Yahoo 

SRMA, and 

The Kelton and 

Toana Freight 

Road protective 

corridors. 

VR-III-A-4. The 

remainder of the 

planning area would 

be managed as VRM 

Class IV (945,000 

acres). 

 The Oregon NHT 

National Trail 

Management 

Corridor, 

ROW corridors 

through areas 

otherwise 

managed as VRM 

Class I or II, 

Portions of the 

Jarbidge Foothills 

and Diamond A 

Desert not 

otherwise 

managed as VRM 

Class I or II, 

Inside Desert 

ACEC, 

Deadman/Yahoo 

SRMA, 

The Kelton and 

Toana Freight 

Road protective 

corridors, and 

Lands between 

the Toana Freight 

Road protective 

corridor and 

Salmon Falls 

Creek.

VR-IV-A-4. The 

remainder of the 

planning area would 

be managed as VRM 

Class IV (802,000 

acres in Alternative IVA; 833,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B). 

Management 

Corridor, 

The Kelton and 

Toana Freight 

Road protective 

corridors,

Lands between 

the Balanced 

Rock ROW 

Corridor and 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek, and 

ROW corridors 

through areas 

otherwise 

managed as VRM 

Class I or II.

VR-V-A-4. The 

remainder of the 

planning area would 

be managed as VRM 

Class IV (352,000 

acres). 

VR-VI-A-3. Areas to 

be managed as VRM 

Class III (248,000 

acres) include: 

The Snake River 

corridor (from the 

planning area

boundary to 0.25 

mile above the 

breaks); 

Areas in the 

Deadman and 

Yahoo SRMAs 

open to crosscountry motorized 

vehicle use that 

are in the Oregon 

NHT visual 

corridor; 

Overhead ROW 

corridors through 

areas otherwise 

managed as VRM 

Class I or II, 

excluding Lower 

Salmon Falls 

Creek WSA; 

Portions of the 

Jarbidge Foothills 

and Diamond A 

Desert not 

otherwise 

managed as VRM 

Class I or II; 

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon ACEC; 

and

The Kelton and 

Toana Freight 

Road protective 

corridors. 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

2-410

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

VR-VI-A-4. The 

remainder of the 

planning area would 

be managed as VRM 

Class IV (958,000 

acres). 

Lands with Wilderness Characteristics (WC)

Goals and Objectives

No goal or objective 

stated.

WC-I-G-1. Protect 

wilderness 

characteristics of

Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics

generally west of the 

Jarbidge River as a 

priority over other 

multiple uses.

WC-I-O-1. Manage 

Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics

generally west of the 

Jarbidge River for their 

undeveloped character 

and to provide 

opportunities for 

primitive recreational 

activities and solitude.

WC-I-O-2. Manage 

Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics east of 

the Jarbidge River, 

emphasizing other 

multiple uses as a 

priority over protecting 

wilderness 

characteristics.

WC-II-G-1. Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics would 

not be managed to 

maintain wilderness 

characteristics. Lands 

with Wilderness 

Characteristics would 

be managed for 

multiple use consistent 

with resource 

objectives and 

designations. 

WC-III-G-1. Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics would 

not be managed to 

maintain wilderness 

characteristics. Lands 

with Wilderness 

Characteristics would 

be managed for 

multiple use consistent 

with resource 

objectives and 

designations.

WC-IV-G-1. Protect 

wilderness 

characteristics of 

Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics in Twin 

Falls County as a 

priority over other 

multiple uses.

WC-IV-O-1. Manage 

Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics in Twin 

Falls County for their 

undeveloped character 

and to provide 

opportunities for 

primitive recreational 

activities and solitude.

WC-IV-O-2. Manage 

Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics in 

Owyhee County, 

emphasizing other 

multiple uses as a 

priority over protecting 

wilderness 

characteristics.

WC-V-G-1. Protect 

wilderness 

characteristics of 

Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics as a 

priority over other 

multiple uses.

WC-VI-G-1. Lands 

with Wilderness 

Characteristics would 

not be managed to 

maintain wilderness 

characteristics. Lands 

with Wilderness 

Characteristics would 

be managed for 

multiple use consistent 

with resource 

objectives and 

designations.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

2-411

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

RESOURCE USES

Livestock Grazing (LG)

Goals and Objectives 

LG-NA-O-1. Design 

and establish grazing 

management practices 

to meet fisheries, 

riparian, and water 

quality needs.

LG-NA-O-2. Establish 

livestock grazing 

systems and practices 

that recognize the 

physiological 

requirements of forbs 

and shrubs.

LG-NA-O-3. Design 

range infrastructure to 

achieve objectives in 

the Vegetation 

Communities, Fish and 

Wildlife, and Livestock 

Grazing sections.

LG-CA-G-1. Manage livestock grazing to ensure achievement of or movement towards meeting Idaho Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for 

Livestock Grazing Management 2005. 

LG-CA-O-1. Manage livestock grazing in annual communities to achieve objectives in the Upland Vegetation and Wildland Fire Ecology and Management

sections.

LG-I-G-1. Provide for 

livestock grazing 

through proper grazing 

management to 

enhance and sustain 

existing and historic 

uses and to improve 

habitat for big game 

and sage-grouse.

LG-I-O-1. In native 

plant communities 

excluding 

Sandberg/non-native 

areas, manage 

livestock grazing to 

help maintain and 

improve native plant 

species diversity and 

abundance, focusing 

on plant reproductive 

and physiological 

needs.

LG-I-O-2. In nonnative perennial 

communities including 

Sandberg/non-native 

areas, manage 

livestock grazing to 

maintain and improve 

perennial plant species 

diversity and 

abundance, taking into 

account sage-grouse 

and big game habitat 

LG-II-G-1. Provide for 

livestock grazing 

through proper grazing 

management to 

maintain or improve 

the condition of forage 

resources while

maintaining native 

plant communities and 

habitat for sagegrouse.

LG-II-O-1. In native 

plant communities 

excluding the 

Sandberg/non-native 

areas, manage 

livestock grazing to 

help maintain or 

improve native plant 

species diversity and 

abundance, focusing 

on plant reproductive 

and physiological 

needs.

LG-II-O-2. In nonnative perennial 

communities including 

Sandberg/non-native 

areas, manage 

livestock grazing to 

maintain or improve

the perennial forage 

base and allow for 

other commercial 

LG-III-G-1. Provide for 

livestock grazing 

through proper grazing 

management to reduce 

wildland fire size and 

intensity while 

maintaining habitat for 

sage-grouse.

LG-III-O-1. In native 

plant communities 

including the 

Sandberg/non-native 

areas, manage 

livestock grazing to 

help maintain and 

improve native plant 

species diversity and 

abundance, focusing 

on plant reproductive 

and physiological 

needs.

LG-III-O-2. Manage 

livestock grazing to 

reduce fuels in nonnative perennial 

communities.

LG-III-O-3. Manage 

(e.g. maintain, 

improve, build, realign, 

remove) range 

infrastructure at levels 

appropriate to the 

amount of livestock 

LG-IV-G-1. Provide for 

livestock grazing 

through proper grazing 

management to 

support restoration of 

the resiliency of 

ecosystem structure 

and function and to 

reduce fragmentation 

of habitat for sagegrouse and other 

native species.

LG-IV-O-1. In native 

plant communities 

including the 

Sandberg/non-native 

areas, manage 

livestock grazing to 

help maintain and 

improve native plant 

species diversity and 

abundance, focusing 

on plant reproductive 

and physiological 

needs.

LG-IV-O-2. In nonnative perennial 

communities, manage 

livestock grazing to 

achieve restoration 

objectives outlined in 

the Upland Vegetation

section.

LG-V-G-1. Provide for 

livestock grazing 

through proper grazing 

management to move 

vegetation toward 

historic plant 

communities that 

provide habitat for 

sage-grouse and other 

special status species.

LG-V-O-1. In native 

plant communities 

including the 

Sandberg/non-native 

areas, manage 

livestock grazing to 

help maintain and 

improve native plant 

species diversity and 

abundance, focusing 

on plant reproductive 

and physiological 

needs.

LG-V-O-2. In nonnative perennial 

communities, manage 

livestock grazing to 

maintain and improve 

shrub cover for sagegrouse.

LG-V-O-3. Manage 

(e.g., maintain, 

improve, build, realign, 

LG-VI-G-1. Allocate a 

stable level of 

available forage for 

livestock grazing 

through proper grazing 

and adaptive 

management to 

support maintenance 

and restoration of 

resilient ecosystem 

structure and function.

LG-VI-O-1. In native 

plant communities 

including the 

Sandberg/non-native 

areas, manage 

livestock grazing to 

help maintain and 

improve native plant 

species diversity and 

abundance, focusing 

on plant reproductive 

and physiological 

needs.

LG-VI-O-2. In nonnative perennial 

communities, manage 

livestock grazing to 

achieve restoration 

objectives outlined in 

the Upland Vegetation

section.

LG-VI-O-3. Manage 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

• •

• •

• •

• •

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2-412

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

needs.

LG-I-O-3. Manage 

(e.g., maintain, 

improve, build, realign, 

remove) range 

infrastructure at levels 

appropriate to the 

amount of livestock 

use to provide for 

efficient management 

of livestock grazing 

allotments, consistent 

with resource 

objectives.

uses.

LG-II-O-3. Manage 

(e.g., maintain, 

improve, build, realign, 

remove) range 

infrastructure at levels 

appropriate to the 

amount of livestock 

use to provide for 

efficient management 

of livestock grazing 

allotments.

use to provide for 

efficient management 

of livestock grazing 

allotments and support 

fire suppression 

efforts.

LG-IV-O-3. Manage 

(e.g., maintain, 

improve, build, realign, 

remove) range 

infrastructure at levels 

appropriate to the 

amount of livestock 

use to provide for 

efficient management 

of livestock grazing 

allotments and support 

resource objectives.

remove) range 

infrastructure at levels 

appropriate to the 

amount of livestock 

use to provide for 

efficient management 

of livestock grazing 

allotments and support 

resource objectives.

(e.g., maintain, 

improve, build, realign, 

remove) range 

infrastructure at levels 

appropriate to the 

amount of livestock 

use to provide for 

efficient management 

of livestock grazing 

allotments and support 

fire suppression and 

resource objectives.

Allocations

LG-NA-A-1. The 

majority of the 

planning area would 

be available for 

livestock grazing 

(1,412,000 acres). 

Salmon Falls Creek 

Canyon would not be 

available for livestock 

grazing (3,000 acres). 

An additional 48,000 

acres are not 

contained within 

grazing allotments and 

therefore are not 

grazed, even though 

the 1987 RMP does 

not specifically make 

these areas 

unavailable for 

livestock grazing; 

these areas would 

continue to be 

unavailable for 

livestock grazing. 

LG-NA-A-2. Continue 

LG-I-A-1. The majority 

of the planning area 

would be available for 

livestock grazing 

(1,389,000 acres). The 

following areas would 

not be available for 

livestock grazing 

(74,000 acres):

Canyons 

associated with 

the Bruneau and 

Jarbidge Rivers 

and Salmon Falls 

Creek; 

Middle Snake 

Area of Critical 

Environmental 

Concern (ACEC), 

except the 

Asquena pasture; 

Wildlife tracts; 

Reference areas; 

Areas open to 

cross-country 

motorized vehicle 

LG-II-A-1. The majority 

of the planning area 

would be available for 

livestock grazing 

(1,408,000 acres). The 

following areas would 

not be available for 

livestock grazing 

(55,000 acres):

Canyons 

associated with 

the Bruneau and 

Jarbidge Rivers 

and Salmon Falls 

Creek, 

Reference areas, 

Wildlife tracts, and

Areas not 

contained within 

grazing 

allotments.

LG-II-A-2. Allocate 

vegetation production 

as follows:

Native perennial 

LG-III-A-1. The 

majority of the 

planning area would 

be available for 

livestock grazing 

(1,407,000 acres). The 

following areas would 

not be available for 

livestock grazing 

(56,000 acres):

Canyons 

associated with 

the Bruneau and 

Jarbidge Rivers 

and Salmon Falls 

Creek, 

Reference areas, 

Wildlife tracts, and

Areas not 

contained within 

grazing 

allotments.

LG-III-A-2. Allocate 

vegetation production 

as follows:

Native perennial 

LG-IV-A-1. The 

majority of the 

planning area would 

be available for 

livestock grazing 

(1,324,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 

1,355,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B). The 

following areas would 

not be available for 

livestock grazing 

(139,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 

108,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B): 

Canyons or 

riparian corridors 

associated with 

the Bruneau and 

Jarbidge Rivers 

and the following 

creeks: Deer (NV), 

Dave, Rocky 

Canyon, and 

Salmon Falls; 

LG-V-A-1. The 

majority of the 

planning area would 

be available for 

livestock grazing 

(1,160,000 acres). The 

following areas would 

be not available for 

livestock grazing 

(303,000 acres):

Canyons or 

riparian corridors 

associated with 

the Bruneau and 

Jarbidge Rivers 

and the following 

creeks: Upper 

Cedar, Deer (ID), 

Deer (NV), Clover, 

Rocky Canyon, 

Flat, Shack, Dave, 

China, and 

Salmon Falls; 

Middle Snake, 

Sand Point, and 

Lower Bruneau 

LG-VI-A-1. The 

majority of the 

planning area would 

be available for 

livestock grazing 

(1,406,000 acres). The 

following areas would 

not be available for 

livestock grazing 

(57,000 acres): 

Canyons 

associated with 

the Bruneau and 

Jarbidge Rivers 

and Salmon Falls 

Creek (below the 

dam),

Reference areas,

Salmon Falls 

Creek ACEC,

Wildlife tracts, and

Areas not 

contained within 

grazing 

allotments.

LG-VI-A-2. Allocate
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

o

•

o

o

•

o o

o

•

o

• • o

•

o

o

o

o

•

o o

o •

o

• o

o o • o

•

•

o

o

o

•

o

o

o

•

•

o o

•

• o

•

o

o

•

•

•

• o o •

•

o •

•

•

o

o

•

•

o o

o o

o o

• •

o

o

o o

• o

• o

o

o

2-413

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

allocating 

approximately 200,000 

animal unit months 

(AUMs) for livestock. 

As the plan is 

implemented, between 

160,000 and 260,000 

AUMs could be issued 

for livestock depending 

on implementation of 

treatments described 

in the Upland 

Vegetation section.

LG-NA-A-3. Allocate 

the following forage:

Bighorn sheep – 

598 AUMS in 

Multiple Use 

Areas (MUAs) 10, 

15, and 16;

Mule deer – 1,600 

AUMs in MUAs 4, 

6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 

13, 14, 15, and 

16;

Pronghorn – 261 

AUMs in MUAs 7, 

10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 

and 16; and

Wild horses – 600 

AUMs in MUA 7.

use; and

Areas not 

contained within 

grazing 

allotments.

LG-I-A-2. Allocate 

vegetation production 

as follows:

Native perennial 

grass production: 

65% to 75% 

to watershed 

and wildlife, 

Less than 1% 

to wild 

horses, and

25% to 35% 

to livestock. 

Non-native 

perennial grass 

production: 

60% to 70% 

to watershed 

and wildlife, 

Less than 1% 

to wild 

horses, and

30% to 40% 

to livestock. 

Annual grass 

production: 

70% to 80% 

to watershed 

and wildlife

and

20% to 30% 

to livestock. 

Shrub and forb 

production: 

grass production: 

50% to 60% 

to watershed 

and wildlife

and

40% to 50% 

to livestock. 

Non-native 

perennial grass 

production: 

40% to 50% 

to watershed 

and wildlife

and

50% to 60% 

to livestock. 

Annual grass 

production: 

20% to 30% 

to watershed 

and wildlife

and

70% to 80% 

to livestock. 

Shrub and forb 

production: 

84% to 88% 

to watershed 

and wildlife

and

12% to 16% 

to livestock. 

Allocate approximately 

350,000 to 423,000 

AUMs to livestock at 

initial implementation 

and approximately 

362,000 to 440,000 at 

full implementation. 

The purpose of 

grass production: 

55% to 65% 

to watershed 

and wildlife, 

Less than 1% 

to wild 

horses, and

35% to 45% 

to livestock. 

Non-native 

perennial grass 

production: 

50% to 60% 

to watershed 

and wildlife, 

Less than 1% 

to wild 

horses, and

40% to 50% 

to livestock. 

Annual grass 

production: 

50% to 60% 

to watershed 

and wildlife

and

40% to 50% 

to livestock. 

Shrub and forb 

production: 

86% to 89% 

to watershed 

and wildlife

and

11% to 14% 

to livestock. 

Allocate approximately 

273,000 to 344,000 

AUMs to livestock at 

initial implementation 

Inside Desert 

ACEC;

Wildlife tracts; 

Reference areas; 

and

Areas not 

contained within 

grazing 

allotments.

LG-IV-A-2. Allocate 

vegetation production 

as follows:

Native perennial 

grass production: 

75% to 85% 

to watershed 

and wildlife, 

Less than1% 

to wild 

horses, and

15% to 25% 

to livestock. 

Non-native 

perennial grass 

production: 

70% to 80% 

to watershed 

and wildlife, 

Less than1% 

to wild 

horses, and

20% to 30% 

to livestock. 

Annual grass 

production: 

100% to 

watershed 

and wildlife. 

Shrub and forb 

Canyon ACECs; 

The Brown's 

Bench/China 

Mountain area; 

Wildlife tracts; 

Reference areas; 

and

Areas not 

contained within 

grazing 

allotments.

LG-V-A-2. Allocate 

vegetation production 

as follows:

Native perennial 

grass production: 

80% to 90% 

to watershed 

and wildlife, 

Less than1% 

to wild 

horses, and

10% to 20% 

to livestock. 

Non-native 

perennial grass 

production: 

80% to 90% 

to watershed 

and wildlife, 

Less than 1% 

to wild

horses, and

10% to 20% 

to livestock. 

Annual grass 

production: 

100% to 

watershed 

and wildlife. 

vegetation production 

as follows:

Native perennial 

grass production: 

60% or 

greater to 

watershed 

and wildlife, 

Less than 1% 

to wild 

horses, and

Up to 40% to 

livestock. 

Non-native 

perennial grass 

production: 

Up to 70% to 

watershed 

and wildlife, 

Less than 1% 

to wild 

horses, and

Up to 45% to 

livestock. 

Annual grass 

production: 

Up to 60% to 

watershed 

and wildlife

and

Up to 50% to 

livestock. 

Shrub and forb 

production: 

Up to 89% to 

watershed 

and wildlife

and

Up to 14% to 

livestock. 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

o

o

o

•

o

2-414

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

89% to 92% 

to watershed 

and wildlife

and

8% to 11% to 

livestock. 

Allocate approximately 

189,000 to 259,000 

AUMs to livestock at 

initial implementation 

and approximately 

179,000 to 245,000 at 

full implementation. 

The purpose of 

allocating vegetation is 

to determine the total 

AUMs available for 

livestock grazing in the 

planning area. AUMs 

for livestock grazing 

are an estimate based 

on 2006 production 

data collected while 

conducting ecological 

site inventories. At the 

time of permit renewal, 

additional production 

data may be 

considered when 

determining the 

appropriate allocation 

for a specific allotment. 

These vegetation 

allocations would be 

implemented during 

the permit renewal 

process. Allocation 

percentages are not 

the same as utilization, 

as the allocation is 

used to identify the 

total number of AUMs 

allocating vegetation is 

to determine the total 

AUMs available for 

livestock grazing in the 

planning area. AUMs 

for livestock grazing 

are an estimate based 

on 2006 production 

data collected while 

conducting ecological 

site inventories. At the 

time of permit renewal, 

additional production 

data may be 

considered when 

determining the 

appropriate allocation 

for a specific allotment. 

These vegetation 

allocations would be 

implemented during 

the permit renewal 

process. Allocation 

percentages are not 

the same as utilization, 

as the allocation is 

used to identify the 

total number of AUMs 

for livestock, while 

utilization identifies the 

amount of vegetation 

used by livestock in a 

specific area. 

Allocation is not 

intended to prescribe 

what livestock actually 

consume. Livestock 

use of specific 

vegetation types would 

be managed through 

the implementation of 

grazing use indicators 

and approximately 

276,000 to 348,000 at 

full implementation. 

The purpose of 

allocating vegetation is 

to determine the total 

AUMs available for 

livestock grazing in the 

planning area. AUMs 

for livestock grazing 

are an estimate based 

on 2006 production 

data collected while 

conducting ecological 

site inventories. At the 

time of permit renewal, 

additional production 

data may be 

considered when 

determining the 

appropriate allocation 

for a specific allotment. 

These vegetation 

allocations would be 

implemented during 

the permit renewal 

process. Allocation 

percentages are not 

the same as utilization, 

as the allocation is 

used to identify the 

total number of AUMs 

for livestock, while 

utilization identifies the 

amount of vegetation 

used by livestock in a 

specific area. 

Allocation is not 

intended to prescribe 

what livestock actually 

consume. Livestock 

use of specific 

production: 

100% to 

watershed 

and wildlife. 

Allocate approximately 

94,000 to 147,000 

AUMs for livestock at 

initial implementation 

in Alternative IV-A and 

approximately 97,000 

to 151,000 in 

Alternative IV-B. At full 

implementation, 

allocate approximately 

78,000 to 123,000 

AUMs for livestock in 

Alternative IV-A and 

81,000 to 127,000 in 

Alternative IV-B. The 

purpose of allocating 

vegetation is to 

determine the total 

AUMs available for 

livestock grazing in the 

planning area. AUMs 

for livestock grazing 

are an estimate based 

on 2006 production 

data collected while 

conducting ecological 

site inventories. At the 

time of permit renewal, 

additional production 

data may be 

considered when 

determining the 

appropriate allocation 

for a specific allotment.

These vegetation 

allocations would be 

implemented during 

Shrub and forb 

production: 

100% to 

watershed 

and wildlife. 

Allocate approximately 

46,000 to 93,000 

AUMs for livestock at 

initial implementation 

and approximately

42,000 to 85,000 at full 

implementation. The 

purpose of allocating 

vegetation is to 

determine the total 

AUMs available for 

livestock grazing in the 

planning area. AUMs 

for livestock grazing 

are an estimate based 

on 2006 production 

data collected while 

conducting ecological 

site inventories. At the 

time of permit renewal, 

additional production 

data may be 

considered when 

determining the 

appropriate allocation 

for a specific allotment. 

These vegetation 

allocations would be 

implemented during 

the permit renewal 

process. Allocation 

percentages are not 

the same as utilization, 

as the allocation is 

used to identify the 

total number of AUMs 

Allocate approximately 

216,000 to 326,000 

AUMs for livestock at 

initial implementation 

and approximately 

186,000 to 279,000 at 

full implementation. 

The purpose of 

allocating vegetation is 

to determine the total 

AUMs available for 

livestock grazing in the 

planning area. AUMs 

for livestock grazing 

are an estimate based 

on 2006 production 

data collected while 

conducting ecological 

site inventories. At the 

time of permit renewal, 

additional production 

data may be 

considered when 

determining the 

appropriate allocation 

for a specific allotment. 

These vegetation 

allocations would be 

implemented during 

the permit renewal 

process. Allocation 

percentages are not 

the same as utilization. 

Allocation is used to 

identify the total 

number of AUMs for 

livestock, while 

utilization identifies the 

amount of vegetation 

used by livestock in a 

specific area.

Livestock use of 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

2-415

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

for livestock, while 

utilization identifies the 

amount of vegetation 

used by livestock in a 

specific area. 

Allocation is not 

intended to prescribe 

what livestock actually 

consume. Livestock 

use of specific 

vegetation types would 

be managed through 

the implementation of 

grazing use indicators 

developed on an 

allotment-specific 

basis.

LG-I-A-3. The amount 

of forage available for 

livestock use would 

likely change as the 

RMP is implemented, 

although allocation 

percentages would 

remain the same. 

Changes to AUMs in 

the future would be 

determined by the 

BLM after monitoring 

and site-specific NEPA 

analysis.

developed on an 

allotment-specific 

basis.

LG-II-A-3. The amount 

of forage available for 

livestock use would 

likely change as the 

RMP is implemented, 

although allocation 

percentages would 

remain the same.

Changes to AUMs in 

the future would be 

determined by the 

BLM after monitoring 

and site-specific NEPA 

analysis.

vegetation types would 

be managed through 

the implementation of 

grazing use indicators 

developed on an 

allotment-specific 

basis.

LG-III-A-3. The 

amount of forage 

available for livestock 

use would likely 

change as the RMP is 

implemented, although 

allocation percentages 

would remain the 

same. Changes to 

AUMs in the future 

would be determined 

by the BLM after 

monitoring and sitespecific NEPA 

analysis.

the permit renewal 

process. Allocation 

percentages are not 

the same as utilization, 

as the allocation is 

used to identify the 

total number of AUMs 

for livestock, while 

utilization identifies the 

amount of vegetation 

used by livestock in a 

specific area. 

Allocation is not 

intended to prescribe 

what livestock actually 

consume. Livestock 

use of specific 

vegetation types would 

be managed through 

the implementation of 

grazing use indicators 

developed on an 

allotment-specific 

basis. 

LG-IV-A-3. The 

amount of forage 

available for livestock 

use would likely 

change as the RMP is 

implemented, although 

allocation percentages 

would remain the 

same. Changes to 

AUMs in the future 

would be determined 

by the BLM after 

monitoring and sitespecific NEPA 

analysis. 

for livestock, while 

utilization identifies the 

amount of vegetation 

used by livestock in a 

specific area. 

Allocation is not 

intended to prescribe 

what livestock actually 

consume. Livestock 

use of specific 

vegetation types would 

be managed through 

the implementation of 

grazing use indicators 

developed on an

allotment-specific 

basis

LG-V-A-3. The amount 

of forage available for 

livestock use would 

likely change as the 

RMP is implemented, 

although allocation 

percentages would 

remain the same. 

Changes to AUMs in 

the future would be 

determined by the 

BLM after monitoring 

and site-specific NEPA 

analysis.

specific vegetation 

types would be 

managed through the 

implementation of 

grazing use indicators 

developed on an 

allotment-specific 

basis. 

LG-VI-A-3. The 

amount of forage 

available for livestock 

use would likely 

change as the RMP is 

implemented, although 

allocation percentages 

would remain the 

same. Changes to 

AUMs in the future 

would be determined 

by the BLM after 

monitoring and sitespecific NEPA 

analysis.
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

•

• • •

•

•

•

•

• • •

•

• • •

• •

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2-416

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Recreation (REC)

Goals and Objectives 

REC-NA-O-1. Protect 

the Salmon Falls 

Creek Canyon (rim-torim) for its natural and 

scenic values through 

special designation 

and management as a 

Special Recreation 

Management Area 

(SRMA). 

REC-CA-G-1. Provide and sustain a variety of dispersed and developed recreational opportunities and experiences while avoiding or minimizing resource 

impacts.

REC-CA-O-1. Provide basic information on recreational opportunities on public lands not designated as Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) 

or Extensive Recreation Management Areas (ERMAs). Provide access and minimal facilities (e.g., signs, protective fences) as needed to ensure visitor 

health and safety, reduce user conflict, and protect resources. 

REC-I-O-1. Manage 

326,000 acres as 

SRMAs to protect and 

enhance recreation 

settings, activities, 

experiences, and 

benefits. 

REC-II-O-1. Manage 

7,000 acres as SRMAs

to protect and enhance 

recreation settings, 

activities, experiences, 

and benefits.

REC-III-O-1. Manage 

42,000 acres as 

SRMAs to protect and 

enhance recreation 

settings, activities, 

experiences, and 

benefits.

REC-IV-O-1. Manage 

190,000 acres as 

SRMAs to protect and 

enhance recreation 

settings, activities, 

experiences, and 

benefits. 

REC-V-O-1. Manage 

5,000 acres as SRMAs

to protect and enhance 

recreation settings, 

activities, experiences, 

and benefits. 

REC-VI-O-1. Manage 

20,000 acres as 

SRMAs to protect and 

enhance recreation 

settings, activities, 

experiences, and 

benefits. Manage 

304,000 acres as 

ERMAs to support and 

sustain recreation 

activities and the 

associated quality and 

condition of the ERMA.

Allocations

REC-NA-A-1.

Continue managing 

the following SRMAs: 

Hagerman-Owsley 

Bridge SRMA 

(3,000 acres),

Oregon Trail 

SRMA (16,000 

acres), 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

SRMA (57,000 

acres), 

Jarbidge Forks 

SRMA (4,000 

acres), and 

Salmon Falls 

Creek SRMA 

(6,000 acres).

REC-I-A-1. Designate 

the following SRMAs:

Deadman/Yahoo 

SRMA (36,000 

acres), 

Balanced Rock 

SRMA (500 

acres), 

Little Pilgrim 

SRMA (300 

acres), 

Jarbidge Forks 

SRMA (2,000 

acres), 

Canyonlands 

SRMA (149,000 

acres), 

Jarbidge Foothills 

SRMA (133,000 

REC-II-A-1. Designate 

the following SRMAs:

Little Pilgrim 

SRMA (300 

acres), 

Jarbidge Forks 

SRMA (2,000 

acres), and

Salmon Falls 

Reservoir SRMA 

(5,000 acres). 

REC-II-A-2. All lands 

not established as a 

SRMA would be

managed to meet 

basic recreation and 

visitor services needs 

and resource 

objectives. Recreation 

REC-III-A-1. Designate 

the following SRMAs:

Deadman/Yahoo 

SRMA (34,000 

acres), 

Balanced Rock 

SRMA (500 

acres), 

Little Pilgrim 

SRMA (300 

acres), 

Jarbidge Forks 

SRMA (2,000 

acres), and

Salmon Falls 

Reservoir SRMA 

(5,000 acres). 

REC-III-A-2. All lands 

not established as a 

REC-IV-A-1.

Designate the 

following SRMAs:

Deadman/Yahoo 

SRMA (34,000 

acres), 

Jarbidge Forks 

SRMA (2,000 

acres), 

Canyonlands 

SRMA (149,000 

acres), and

Salmon Falls 

Reservoir SRMA 

(5,000 acres).

REC-IV-A-2. All lands 

not established as a 

SRMA would be 

managed to meet 

REC-V-A-1. Designate 

the following SRMAs: 

Yahoo SRMA 

(3,000 acres) and

Jarbidge Forks 

SRMA (2,000

acres). 

REC-V-A-2. All lands 

not established as a 

SRMA would be 

managed to meet 

basic recreation and 

visitor services needs 

and resource 

objectives. Recreation 

would not be 

emphasized; however, 

recreation activities 

may occur to the 

REC-VI-A-1.

Designate the 

following SRMAs: 

Yahoo SRMA 

(3,000 acres),

Deadman SRMA 

(13,000 acres),

Jarbidge Forks 

SRMA (2,000 

acres), 

Balanced Rock 

SRMA (500 

acres), 

Little Pilgrim 

SRMA (300 

acres), and

Salmon Falls 

Reservoir SRMA 

(1,000 acres).
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2-417

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

acres), and

Salmon Falls 

Reservoir SRMA 

(5,000 acres).

REC-I-A-2. All lands 

not established as a 

SRMA would be 

managed to meet 

basic recreation and 

visitor services needs 

and resource 

objectives. Recreation 

would not be 

emphasized; however, 

recreation activities 

may occur to the 

extent that they are 

consistent with other 

resource uses.

would not be 

emphasized; however, 

recreation activities 

may occur to the 

extent that they are 

consistent with other 

resource uses. 

SRMA would be 

managed to meet 

basic recreation and 

visitor services needs 

and resource 

objectives. Recreation 

would not be 

emphasized; however, 

recreation activities 

may occur to the 

extent that they are 

consistent with other 

resource uses. 

basic recreation and 

visitor services needs 

and resource 

objectives. Recreation 

would not be 

emphasized; however, 

recreation activities 

may occur to the 

extent that they are 

consistent with other 

resource uses.

extent that they are 

consistent with other 

resource uses.

REC-VI-A-2.

Designate the 

following ERMAs:

Jarbidge Foothills 

ERMA (133,000 

acres), 

Canyonlands 

ERMA (149,000 

acres), 

Rosevear ERMA 

(19,000 acres), 

and

Luds Point ERMA 

(3,000 acres).

REC-VI-A-3. The 

Salmon Falls 

Reservoir SRMA 

would consist of two 

Recreation 

Management Zones 

(RMZs): 

Antelope Bay 

RMZ (1,000 

acres) and

Cedar Creek RMZ 

(100 acres).

REC-VI-A-4. All lands 

not established as a 

SRMA or ERMA would 

be managed to meet 

basic recreation and 

visitor services needs 

and resource 

objectives. Recreation 

would not be 

emphasized; however, 

recreation activities 

may occur to the 

extent that they are 

consistent with other 

resource uses. 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

2-418

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Transportation and Travel (TR)

Goals and Objectives

No goal or objective 

stated.

TR-CA-G-1. Manage and provide for motorized, non-motorized, and non-mechanized access that would balance resource protection and use.

TR-I-O-1. Provide a 

transportation and 

travel system that 

facilitates multiple use, 

with an emphasis on 

recreational use, 

livestock grazing, and 

minimizing impacts to 

big game habitats.

TR-II-O-1. Provide a 

transportation and 

travel system to 

facilitate multiple use, 

with an emphasis on 

commercial use and 

minimizing impacts on 

native vegetation.

TR-III-O-1. A 

transportation and 

travel system would 

provide for multiple 

use, with an emphasis 

on wildland fire 

prevention and 

suppression activities.

TR-IV-O-1. Provide a 

transportation and 

travel system to 

facilitate multiple use 

and resource 

protection with an 

emphasis on meeting 

native vegetation and 

special status species 

objectives.

TR-V-O-1. Provide a 

transportation and 

travel system to 

facilitate multiple use 

and resource 

protection with an 

emphasis on meeting 

native vegetation and 

special status species 

goals.

TR-VI-O-1. Provide a 

transportation and 

travel system to 

facilitate habitat 

restoration, resource 

protection, and 

multiple use. 

Allocations

TR-C-A-1. The Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness would be closed to motorized and mechanized vehicle use (60,000 acres). The Lower Salmon Falls Creek Wilderness Study 

Area would be closed to motorized vehicle use (2,000 acres).

TR-NA-A-1. Three 

hundred forty two 

thousand (342,000) 

acres would be open 

to cross-country 

motorized vehicle use 

in Multiple Use Areas 

(MUAs) 4, 6, 7, 9, 12, 

13, and 15. 

TR-NA-A-2. Within the 

MUAs located in 

Owyhee County (10, 

11, and 16, and 

portions of 4, 6, 7, 12, 

13, and 15), all 

recreational motorized 

and mechanized offhighway vehicle use 

would be limited to 

existing roads and 

trails lawfully in 

existence as described 

in the Omnibus Public 

Lands Management 

Act of 2009. 

TR-I-A-1. Designated 

areas in the 

Deadman/Yahoo 

Special Recreation 

Management Area

(SRMA) would be 

open to cross-country 

motorized vehicle use 

(4,000 acres).

TR-I-A-2. Salmon Falls 

Creek ACEC north and 

south of Lilly Grade 

crossing and Lands 

with Wilderness 

Characteristics 

managed for 

wilderness 

characteristics would 

be closed to motorized 

vehicle use (54,000

acres). 

TR-I-A-3. Travel would 

be limited to 

designated routes in 

the remainder of the 

TR-II-A-1. No areas 

would be open to 

cross-country 

motorized vehicle use.

TR-II-A-2. Travel 

would be limited to 

designated routes in 

the remainder of the 

planning area 

(1,309,000 acres). 

Specific route 

designations would be 

made in an 

implementation-level 

travel and 

transportation 

management planning 

process following the 

completion of the 

RMP. Until route 

designation occurs, 

areas limited to 

designated routes 

would be managed as 

limited to existing 

TR-III-A-1. Designated 

areas in the 

Deadman/Yahoo 

SRMA would be open 

to cross-country 

motorized vehicle use 

(4,000 acres).

TR-III-A-2. Salmon 

Falls Creek ACEC 

Concern north and 

south of Lilly Grade 

crossing would be 

closed to motorized 

vehicle use (3,000

acres). 

TR-III-A-3. Travel 

would be limited to 

designated routes in 

the remainder of the 

planning area 

(1,304,000 acres). 

Specific route 

designations would be 

made in an 

implementation-level 

TR-IV-A-1. Designated 

areas in the 

Deadman/Yahoo 

SRMA would be open 

to cross-country 

motorized vehicle use 

(4,000 acres).

TR-IV-A-2. Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics would 

be closed to motorized 

vehicle use (37,000

acres). 

TR-IV-A-3. Travel 

would be limited to 

designated routes in 

the remainder of the 

planning area 

(1,269,000 acres). 

Specific route 

designations would be 

made in an 

TR-V-A-1. Designated 

areas in the Yahoo 

SRMA would be open 

to cross-country 

motorized vehicle use 

(1,000 acres).

TR-V-A-2. Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics would 

be closed to motorized 

vehicle use (104,000

acres). 

TR-V-A-3. Travel 

would be limited to 

designated routes in 

the remainder of the 

planning (1,204,000 

acres). Specific route 

designations would be 

made in an 

implementation-level 

travel and 

TR-VI-A-1. Designated 

areas of the Deadman 

and Yahoo SRMAs 

would be open to 

cross-country 

motorized vehicle use 

(4,000 acres).

TR-VI-A-2. The 

Rosevear Extensive 

Recreation 

Management Areas 

(ERMAs) (19,000 

acres) would provide a 

series of designated 

motorized routes that 

link the Deadman and 

Yahoo SRMAs.

TR-VI-A-3. Salmon 

Falls Creek ACEC 

north and south of Lilly

Grade crossing would 

be closed to motorized 

vehicle use (3,000 

acres). 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

•

2-419

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

TR-NA-A-3. Salmon 

Falls Creek Area of 

Critical Environmental 

Concern (ACEC) and 

cultural sites identified 

as special MUAs in the 

RMP would be closed 

to motorized vehicle 

use (3,000 acres). 

TR-NA-A-4. Seven 

hundred fifty one 

thousand (751,000) 

acres would be limited 

to designated routes, 

including: 

Sand Point ACEC

and surrounding 

paleontological 

deposits, 

Oregon National 

Historic Trail, 

Devil Creek, 

Juniper Ranch, 

and Clover Creek 

cultural areas in 

MUA 12; 

Devil Creek 

Complex in MUA 

13, and

Devil Creek and 

bighorn sheep 

habitat in MUAs 

15 and 16.

TR-NA-A-5. Crucial 

mule deer and 

pronghorn winter 

range within MUAs 15 

and 16 would be 

limited seasonally for 

snow vehicles if Idaho 

Department of Fish 

planning area 

(1,253,000 acres). 

Specific route 

designations would be 

made in an 

implementation-level 

travel and 

transportation 

management planning 

process following the 

completion of the 

RMP. Until route 

designation occurs, 

areas limited to 

designated routes 

would be managed as 

limited to existing 

routes as depicted on 

Map 71. A more 

thorough review of the 

existing transportation 

routes would be 

performed as part of 

the travel management 

planning process, 

which may include 

additional on-theground data collection 

and verification.

TR-I-A-4. Travel within 

the Herd Management 

Area (HMA) would be 

seasonally restricted 

during foaling (March 

through July); 

motorized travel would 

not be allowed on 

primitive roads during 

this time.

routes as depicted on 

Map 71. A more 

thorough review of 

existing transportation 

routes would be 

performed as part of 

the travel management 

planning process, 

which may include 

additional on-theground data collection 

and verification.

travel and 

transportation 

management planning 

process following the 

completion of the 

RMP. Until route 

designation occurs, 

areas limited to 

designated routes 

would be managed as 

limited to existing 

routes as depicted on 

Map 71. A more 

thorough review of the

existing transportation 

routes would be 

performed as part of 

the travel management 

planning process, 

which may include 

additional on-theground data collection 

and verification.

TR-III-A-4. Travel 

within the HMA would 

be seasonally 

restricted during 

foaling (March through 

July); motorized travel 

would not be allowed 

on primitive roads 

during this time.

implementation-level 

travel and 

transportation 

management planning 

process following the 

completion of the 

RMP. Until route 

designation occurs, 

areas limited to 

designated routes 

would be managed as 

limited to existing 

routes as depicted on 

Map 71. A more 

thorough review of the 

existing transportation 

routes would be 

performed as part of 

the travel management 

planning process, 

which may include 

additional on-theground data collection 

and verification.

transportation 

management planning 

process following the 

completion of the 

RMP. Until route 

designation occurs, 

areas limited to 

designated routes 

would be managed as 

limited to existing 

routes as depicted on 

Map 71. A more 

thorough review of the 

existing transportation 

routes would be 

performed as part of 

the travel management 

planning process, 

which may include 

additional on-theground data collection 

and verification.

TR-VI-A-4. Travel 

would be limited to 

designated routes in 

the remainder of the 

planning area 

(1,304,000 acres). 

Specific route 

designations would be 

made in an 

implementation-level 

travel and 

transportation 

management planning 

process following the 

completion of the 

RMP. Until route 

designation occurs, 

areas limited to 

designated routes 

would be managed as 

limited to existing 

routes as depicted on 

Map 71. A more 

thorough review of the 

existing transportation 

routes would be 

performed as part of 

travel management 

planning process, 

which may include 

additional on-theground data collection 

and verification.
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

o

•

•

•

•

• • • •

•

•

o o o o

2-420

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

and Game determines 

harassment is 

occurring.

Land Use Authorizations (LA)

Goals and Objectives

No goal or objective 

stated.

LA-CA-G-1. Public needs for land use authorizations would be met with consideration for other resource values.

LA-I-O-1. Provide for 

the development of 

renewable energy 

resources, 

transportation routes, 

utility corridors, 

transmission lines, 

communication sites 

and other uses with 

consideration for 

resource objectives.

LA-II-O-2. Provide for 

the development of 

renewable energy 

resources, 

transportation routes, 

utility corridors, 

transmission lines, 

communication sites 

and other uses with 

consideration for 

resource objectives.

LA-III-O-1. Provide for 

the development of 

renewable energy 

resources, 

transportation routes, 

utility corridors, 

transmission lines, 

communication sites 

and other uses with 

consideration for 

resource objectives 

and wildland fire 

prevention and 

suppression 

objectives.

LA-IV-O-1. Provide for 

the development of 

renewable energy 

resources, 

transportation routes, 

utility corridors, 

transmission lines, 

communication sites 

and other uses with 

consideration for 

resource objectives.

LA-V-O-1. Provide for 

the development of 

renewable energy 

resources, 

transportation routes, 

utility corridors, 

transmission lines, 

communication sites 

and other uses with 

consideration for 

resource objectives.

LA-VI-O-1. Provide for 

the development of 

renewable energy 

resources, 

transportation routes, 

utility corridors, 

transmission lines, 

communication sites 

and other uses with 

consideration for 

resource objectives.

Allocations

LA-NA-A-1. The 

following areas would 

be exclusion areas for 

rights-of-way (ROWs) 

(62,000 acres); they 

would not be available 

for ROWs under any 

conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness 

and

 Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek 

Wilderness Study 

Area (WSA). 

LA-NA-A-2. The 

following areas would 

be utility 

LA-CA-A-1. Retain existing withdrawals, with the option of a Section 24 restoration for power site classifications and power site reserves if needed, as 

provided for in the Federal Power Act of 1920.

LA-I-A-1. The 

following areas would 

be avoidance areas for 

ROWs (1,001,000 

acres); ROWs would 

be allowed in these 

areas only if the 

avoidance stipulations 

are met and if the area 

is not identified for 

ROW exclusion: 

Areas within 

USAF MOAs

(983,000 acres): 

New ROWs 

must be 

LA-II-A-1. The 

following areas would 

be avoidance areas for 

ROWs (1,001,000 

acres); ROWs would 

be allowed in these 

areas only if the 

avoidance stipulations 

are met and if the area 

is not identified for 

ROW exclusion:

Areas within 

USAF MOAs

(983,000 acres): 

New ROWs 

must be 

LA-III-A-1. The 

following areas would 

be avoidance areas for 

ROWs (1,001,000 

acres); ROWs would 

be allowed in these 

areas only if the 

avoidance stipulations 

are met and if the area 

is not identified for 

ROW exclusion: 

Areas within 

USAF MOAs

(983,000 acres): 

New ROWs 

must be 

LA-IV-A-1. The 

following areas would 

be avoidance areas for 

ROWs (1,001,000

acres); ROWs would 

be allowed in these 

areas only if the 

avoidance stipulations 

are met and if the area 

is not identified for 

ROW exclusion: 

Areas within 

USAF MOAs

(983,000 acres): 

New ROWs 

must be 

LA-V-A-1. The 

following areas would 

be avoidance areas for 

ROWs (1,227,000 

acres); ROWs would 

be allowed in these 

areas only if the 

avoidance stipulations 

are met and if the area 

is not identified for 

ROW exclusion: 

Areas within 

USAF MOAs

(983,000 acres): 

New ROWs 

must be 

LA-VI-A-1. The 

following areas would 

be exclusion areas for 

ROW (63,000 acres); 

they would not be 

available for ROWs 

under any conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness, 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA, 

and

Sand Point ACEC.

LA-VI-A-2. The 

following areas would
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

• •

•

•

•

o

o

• •

o

o •

•

•

•

o

o o o

•

•

• • • • •

• o

o

•

• o

o

•

2-421

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

avoidance/restricted 

areas (935,000 acres): 

Areas within US

Air Force (USAF) 

Military Operating 

Areas (MOAs); 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated

Wild and Scenic 

River corridors;

Paleontological 

sites at Glenns 

Ferry and 

Pasadena Valley 

(surface, 

underground); 

Sand Point Area 

of Critical 

Environmental 

Concern (ACEC) 

(surface, 

underground); 

Dove Springs;

96 paleontological

sites; 

 All rutted 

segments of the 

Oregon Trail

(overhead, 

surface, 

underground); 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

River ACEC 

(overhead, 

surface, 

underground);

 Portions of 24,080

acres of the Dry 

Lakes/Bruneau 

River Complex 

and Post Office 

Cultural areas 

consistent 

with USAF 

airspace 

restrictions. 

 Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics

managed for 

wilderness 

characteristics

(52,000 acres): 

ROWs must 

not impact 

naturalness, 

opportunities 

for solitude, 

or 

opportunities 

for primitive 

and/or 

unconfined 

recreation in 

these areas. 

Oregon National 

Historic Trail 

(NHT) protective 

zone (11,000 

acres): 

New surface 

or overhead 

ROWs would 

follow existing 

ROW or 

disturbance 

corridors, 

underground 

ROWs would 

be allowed 

with 

mitigation for 

disturbance 

consistent 

with USAF 

airspace 

restrictions. 

Oregon NHT 

protective zone

(11,000 acres): 

Surface, 

overhead, 

and 

underground 

ROWs would 

be allowed 

with 

mitigation for 

disturbance 

within the 

protective 

zone. 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors 

(30,000 acres): 

ROWs must 

maintain/

enhance the 

river 

segment's 

ORVs, freeflowing 

condition, 

water quality, 

and tentative 

classification.

Several ROW 

avoidance areas 

overlap; where this 

occurs, all avoidance 

stipulations must be 

met. In addition, some 

ROW avoidance areas 

consistent 

with USAF 

airspace 

restrictions. 

Oregon NHT 

protective zone

(11,000 acres): 

New surface 

or overhead 

ROWs would 

follow existing 

ROW or 

disturbance 

corridors, 

underground 

ROWs would 

be allowed 

with 

mitigation for 

disturbance 

within the 

protective 

zone. 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors 

(30,000 acres): 

ROWs must 

maintain/

enhance the 

river 

segment's 

ORVs, freeflowing 

condition, 

water quality, 

and tentative 

classification. 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC (57,000 

consistent 

with USAF 

airspace 

restrictions. 

Oregon NHT 

protective zone

(11,000 acres): 

New surface 

or overhead 

ROWs would 

follow existing 

ROW or 

disturbance 

corridors, 

underground 

ROWs would 

be allowed 

with 

mitigation for 

disturbance 

within the 

protective 

zone. 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors 

(30,000 acres): 

ROWs must 

maintain/

enhance the 

river 

segment's 

ORVs, freeflowing 

condition, 

water quality, 

and tentative 

classification. 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC (123,000 

consistent 

with USAF 

airspace 

restrictions. 

Oregon NHT 

protective zone

(11,000 acres): 

New surface 

or overhead 

ROWs would 

follow existing 

ROW or 

disturbance 

corridors, 

underground 

ROWs would 

be allowed 

with 

mitigation for 

disturbance 

within the 

protective 

zone. 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors 

(30,000 acres): 

ROWs must 

maintain/

enhance the 

river 

segment's 

ORVs, freeflowing 

condition, 

water quality, 

and tentative 

classification. 

Sagebrush Sea 

ACEC (956,000 

be avoidance areas for 

ROWs (1,234,000 

acres); ROWs could 

be allowed in 

accordance with the 

corresponding 

stipulations:

Areas within 

USAF MOAs

(983,000 acres): 

New ROWs 

must be 

consistent 

with USAF 

airspace 

restrictions.

Oregon NHT 

protective zone 

and Kelton and 

Toana Freight 

Road protective 

corridors (31,000 

acres): 

New surface 

or overhead 

ROWs would 

follow existing 

ROW or 

disturbance 

corridors, 

underground 

ROWs would 

be allowed 

with 

mitigation for 

disturbance 

within the 

protective 

zone and 

corridors. 

Where the 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

• •

• •

•

•

•

• •

•

•

o

•

•

•

o

•

o

•

o

•

• o o

•

o

•

•

•

•

•

2-422

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

(surface, 

underground); 

Portions of 4,480

acres of three

cultural resource 

complexes at 

Juniper Ranch, 

Clover Creek, and 

Devil Creek 

(surface, 

underground); and

Salmon Falls 

Creek Canyon

(overhead, 

surface, 

underground). 

LA-NA-A-3. Designate 

the following Section 

368 (of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005) 

energy ROW corridors, 

all of which are 3,500 

feet wide and are 

compatible for 

multimodal uses (e.g., 

oil, gas, electrical 

transmission, 

hydrogen pipeline): 

Pilgrim Gulch, 

Shoestring, 

Balanced Rock, 

and

Saylor Creek.

within the 

protective 

zone. 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

Wild and Scenic 

River (WSR) 

corridors (30,000 

acres): 

ROWs must 

maintain/enha

nce the river 

segment's 

outstandingly 

remarkable 

values

(ORVs), freeflowing 

condition, 

water quality, 

and tentative 

classification. 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

and Salmon Falls 

Creek ACECs 

(88,000 acres): 

New ROWs 

would be 

restricted to 

ROW 

corridors and 

locations of 

existing 

ROWs.

Several ROW 

avoidance areas 

overlap; where this 

occurs, all avoidance 

stipulations must be 

met. In addition, some 

ROW avoidance areas 

overlap with ROW 

exclusion areas; where 

this occurs, the more 

restrictive exclusion 

management applies. 

LA-II-A-2. The 

following areas would 

be exclusion areas for 

ROW (62,000 acres); 

they would not be 

available for ROWs 

under any conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness 

and

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA.

LA-II-A-3. Designate 

the following ROW 

corridors for utilities 

(i.e., corridors for oil, 

gas, and hydrogen 

pipelines, electricity 

transmission, phone 

lines, and distribution 

facilities), all of which 

are 1-mile wide:

Pilgrim Gulch 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(4,000 acres), 

Shoestring 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(5,000 acres), 

Saylor Creek 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(11,000 acres), 

Balanced Rock 

(Section 368 

acres): 

No new 

overhead 

ROWs would 

be allowed. 

Salmon Falls 

Creek ACEC 

(3,000 acres): 

New ROWs 

would be 

restricted to 

ROW 

corridors and 

locations of 

existing 

ROWs.

Several ROW 

avoidance areas 

overlap; where this 

occurs, all avoidance 

stipulations must be 

met. In addition, some 

ROW avoidance areas 

overlap with ROW 

exclusion areas; where 

this occurs, the more 

restrictive exclusion 

management applies. 

LA-III-A-2. The 

following areas would 

be exclusion areas for 

ROW (63,000 acres); 

they would not be 

available for ROWs 

under any conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness, 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA, 

acres): 

New ROWs 

would be 

restricted to 

ROW 

corridors and 

locations of 

existing 

ROWs.

Several ROW 

avoidance areas 

overlap; where this 

occurs, all avoidance 

stipulations must be 

met. In addition, some 

ROW avoidance areas 

overlap with ROW 

exclusion areas; where 

this occurs, the more 

restrictive exclusion 

management applies.

LA-IV-A-2. The 

following areas would 

be exclusion areas for 

ROW (100,000 acres); 

they would not be 

available for ROWs 

under any conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness, 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA, 

Sand Point ACEC, 

and

Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics.

acres): 

New ROWs 

would be 

restricted to 

ROW 

corridors and 

locations of 

existing 

ROWs.

Several ROW 

avoidance areas 

overlap; where this 

occurs, all avoidance 

stipulations must be 

met. In addition, some 

ROW avoidance areas 

overlap with ROW 

exclusion areas; where 

this occurs, the more 

restrictive exclusion 

management applies. 

LA-V-A-2. The 

following areas would 

be exclusion areas for 

ROW (167,000 acres); 

they would not be 

available for ROWs 

under any conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness, 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA, 

Sand Point ACEC, 

and

Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics 

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics.

alignment of 

a new largescale linear 

ROW with 

multijurisdictional 

impacts is 

constrained 

or determined 

by external 

factors which 

make 

avoidance 

impractical or 

infeasible, the 

ROW grant 

would require 

mitigation 

commensurat

e with 

impacts.

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors 

(30,000 acres): 

ROWs must 

maintain/enh

ance the river 

segment's 

outstandingly 

remarkable 

values, freeflowing 

condition, 

water quality, 

and tentative 

classification. 

Upper Bruneau 

Canyon and 

Salmon Falls 

Creek ACECs 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

• •

• •

•

• •

•

• •

•

•

•

•

• •

•

• •

•

• o

•

o

o

2-423

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

overlap with ROW 

exclusion areas; where 

this occurs, the more 

restrictive exclusion 

management applies. 

LA-I-A-2. The 

following areas would 

be exclusion areas for 

ROWs (63,000 acres); 

they would not be 

available for ROWs 

under any conditions: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness, 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA, 

and

Sand Point ACEC.

LA-I-A-3. Designate 

the following ROW 

corridors for utilities 

(i.e., corridors for oil, 

gas, and hydrogen 

pipelines, electricity 

transmission, phone 

lines, and distribution 

facilities), all of which 

are 1-mile wide:

Pilgrim Gulch 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(4,000 acres), 

Shoestring 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(5,000 acres), 

Saylor Creek 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(11,000 acres), 

energy corridor)

(10,000 acres), 

and

Jarbidge (24,000 

acres). 

LA-II-A-4. Wind 

energy development

can be considered 

throughout the 

planning area, 

consistent with 

stipulations for ROW 

avoidance areas and 

outside ROW 

exclusion areas and 

utility ROW corridors. 

and

Sand Point ACEC.

LA-III-A-3. Designate 

the following ROW 

corridors for utilities 

(i.e., corridors for oil, 

gas, and hydrogen 

pipelines, electricity 

transmission, phone 

lines, and distribution 

facilities), all of which 

are 1-mile wide:

Pilgrim Gulch 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(4,000 acres), 

Shoestring 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(5,000 acres), 

Saylor Creek 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(11,000 acres), 

Balanced Rock 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(10,000 

acres),and

Jarbidge (24,000 

acres). 

LA-III-A-4. Wind 

energy development

can be considered in 

areas with annual or 

non-native vegetation 

communities, 

consistent with 

stipulations for ROW 

avoidance areas and 

outside ROW 

LA-IV-A-3. Designate 

the following ROW 

corridors for utilities 

(i.e., corridors for oil, 

gas, and hydrogen 

pipelines, electricity 

transmission, phone 

lines, and distribution 

facilities), all of which 

are 1-mile wide:

Pilgrim Gulch 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(4,000 acres), 

Shoestring 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(5,000 acres), 

Saylor Creek 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(11,000 acres), 

Balanced Rock 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(10,000 acres), 

and

Jarbidge (24,000 

acres). 

LA-IV-A-4. Wind 

energy development

can be considered in 

areas with annual or 

non-native perennial 

communities, 

consistent with 

stipulations for ROW 

avoidance areas and 

outside ROW 

exclusion areas and 

utility ROW corridors. 

LA-V-A-3. Designate 

the following ROW 

corridors for utilities 

(i.e., corridors for oil, 

gas, and hydrogen 

pipelines, electricity 

transmission, phone 

lines, and distribution 

facilities), all of which 

are 1-mile wide:

Pilgrim Gulch 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(4,000 acres), 

Shoestring 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(5,000 acres), 

Saylor Creek 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(11,000 acres), 

Balanced Rock 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(10,000 acres), 

and

Jarbidge (24,000 

acres). 

LA-V-A-4. Wind 

energy development 

can be considered in 

areas with annual or 

non-native perennial 

vegetation, consistent 

with stipulations for 

ROW avoidance areas 

and outside ROW 

exclusion areas and 

utility ROW corridors. 

(21,000 acres): 

New ROWs 

would be 

restricted to 

ROW 

corridors and 

locations of 

existing 

ROWs.

Sage-grouse 

management area 

(990,000 acres): 

New tall 

structures 

(e.g., 

overhead 

power and 

phone lines, 

communicatio

n towers) 

would be 

located more 

than 4 miles 

from 

occupied and 

unknownstatus sagegrouse leks. 

In some 

cases, 

topographic 

screening 

may allow 

infrastructure 

to be placed 

at less than 4 

miles from 

leks.

Where the 

alignment of 

a new largescale linear
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

o

•

•

2-424

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Balanced Rock 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(10,000 acres), 

and

Jarbidge (24,000 

acres). 

LA-I-A-4. Wind energy 

developments could be 

considered in areas 

with annual or nonnative vegetation 

communities, 

consistent with 

stipulations for ROW 

avoidance areas and 

outside ROW 

exclusion areas and 

utility ROW corridors. 

exclusion areas and 

utility ROW corridors. 

ROW with 

multijurisdictional 

impacts is 

constrained 

or determined 

by external 

factors which 

make 

avoidance 

impractical or 

infeasible, the 

ROW grant 

would require 

mitigation 

commensurat

e with 

impacts.

Several ROW 

avoidance 

areas 

overlap; 

where this 

occurs, all 

avoidance 

stipulations 

must be met. 

In addition, 

some ROW 

avoidance 

areas overlap 

with ROW 

exclusion 

areas; where 

this occurs, 

the more 

restrictive 

exclusion 

management 

applies. 

LA-VI-A-3. Designate 

the following ROW 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

•

•

2-425

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

corridors for utilities 

(i.e., corridors for oil, 

gas, and hydrogen 

pipelines, electricity 

transmission, phone 

lines, and distribution 

facilities), all of which 

are 1-mile wide:

Pilgrim Gulch 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(4,000 acres), 

Shoestring 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(5,000 acres), 

Saylor Creek 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(11,000 acres), 

Balanced Rock 

(Section 368 

energy corridor)

(10,000 acres), 

Roseworth (2,000 

acres), and

 Oil/gas pipelines

(11,000 acres). 

Roseworth ROW 

corridor has a limited 

capacity due to 

topographic features 

where it crosses Lilly

Grade.

LA-VI-A-4.

Commercial wind and 

solar energy 

developments would 

not be permitted inside 

the sage-grouse 

management area or 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

• • • •

• • • • •

• •

•

• •

• •

•

•

•

•

• • •

•

•

• •

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

2-426

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

within utility ROW 

corridors.

Land Tenure (LT)

Goals and Objectives

LT-NA-O-1. Retain 

public lands in Federal 

ownership to be 

managed by BLM 

according to the 

principles of multiple 

use and sustained 

yield, except those 

lands specifically 

identified in the plan or 

amendment as transfer 

areas.

LT-CA-G-1. Manage land tenure to provide for public ownership of lands with high resource and multiple use values and to improve management 

efficiency.

LT-CA-O-1. Improve BLM's ability to manage the land base and resource values, and help meet resource objectives through land tenure adjustments.

Allocations

LT-NA-A-1. Lands that 

are not available for 

disposal (62,000

acres) include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness

and 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek 

Wilderness Study 

Area (WSA).

LT-NA-A-2. Consider 

for transfer from 

Federal ownership:

600 acres of 

public land 

through sale (T1; 

Multiple Use 

Areas [MUAs] 4, 

6, 7, 12, and 13); 

2,000 acres 

through sale or 

exchange (T2; 

LT-I-A-1. Zone 1 

consists of lands for 

retention that are not 

available for disposal 

(1,108,000 acres). 

Zone 1 lands include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

The Oregon 

National Historic 

Trail (NHT) 

protective zone; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

Wild and Scenic 

River (WSR) 

corridors; 

The BruneauJarbidge, Lower 

Bruneau Canyon, 

and Sand Point 

LT-II-A-1. Zone 1 

consists of lands for 

retention that are not 

available for disposal 

(977,000 acres). Zone 

1 lands include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors; 

Saylor Creek 

HMA; and 

Other 

consolidated 

public lands. 

LT-II-A-2. Zone 2 

consists of lands for 

LT-III-A-1. Zone 1 

consists of lands for 

retention that are not 

available for disposal 

(1,108,000 acres).

Zone 1 lands include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors; 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

and Sand Point 

ACECs; 

Saylor Creek 

HMA; and 

Other 

consolidated

LT-IV-A-1. Zone 1 

consists of lands for 

retention that are not 

available for disposal 

(1,137,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 

1,136,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B). Zone 

1 lands include: 

The BruneauJarbidge Rivers 

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors; 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, 

Inside Desert, 

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon, and Sand 

Point ACECs;

LT-V-A-1. Zone 1 

consists of lands for 

retention that are not 

available for disposal 

(1,282,000 acres). 

Zone 1 lands include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors; 

Sand Point, Lower 

Bruneau Canyon, 

and Sagebrush 

Sea ACECs; 

Saylor Creek 

HMA; 

Lands with 

Wilderness 

LT-VI-A-1. Zone 1 

consists of lands for 

retention that are not 

available for disposal 

(1,326,000 acres). 

Zone 1 lands include: 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

The Oregon NHT

protective zone 

and Kelton and 

Toana Freight 

Road protective 

corridors; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors; 

ACECs; 

Special 

Recreation 

Management 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

• • •

•

•

•

•

• •

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• •

• •

•

2-427

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

MUAs 4, 6, 7, 15, 

and 16); and 

 3,000 acres 

through exchange 

(T3; MUAs 7, 11, 

and 12).

LT-NA-A-3. Retain 

1,299,000 acres of 

public lands across all 

MUAs, including all 

lands in the Bruneau 

Known Geothermal 

Resource Area and all 

subsurface ownership 

in MUA 15. 

LT-NA-A-4. Make 

available 67,000 acres 

of land for potential 

Desert Land Act and 

Carey Act 

development (T4; 

MUAs 4, 6, and 7).

LT-NA-A-5. Close 

1,275,000 acres to

agricultural entry in 

MUAs 4, 6, 7, 9, 11, 

12, 13, 15, and 16.

LT-NA-A-6. Public 

lands that are to be 

retained in Federal

ownership may be 

considered for 

Recreation and Public 

Purposes Act of 1954

(R&PP) leases, private 

exchanges and State

exchanges following 

amendment 

procedures. 

Areas of Critical 

Environmental 

Concern (ACECs); 

Saylor Creek Herd 

Management Area

(HMA); 

Land with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics 

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics; 

and 

Other 

consolidated 

public lands. 

LT-I-A-2. Zone 2 

consists of lands for 

consolidation within 

the planning area 

(243,000 acres); these 

can be exchanged for 

other lands adjacent to

Zone 1 or Zone 2 or 

offered as R&PP 

leases. Zone 2 lands 

include: 

Selected lands near 

Indian Cove, Hammett, 

Glenns Ferry, and King 

Hill;

Selected lands in 

the northeast

corner of the 

planning area, 

Selected lands in 

the Jarbidge 

Foothills, 

Selected lands 

between Clover

Creek and Cedar 

consolidation within 

the planning area 

(349,000 acres); these 

can be exchanged for 

other lands adjacent to

Zone 1 or Zone 2 or 

offered as Recreation 

and Public Purposes 

Act of 1954 (R&PP) 

leases. Zone 2 lands 

include: 

Selected lands 

near Indian Cove 

and Hammett,

Selected lands in 

the northeast 

corner of the 

planning area,

Selected lands in 

the Jarbidge 

Foothills,

Selected lands 

between Clover 

Creek and Cedar 

Creek Reservoir,

Selected lands 

near the Jarbidge 

River in Nevada, 

and

Lands adjacent to 

private lands not 

in Zone 3.

LT-II-A-3. Zone 3 

lands (46,000 acres) 

are available for 

FLPMA Section 203 

sales (as listed in 

Appendix I) subject to 

NEPA compliance and 

consistent with other 

decisions in this RMP. 

public lands. 

LT-III-A-2. Zone 2 

consists of lands for 

consolidation within 

the planning area 

(243,000 acres); these 

can be exchanged for 

other lands adjacent to

Zone 1 or Zone 2 or 

offered as R&PP 

leases. Zone 2 lands 

include: 

Selected lands 

near Indian Cove, 

Hammett, Glenns 

Ferry, and King 

Hill;

Selected lands in 

the northeast 

corner of the 

planning area;

Selected lands in 

the Jarbidge 

Foothills;

Selected lands 

between Clover 

Creek and Cedar 

Creek Reservoir; 

and

Selected lands 

near the Jarbidge 

River in Nevada.

LT-III-A-3. Zone 3 

lands (20,000 acres) 

are available for 

FLPMA Section 203 

sales (as listed in 

Appendix I) subject to 

NEPA compliance and 

consistent with other 

decisions in this RMP. 

Saylor Creek 

HMA; 

Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics; 

and 

Other 

consolidated 

public lands.

LT-IV-A-2. Zone 2 

consists of lands for 

consolidation within 

the planning area 

(219,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 

220,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B); these 

can be exchanged for 

other lands adjacent to

Zone 1 or Zone 2 or 

offered as R&PP 

leases. Zone 2 lands 

include: 

Selected lands 

near Glenns Ferry 

and Roseworth,

Selected lands in 

the northeast 

corner of the 

planning area,

Selected lands in 

the Jarbidge 

Foothills, and

Selected lands 

between Clover 

Creek and Cedar 

Creek Reservoir.

LT-IV-A-3. Zone 3 

Characteristics

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics; 

and 

Other 

consolidated 

public lands.

LT-V-A-2. Zone 2 

consists of lands for 

consolidation within 

the planning area 

(89,000 acres); these 

can be exchanged for 

other lands adjacent to

Zone 1 or Zone 2 or 

offered as R&PP 

leases. Zone 2 lands 

include:

Selected lands 

near Hammett, 

Glenns Ferry, and 

King Hill and

Selected lands in 

the northeast 

corner of the 

planning area.

LT-V-A-3. Zone 3 

lands are available for 

FLPMA Section 203 

sales subject to NEPA 

compliance and 

consistent with other 

decisions in this RMP.

No lands are identified 

for inclusion in Zone 3. 

LT-V-A-4. R&PP 

leases to State and 

local governments and 

non-profit 

organizations would be 

Areas (SRMAs); 

Saylor Creek 

HMA; and

Other 

consolidated 

public lands.

LT-VI-A-2. Zone 2 

consists of lands for 

consolidation within 

the planning area 

(32,000 acres). Zone 2 

lands include:

Selected lands 

near Glenns Ferry 

and Roseworth, 

Selected lands in 

the northeast 

corner of the 

planning area, 

Selected lands in 

the Jarbidge 

Foothills, and 

Selected lands 

between Clover 

Creek and Cedar 

Creek Reservoir.

LT-VI-A-3. Zone 3 

lands (13,000 acres) 

are available for 

FLPMA Section 203 

sales (as listed in 

Appendix I) subject to 

NEPA compliance and 

consistent with other 

decisions in this RMP. 

Zone 3 lands include:

Selected lands 

near Blue Gulch, 

Glenns Ferry, 

Grindstone, Magic 

Waters, Bliss 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

• • •

2-428

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Creek Reservoir, 

and

Selected lands 

near the Jarbidge

River in Nevada.

LT-I-A-3. Zone 3 lands 

(20,000 acres) are 

available for Federal 

Land Policy and 

Management Act 

(FLPMA) Section 203 

sales (as listed in 

Appendix I) subject to 

NEPA compliance and 

consistent with other 

decisions in this RMP. 

Zone 3 lands include:

Selected lands 

near Hammett, 

Glenns Ferry, 

King Hill, and 

Roseworth. 

LT-I-A-4. Lands 

identified for disposal 

in previous RMPs prior 

to July 25, 2000 (3,000

acres) would continue 

to be available for 

disposal under the 

Federal Land 

Transaction Facilitation 

Act of 2000 (FLTFA) 

(Appendix I). Proceeds 

from the sale or 

exchange of these 

public lands may be 

used to purchase 

additional public lands, 

as provided for in 

FLTFA.

LT-I-A-5. R&PP leases 

Zone 3 lands include:

Selected lands 

near Hammett, 

Glenns Ferry, 

King Hill, and 

Roseworth and

Selected lands 

between 

Castleford and 

Hagerman.

LT-II-A-4. Lands 

identified for disposal 

in previous RMPs prior 

to July 25, 2000 (4,000 

acres) would continue 

to be available for 

disposal under the 

Federal Land 

Transaction Facilitation 

Act of 2000 (FLTFA) 

(Appendix I). Proceeds 

from the sale or 

exchange of these 

public lands may be 

used to purchase 

additional public lands, 

as provided for in 

FLTFA.

LT-II-A-5. R&PP 

leases to State and 

local governments and 

non-profit 

organizations would be 

considered on a caseby-case basis on lands 

in Zones 2 and 3.

Zone 3 lands include:

Selected lands 

near Hammett, 

Glenns Ferry, 

King Hill, and 

Roseworth.

LT-III-A-4. Lands 

identified for disposal 

in previous RMPs prior 

to July 25, 2000 (3,000 

acres) would continue 

to be available for 

disposal under FLTFA

(Appendix I). Proceeds 

from the sale or 

exchange of these 

public lands may be 

used to purchase 

additional public lands, 

as provided for in 

FLTFA.

LT-III-A-5. R&PP 

leases to State and 

local governments and 

non-profit 

organizations would be 

considered on lands in 

Zones 2 and 3.

lands (16,000 acres) 

are available for 

FLPMA Section 203 

sales (as listed in 

Appendix I) subject to 

NEPA compliance and 

consistent with other 

decisions in this RMP. 

Zone 3 lands include:

Selected lands 

near Hammett, 

Glenns Ferry, and 

King Hill.

LT-IV-A-4. Lands 

identified for disposal 

in previous RMPs prior 

to July 25, 2000 (3,000

acres) would continue 

to be available for 

disposal under FLTFA

(Appendix I). Proceeds 

from the sale or 

exchange of these 

public lands may be 

used to purchase 

additional public lands, 

as provided for in 

FLTFA.

LT-IV-A-5. R&PP 

leases to State and 

local governments and 

non-profit 

organizations would be 

considered on a caseby-case basis on lands 

in Zones 2 and 3.

considered on a caseby-case basis on lands 

in Zone 2.

Dam, and 

Pasadena Valley.

LT-VI-A-4. Lands 

identified for disposal 

in previous RMPs prior 

to July 25, 2000 (3,000

acres) would continue 

to be available for 

disposal under FLTFA 

(Appendix I). Proceeds 

from the sale or 

exchange of these 

public lands may be 

used to purchase 

additional public lands, 

as provided for in 

FLTFA.

LT-VI-A-5. R&PP 

leases would be 

considered on lands in 

Zones 2 and 3.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

2-429

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

to State and local 

governments and nonprofit organizations 

would be considered 

on a case-by-case 

basis on lands in 

Zones 2 and 3.

Minerals

Leasable Minerals (LE)

Goals and Objectives

LE-NA-O-1. Make 

1,259,000 acres of the 

area available for 

leasable mineral 

exploration and 

development across all 

Multiple Use Areas 

(MUAs). 

LE-CA-G-1. Provide leasable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other resources.

LE-I-O-1. Facilitate 

reasonable, 

economical, and 

environmentally sound 

exploration and 

development of 

leasable minerals 

where compatible with 

resource objectives.

LE-II-O-1. Facilitate 

reasonable, 

economical, and 

environmentally sound 

exploration and 

development of

leasable minerals 

where compatible with 

resource objectives.

LE-III-O-1. Facilitate 

reasonable, 

economical, and 

environmentally sound 

exploration and 

development of 

leasable minerals 

where compatible with 

resource and wildland 

fire prevention and 

suppression 

objectives.

LE-IV-O-1. Facilitate 

reasonable, 

economical, and 

environmentally sound 

exploration and 

development of 

leasable minerals 

where compatible with 

resource objectives.

LE-V-O-1. Facilitate 

reasonable, 

economical, and 

environmentally sound 

exploration and 

development of 

leasable minerals 

where compatible with 

resource objectives.

LE-VI-O-1. Facilitate 

reasonable, 

economical, and 

environmentally sound 

exploration and 

development of 

leasable minerals 

where compatible with 

resource objectives.

Allocations

LE-NA-A-1. Generally, 

the public lands may 

be considered for 

energy and minerals 

leasing and sale.

LE-NA-A-2. The 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness, the 

Lower Salmon Falls 

Creek Wilderness 

Study Areas (WSA), 

designated Wild and 

Scenic River (WSR) 

corridors, and areas in 

MUAs 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 

LE-I-A-1. The majority 

of the planning area 

(1,220,000 acres) 

would be open to 

mineral leasing, 

subject to laws, 

regulations, and formal 

orders; the terms and 

conditions of the 

standard lease form; 

and stipulations for 

Endangered Species 

Act of 1973 (ESA) 

Section 7 Consultation 

and Cultural Resource 

Protection. Areas that 

LE-II-A-1. The 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness, the 

Lower Salmon Falls 

Creek WSA, and 

designated WSR 

corridors (62,000 

acres) would be closed 

to mineral leasing.

LE-II-A-2. The majority 

of the planning area 

(1,309,000 acres) 

would be open to 

mineral leasing, 

subject to laws, 

LE-III-A-1. The 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness, the 

Lower Salmon Falls 

Creek WSA, eligible, 

suitable, and 

designated WSR 

corridors; and the 

Bruneau-Jarbidge and 

Sand Point ACECs 

(79,000 acres) would 

be closed to mineral 

leasing.

LE-III-A-2. The 

majority of the 

LE-IV-A-1. The 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness, the 

Lower Salmon Falls 

Creek WSA, eligible, 

suitable, and 

designated WSR 

corridors; the Inside 

Desert, Lower Bruneau 

Canyon, BruneauJarbidge, and Sand 

Point ACECs; and 

Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics

managed for their 

wilderness 

LE-V-A-1. The 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness, the 

Lower Salmon Falls 

Creek WSA, eligible, 

suitable, and 

designated WSR 

corridors; the Lower 

Bruneau Canyon, 

Middle Snake, and 

Sand Point ACECs; 

and Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics

managed for their 

wilderness 

LE-VI-A-1. The 

majority of the 

planning area 

(1,276,000 acres) 

would be open to 

mineral leasing, 

subject to laws, 

regulations, and formal 

orders; the terms and 

conditions of the 

standard lease form; 

and stipulations for 

ESA Section 7 

Consultation and 

Cultural Resource 

Protection. Areas that 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• •

•

•

2-430

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

12, 15, and 16

(112,000 acres) would 

be closed to mineral 

leasing.

LE-NA-A-3. Five 

hundred thirty nine 

thousand acres 

(539,000) would be 

open with standard 

leasing terms in MUAs 

4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 

13, 14, 15, and 16.

LE-NA-A-4. Crucial 

wildlife habitats shown 

below would be open 

to mineral leasing with 

no surface occupancy 

(NSO) during the 

following time periods: 

December through 

April in mule deer 

winter range, 

December through 

April in pronghorn 

winter range, 

May through June 

in pronghorn 

fawning range, 

December through 

mid-February in 

sage-grouse and 

sharp-tailed 

grouse winter 

range, 

Mid-February 

through June in 

sage-grouse and 

sharp-tailed 

grouse breeding 

grounds, 

April through June 

would be subject to 

additional moderate or 

major constraints 

specific to Alternative I 

are as follows:

Moderate 

constraints

(791,000 acres): 

Big game winter 

range, key sagegrouse habitat, 

and Riparian 

Conservation 

Areas (RCAs) in 

bull trout and 

redband trout 

spawning habitat 

would be open to 

mineral leasing 

with seasonal 

restrictions. RCAs 

would be open to 

mineral leasing,

consistent with 

goals and 

objectives for 

riparian areas and 

wetlands.

Major constraints

(25,000 acres): 

The Oregon 

National Historic 

Trail (NHT) 

protective zone 

and the Kelton

and Toana Freight 

Road protective 

corridors would be 

open to mineral 

leasing with no 

surface 

occupancy (NSO). 

regulations, and formal 

orders; the terms and 

conditions of the 

standard lease form; 

and stipulations for 

ESA Section 7 

Consultation and 

Cultural Resource 

Protection. Areas that 

would be subject to 

additional moderate or 

major constraints 

specific to Alternative II 

are as follows:

Moderate 

constraints (8,000 

acres): RCAs 

would be open to 

mineral leasing, 

consistent with the 

goals and 

objectives for 

riparian areas and 

wetlands.

Major constraints

(25,000 acres): 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone

and eligible and 

suitable WSR 

corridors would be 

open to mineral 

leasing with NSO.

LE-II-A-3. Areas open 

or closed to 

exploration and 

development of nonenergy leasable 

minerals (e.g. 

phosphate) would 

follow allocations 

planning area 

(1,292,000 acres) 

would be open to 

mineral leasing, 

subject to laws, 

regulations, and formal 

orders; and the terms 

and conditions of the 

standard lease form. 

However, exploration 

and development 

activities would not be 

allowed during fire 

restrictions. Areas that 

would be subject to 

additional major 

constraints specific to 

Alternative III are as 

follows:

Moderate 

constraints (8,000 

acres): RCAs 

would be open to 

mineral leasing, 

consistent with the 

goals and 

objectives for 

riparian areas and 

wetlands.

Major constraints

(9,000 acres): The 

Oregon NHT 

protective zone 

would be open to 

mineral leasing 

with NSO. 

LE-III-A-3. Areas open 

or closed to 

exploration and 

development of nonenergy leasable 

minerals (e.g., 

characteristics 

(242,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 

210,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B) would 

be closed to mineral 

leasing.

LE-IV-A-2. The 

majority of the 

planning area 

(1,129,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 

1,161,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B) would 

be open to mineral 

leasing, subject to 

laws, regulations, and 

formal orders; the 

terms and conditions 

of the standard lease 

form; and stipulations 

for ESA Section 7 

Consultation and 

Cultural Resource 

Protection. Areas that 

would be subject to 

additional moderate or 

major constraints 

specific Alternative IV 

are as follows:

Moderate 

constraints

(697,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A, 

729,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B): 

Big game winter 

range, key sagegrouse habitat, 

and RCAs in bull 

trout and redband 

trout spawning 

characteristics 

(183,000 acres) would 

be closed to mineral 

leasing.

LE-V-A-2. The majority 

of the planning area 

(1,188,000 acres) 

would be open to 

mineral leasing, 

subject to laws, 

regulations, and formal 

orders; the terms and 

conditions of the 

standard lease form; 

and stipulations for 

ESA Section 7 

Consultation and 

Cultural Resource 

Protection. Areas that 

would be subject to 

additional moderate or 

major constraints 

specific to Alternative 

V are as follows:

Moderate 

constraints

(229,000 acres): 

Key sage-grouse 

habitat and RCAs 

in bull trout and 

redband trout 

spawning habitat 

would be open to 

mineral leasing 

with seasonal 

restrictions. RCAs 

would be open to 

mineral leasing, 

consistent with 

goals and 

objectives for 

riparian areas and 

would be subject to 

additional moderate or 

major constraints 

specific to Alternative 

VI are as follows:

Moderate 

constraints

(915,000 acres):

Big game winter 

range, sagegrouse 

management 

area, and RCAs in 

bull trout 

spawning habitat 

and redband trout 

spawning habitat 

would be open to 

mineral leasing 

with seasonal 

restrictions. RCAs 

would be open to 

mineral leasing, 

consistent with 

goals and 

objectives for 

riparian areas and 

wetlands.

Major constraints

(26,000 acres):

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone 

and the Kelton 

and Toana Freight 

Road protective 

corridors would be 

open to mineral 

leasing with NSO. 

LE-VI-A-2. The 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness, the 

Lower Salmon Falls 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2-431

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

in within two miles 

of leks in sagegrouse and sharptailed grouse 

nesting and brood 

rearing habitat, 

December through 

March in bald 

eagle and 

peregrine falcon 

winter habitat, 

February through 

June within 0.75

mile of golden 

eagle nests, 

Mid-March 

through June 

within 0.75 mile of 

ferruginous hawk, 

prairie falcon, and 

long-billed curlew 

nests, 

 Mid-March 

through June 

within 0.25 mile of 

white-faced ibis 

and Western 

burrowing owl 

nests, and

 Mid-April through 

August within 0.75

mile of osprey 

nests. 

LE-NA-A-5. The 

following 139,000

acres in MUAs 4, 6, 7, 

9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 

15, and 16 would be 

open to mineral 

leasing (excluding 

geothermal leasing) 

LE-I-A-2. The 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness, the 

Lower Salmon Falls 

Creek Wilderness 

Study Area (WSA); 

eligible, suitable, and 

designated Wild and 

Scenic River (WSR) 

corridors; Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics 

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics, and the 

Areas of Critical 

Environmental 

Concern (ACECs; 

151,000 acres) would 

be closed to mineral 

leasing.

LE-I-A-3. Areas open 

or closed to 

exploration and 

development of nonenergy leasable 

minerals (e.g., 

phosphate) would 

follow allocations 

outlined above.

outlined above. phosphate) would 

follow allocations 

outlined above.

habitat would be 

open to mineral 

leasing with 

seasonal 

restrictions. RCAs 

would be open to 

mineral leasing, 

consistent with the 

goals and 

objectives for 

riparian areas and 

wetlands.

Major constraints 

(25,000 acres): 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone 

(11,000 acres) 

and the Kelton 

and Toana Freight 

Road protective 

corridors (20,000 

acres) would be 

open to mineral 

leasing with NSO. 

LE-IV-A-3. Areas open 

or closed to 

exploration and 

development of nonenergy leasable 

minerals (e.g., 

phosphate) would 

follow allocations 

outlined above.

wetlands.

Major constraints

(25,000 acres): 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone 

and the Kelton 

and Toana Freight 

Road protective 

corridors would be 

open to mineral 

leasing with NSO. 

LE-V-A-3. Areas open 

or closed to 

exploration and

development of nonenergy leasable 

minerals (e.g., 

phosphate) would 

follow allocations 

outlined above.

Creek WSA, eligible, 

suitable, and 

designated WSR 

corridors; and the 

ACECs (95,000 acres) 

would be closed to 

mineral leasing.

LE-VI-A-3. Exploration 

and development of 

non-energy leasable 

minerals (e.g. 

phosphate) would 

follow allocations 

outlined above.
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2-432

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

with NSO year-round: 

Oregon National 

Historic Trail 

(NHT) protective 

zone, 

 Paleontological 

sites and cultural

resource 

complexes,

Sand Point Area 

of Critical 

Environmental 

Concern (ACEC), 

 Power site in MUA 

9, 

Portions of the 

Bruneau, 

Jarbidge, Arch, 

and Salmon Falls 

Canyons outside 

of wilderness, 

Bruneau-Jarbidge

Special 

Recreation 

Management Area 

(SRMA), 

Bighorn sheep 

habitat, and

 Within 500 feet of 

reservoirs, ponds, 

lakes, streams, 

wetlands, 

marshes, and 

riparian areas.

LE-NA-A-6. In 

addition, cultural sites 

identified as special 

MUAs in the RMP and 

areas within one mile 

of bald eagle and 

peregrine falcon nests, 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

2-433

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

within essential nesting 

habitat for other birds 

of prey, and within 0.5 

mile of heron rookeries 

would also be open to 

mineral leasing with 

NSO year-round. 

LE-NA-A-7. The

Oregon Trail would be 

closed to geothermal 

leasing.

LE-NA-A-8. The 

following areas would 

be open to geothermal 

leasing with NSO:

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

and Salmon Falls 

Creek ACECs; 

Designated or 

proposed, critical 

habitat for listed 

species under the 

Endangered 

Species Act of 

1973 (ESA) if 

geothermal 

leasing would 

adversely modify 

the habitat; for 

listed or proposed 

species without 

designated 

habitat, NSO 

would be 

implemented to 

the extent 

necessary to 

avoid jeopardy;

Within the 

boundary of 

properties 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

2-434

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

designated or 

eligible for the 

National Register 

of Historic Places, 

including National 

Landmarks and 

National Register 

Districts and Sites, 

and additional 

lands outside the 

designated

boundaries to the 

extent necessary 

to protect values 

where the setting 

and integrity is 

critical to their 

designation or 

eligibility;

Areas with 

important cultural 

and 

archaeological 

resources, such 

as traditional 

cultural properties 

and Native 

American sacred 

sites, as identified 

through 

consultation;

Water bodies, 

riparian areas, 

wetlands, playas, 

and 100-year 

floodplains;

Developed 

recreational 

facilities; 

Eligible and 

suitable WSR 

corridors; 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

2-435

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Areas managed 

as Visual 

Resource 

Management 

Class I; and

Slopes in excess 

of 40% and/or 

soils with high 

erosion potential.

Salable Minerals (SA)

Goals and Objectives

SA-NA-O-1. Manage 

700 acres in Multiple 

Use Areas (MUAs) 4, 

6, 7, and 12 for 

material use sites.

SA-CA-G-1. Provide salable mineral development opportunities where they are compatible with other resources.

SA-I-O-1. Provide 

salable minerals 

needed for community 

and economic 

purposes and facilitate 

their reasonable, 

economical, and 

environmentally sound 

development where 

available and 

compatible with 

resource objectives.

SA-II-O-1. Provide 

salable minerals 

needed for community 

and economic 

purposes and facilitate 

their reasonable, 

economical, and 

environmentally sound 

development where 

available and 

compatible with 

resource objectives.

SA-III-O-1. Provide 

salable minerals 

needed for community 

and economic 

purposes and facilitate 

their reasonable, 

economical, and 

environmentally sound 

development where 

available and 

compatible with 

resource and wildland 

fire prevention and 

suppression 

objectives.

SA-IV-O-1. Provide 

salable minerals 

needed for community 

and economic 

purposes and facilitate 

their reasonable, 

economical, and 

environmentally sound 

development where 

available and 

compatible with 

resource objectives.

SA-V-O-1. Provide 

salable minerals 

needed for community 

and economic 

purposes and facilitate 

their reasonable, 

economical, and 

environmentally sound 

development where 

available and 

compatible with 

resource objectives.

SA-VI-O-1. Provide 

salable minerals 

needed for community 

and economic 

purposes and facilitate 

their reasonable, 

economical, and 

environmentally sound 

development where 

available and 

compatible with 

resource objectives.

Allocations

SA-NA-A-1. The 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers Wilderness, the 

Lower Salmon Falls 

Creek Wilderness 

Study Area (WSA), 

and designated Wild 

and Scenic River 

(WSR) corridors 

(62,000 acres) would 

be closed to salable 

mineral exploration 

and development.

SA-CA-A-1. The Oregon National Historic Trail (NHT) protective zone and the Kelton and Toana Freight Road protective corridors (27,000 acres) would 

be closed to new salable mineral development. See NHT-CA-MA-8 and CR-CA-MA-12. 

SA-I-A-1. The majority 

of the planning area 

would be open to 

salable mineral 

development 

(1,200,000 acres), 

subject to site-specific 

NEPA analysis, 

stipulations, and 43 

CFR 3600 regulations, 

except for the following 

SA-II-A-1. The majority 

of the planning area 

would be open to 

salable mineral 

development 

(1,282,000 acres), 

subject to site-specific 

NEPA analysis, 

stipulations, and 43 

CFR 3600 regulations, 

except for the following 

SA-III-A-1. The 

majority of the 

planning area would 

be open to salable 

mineral development 

(1,266,000 acres), 

subject to site-specific 

NEPA analysis, 

stipulations, and 43 

CFR 3600 regulations, 

except for the following 

SA-IV-A-1. The 

majority of the 

planning area would 

be open to salable 

mineral development 

(1,103,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-A; 

1,135,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B), 

subject to site-specific 

NEPA analysis, 

SA-V-A-1. The 

majority of the 

planning area would 

be open to salable 

mineral development 

(1,162,000 acres), 

subject to site-specific 

NEPA analysis, 

stipulations, and 43 

CFR 3600 regulations, 

except for the following 

SA-VI-A-1. The 

majority of the 

planning area would 

be open to salable 

mineral development 

(1,250,000 acres), 

subject to site-specific 

NEPA analysis, 

stipulations, and 43 

CFR 3600 regulations, 

except for the following 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

• • • •

•

•

• • •

•

•

• •

• • • •

•

•

• •

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

2-436

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

SA-NA-A-2. Manage 

areas for material use 

sites as follows:

65 acres in MUA 

4,

28 acres in MUA 

6,

24 sites containing 

524 acres in MUA 

7, and 

80 acres in MUA 

12.

areas which are closed 

to salable mineral 

exploration and 

development (144,000 

acres): 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors; 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, 

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon, Salmon 

Falls Creek, and 

Sand Point Areas 

of Critical 

Environmental 

Concern (ACECs); 

Playas (300-feet 

buffer); and 

 Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics.

areas which are closed 

to salable mineral 

exploration and 

development (62,000 

acres): 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness, 

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA, 

and

Designated WSR 

corridors. 

areas which are closed 

to salable mineral 

exploration and 

development (78,000 

acres): 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness;

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors; 

Sand Point, 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, 

and Salmon Falls 

Creek ACECs; 

and 

Playas (300-feet 

buffer). 

stipulations, and 43 

CFR 3600 regulations, 

except for the following 

areas which are closed 

to salable mineral 

exploration and 

development (241,000 

acres in Alternative IVA; 209,000 acres in 

Alternative IV-B): 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness;

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors; 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, 

Inside Desert, 

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon, and Sand 

Point ACECs;

Playas (300-feet 

buffer); and 

Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics.

areas which are closed 

to salable mineral 

exploration and 

development (182,000 

acres): 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness;

Lower Salmon 

Falls Creek WSA; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors;

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon, Middle 

Snake, and Sand 

Point ACECs;

Playas (300-feet 

buffer); and

Lands with 

Wilderness 

Characteristics

managed for their 

wilderness 

characteristics. 

areas which are closed 

to salable mineral 

exploration and 

development (94,000 

acres): 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Rivers 

Wilderness; 

Lower Salmon

Falls Creek WSA; 

Eligible, suitable, 

and designated 

WSR corridors; 

ACECs; and 

Playas (300-feet 

buffer).

Locatable Minerals (LO)

Goals and Objectives

LO-NA-O-1. Make 

1,153,000 acres of the 

area available for 

locatable minerals 

across all Multiple Use

Areas (MUAs). 

LO-CA-G-1. Locatable mineral development would not cause unnecessary and undue degradation of resources.

LO-CA-O-1. Facilitate reasonable, economical, and environmentally sound exploration and development of locatable minerals.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

•

•

• • • •

• •

•

•

•

• •

• •

2-437

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Allocations

LO-C-A-1. The planning area, excluding the following withdrawn areas (60,000 acres), would be available for location of mining claims: 

 Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness and 

Designated Wild and Scenic River (WSR) corridors.

LO-NA-A-1. Generally, 

the public lands would 

be available for 

mineral exploration 

and development, 

subject to applicable 

regulations and 

Federal and State 

laws. Areas within the 

planning area would 

be available for 

exploration and 

development of 

locatable minerals 

except where 

specifically restricted 

or excluded. The 

public lands would be 

available for location of 

mining claims unless 

withdrawn.

LO-NA-A-2.

Recommend 158,000 

acres for withdrawal 

from locatable entry in 

MUAs 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 

12, 13, 15, and 16. 

Areas include:

Sand Point and 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

Areas of Critical 

Environmental 

Concern (ACECs); 

Oregon Trail; 

Paleontological 

sites and cultural 

resource 

LO-I-A-1. Recommend 

the following areas for 

withdrawal from mining 

laws for locatable 

exploration and 

development (117,000 

acres): 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, 

Middle Snake, 

Salmon Falls 

Creek, and Sand 

Point ACECs; 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone; 

and 

Eligible and 

suitable WSR 

corridors. 

LO-II-A-1.

Recommend the 

following areas for 

withdrawal from mining 

laws for locatable 

exploration and 

development (26,000 

acres): 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone

and 

Eligible and 

suitable WSR 

corridors. 

LO-III-A-1.

Recommend the 

following areas for 

withdrawal from mining 

laws for locatable 

exploration and 

development (28,000 

acres): 

Bruneau-Jarbidge, 

Salmon Falls 

Creek, and Sand 

Point ACECs; 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone; 

and 

Eligible and 

suitable WSR 

corridors. 

LO-IV-A-1.

Recommend the 

following areas for 

withdrawal from mining 

laws for locatable 

exploration and 

development (83,000 

acres): 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

and Sand Point 

ACECs; 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone; 

and 

Eligible and 

suitable WSR 

corridors. 

LO-V-A-1.

Recommend the 

following areas for 

withdrawal from mining 

laws for locatable 

exploration and 

development (33,000 

acres): 

Middle Snake and 

Sand Point 

ACECs; 

The Oregon NHT 

protective zone; 

and 

Eligible and 

suitable WSR 

corridors. 

No alternative-specific 

allocations stated.
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

2-438

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

complexes; 

Dove Springs; 

Dean Site; 

Bruneau, 

Jarbidge, and 

Salmon Falls 

Canyons; and 

Bighorn sheep 

habitat.

Recommendations by 

BLM for withdrawal are 

subject to final 

consideration by the 

Secretary of the 

Interior.

SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 

Goals and Objectives

No goal stated. ACEC-I-G-1. ACECs 

would be managed to 

protect the important 

biological, cultural, 

scenic, and historic 

resources that meet 

the criteria for 

relevance and 

importance.

No alternative-specific 

goal stated

ACEC-III-G-1. ACECs 

would be managed to 

protect the important 

biological, cultural, 

scenic, and historic 

resources that meet 

the criteria for 

relevance and 

importance.

ACEC-IV-G-1. ACECs 

would be managed to 

protect the important 

biological, cultural, 

scenic, and historic 

resources that meet 

the criteria for 

relevance and 

importance.

ACEC-V-G-1. ACECs 

would be managed to 

protect the important 

biological, cultural, 

scenic, and historic 

resources that meet 

the criteria for 

relevance and 

importance.

ACEC-VI-G-1. ACECs 

would be managed to 

protect the important 

biological, cultural, 

scenic, and historic 

resources that meet 

the criteria for 

relevance and 

importance.

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC

ACEC-NA-O-1.

Protect the cultural 

values of the Dry 

Lake/Bruneau River 

Complex and Arch 

Canyon and the scenic 

and recreation values 

of the Bruneau and 

Jarbidge Rivers 

through special 

designation and 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC

ACEC-I-O-1. Manage 

the lands within the 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC to protect their 

fish, wildlife, botanical, 

scenic, and cultural 

resource values.

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon ACEC

ACEC-I-O-2. Protect 

vertebrate and 

No alternative-specific 

objective stated.

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC

ACEC-III-O-1. Manage 

the lands within the 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC to protect their 

fish, wildlife, botanical, 

scenic, and cultural 

resource values.

Salmon Falls Creek 

ACEC

ACEC-III-O-2. Protect 

scenic values, redband 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC

ACEC-IV-O-1. Manage 

the lands within the 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC to protect their 

fish, wildlife, botanical, 

scenic, and cultural 

resource values.

Inside Desert ACEC

ACEC-IV-O-2. Manage 

the lands within the 

Inside Desert ACEC to 

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon ACEC

ACEC-V-O-1. Protect 

vertebrate and 

invertebrate 

paleontological 

resources; restore and 

protect special status 

plant habitat for 

Packard’s cowpie 

buckwheat, spine-node 

milkvetch, and rare 

desert annuals.

Upper Bruneau 

Canyon ACEC

ACEC-VI-O-1. Protect 

and maintain habitat 

for California bighorn 

sheep, other special 

status wildlife, interior 

redband trout and nongame fishery, special 

status plants including 

Davis peppergrass, 

scenic, and cultural 

resource values.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

2-439

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

management. 

ACEC-NA-O-2.

Protect and enhance 

the Arch Canyon area 

and bighorn sheep 

habitat in the West 

Fork of the Bruneau 

River and the Jarbidge 

River system to a good 

ecological condition 

class and protect and 

maintain the cultural, 

geologic, scenic, and 

natural values present 

in the area.

Salmon Falls Creek 

ACEC

ACEC-NA-O-3.

Protect the Salmon 

Falls Creek Canyon 

(rim-to-rim) for its 

natural and scenic 

values through special 

designation and 

management.

Sand Point ACEC

ACEC-NA-O-4.

Protect and manage 

the Sand Point 

Paleontologic Area. 

Protect its 

paleontological and 

cultural resources from 

destruction and loss, 

protect the geologic 

features present, and 

ensure that its scenic 

and wildlife values are 

maintained.

invertebrate 

paleontological 

resources; restore and 

protect special status 

plant habitat for 

Packard’s cowpie 

buckwheat, spine-node 

milkvetch, and rare 

desert annuals.

Middle Snake ACEC

ACEC-I-O-3. Manage 

the lands within the 

Middle Snake ACEC to 

protect their fish and 

botanical values.

Salmon Falls Creek 

ACEC

ACEC-I-O-4. Protect 

scenic values, redband 

trout habitat, golden 

eagle nests, special 

status wildlife including 

prairie falcons and 

spotted bats, and 

native vegetation 

communities.

Sand Point ACEC

ACEC-I-O-5. Protect 

the Oregon National 

Historic Trail (NHT), 

archaeological sites, 

vertebrate and 

invertebrate 

paleontological 

resources, and the 

Glenns Ferry geologic 

formation.

trout habitat, golden 

eagle nests, special 

status wildlife including 

prairie falcons and 

spotted bats, and 

native vegetation 

communities.

Sand Point ACEC

ACEC-III-O-3. Protect 

the Oregon NHT, 

archaeological sites, 

vertebrate and 

invertebrate 

paleontological 

resources, and the 

Glenns Ferry geologic 

formation.

protect their botanical 

values.

Jarbidge Foothills 

ACEC

Alternative IV-A 

ACEC-IV-O-3. Manage 

the lands within the 

Jarbidge Foothills 

ACEC to protect their 

cultural, fish, wildlife, 

and botanical values.

Alternative IV-B 

ACEC-IV-O-4. Manage 

the lands within the 

Jarbidge Foothills 

ACEC to protect their 

cultural, wildlife, and 

botanical values.

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon ACEC

ACEC-IV-O-5. Protect 

vertebrate and 

invertebrate 

paleontological 

resources; restore and 

protect special status 

plant habitat for 

Packard’s cowpie 

buckwheat, spine-node 

milkvetch, and rare 

desert annuals.

Sand Point ACEC

ACEC-IV-O-6. Protect 

the Oregon NHT, 

archaeological sites, 

vertebrate and 

invertebrate 

paleontological 

resources, and the 

Glenns Ferry geologic 

Middle Snake ACEC

ACEC-V-O-2. Manage 

the lands within the 

Middle Snake ACEC to 

protect their fish and 

botanical values.

Sagebrush Sea 

ACEC

ACEC-V-O-3. Manage 

the lands within the 

Sagebrush Sea ACEC 

to protect their cultural, 

fish, wildlife, and 

botanical values.

Sand Point ACEC

ACEC-V-O-4. Protect 

the Oregon NHT, 

archaeological sites, 

vertebrate and 

invertebrate 

paleontological 

resources, and the 

Glenns Ferry geologic 

formation. 

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon ACEC

ACEC-VI-O-2. Protect 

vertebrate and 

invertebrate 

paleontological 

resources; restore and 

protect special status 

plant habitat for 

Packard’s cowpie 

buckwheat, spinenode milkvetch, and 

rare desert annuals.

Salmon Falls Creek 

ACEC

ACEC-VI-O-3. Protect 

scenic values, redband 

trout habitat, golden 

eagle nests, special 

status wildlife including 

prairie falcons and 

spotted bats, and 

native vegetation 

communities.

Sand Point ACEC

ACEC-VI-O-4. Protect 

the Oregon NHT, 

archaeological sites, 

vertebrate and 

invertebrate 

paleontological 

resources, and the 

Glenns Ferry geologic 

formation. 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

2-440

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

formation.

Allocations

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC

ACEC-NA-A-1.

Manage 85,000 acres 

of public land as the 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC. 

Salmon Falls Creek 

ACEC

ACEC-NA-A-2.

Manage 3,000 acres of 

public land as the 

Salmon Falls Creek 

ACEC. 

Sand Point ACEC

ACEC-NA-A-3.

Manage 800 acres of 

public land as the 

Sand Point ACEC. 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC

ACEC-I-A-1. Manage 

85,000 acres of public 

land as the BruneauJarbidge ACEC.

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon ACEC

ACEC-I-A-2. Manage 

1,000 acres of public 

lands as the Lower 

Bruneau Canyon 

ACEC. 

Middle Snake ACEC

ACEC-I-A-3. Manage 

7,000 acres of public 

lands as the Middle 

Snake ACEC. 

Salmon Falls Creek 

ACEC

ACEC-I-A-4. Manage 

3,000 acres of public 

land as the Salmon 

Falls Creek ACEC. 

Sand Point ACEC

ACEC-I-A-5. Manage 

1,000 acres of public 

land as the Sand Point 

ACEC. 

ACEC-II-A-1. No 

ACECs would be 

designated.

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC

ACEC-III-A-1. Manage 

57,000 acres of public 

land as the BruneauJarbidge ACEC. 

Salmon Falls Creek 

ACEC

ACEC-III-A-2. Manage 

3,000 acres of public 

land as the Salmon 

Falls Creek ACEC.

Sand Point ACEC

ACEC-III-A-3. Manage 

1,000 acres of public 

land as the Sand Point 

ACEC. 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC

ACEC-IV-A-1. Manage 

123,000 acres of 

public land as the 

Bruneau-Jarbidge 

ACEC. 

Inside Desert ACEC

Alternative IV-A 

ACEC-IV-A-2. Manage 

73,000 acres of public 

land as the Inside 

Desert ACEC. 

Alternative IV-B 

ACEC-IV-A-3. Manage 

41,000 acres of public 

land as the Inside 

Desert ACEC. 

Jarbidge Foothills 

ACEC

Alternative IV-A 

ACEC-IV-A-4. Manage 

134,000 acres of 

public land as the 

Jarbidge Foothills 

ACEC. 

Alternative IV-B 

ACEC-IV-A-5. Manage 

64,000 acres of public 

lands as the Jarbidge 

Foothills ACEC. 

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon ACEC

ACEC-IV-A-6. Manage 

1,000 acres of public 

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon ACEC

ACEC-V-A-1. Manage 

1,000 acres of public 

lands as the Lower 

Bruneau Canyon 

ACEC. 

Middle Snake ACEC

ACEC-V-A-2. Manage 

7,000 acres of public 

lands as the Middle 

Snake ACEC.

Sagebrush Sea 

ACEC

ACEC-V-A-3. Manage 

956,000 acres of 

public land as the 

Sagebrush Sea ACEC. 

Sand Point ACEC

ACEC-V-A-4. Manage 

1,000 acres of public 

land as the Sand Point 

ACEC 

Upper Bruneau 

Canyon ACEC

ACEC-VI-A-1. Manage 

18,000 acres of public 

land as the Upper 

Bruneau Canyon 

ACEC.

Lower Bruneau 

Canyon ACEC

ACEC-VI-A-2. Manage 

1,000 acres of public 

lands as the Lower 

Bruneau Canyon 

ACEC.

Salmon Falls Creek 

ACEC

ACEC-VI-A-3. Manage 

3,000 acres of public 

land as the Salmon 

Falls Creek ACEC.

Sand Point ACEC

ACEC-VI-A-4. Manage 

1,000 acres of public 

land as the Sand Point 

ACEC. 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

2-441

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

land as the Lower 

Bruneau Canyon 

ACEC. 

Sand Point ACEC

ACEC-IV-A-7. Manage 

1,000 acres of public 

land as the Sand Point 

ACEC. 

National Historic Trail (NHT)

Goals and Objectives

NHT-NA-O-1. Protect 

and manage the 

Oregon NHT to 

preserve all remaining 

ruts and trail features; 

develop an interpretive 

marker program, 

signing, and facilities 

to serve trail users; 

and nominate to the 

National Register.

NHT-CA-G-1. The Oregon NHT National Trail Management Corridor would be managed to preserve and protect the historic, scenic, and recreational 

values associated with the trail.

NHT-CA-O-1. Protect, preserve, and provide opportunities to experience the historic, scenic, and recreational values of the Oregon NHT.

Allocations

NHT-NA-A-1. Manage 

0.25 mile on either 

side of the Oregon 

NHT as the National 

Trail Management 

Corridor and the 

Oregon NHT protective 

zone (11,000 acres).

NHT-I-A-1. Manage 

1.5 miles on either side 

of the Oregon NHT as 

the National Trail 

Management Corridor 

(42,000 acres). Within 

the corridor, manage 

0.25 mile on either 

side of the Oregon 

NHT or the visual 

horizon (whichever is 

narrower) as a 

protective zone 

(11,000 acres).

NHT-II-A-1. Manage 

0.25 mile on either 

side of the Oregon 

NHT as the National 

Trail Management 

Corridor and the 

Oregon NHT protective 

zone (11,000 acres).

NHT-III-A-1. Manage 

1.5 miles on either side 

of the Oregon NHT as 

the National Trail 

Management Corridor 

(42,000 acres). Within 

the corridor, manage 

0.25 mile on either 

side of the Oregon 

NHT or the visual 

horizon (whichever is 

narrower) as a 

protective zone 

(11,000 acres).

NHT-IV-A-1. Manage 

1.5 miles on either side 

of the Oregon NHT as 

the National Trail 

Management Corridor 

(42,000 acres). Within 

the corridor, manage 

0.25 mile on either 

side of the Oregon 

NHT or the visual 

horizon (whichever is 

narrower) as a 

protective zone 

(11,000 acres).

NHT-V-A-1. Manage 

1.5 miles on either side 

of the Oregon NHT as 

the National Trail 

Management Corridor 

(42,000 acres). Within 

the corridor, manage 

0.25 mile on either 

side of the Oregon 

NHT or the visual 

horizon (whichever is 

narrower) as a 

protective zone 

(11,000 acres).

NHT-VI-A-1. Manage 

2 miles on either side 

of the Oregon NHT as 

the National Trail 

Management Corridor 

(52,000 acres). Within 

the corridor, manage 

0.25 mile on either 

side of the Oregon 

NHT or the visual 

horizon (whichever is 

narrower) as a 

protective zone 

(11,000 acres).

Wilderness (WS)

Goals and Objectives

WD-C-G-1. Manage the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to protect wilderness values.
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Alternatives

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2-442

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 

Goals and Objectives

WSR-C-G-1. Maintain or enhance the outstandingly remarkable values, free-flowing condition, and water quality of designated, suitable, and eligible WSR segments.

Allocations

WSR-C-A-1. River segments designated as Wild and Scenic include: 

A 38.1-mile segment of the Bruneau River from the downstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau 

River, except for a 0.5-mile segment at the Indian Hot Springs public road access, to be administered as a wild river;

A 0.5-mile segment of the Bruneau River at the Indian Hot Springs public road access to be administered as a recreational river;

A 0.3-mile segment of the West Fork of the Bruneau River from the confluence with the Jarbidge River to the downstream boundary of the Bruneau Canyon Grazing Allotment 

to be administered as a wild river; and

A 27.9-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the confluence with the West Fork of the Bruneau River to the upstream boundary of the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness 

to be administered as a wild river.

WSR-C-A-2. Segments recommended suitable for inclusion in the WSR system include: 

A 23.0-mile segment of the Bruneau River from Blackrock Crossing to 0.3 mile above the confluence of the West Fork of the Bruneau River and the Jarbidge River.

WSR-C-A-3. Segments eligible for inclusion in the WSR system include: 

A 39.0-mile segment of Salmon Falls Creek from the Nevada border to Salmon Falls Reservoir and from Salmon Falls Dam to Balanced Rock Park; 

A 25.0-mile segment of the Three Island, King Hill, and Hagerman reaches of the Snake River; 

A 10.2-mile segment of the Jarbidge River from the planning area boundary to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 9.6-mile segment of the Jarbidge River, East Fork from the planning area boundary to Murphy Hot Springs and from Murphy Hot Springs to the Jarbidge Forks; 

A 2.7-mile segment of Dave Creek from private land boundary to Jarbidge River, East Fork confluence; 

A 1.0-mile segment of Cougar Point Creek from the planning area boundary to Jarbidge River, East Fork confluence; and 

A 1.5-mile segment of Rocky Canyon Creek from its headwaters to Salmon Falls Creek, North Fork confluence.

WSR-C-A-4. Wild and Scenic River corridors are designated to extend either the average distance of 0.25 mile from the high water mark on each side of the river segment; or the 

distance to the nearest confined canyon rim, whichever is shorter.

WSR-C-A-5. Wild and Scenic River corridors that are suitable or eligible extend outward from the ordinary high water mark 0.25 mile on both sides of the river.

Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs)

Goals and Objectives

WSA-C-G-1. Manage and protect the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA to preserve wilderness characteristics so as not to impair the suitability for designation by Congress as 

wilderness.

Allocations

WSA-C-A-1. Manage 2,000 acres of public land as the Lower Salmon Falls Creek WSA.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC FEATURES

Social and Economic Conditions

Goals and Objectives

No goal or objective 

stated.

SE-CA-G-1. Management of the resources and uses of public lands would provide social and economic benefits to residents, businesses, visitors, and 

future generations.

SE-CA-O-1. Provide opportunities for economic and social benefit while maintaining natural and cultural resource values.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Alternatives

2-443

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Hazardous Materials

Goals and Objectives

No goal or objective 

stated.

HM-CA-G-1. Ensure hazardous substances on public lands remain a high priority for removal or mitigation.

HM-CA-O-1. Mitigate issues related to hazardous substances.

Interpretation, Outreach, and Environmental Education

Goals and Objectives

No goal or objective 

stated.

IOE-CA-G-1. Working with partners, provide interpretation, outreach, and environmental education to highlight the natural, cultural, and historic features of 

the planning area and to further resource protection and public safety.
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

•

•

•

•

• • • • • •

• • • • •

•

•

• • •

• • • • •

• • • • • •

•

•

•

•

2-444

2.10.2 Comparison of Environmental Consequences

Table 2-7 provides a summary of the impacts on the human and natural environment in terms of the consequences that are predicted to occur from implementing 

the alternatives presented in Chapter 2; differences between the two sub-alternatives of Alternative IV are described only where they occur. The effects of the 

various management actions in each alternative are discussed in detail in the environmental consequences section presented in Chapter 4.

Differences between the wording of environmental consequences in the main text of Chapter 4 and the wording in the summary table should not be construed to 

confine or redefine the analysis of impacts. Wording was modified to be more concise in the summary table. Sections are summarized in the order in which they 

appear in Chapter 4.

Table 2-7. Summary Comparison of Environmental Consequences

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Impacts to Tribal Rights and Interests

The No Action Alternative 

would result in the second 

most impacts to tribal 

rights and interests. 

Highest impact to the 

natural resource 

base used by the 

tribes, 

Second highest 

impact to the 

physical integrity of 

cultural resources, 

and

Second highest risk 

to the future exercise 

of treaty rights and 

tribal interests from 

potential disposal of 

public land.

Alternative I would result 

in the third lowest impacts 

to tribal rights and 

interests.

Third lowest impact 

to the natural 

resource base used 

by the tribes, 

Third lowest impact 

to the physical 

integrity of cultural 

resources, and

Forth lowest risk to 

the future exercise of 

treaty rights and 

tribal interests from 

potential disposal of 

public land.

Alternative II would result 

in more impacts to tribal 

rights and interests than 

any of the alternatives.

Highest impact to the 

natural resource 

base used by the 

tribes, 

Highest impact on 

the physical integrity 

of cultural resources, 

and

Highest risk to the 

future exercise of 

treaty rights and 

tribal interests from 

potential disposal of 

public land. 

Alternative III would result 

in the third most impacts 

to tribal rights and 

interests.

Second highest 

impact to the natural 

resource base used 

by the tribes, 

Third highest impact 

to the physical 

integrity of cultural 

resources, and

Forth lowest risk to 

the future exercise of 

treaty rights and 

tribal interests from 

potential disposal of 

public land. 

Alternative IV would result 

in the second lowest

impacts to tribal rights and 

interests. 

Lowest impact to the 

natural resource 

base used by the 

tribes, 

Second lowest 

impact to the 

physical integrity of 

cultural resources, 

and

Third lowest risk to 

the future exercise of 

treaty rights and 

tribal interests from 

potential disposal of 

public land. 

Alternative V would result 

in fewer impacts to tribal 

rights and interests than 

any of the alternatives.

Lowest impact to the 

natural resource 

base used by the 

tribes, 

Lowest impact to the 

physical integrity of 

cultural resources, 

and

Second lowest risk to 

the future exercise of 

treaty rights and 

tribal interests from 

potential disposal of 

public land. 

Alternative VI would result 

in the third lowest impacts 

to tribal rights and 

interests.

Second lowest 

impact to the natural 

resource base used 

by the tribes, 

Forth lowest impact 

to the physical 

integrity of cultural 

resources, and

Lowest risk to the 

future exercise of 

treaty rights and 

tribal interests from 

potential disposal of 

public land. 

Resources

Impacts to Air and Atmospheric Values 

Impacts to Air Quality

The No Action Alternative 

would have the highest 

impact to air quality.

The frequency of 

large fires would be 

maintained. 

The acres open to 

cross-country 

motorized vehicle 

Alternative I would have 

the second lowest impact 

to air quality.

The frequency of 

large fires would 

decrease. 

The acres open to 

cross-country 

motorized vehicle 

Alternative II would have 

the third highest impact to 

air quality.

The frequency of 

large fires would be 

maintained. 

No acres would be 

open to crosscountry motorized 

Alternative III would have 

the second highest impact 

to air quality.

The frequency of 

large fires would 

decrease. 

The acres open to 

cross-country 

motorized vehicle 

Alternative IV would have 

the third lowest impact to 

air quality.

The frequency of 

large fires would 

decrease. 

The acres open to 

cross-country 

motorized vehicle 

Alternative V would have 

the lowest impact to air 

quality.

The frequency of 

large fires would 

decrease. 

The acres open to 

cross-country 

motorized vehicle 

Alternative VI would have 

the forth lowest impact to 

air quality.

The frequency of 

large fires would 

decrease. 

The acres open to 

cross-country 

motorized vehicle 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

• •

•

• • • •

•

2-445

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

use would be 

maintained. 

Approximately 1,700 

tons of PM2.5

(particulate matter 

with a diameter of 

2.5 microns or less) 

and 2,100 tons of 

PM10 (particulate 

matter with a 

diameter of 10 

microns or less) 

would be produced 

by prescribed fires 

over the life of the 

plan.

use would be 

reduced. 

No emissions of 

PM2.5 and PM10

would be produced 

since prescribed fires 

would not be 

allowed.

vehicle use.

Approximately 1,800 

tons of PM2.5 and 

2,400 tons of PM10

would be produced 

by prescribed fires 

over the life of the 

plan. 

use would be 

reduced. 

Unvegetated fuel 

breaks would be 

created and 

maintained. 

Approximately 1,800 

tons of PM2.5 and 

2,400 tons of PM10

would be produced 

by prescribed fires 

over the life of the 

plan.

use would be 

reduced. 

Approximately 2,900 

tons of PM2.5 and 

3,800 tons of PM10

would be produced 

by prescribed fires 

over the life of the 

plan.

use would be 

reduced. 

Approximately 800 

tons of PM2.5 and 

1,100 tons of PM10

would be produced 

by prescribed fires 

over the life of the 

plan.

use would be 

reduced. 

Approximately 2,200 

tons of PM2.5 and 

2,900 tons of PM10

would be produced 

by prescribed fires 

over the life of the 

plan.

Impacts to Climate Change

Enteric Fermentation Emissions in Teragrams (Tg) Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Equivalents Over the Life of the Plan:

0.018 0.017 0.031 0.025 0.009 0.006 0.020

Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Prescribed Fire in Tg CO2 Equivalents Over the Life of the Plan:

0.166 0 0.080 0.067 0.164 0.014 0.129

Carbon Sequestration Potential in Tg CO2 Equivalents Over the Life of the Plan:

49.71 54.46 50.75 52.54 57.81 55.68 56.16 

Impacts to Geologic Features

The No Action Alternative 

ranks fourth for 

maintaining geologic 

features, due to 

availability for salable 

mineral development and 

lack of management to 

maintain naturalness in 

areas with geologic 

features.

Alternative I ranks third for 

maintaining geologic 

features, due to leasable 

and salable mineral 

closures, 

recommendations for 

withdrawal from mineral 

entry, and complementary 

management for Areas of 

Critical Environmental 

Concern (ACECs) and 

naturalness in areas with

geologic features. 

Alternative II ranks last for 

maintaining geologic 

features, due to 

availability for leasable, 

salable, and locatable 

mineral development and 

lack of complementary 

management for ACECs 

or naturalness in areas 

with geologic features.

Alternative III ranks sixth 

for maintaining geologic 

features, due to 

availability for leasable, 

salable, and locatable 

mineral development but 

presence of 

complementary 

management through 

ACEC designations in 

areas with geologic 

features.

Alternative IV ranks first 

for maintaining geologic 

features, due to leasable 

and salable mineral 

closures, 

recommendations for 

withdrawal from mineral 

entry, and highest amount 

of complementary 

management for ACECs 

and naturalness in areas 

with geologic features.

Alternative V ranks 

second for maintaining

geologic features, due to 

leasable and salable 

mineral closures, a 

smaller area 

recommended for 

withdrawal from mineral 

entry than Alternative IV, 

and complementary 

management for ACECs 

and naturalness in areas 

with geologic features. 

Alternative VI ranks fifth 

for maintaining geologic 

features, due to 

availability for leasable, 

salable, and locatable 

mineral development but 

presence of 

complementary 

management through 

ACEC designations in 

areas with geologic 

features.

Impacts to Soil Resources

The No Action Alternative 

would do the least to 

reduce impacts to soil 

resources.

Alternative I ranks fifth for 

reducing impacts to soil 

resources.

Alternative II ranks 

seventh for reducing 

impacts to soil resources.

Alternative III ranks sixth 

for reducing impacts to 

soil resources.

Alternative IV-A would do 

the most to reduce 

impacts to soil resources. 

Alternative IV-B rates 

second due to the smaller 

geographic area affected.

Alternative V ranks third 

for reducing impacts to 

soil resources.

Alternative VI ranks fourth 

for reducing impacts to 

soil resources.

The No Action Alternative 

lacks specific actions that 

Management actions 

would tend to moderate 

Higher livestock grazing 

allocations and amounts 

Less fire on the landscape 

would reduce impacts to 

Both sub-alternatives 

would reduce soil impacts 

The more passive 

approach to vegetation 

Alternative VI would 

provide management to 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

•

• •

•

•

• •

• •

• •

•

2-446

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

would be incorporated at 

the implementation level 

as design features, 

stipulations, or closures to 

manage for soils, and 

particularly soils with 

higher hazard ratings for 

water and wind erosion.

impacts to soil resources 

while allowing for multiple 

uses. Alternative I would 

tend to maintain current 

conditions with some 

potential for improvement 

on soil resource 

conditions over the long 

term.

of livestock facilities would 

tend to reduce cover and 

would compact soils in 

facility locations. Impacts 

associated with roads 

would tend to increase 

erosion potential; density 

of roads would increase 

soil bulk density over the 

proportion of soils 

compacted by use.

soils. Alternative III would 

increase short- and longterm impacts from roads, 

fire suppression facilities, 

creation and maintenance 

of fuel breaks and fireresistant plant 

communities, and use of 

livestock grazing to 

reduce fuels. 

through upland vegetation 

treatments to restore 

native shrubland 

communities, fire 

management priorities 

that protect existing and 

restored native shrubland 

communities, reductions 

in livestock grazing 

allocations and facilities, 

and limits on travel and 

transportation allocations, 

land use authorizations, 

and mineral development. 

treatments would reduce 

short-term impacts to 

soils, but long-term effects 

related to restoration of 

upland vegetation 

communities and soil 

function would cover a 

smaller geographic area 

than Alternatives IV-A and 

IV-B. 

reduce soil impacts 

through upland vegetation 

treatments to restore 

native shrubland 

communities, fire 

management priorities 

that protect existing and 

restored native shrubland 

communities, and limits 

on travel and 

transportation allocations, 

land use authorizations, 

and mineral development.

Impacts to Water Resources

The No Action Alternative 

would result in the fewest 

miles of water quality 

impaired stream achieving 

State water quality 

standards. The No Action 

Alternative would have 

the highest risk to water 

quality and longest 

recovery time of degraded 

watershed conditions.

Alternative I is the fourth

most likely to attain 

riparian objectives and 

State water quality 

standards over the life of 

the plan.

Alternative II is the fifth 

most likely to attain State 

water quality standards 

over the life of the plan. 

Alternative II would have 

the most resource uses 

and fewest miles at PFC. 

Alternative III is the third 

most likely to attain 

riparian objectives and 

State water quality 

standards over the life of 

the plan. The attainment 

of the riparian objectives 

is less likely due to the 

increased resource uses 

in addition to the 

enhanced wildland fire 

suppression 

infrastructure. 

Alternative IV has the 

greatest potential to 

achieve State water 

quality standards. Active 

restoration is more likely 

to facilitate the 

achievement of State 

water quality standards 

within the life of the plan 

than passive restoration. 

Alternative V would be the 

second most likely to 

attain riparian objectives 

and State water quality 

standards over the life of 

the plan. Passive 

restoration would have 

fewer short-term impacts 

and longer timeframes to 

meet riparian objectives 

and State water quality 

standards. 

Alternative VI has the 

greatest potential to 

achieve State water 

quality standards. Active 

restoration is more likely 

to facilitate the 

achievement of State 

water quality standards 

within the life of the plan 

than passive restoration.

The No Action Alternative 

has no objectives to 

maintain or improve 

proper functioning 

condition (PFC). 

PFC objectives include:

145 miles at PFC

and

80 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

85 miles at PFC and

140 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

183 miles at PFC

and 

42 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

183 miles at PFC

and

42 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

183 miles at PFC

and

42 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

183 miles at PFC

and

42 miles toward 

PFC.

The Aquatic and Riparian 

Management Strategy 

(ARMS) does not apply.

The ARMS applies and would mitigate impacts from authorized and allowed uses.

Impacts to Vegetation Communities

Impacts to Upland Vegetation

Acres of Vegetation Sub-Groups (VSGs) in the Planning Area Following Vegetation Treatments:

Annual 120,000

Non-Native

Perennial 402,000

Non-Native

Understory 40,000

Native

Annual 78,500

Non-Native 

Perennial 308,000

Non-Native

Understory 35,000

Native

Annual 45,500

Non-Native

Perennial 455,000

Non-Native

Understory 41,000

Native

Annual 54,250 

Non-Native

Perennial 425,000

Non-Native

Understory 59,000

Native

Annual 45,500

Non-Native

Perennial 161,000

Non-Native

Understory 132,000

Native

Annual 84,500

Non-Native

Perennial 157,000

Non-Native

Understory 259,000

Native

Annual 68,25

Non-Native

Perennial 199,000

Non-Native

Understory 101,000

Native
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

2-447

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Grassland 476,000

Native

Shrubland 285,000

Grassland 243,000

Native

Shrubland 659,000

Grassland 476,000

Native

Shrubland 306,000

Grassland 259,000

Native

Shrubland 507,000

Grassland 169,000

Native

Shrubland 816,000

Grassland 278,000

Native

Shrubland 545,000

Grassland 226,000

Native

Shrubland 729,000

Acres of Seral Stages in the Planning Area Following Vegetation Treatments:

Early 476,000

Mid 52,000

Late 224,000

Uncharacteristic 569,000

Early 242,000

Mid 442,000

Late 216,000

Uncharacteristic 421,000

Early 477,000

Mid 88,000

Late 216,000

Uncharacteristic 540,000

Early 260,000

Mid 292,000

Late 212,000

Uncharacteristic 538,000

Early 170,000

Mid 597,000

Late 216,000

Uncharacteristic 338,000

Early 279,000

Mid 327,000

Late 216,000

Uncharacteristic 499,000

Early 227,000

Mid 508,000

Late 216,000

Uncharacteristic 370,000

The No Action Alternative 

would increase the 

relative proportion of 

acreage occupied by nonnative perennial 

communities while 

maintaining proportions of 

annual, native grassland, 

and native shrubland 

communities and reducing 

proportions of non-native 

understory communities.

Alternative I would create 

a landscape with greater 

species diversity and 

structural complexity 

compared to the No 

Action Alternative and 

Alternatives II and III.

Alternative II would create 

a relatively homogeneous 

landscape dominated by 

early-seral and 

uncharacteristic 

vegetation in Vegetation 

Management Areas 

(VMAs) A, B, and C. 

Limited species and 

structural diversity in 

areas dominated by nonnative perennial 

vegetation would 

decrease water and 

nutrient cycling compared 

to shrubland communities.

Alternative III would 

create a landscape with 

more species diversity 

and structural complexity 

than would be created 

under either the No Action 

Alternative or Alternative 

II. Native communities, 

particularly shrublands, 

would be less continuous 

than in Alternatives I, IV, 

V, or VI.

Alternative IV would 

create a landscape 

dominated by native 

communities in a variety 

of seral stages and the 

lowest proportion of 

uncharacteristic 

vegetation of all the 

alternatives. This would 

improve landscape 

functions, including water 

infiltration, nutrient 

cycling, and soil 

stabilization.

Alternative V would create 

a landscape with large 

patches of native 

communities in a variety 

of seral stages 

interspersed with nonnative perennial and nonnative understory 

communities. This would 

improve landscape 

functions, including water 

infiltration, nutrient 

cycling, and soil 

stabilization.

Alternative VI would 

create a landscape 

dominated by native 

communities in a variety 

of seral stages and a 

lower proportion of 

uncharacteristic 

vegetation than 

Alternatives II, III, V, and 

the No Action. This would 

improve landscape 

functions, including water 

infiltration, nutrient 

cycling, and soil 

stabilization.

The lack of prioritization 

for wildland fire 

suppression would 

perpetuate the current 

trend of native shrubland 

loss.

Fire management 

priorities would promote 

protection of existing and 

restored native shrubland 

communities; however, 

suppression priorities 

would likely result in 

continued loss of native 

shrublands.

Fire management 

priorities would promote 

protection of native 

grassland and non-native 

perennial communities 

with no prioritization for 

shrubland communities. 

Continued loss of native 

shrublands is likely. 

Fire management 

priorities would promote 

protection of native 

shrubland, as well as 

native grassland and nonnative perennial 

communities and would 

reduce the potential for 

loss of existing shrubland 

patches.

Fire management 

priorities would promote 

the protection of existing 

and restored native 

shrubland communities. 

Suppression priorities 

would not be adequate to 

retain all native 

communities; however, 

native grasslands would 

be relatively resilient if 

burned. 

Fire management 

priorities would promote 

protection of existing and 

restored native shrubland 

communities. In VMAs B, 

C, and D, opportunities 

would be limited for post 

wildland fire treatments; 

therefore, Alternative V 

would require more use of 

prescribed fire in these 

VMAs as part of 

vegetation treatments.

Fire management 

priorities would promote 

the protection of existing 

and restored native 

shrubland communities. 

Suppression priorities 

would not be adequate to 

retain all native 

communities; however, 

native grasslands would 

be relatively resilient if 

burned.

Livestock management 

actions would promote 

uniform use of perennial 

grass and dominance by 

non-native perennial and 

short-stature, early- and 

mid-seral grasses. 

Livestock management 

actions would result in 

moderate, uniform use 

that would tend to reduce 

structural complexity for 

perennial herbaceous 

plants.

Livestock management 

actions would promote 

uniform use of perennial 

grass and long-term 

dominance by non-native 

perennial and shortstature, early- and midseral grasses.

Livestock management 

actions would result in 

moderate, uniform use 

that would tend to reduce 

structural complexity for 

perennial herbaceous 

plants. 

Livestock management 

actions coupled with 

vegetation treatments 

would result in greater 

structural complexity for 

both woody and 

herbaceous vegetation 

compared to the No 

Action Alternative and 

Livestock management 

actions coupled with 

vegetation treatments 

would result in the 

greatest potential for 

species diversity and 

structural complexity and 

the highest potential for 

landscape stability 

Livestock management 

actions coupled with 

vegetation treatments 

would result in greater 

structural complexity for 

both woody and 

herbaceous vegetation 

compared to the No 

Action Alternative and 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

•

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

•

2-448

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Alternatives I, II, and III. compared to all other 

alternatives. 

Alternatives I, II, and III.

Impacts to Riparian Areas and Wetlands

The No Action Alternative 

has no objectives to 

maintain or improve 

proper functioning 

condition (PFC). 

PFC objectives include:

145 miles at PFC

and

80 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

85 miles at PFC and

140 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

183 miles at PFC

and

42 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

183 miles at PFC

and

42 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

183 miles at PFC

and

42 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

183 miles at PFC

and

42 miles toward 

PFC.

The Aquatic and Riparian 

Management Strategy 

(ARMS) does not apply.

The ARMS applies and would mitigate impacts from authorized and allowed uses.

The No Action Alternative 

would result in the 

greatest potential to 

reduce habitat condition 

and PFC ratings of all 

alternatives and is the 

least likely to attain 

habitat condition and 

riparian objectives over 

the life of the plan.

Alternative I is the third 

most likely to attain 

habitat condition and 

riparian objectives over 

the life of the plan.

Alternative II is the fifth 

most likely to attain 

habitat condition and 

riparian objectives and 

would result in the fewest 

miles of riparian area at 

PFC over the life of the 

plan.

Alternative III is the fourth 

most likely to attain 

habitat condition and 

riparian objectives over 

the life of the plan. The 

attainment of the riparian 

objectives is less likely 

due to the increased 

resource uses in addition 

to the enhanced wildland 

fire suppression 

infrastructure. 

Alternative IV is most 

likely to attain habitat 

condition and riparian 

objectives over the life of 

the plan. Alternative IV 

would have fewer areas 

available for authorized 

uses and less wildland fire 

infrastructure. Active 

restoration is more likely 

to achieve restoration 

objectives and in a shorter 

timeframe than passive 

restoration. 

Alternative V is the 

second most likely to 

attain habitat condition 

and riparian objectives 

over the life of the plan. 

Alternative V would have 

the fewest areas available 

for land uses of all 

alternatives. Passive 

restoration would have 

fewer short-term impacts, 

but longer timeframes for 

riparian objectives to be 

met. 

Alternative VI is the fourth 

most likely to attain 

habitat condition and 

riparian objectives over 

the life of the plan. The 

attainment of the riparian 

objectives is less likely 

due to the increased 

wildland fire suppression 

infrastructure and 

authorized uses.

Impacts to Fish and Wildlife

Impacts to Fish 

Impacts to fish would be the same as described for special status fish and aquatic invertebrates and riparian areas and wetlands.

Impacts to Wildlife

The No Action Alternative 

would not restore habitat 

for wildlife in the mountain 

mahogany/mountain 

shrub and sagebrush 

steppe groups, but would 

maintain the highest 

amount of habitat for 

wildlife in the grassland 

group.

Alternative I would restore 

328,000 acres of 

shrubland for wildlife in 

the mountain 

mahogany/mountain 

shrub and sagebrush 

steppe groups and would 

have the fourth largest 

reduction in the amount of 

habitat for wildlife in the 

grassland group.

Alternative II would not 

restore habitat for wildlife 

in the mountain 

mahogany/mountain 

shrub and sagebrush 

steppe groups, but would 

maintain the second 

highest amount of habitat 

for wildlife in the 

grassland group.

Alternative III would 

restore 241,000 acres of 

shrubland for wildlife in 

the mountain 

mahogany/mountain 

shrub and sagebrush 

steppe groups and would 

maintain the fifth largest 

reduction in the amount of 

habitat for wildlife in the 

grassland group.

Alternative IV would 

restore 582,000 acres of 

shrubland for wildlife in 

the mountain 

mahogany/mountain 

shrub and sagebrush 

steppe groups and would 

have the largest reduction 

in the amount of habitat 

for wildlife in the 

grassland group. 

Alternative V would 

restore 438,000 acres of 

shrubland for wildlife in 

the mountain 

mahogany/mountain 

shrub and sagebrush 

steppe groups and would 

have the third largest 

reduction in the amount of 

habitat for wildlife in the 

grassland group. 

Alternative VI would 

restore 464,000 acres of 

shrubland for wildlife in 

the mountain 

mahogany/mountain 

shrub and sagebrush 

steppe groups and would 

have the second largest 

reduction in the amount of 

habitat for wildlife in the 

grassland group.

The No Action Alternative 

would provide the fourth 

highest amount of 

residual cover for wildlife, 

as it would make the 

fewest acres unavailable 

Alternative I would 

provide the third highest 

amount of residual cover 

for wildlife, as it would 

make the fifth smallest 

acreage unavailable for 

Alternative II would 

provide the least residual 

cover for wildlife, as it 

would make the second 

smallest acreage 

unavailable for to 

Alternative III would 

provide the second lowest 

amount of residual cover 

for wildlife, as it would 

make the third smallest 

acreage unavailable for 

Alternative IV would 

provide the second 

highest amount of 

residual cover for wildlife, 

as it would make the 

second largest acreage 

Alternative V would 

provide the most residual 

cover for wildlife, as it 

would make the largest 

acreage unavailable for 

livestock grazing and 

Alternative VI would 

provide the fifth highest 

amount of residual cover 

for wildlife, as it would 

make the forth smallest 

acreage unavailable for 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

2-449

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

for livestock grazing and 

allocate the fourth highest 

amount of vegetation for 

livestock. 

livestock grazing and 

allocate the fifth highest 

amount of vegetation for 

livestock. 

livestock grazing and 

allocate the highest 

amount of vegetation for 

livestock. 

livestock grazing and 

allocate the second 

highest amount of 

vegetation for livestock.

unavailable for livestock 

grazing and allocate the 

second lowest amount of 

vegetation for livestock. 

allocate the lowest 

amount of vegetation for 

livestock. 

livestock grazing and 

allocate the third highest

amount of vegetation for 

livestock.

The No Action Alternative 

would have the largest 

decrease in habitat patch 

size due to the highest 

increase in new routes 

and infrastructure.

Alternative I would slightly 

increase habitat patch 

size for wildlife in the

sagebrush steppe group. 

This alternative would 

have the forth lowest 

amount of new roads and 

infrastructure, which 

partially offsets gains in 

habitat patch size due to 

restoration. New 

infrastructure would be 

encouraged to be located 

in existing disturbance 

areas.

Alternative II would 

decrease habitat patch 

size for wildlife in the 

sagebrush steppe group 

due to having the second 

largest amount of 

infrastructure and allowing 

new roads and new 

infrastructure to be 

constructed in areas that 

are currently undisturbed.

Alternative III would 

slightly increase habitat 

patch size for wildlife in 

the sagebrush steppe 

group to having the fifth 

lowest amount of new 

roads and other 

infrastructure, as well as 

the construction of 

unvegetated fuel breaks. 

These impacts would be 

partially offset by locating 

new infrastructure in 

existing disturbance 

areas.

Alternative IV would 

increase habitat patch 

size for wildlife in the 

sagebrush steppe group. 

While the amount of 

habitat restoration would 

generally increase patch 

size, these gains would 

be offset by having more 

new roads and 

infrastructure than 

Alternatives V and VI.

Alternative V would 

increase habitat patch 

size for wildlife in the 

sagebrush steppe group. 

This alternative would 

restore habitat and have 

the lowest amount of new 

roads and infrastructure. 

New infrastructure would 

be encouraged to be 

located in existing 

disturbance areas. 

Alternative VI would 

increase habitat patch 

size for wildlife in the 

sagebrush steppe group. 

This alternative would 

have the second lowest 

amount of new roads and 

infrastructure, which 

partially offsets gains in 

habitat patch size due to 

restoration. New 

infrastructure would be 

encouraged to be located 

in existing disturbance 

areas.

Impacts to Special Status Species

Impacts to Special Status Plants 

The No Action Alternative 

ranks seventh for 

management of special 

status plants and their 

habitats as it would do 

little to restore potential 

habitat.

Alternative I ranks fifth for 

management of special 

status plants, due 

primarily to intermediate 

levels of habitat 

restoration and 

management that would 

reduce fire-related 

impacts to special status 

plants and their habitats 

and prevent impacts due 

to cross-country 

motorized use and route 

densities.

Alternative II would do the 

least to manage for 

special status plants and 

their habitats, due to low 

levels of habitat 

restoration combined with 

the highest amount and 

intensity of livestock use 

and impacts due to route 

densities. Critical fire 

suppression priorities 

would do little to protect 

special status plants and 

their habitats.

Alternative III ranks sixth 

for management of 

special status plants and 

their habitats due 

primarily to relatively high 

levels of habitat 

fragmentation from 

actions intended to 

reduce large wildland 

fires. Vegetated and 

unvegetated fuel breaks, 

combined with increased 

fire suppression 

infrastructure, would 

break up contiguous 

blocks of special status 

plant habitats. Critical fire 

suppression priorities 

would not fully protect 

occupied and potential 

habitats for special status 

plants.

Alternative IV-A ranks first 

while Alternative IV-B 

ranks third in maintaining 

existing special status 

plant populations and 

maintaining or increasing 

occupied and potential 

habitats due primarily to 

actions that actively 

restore habitats. 

Management is included 

in Alternative IV to reduce 

fire-related impacts to 

special status plants and 

their habitats and to 

prevent impacts due to 

cross-country motorized 

vehicle use and route 

densities.

Alternative V ranks 

second for management 

of special status plants, 

due primarily to the 

passive restoration and 

noxious and invasive 

weed treatments, 

reducing acreage and 

increasing the time 

required for restoration. 

Alternative V would 

provide the greatest 

amount of active 

management to reduce 

fire-related impacts to 

special status plants and 

to prevent impacts due to 

cross-country motorized 

vehicle use and route 

densities.

Alternative VI ranks fourth 

in maintaining existing 

special status plant 

populations and 

maintaining or increasing 

occupied and potential 

habitats. This is due 

primarily to actions that 

actively restore habitats, 

including diversification of 

plant community 

composition to support 

pollinator species and 

management that would 

reduce fire-related 

impacts to special status 

plants and their habitats 

and prevent impacts due 

to cross-country 

motorized use and route 

densities.

The No Action Alternative 

contains low levels of 

management for 

protection of existing 

ACEC management for 

special status plants and 

their habitats would only 

occur along the Bruneau, 

Under Alternative II there 

would be no ACEC 

designations and, 

therefore, no special 

ACEC designations would 

only manage special 

status plants and habitats 

along the Bruneau and 

ACEC designations under 

Alternative IV-A would 

provide management for 

special status plants and 

ACEC designations under 

Alternative V would 

provide management for 

special status plants on 

ACEC designations under 

Alternative VI would only 

do more than Alternative 

II for the protection of 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

•

• •

• •

• •

• •

• •

•

2-450

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

special status plant 

populations. This includes 

indirect impacts from 

special management for 

bighorn sheep in the 

Bruneau-Jarbidge Area of 

Critical Environmental 

Concern (ACEC). 

Jarbidge, Middle Snake, 

and Salmon Falls Creek 

drainages; populations in 

the interior of the planning 

area would not have 

elevated levels of 

management.

management for special 

status plants and their 

habitats.

Jarbidge Rivers, in an 

area 2/3 the size of that 

protected under 

Alternative I; populations 

of special status plants 

throughout most of the 

planning area would not 

have elevated levels of 

management.

their habitats throughout 

the planning area. 

Alternative IV-B would 

slightly reduce acreages 

for special management 

associated with ACECs.

the most acreage of all 

the alternatives, and thus, 

for the most special status 

plants and their habitats.

special status plants and 

their habitats.

Impacts to Special Status Fish and Aquatic Invertebrates

The No Action Alternative 

would result in the least 

improvement in habitat 

and proper functioning 

condition (PFC) ratings of 

all alternatives and is the 

least likely to attain 

habitat condition and 

riparian objectives over 

the life of the plan. 

Alternative I is the third 

most likely to attain 

habitat condition and 

riparian objectives over 

the life of the plan. 

Alternative II is the 

second least likely to 

attain habitat condition 

and riparian objectives 

over the life of the plan. 

Increased commercial 

uses, combined with 

fewer miles achieving 

PFC and habitat condition 

objectives, would result in 

the most miles of special 

status aquatic species 

habitat in a reduced 

condition.

Alternative III is fourth 

most likely to attain 

habitat condition and 

riparian objectives over 

the life of the plan. The 

attainment of the riparian 

and habitat condition 

objectives is less likely 

due to the increased 

resource uses, in addition 

to the enhanced wildland 

fire suppression 

infrastructure. 

Alternative IV is the most 

likely to attain habitat 

condition and riparian 

objectives over the life of 

the plan. Active 

restoration is more likely 

to achieve restoration 

objectives and in a shorter 

timeframe than passive 

restoration. 

Alternative V is the 

second most likely to 

attain habitat condition 

and riparian objectives 

over the life of the plan. 

Passive restoration would 

have fewer short-term 

impacts, but longer 

timeframes for habitat and 

riparian objectives to be 

met. 

Alternative VI is the most 

likely to attain habitat 

condition and riparian 

objectives over the life of 

the plan. Active 

restoration is more likely 

to achieve restoration 

objectives and in a shorter 

timeframe than passive 

restoration.

The No Action Alternative 

has no objectives to 

maintain or improve PFC.

PFC objectives include:

145 miles at PFC

and

80 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

85 miles at PFC and

140 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

183 miles at PFC

and

42 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

183 miles at PFC

and

42 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

183 miles at PFC

and

42 miles toward 

PFC.

PFC objectives include:

183 miles at PFC

and

42 miles toward 

PFC.

The Aquatic and Riparian 

Management Strategy 

(ARMS) does not apply.

The ARMS applies and would mitigate impacts from authorized and allowed uses.

Impacts to Special Status Wildlife

The No Action Alternative 

would restore the lowest 

amount of habitat for 

sage-grouse and other 

special status species in 

the sagebrush group. 

Alternative I would restore 

the third highest amount 

of habitat for sage-grouse 

and other special status 

species in the sagebrush 

group.

Alternative II would 

restore the second lowest 

amount of habitat for 

sage-grouse and other 

special status species in 

the sagebrush group.

Alternative III would 

restore the fifth highest 

amount of habitat for 

sage-grouse and other 

special status species in 

the sagebrush group.

Alternative IV would 

restore the highest 

amount of habitat for 

sage-grouse and other 

special status species in 

the sagebrush group.

Alternative V would 

restore the fourth highest 

amount of habitat for 

sage-grouse and other 

special status species in 

the sagebrush group.

Alternative VI would 

restore the second 

highest amount of habitat 

for sage-grouse and other 

special status species in 

the sagebrush group.

This alternative would 

provide the fourth highest 

amount of residual cover 

for sage-grouse and other 

special status species in 

the sagebrush group.

This alternative would 

provide the third highest 

amount of residual cover 

for sage-grouse and other 

special status species in 

the sagebrush group.

This alternative would 

provide the least residual 

cover for sage-grouse and 

other special status 

species in the sagebrush 

group.

This alternative would 

provide the second lowest 

amount of residual cover 

for sage-grouse and other 

special status species in 

the sagebrush group. 

This alternative would 

provide the second 

highest amount of 

residual cover for sagegrouse and other special 

status species in the 

sagebrush group.

This alternative would 

provide the most residual 

cover for sage-grouse and 

other special status 

species in the sagebrush 

group.

This alternative would 

provide the fifth highest 

amount of residual cover 

for sage-grouse and other 

special status species in 

the sagebrush group.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

2-451

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

The No Action Alternative 

is expected to result in the 

most new roads and 

infrastructure in habitat for 

sage-grouse and other 

special status species in 

the sagebrush group.

Alternative I is expected 

to result in the fourth 

highest amount of new 

roads and infrastructure in 

habitat for sage-grouse 

and other special status 

species in the sagebrush 

group.

Alternative II is expected 

to result in second highest 

amount of new roads and 

infrastructure in habitat for 

sage-grouse and other 

special status species in 

the sagebrush group.

Alternative III is expected 

to result in the third 

highest amount of new 

roads and infrastructure in 

habitat for sage-grouse 

and other special status 

species in the sagebrush 

group.

Alternative IV is expected 

to result in the fifth highest 

amount of new roads and 

infrastructure in habitat for 

sage-grouse and other 

special status species in 

the sagebrush group.

Alternative V is expected 

to result in the least new 

roads and infrastructure in 

habitat for sage-grouse 

and other special status 

species in the sagebrush 

group.

Alternative IV is expected 

to result in the second 

lowest amount of new 

roads and infrastructure in 

habitat for sage-grouse 

and other special status 

species in the sagebrush 

group.

The No Action Alternative 

would restore the smallest 

amount of habitat for 

spotted frogs and other 

special status riparian 

guild wildlife. 

Alternative I would restore 

the second highest 

amount of habitat for 

spotted frogs and other 

special status riparian 

guild wildlife. 

Same as the No Action 

Alternative.

Alternative III would 

restore the highest 

amount of habitat for 

spotted frogs and other 

special status riparian 

guild wildlife.

Same as Alternative III. Same as Alternative III. Same as Alternative III.

Impacts to Noxious Weeds and Invasive Plants

The No Action Alternative 

ranks seventh in reducing 

the potential for 

introduction and spread of 

noxious weeds and 

invasive plants.

Alternative I ranks fourth 

for reducing the potential 

for introduction and 

spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants.

Alternative II would do the 

least to reduce the 

potential for introduction

and spread of noxious 

weeds and invasive 

plants.

Alternative III ranks sixth 

for reducing the potential 

for introduction and 

spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants.

Alternative IV-A does the 

most to reduce the 

potential for introduction 

and spread of noxious 

weeds and invasive 

plants. Alternative IV-B 

rates second due to the 

smaller geographic area 

affected.

Alternative V ranks third 

for reducing the potential 

for introduction and 

spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants.

Alternative VI ranks fifth

for reducing the potential 

for introduction and 

spread of noxious weeds 

and invasive plants

The No Action Alternative 

would do little to change 

current trends for noxious 

weeds and invasive plants 

through vegetation 

treatments, wildland fire 

management, travel 

management, or land use 

authorizations. 

Management actions 

would tend to moderate 

disturbance to vegetation 

and soil resources while 

allowing for multiple uses. 

Alternative I would tend to 

maintain current 

conditions with some 

potential for reduction in 

introduction and spread of 

noxious weeds and 

invasive plants over the 

long term.

Higher livestock grazing 

allocations as well as 

increased amounts of 

livestock facilities would 

tend to reduce vegetation 

cover and disrupt soils in 

facility locations. Impacts 

associated with density of 

roads would increase the 

potential for introduction 

and spread of noxious 

weeds and invasive 

plants.

While less fire on the 

landscape would reduce 

the potential for noxious 

weed and invasive plant 

introduction and spread, 

the alternative would 

increase short- and longterm impacts resulting 

from roads, fire 

suppression facilities, 

creation and maintenance 

of fire breaks, and use of 

livestock grazing to 

reduce fuels. 

Both sub-alternatives 

would reduce long-term 

potential for noxious weed 

and invasive plant 

introduction and spread 

through upland vegetation 

treatments to restore 

native shrubland 

communities, fire 

management priorities 

that protect native 

shrubland communities, 

reductions in livestock 

grazing allocations and 

facilities, and limits on 

other uses. 

The more passive 

approach to vegetation 

treatments would reduce 

short-term impacts to 

existing vegetation and 

soils, long-term effects 

related to restoration of 

upland vegetation 

communities would cover 

a smaller geographic area 

compared to Alternatives 

IV-A and IV-B. 

Management actions tend 

to moderate disturbance 

to vegetation and soil 

resources while allowing 

for multiple uses. 

Alternative VI would 

maintain current 

conditions with some 

potential for reduction in 

introduction and spread of 

noxious weeds and 

invasive plants over the 

long term.

Impacts to Wildland Fire Ecology and Management

Impacts to Wildland Fire Management

The No Action Alternative 

would rank second to last 

in improving Fire Regime 

Condition Class (FRCC) 

(similar to Alternative III), 

Alternative I would rank 

fourth in improving FRCC, 

third in reducing the 

number of human-caused 

fires, and fifth in reducing 

Alternative II would rank 

last in improving FRCC, 

fourth in reducing the 

number of human-caused 

fires (same as Alternative 

Alternative III would rank 

second to last in 

improving FRCC (same 

as the No Action 

Alternative), fourth in 

Alternative IV would rank 

first in improving FRCC, 

second in reducing the 

number of human-caused 

fires (same as Alternative 

Alternative V would rank 

second in improving 

FRCC, first in reducing 

the number of humancaused fires, and second 

Alternative VI would rank 

third in improving FRCC, 

second in reducing the 

number of human-caused 

fires (same as Alternative 
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

•

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

• •

•

•

• •

•

•

•

• • •

• •

•

• •

•

•

• • • •

• • • • • • •

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2-452

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

last in reducing the 

number of human-caused 

fires, and last in reducing 

fire size.

fire size III), and first in reducing 

fire size.

reducing the number of 

human-caused fires 

(same as Alternative II), 

and second in reducing 

fire size.

VI), and fourth in reducing 

fire size.

to last in reducing fire 

size.

IV), and third in reducing 

fire size.

No vegetation treatments 

are identified that would 

move vegetation toward 

fuels with a lower rate of 

spread.

If vegetation objectives 

are met, this alternative 

could reduce the rate of 

spread on 3% of the 

planning area.

If vegetation objectives 

are met, this alternative 

could reduce the rate of 

spread on 6% of the 

planning area.

If vegetation objectives 

are met, this alternative 

could reduce the rate of 

spread on 5% of the 

planning area.

If vegetation objectives 

are met, this alternative 

could reduce the rate of 

spread on 6% of the 

planning area.

If vegetation objectives 

are met, this alternative 

could reduce the rate of 

spread on 3% of the 

planning area.

If vegetation objectives 

are met, this alternative 

could reduce the rate of 

spread on 4% of the 

planning area.

No fuels treatments are 

identified for the Wildland 

Urban Interface (WUI).

Approximately 4,000 

acres of fuels treatments 

in the WUI would be 

implemented. 

Approximately 5,000

acres of fuels treatments 

in the WUI would be 

implemented. 

Approximately 6,000 

acres of fuels treatments 

in the WUI would be 

implemented. 

Approximately 4,000 

acres of fuels treatments 

in WUI would be 

implemented; 

improvements in overall 

FRCC would also benefit 

the WUI by reducing fire 

size in the long term.

Approximately 3,000 

acres of fuels treatments 

in the WUI would be 

implemented. 

Approximately 4,000 

acres of fuels treatments 

in the WUI would be 

implemented. 

FRCC by Vegetation Type by Vegetation Management Area (VMA) Following Full Implementation of the Plan

VMA A:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Remains at 

FRCC 3.

VMA B:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Declines 

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 3. 

VMA C:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Declines 

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 3. 

Basin big sagebrush: 

Remains at FRCC 3. 

Black/low sagebrush: 

Remains at FRCC 3.

VMA D:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Declines 

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 3. 

Basin big sagebrush: 

Remains at FRCC 3. 

Black/low sagebrush: 

Declines from FRCC 

VMA A:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Remains at 

FRCC 3.

VMA B:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Improves

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 1. 

VMA C:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Improves

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 1. 

Basin big 

sagebrush: 

Improves from

FRCC 3 to FRCC 1. 

Black/low 

sagebrush: 

Improves from

FRCC 3 to FRCC 2.

VMA D:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Remains at 

FRCC 2. 

Basin big 

VMA A:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Remains at 

FRCC 3.

VMA B:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Remains at 

FRCC 2. 

VMA C:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Remains at 

FRCC 2. 

Basin big sagebrush: 

Remains at FRCC 3. 

Black/low sagebrush: 

Remains at FRCC 3.

VMA D:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Remains at 

FRCC 2. 

Basin big sagebrush: 

Remains at FRCC 3. 

Black/low sagebrush: 

Remains at FRCC 2. 

Mtn. big sagebrush: 

Remains at FRCC 1. 

VMA A:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Remains at 

FRCC 3.

VMA B:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Remains at 

FRCC 2. 

VMA C:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Improves 

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 1. 

Basin big sagebrush: 

Improves from FRCC 

3 to FRCC 1. 

Black/low sagebrush: 

Improves from FRCC 

3 to FRCC 2.

VMA D:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Remains at 

FRCC 2. 

Basin big sagebrush: 

Improves from FRCC 

3 to FRCC 2. 

Black/low sagebrush: 

VMA A:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Improves 

from FRCC 3 to 

FRCC 2.

VMA B:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Improves 

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 1. 

VMA C:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Improves 

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 1. 

Basin big sagebrush: 

Improves from 

FRCC 3 to FRCC 1. 

Black/low 

sagebrush: Improves 

from FRCC 3 to 

FRCC 1.

VMA D:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Improves 

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 1. 

VMA A:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Remains at 

FRCC 3.

VMA B:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Remains at 

FRCC 2. 

VMA C:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Improves 

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 1. 

Basin big sagebrush: 

Improves from FRCC 

3 to FRCC 1. 

Black/low sagebrush: 

Improves from FRCC 

3 to FRCC 2. 

VMA D:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Improves 

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 1. 

Basin big sagebrush: 

Improves from FRCC 

3 to FRCC 1. 

VMA A:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Remains at 

FRCC 3.

VMA B:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Improves 

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 1. 

VMA C:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Improves 

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 1. 

Basin big sagebrush: 

Improves from FRCC 

3 to FRCC 1. 

Black/low sagebrush: 

Improves from FRCC 

3 to FRCC 1.

VMA D:

WY. sagebrush 

steppe: Improves 

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 1. 

Basin big sagebrush: 

Improves from FRCC 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

•

•

•

•

• •

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

• • • •

• •

• •

•

•

•

• • •

•

•

•

•

2-453

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

2 to FRCC 3. 

Mtn. big sagebrush: 

Declines from FRCC 

1 to FRCC 3.

sagebrush: 

Improves from 

FRCC 3 to FRCC 1. 

Black/low

sagebrush: 

Improves from 

FRCC 2 to FRCC 1. 

Mtn. big sagebrush: 

Remains at FRCC 1. 

Remains at FRCC 2. 

Mtn. big sagebrush: 

Remains at FRCC 1. 

Basin big sagebrush: 

Improves from 

FRCC 3 to FRCC 1. 

Black/low 

sagebrush: Improves 

from FRCC 2 to 

FRCC 1. 

Mtn. big sagebrush: 

Remains at FRCC 1. 

Black/low sagebrush: 

Improves from FRCC 

2 to FRCC 1. 

Mtn. big sagebrush: 

Remains at FRCC 1. 

3 to FRCC 2. 

Black/low sagebrush: 

Improves from FRCC 

2 to FRCC 1.

Mtn. big sagebrush: 

Remains at FRCC 1.

Impacts to Wild Horses

The number of wild 

horses in the Herd 

Management Area (HMA) 

would be maintained at 

50.

A reproducing herd of 100 

to 200 wild horses would 

be maintained.

Wild horses in the HMA 

would be gathered, and 

the HMA would be 

unpopulated.

A reproducing herd of 200 

to 600 horses would be 

maintained.

Wild horses would be 

gathered and replaced by 

a non-reproducing herd 

up to 200.

Wild horses would be 

gathered and replaced by 

a non-reproducing herd of 

200 to 500.

Wild horses would be 

gathered and replaced by 

a non-reproducing herd of 

50 to 200.

The No Action Alternative 

would have the most 

impact to wild horses, as 

it would result in:

The most difficulty in 

maintaining the 

genetic diversity of 

the herd, 

The least 

improvement in 

forage and water 

availability and 

stability, and

The most disruption 

to wild horses due to 

conflict with human 

activity and 

infrastructure.

Alternative I would have 

the third highest impact to 

wild horses, as it would 

result in:

Some difficulty in 

maintaining the 

genetic diversity of 

the herd, 

Improvement in 

forage and water 

availability, and

Moderate reduction 

in disruption to wild 

horses due to conflict 

with livestock grazing 

and vegetation 

treatments.

Reducing the wild horse 

herd to zero would have 

the highest short-term 

effects on wild horses 

during the process of 

gathering and relocating 

wild horses. In the long 

term, genetic diversity of 

the herd, forage and 

water availability, and 

disruption to wild horses 

would no longer be an 

issue. 

Alternative III would have 

the second lowest impact 

to wild horses, as it would 

result in: 

The least difficulty in 

maintaining the 

genetic diversity of 

herd; 

Improvement in 

forage availability 

Improvement to 

water systems to 

increase reliability 

and supply of water; 

and

Reduced disruption 

to wild horses due to 

fewer conflicts with 

motorized recreation, 

removal of fences in 

the HMA, and the 

fewest vegetation 

treatments of the 

action alternatives, 

even though conflicts 

with livestock grazing 

would remain high.

Alternative IV would have 

the least impact to wild 

horses, as it would result 

in:

No impacts to the 

genetic diversity of 

the herd; 

Improvement in 

forage availability; 

Potential difficulty in 

improving water 

availability due to 

reduced need for 

livestock water in the 

HMA; and

Highest overall 

reduction in 

disruption to wild 

horses due to 

reductions in human 

activity and uses and 

realignment of 

fences in the HMA, 

even though conflicts 

with vegetation 

treatments may be 

high.

Alternative V would have 

the second highest impact 

to wild horses, as it would 

result in:

No impacts to the 

genetic diversity of 

the herd; 

Less improvement in 

forage availability 

than Alternatives I, 

III, and IV, offset 

partially by the 

reduced allocation of 

vegetation for 

livestock; 

No increase in water 

availability due to the 

reduced need for 

livestock water in the 

HMA and new 

pipelines being 

prohibited; and

Highest overall 

reduction in 

disruption to wild 

horses, due to 

reductions in human 

activity and uses.

Alternative VI would have 

the third highest impact to 

wild horses, as it would 

result in:

Some difficulty in 

maintaining the 

genetic diversity of 

the herd, 

Improvement in 

forage and water 

availability, and

Moderate reduction 

in disruption to wild 

horses due to conflict 

with livestock grazing 

and vegetation 

treatments.
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

•

•

• • •

• • •

•

•

• • •

• • •

•

•

•

•

•

2-454

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Impacts to Paleontological Resources

The No Action Alternative 

would have the highest 

potential to affect the 

integrity of paleontological 

resources, as there would 

be:

The second most 

Potential Fossil Yield 

Classification 

(PFYC) Class 5 

acres vulnerable to 

impacts from utility, 

and wind energy 

development and the 

most acres 

vulnerable to mineral 

development and 

transportationrelated impacts, 

The fourth most 

PFYC Class 5 acres 

retained in Federal 

ownership, and

The third most 

special management 

related to Area of 

Critical 

Environmental 

Concern (ACEC) 

designation for 

maintaining the 

integrity of 

paleontological 

resources.

Alternative I would have 

the second lowest 

potential to affect the 

integrity of paleontological 

resources, as there would 

be:

Fewer PFYC Class 5 

acres vulnerable to 

impacts from 

transportation, 

mineral, utility, and 

wind energy 

development; 

The third most PFYC 

Class 5 acres 

retained in Federal 

ownership; and

The most special 

management related 

to ACEC designation 

for maintaining the 

integrity of 

paleontological 

resources.

Alternative II would have 

the second highest 

potential to affect the 

integrity of paleontological 

resources, as there would 

be: 

The most PFYC 

Class 5 acres 

vulnerable to impacts 

from wind energy 

development, even 

though impacts from 

transportation would 

be lowest; 

The least PFYC 

Class 5 acres 

retained in Federal 

ownership; and

No special 

management related 

to ACEC designation 

for maintaining the 

integrity of 

paleontological 

resources.

Alternative III would have 

the fifth lowest potential to 

affect the integrity of 

paleontological resources, 

as there would be:

Fewer PFYC Class 5 

acres vulnerable to 

impacts from 

transportation and 

mineral, utility, and 

wind energy 

development; 

The third most PFYC 

Class 5 acres 

retained in Federal 

ownership; and

The second most 

special management 

related to ACEC 

designation for 

maintaining the 

integrity of 

paleontological 

resources.

Alternative IV would have 

the third lowest potential 

to affect the integrity of 

paleontological resources, 

as there would be:

Fewer PFYC Class 5 

acres vulnerable to 

impacts from 

transportation, 

mineral, utility, and 

wind energy 

development; 

The second most 

PFYC Class 5 acres 

retained in Federal 

ownership; and

The most special 

management related 

to ACEC designation 

for maintaining the 

integrity of 

paleontological 

resources. 

Alternative V would have 

the lowest potential to 

affect the integrity of 

paleontological resources, 

as there would be:

Fewer PFYC Class 5 

acres vulnerable to 

impacts from 

transportation and 

mineral, utility, and 

wind energy 

development; 

The second most 

PFYC Class 5 acres 

retained in Federal 

ownership; and

The most special 

management related 

to ACEC designation 

for maintaining the 

integrity of 

paleontological 

resources. 

Alternative VI would have 

the fourth lowest potential 

to affect the integrity of 

paleontological resources, 

as there would be:

Fewer PFYC Class 5 

acres vulnerable to 

impacts from 

transportation, 

mineral, and wind 

energy development; 

The most PFYC 

Class 5 acres 

retained in Federal 

ownership; and

The most special 

management related 

to ACEC designation 

for maintaining the 

integrity of 

paleontological 

resources. 

Impacts to Cultural Resources

The No Action Alternative 

would result in the second 

highest level of impacts to 

the integrity and setting of 

cultural resources.

Alternative I would result 

in the third lowest level of 

impacts to the integrity 

and setting of cultural 

resources.

Alternative II would result 

in the highest level of 

impacts to the integrity 

and setting of cultural 

resources.

Alternative III would result 

in the fourth lowest level 

of impacts to the integrity 

and setting of cultural 

resources.

Alternative IV would result 

in the second lowest level 

of impacts to the integrity 

and setting of cultural 

resources.

Alternative V would result 

in the lowest level of 

impacts to the integrity 

and setting of cultural 

resources.

Alternative VI would result 

in the third lowest level of 

impacts to the integrity 

and setting of cultural 

resources.

Impacts to Visual Resources

The No Action Alternative 

would support retaining 

the existing visual 

character of 100% of 

Alternative I would 

support retaining the 

existing visual character 

of 100% of VRI Class I 

Alternative II would 

support retaining the 

existing visual character 

of 99% of VRI Class I 

Alternative III would 

support retaining the 

existing visual character 

of 99% of VRI Class I 

Alternative IV would 

support retaining the 

existing visual character 

of 100% of VRI Class I 

Alternative V would 

support retaining the 

existing visual character 

of 99% of VRI Class I 

Alternative IV would 

support retaining the 

existing visual character 

of 99% of VRI Class I 
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

5

5

2-455

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Visual Resource Inventory 

(VRI) Class I lands and 

69% of VRI Class II lands. 

lands and 83% of VRI 

Class II lands. 

lands and 2% of VRI 

Class II lands. 

lands and 3% of VRI 

Class II lands. 

lands and 88% of VRI 

Class II lands. 

lands and 91% of VRI 

Class II lands.

lands and 57% of VRI 

Class II lands. 

Acres of VRI Class I and II lands whose visual character would receive the highest level of protection (Visual Resource Management [VRM] Class I or II)

VRI I 71,000

VRI II 62,000

VRI I 71,000

VRI II 75,000

VRI I 70,000

VRI II 2,000

VRI I 70,000

VRI II 3,000

VRI I 71,000

VRI II 79,000

VRI I 70,800

VRI II 82,000

VRI I 70,000

VRI II 51,000

Impacts to Lands with Wilderness Characteristics

The No Action Alternative 

ranks sixth for 

management that 

maintains wilderness 

characteristics, as there 

would be no specific 

management for these 

values, absence of 

transportation closures, 

and few or no restrictions 

on land use authorizations 

or mineral development in 

these areas; management 

for visual resources would 

maintain some wilderness 

characteristics.

Alternative I ranks second 

for management that 

maintains wilderness 

characteristics, as it would 

manage 50% of 

inventoried lands with 

wilderness characteristics.

Alternative II ranks last for 

management that 

maintains wilderness 

characteristics, as there 

would be no specific 

management for these 

values and few or no 

restrictions on land use 

authorizations or mineral 

development in these 

areas. 

Alternative III ranks fifth 

for management that 

maintains wilderness 

characteristics, as there 

would be no specific 

management for these 

values, few or no 

restrictions on mineral 

development, but some 

restrictions on wind 

energy and utility 

development in these 

areas. 

Alternative IV ranks third 

for management that 

maintains wilderness 

characteristics, as it would 

manage 36% of 

inventoried lands with 

wilderness characteristics. 

Alternative V ranks first 

for management that 

maintains wilderness 

characteristics, as it would 

manage for all inventoried 

lands with wilderness 

characteristics. 

Alternative VI ranks fourth 

for management that 

maintains wilderness 

characteristics, as there 

would be no specific 

management for these 

values, few or no 

restrictions on mineral 

development, but some 

restrictions on wind 

energy and utility 

development in these 

areas. Management for 

visual resources would 

maintain some wilderness 

characteristics.

Resource Uses

Impacts to Livestock Grazing

Forage Available for Livestock at Initial and Full Implementation of the Plan based on Areas Available for Livestock Grazing, Vegetation Allocation and Treatments, and 2006 Vegetation 

Production Data (for Comparison Purposes Only)

Initial implementation:

200,000 animal unit 

months (AUMs) 

Full implementation:

160,000-260,000 AUMs

Initial implementation:

189,000-259,000 AUMs

Full implementation : 

For all action alternatives, reflects the impact of vegetation treatments on forage availability.

179,000-245,000 AUMs

Initial implementation:

350,000-423,000 AUMs

Full implementation:

362,000-440,000 AUMs

Initial implementation:

273,000-344,000 AUMs

Full implementation:

276,000-348,000 AUMs

Alternative IV-A:

Initial implementation:

94,000-147,000 AUMs

Full implementation:

77,000-122,000 AUMs

Alternative IV-B:

Initial implementation:

97,000-151,000 AUMs

Full implementation:

81,000-127,000 AUMs

Initial implementation:

46,000-93,000 AUMs

Full implementation:

42,000-85,000 AUMs

Initial implementation:

216,000-326,000 AUMs

Full implementation:

186,000-279,000 AUMs

The No Action alternative 

has a low level of 

limitation on infrastructure 

for livestock management.

Alternative I provides a 

moderate level of 

limitation on infrastructure 

for livestock management. 

Same as the No Action 

Alternative.

Same as the No Action 

Alternative.

Alternative IV provides a 

high level of limitation on 

infrastructure for livestock 

management. 

Alternative V provides the 

highest level of limitation 

on infrastructure for 

livestock management. 

Same as Alternative I.
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

2-456

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

The level of effort required 

to minimize conflicts with 

livestock grazing would be 

low with regard to 

resources and high with 

regard to other uses.

The level of effort required 

to minimize conflicts with 

livestock grazing would be 

low with regard to 

resources and other uses.

Same as the No Action 

Alternative.

A moderate amount of 

effort would be required to 

minimize conflicts with 

livestock grazing with 

regard to resources and 

other uses.

Same as Alternative III.

The level of effort required 

to minimize conflicts with 

livestock grazing would be 

high with regard to 

resources and low with 

regard to other uses.

Same as Alternative I.

Impacts to Recreation

Areas with focused 

recreation management 

would not change (86,000 

acres). However, 

managing the Special 

Recreation Management 

Areas (SRMAs) without 

clearly established 

boundaries does not 

address the existing or 

anticipated increase in 

demand of the 

recreational resources.

The SRMAs in Alternative 

I would provide the 

broadest range of activity 

type among all 

alternatives, maintaining 

or enhancing existing 

opportunities. Areas with 

focused recreation 

management would 

increase to 326,000 

acres.

The SRMAs in Alternative 

II would maintain or 

enhance some existing 

opportunities, while 

minimizing conflict with 

resource uses. Areas with 

focused recreation 

management would 

decrease to 7,000 acres.

The SRMAs in Alternative 

III would maintain or 

enhance existing 

opportunities. Areas with 

focused recreation 

management would 

decrease to 42,000 acres.

The SRMAs in Alternative 

IV would maintain or 

enhance existing 

opportunities. Areas with 

focused recreation 

management would 

increase to 190,000 

acres.

The SRMAs in Alternative 

V would maintain some 

existing opportunities. 

Areas with focused 

recreation management 

would decrease to 5,000 

acres.

Alternative IV would 

designate 20,000 acres 

as SRMAs. Alternative VI 

would be the only 

alternative designating 

Extensive Recreation 

Management Areas 

(ERMAs) (304,000 acres), 

which would sustain the 

principal recreation 

activities, commensurate 

with management of other 

resources and resource 

uses, for these areas.

The type, number, and 

setting of motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be maintained.

The type, number, and 

setting of motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be enhanced.

The type, number, and 

setting of motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be limited.

The type, number, and 

setting of motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be enhanced.

The type, number, and 

setting of motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be enhanced.

The type, number, and 

setting of motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be limited.

The type, number, and 

setting of motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be enhanced.

The type, number, and 

setting of non-motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be limited.

The type, number, and 

setting of non-motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be enhanced.

The type, number, and 

setting of non-motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be limited.

The type, number, and 

setting of non-motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be maintained.

The type, number, and 

setting of non-motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be enhanced.

The type, number, and 

setting of non-motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be maintained.

The type, number, and 

setting of non-motorized 

recreation opportunities 

would be enhanced.

Impacts to Transportation and Travel

Travel management 

would be the least 

restrictive.

Travel management 

would be the third most 

restrictive but would 

continue to provide 

access within the majority 

of the planning area.

Travel management 

would be the second least 

restrictive.

Travel management 

would be the fifth most 

restrictive.

Travel management 

would be the second most 

restrictive but would 

continue to provide 

access within the majority 

of the planning area.

Travel management 

would be the most 

restrictive but would 

continue to provide 

access within the majority 

of the planning area.

Travel management 

would be the fourth most 

restrictive but would 

continue to provide 

access within the majority 

of the planning area.

Route density is expected 

to increase as a result of 

the number of acres open 

to cross-country 

motorized vehicle use and 

available for right-of-way

(ROW) development.

Route density is expected 

to decrease overall; 49% 

of the planning area is 

expected to remain at the 

same route density, and 

48% is expected to 

experience a decrease in 

route density. 

Route density is expected 

to increase overall; 16% 

of the planning area is 

expected to remain at the 

same route density, and 

84% is expected to 

experience an increase in 

route density.

Route density is expected 

to remain mostly 

unchanged; 98% of the 

planning area is expected 

to remain at the same 

route density, and 2% is 

expected to experience 

an increase in route 

density.

Route density is expected 

to decrease overall; 2% of 

the planning area is 

expected to experience 

an increase in route 

density, and 98% is 

expected to experience a 

decrease in route density.

Route density is expected 

to decrease overall; 1% of 

the planning area is 

expected to experience 

an increase in route 

density, and 99% is 

expected to experience a 

decrease in route density.

Route density is expected 

to remain mostly 

unchanged; 88% of the 

planning area is expected 

to remain at the same 

route density, and 10% is 

expected to experience a 

decrease in route density.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

6

7

6

7

2-457

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Impacts to Land Use Authorizations

Availability of Public Lands for Right-of-way (ROW) Developments (Acres)

Available 374,000

Avoidance 935,000

Exclusion 62,000

Available 369,000

Avoidance 1,001,000

Exclusion 63,000

Available 370,000

Avoidance 1,001,000

Exclusion 62,000

Available 369,000

Avoidance 1,001,000

Exclusion 63,000

Available 335,000

Avoidance 1,001,000

Exclusion 100,000

Available 144,000

Avoidance 1,227,000

Exclusion 167,000

Available 136,000

Avoidance 1,234,000

Exclusion 63,000

Utility ROW corridors 

would consist of Pilgrim 

Gulch, Shoestring, 

Balanced Rock, and 

Saylor Creek (30,000 

acres).

Utility ROW corridors 

would consist of Pilgrim 

Gulch, Shoestring, 

Balanced Rock, Saylor 

Creek, and Jarbidge 

(53,000 acres).

Same as Alternative I. Same as Alternative I. Same as Alternative I. Same as Alternative I.

Utility ROW corridors 

would consist of Pilgrim 

Gulch, Shoestring, 

Balanced Rock, Saylor 

Creek, Roseworth, and 

Oil/Gas Pipelines (43,000 

acres).

Forty seven percent of 

lands within 2 miles of 

areas rated fair or higher 

for wind resources would 

be available for wind 

energy development.

Seventeen percent of 

lands within 2 miles of 

areas rated fair or higher 

for wind resources would 

be available for wind 

energy development.

Fifty four percent of lands 

within 2 miles of areas 

rated fair or higher for 

wind resources would be 

available for wind energy 

development.

Twenty one percent of 

lands within 2 miles of 

areas rated fair or higher 

for wind resources would 

be available for wind 

energy development.

Sixteen percent of lands 

within 2 miles of areas 

rated fair or higher for 

wind resources would be 

available for wind energy 

development.

Thirteen percent of lands 

within 2 miles of areas 

rated fair or higher for 

wind resources would be 

available for wind energy 

development.

Same as Alternative V.

Impacts to Land Tenure

Availability of Public Lands for Various Land Tenure Transactions (Acres)

Sale 2,000

Exchange 243,000

DLE/CA

Desert Land Entry Act of 1877/Carey Act of 1894.

 67,000

R&PP

Recreation and Public Purposes Act of 1954.

 

1,371,000

Sale 20,000

Exchange 243,000

DLE/CA 960

R&PP 243,000

Sale 46,000

Exchange 349,000

DLE/CA 960 

R&PP 349,000

Sale 20,000

Exchange 243,000

DLE/CA 960 

R&PP 243,000

Sale 16,000

Exchange 219,000

DLE/CA 960 

R&PP 219,000

Sale 0 

Exchange 89,000

DLE/CA 960 

R&PP 89,000

Sale 13,000

Exchange 32,000

DLE/CA 960 

R&PP 32,000

Impacts to Minerals 

Impacts to Leasable Minerals

Availability of Federal Mineral Estate for Mineral Leasing (Acres)

Open 539,000

Open with

Constraint 720,000

Closed 112,000

Open 403,000

Open with

Constraint 817,000

Closed 151,000

Open 1,277,000

Open with

Constraint 33,000

Closed 62,000

Open 1,275,000

Open with

Constraint 17,000

Closed 79,000

Alternative IV-A

Open 407,000

Open with

Constraint 722,000

Closed 242,000

Alternative IV-B 

Open 407,000

Open with

Constraint 754,000

Closed 210,000

Open 934,000

Open with

Constraint 254,000

Closed 183,000

Open 335,000

Open with

Constraint 942,000

Closed 95,000

Availability of Federal Mineral Estate in Potential Oil and Gas Areas for Mineral Leasing (Acres)

Open 188,000

Open with

Constraint 101,000

Open 185,000

Open with

Constraint 100,000

Open 288,000

Open with

Constraint 18,000

Open 288,000

Open with

Constraint 13,000

Open 189,000

Open with

Constraint 83,000

Open 209,000

Open with

Constraint 56,000

Open 189,000

Open with

Constraint 113,000
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

•

•

•

• • • • •

• • • • •

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

2-458

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Closed 18,000 Closed 11,000 Closed 100 Closed 5,000 Closed 35,000 Closed 41,000 Closed 5,000

Availability of Federal Mineral Estate in Potential Geothermal Areas for Mineral Leasing (Acres)

Open 289,000

Open with

Constraint 53,000

Closed 24,000

Open 327,000

Open with

Constraint 25,000

Closed 14,000

Open 349,000

Open with

Constraint 16,000

Closed 700

Open 349,000

Open with

Constraint 12,000

Closed 5,000

Open 331,000

Open with

Constraint 29,000

Closed 8,000

Open 335,000

Open with

Constraint 20,000

Closed 12,000

Open 309,000

Open with

Constraint 50,000

Closed 5,000

In the next 20 years under the reasonably foreseeable development scenarios, approximately 90 acres would be developed for oil and gas and 185 to 230 acres for geothermal resources.

Impacts to Salable Minerals

Availability of Federal Mineral Estate for Salable Mineral Development (Acres)

Open 1,310,000

Closed 62,000

Closed to New 

Development 0 

Open 1,200,000

Closed 144,000

Closed to New 

Development 27,000

Open 1,282,000

Closed 62,000

Closed to New 

Development 27,000

Open 1,266,000

Closed 78,000

Closed to New 

Development 27,000

Alternative IV-A

Open 1,103,000

Closed 241,000

Closed to New 

Development 27,000

Alternative IV-B

Open 1,135,000

Closed 209,000

Closed to New 

Development 27,000

Open 1,162,000

Closed 182,000

Closed to New 

Development 27,000 

Open 1,250,000

Closed 94,000

Closed to New 

Development 27,000 

Impacts to Locatable Minerals

Availability of Federal Mineral Estate for Locatable Mineral Development (Acres)

Recommend for 

Withdrawal 158,000

Withdrawn by

Statute 60,000

Recommend for 

Withdrawal 69,000

Withdrawn by

Statute 60,000

Recommend for 

Withdrawal 26,000

Withdrawn by

Statute 60,000

Recommend for 

Withdrawal 28,000

Withdrawn by

Statute 60,000

Recommend for 

Withdrawal 83,000

Withdrawn by

Statute 60,000

Recommend for 

Withdrawal 33,000

Withdrawn by

Statute 60,000

Recommend for 

Withdrawal 0 

Withdrawn by

Statute 60,000

Special Designations

Impacts to Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) 

The No Action Alternative 

would have:

3 ACECs 

designated; 

89,000 acres under 

ACEC management; 

and

25% of lands with 

relevant and 

important values 

would receive 

special management 

through ACEC 

designation.

Alternative I would have:

5 ACECs 

designated; 

97,000 acres under 

ACEC management; 

and

44% of lands with 

relevant and 

important values 

would receive 

management 

through ACEC 

designation.

Alternative II would have:

0 ACECs 

designated, 

0 acres under ACEC 

management, and

0% of lands with 

relevant and 

important values 

would receive 

management 

through ACEC 

designation.

Alternative III would have:

3 ACECs 

designated; 

61,000 acres under 

ACEC management; 

and

19% of lands with 

relevant and 

important values 

would receive 

management 

through ACEC 

designation.

Alternative IV would have:

5 ACECs 

designated; 

333,000 acres 

(Alternative IV-A) 

and 230,000 acres 

(Alternative IV-B) 

under ACEC 

management; and

56% (Alternative IVA) and 48% 

(Alternative IV-B) of 

lands with relevant 

and important values 

would receive 

management 

through ACEC 

designation.

Alternative V would have:

4 ACECs 

designated; 

966,000 acres under 

ACEC management; 

and

61% of lands with 

relevant and 

important values 

would receive 

management 

through ACEC 

designation.

Alternative VI would have:

4 ACECs 

designated; 

22,000 acres under 

ACEC management; 

and

5% of lands with 

relevant and 

important values 

would receive 

management 

through ACEC 

designation.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

2-459

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Impacts to National Historic Trail (NHT)

The No Action Alternative 

ranks sixth for maintaining 

or improving the physical, 

visual, or acoustic setting 

of the Oregon NHT, due 

to:

No priority for 

treatments of upland 

vegetation and 

noxious weeds and 

invasive plants and

Designation of 36% 

of the Oregon NHT 

corridor and 

foreground as Visual 

Resource 

Management (VRM) 

Class I or II.

Alternative I ranks third for 

maintaining or improving 

the physical, visual, or 

acoustic setting of the 

Oregon NHT due to:

Priority for noxious 

weeds and invasive 

plants treatments

and

Designation of 12% 

of the Oregon NHT 

corridor and 

foreground as VRM 

Class I or II.

Alternative II ranks last for 

maintaining or improving 

the physical, visual, or 

acoustic setting of the 

Oregon NHT, due to:

No priority for 

treatments of upland 

vegetation and 

noxious weeds and 

invasive plants and

Designation of 95% 

of the visual 

foreground as VRM 

Class IV and the 

second highest 

amount of 

foreground available 

for wind energy 

development.

Alternative III ranks fifth 

for maintaining or 

improving the physical, 

visual, or acoustic setting 

of the Oregon NHT, due 

to:

Priority for noxious 

weeds and invasive 

plants treatments, 

but not for upland 

vegetation 

treatments and

Designation of 12% 

of the Oregon NHT 

corridor and 

foreground as VRM 

Class I or II.

Alternative IV ranks fourth 

for maintaining or 

improving the physical, 

visual, or acoustic setting 

of the Oregon NHT.

This alternative is 

essentially identical to 

Alternative III, with slightly 

less protective zone and 

National Trail 

Management Corridor 

acres available for 

grazing, thus avoiding 

changes to the physical 

settings of the trail from 

this use.

Alternative V ranks 

second for maintaining or 

improving the physical, 

visual, or acoustic setting 

of the Oregon NHT. 

This alternative is 

essentially identical to 

Alternative I, with slightly 

less land available for 

wind energy development 

authorizations and the 

fewest corridor acres 

available for grazing, 

minimizing impacts to trail 

resources from this use.

Alternative VI ranks first 

for maintaining or 

improving the physical, 

visual, or acoustic setting 

of the Oregon NHT.

This alternative is similar 

to Alternatives I and V but 

with substantially less 

land available for wind 

energy development 

authorizations and 

substantially more land 

allocated to VRM Class II.

Impacts to Wilderness

All alternatives would manage the Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness to protect wilderness values.

Impacts to Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) 

The No Action Alternative 

ranks sixth for 

management that would 

maintain the existing 

outstandingly remarkable 

values (ORVs) and 

tentative classification. 

Decreases to these 

values would be due to 

the potential for leasable 

and locatable mineral 

development in study river 

corridors.

Alternative I ranks second 

for management that 

would maintain the 

existing ORVs and 

tentative classification. 

Impacts from 

management in this 

alternative are essentially 

identical to Alternatives III, 

IV, and V, with only a 

variation in 

complementary Area of 

Critical Environmental 

Concern (ACEC) 

management.

Alternative II ranks 

seventh for management 

that would maintain the 

existing ORVs and 

tentative classification. 

The most notable 

decreases to these values 

would be due to study 

river lands being available 

for salable mineral 

development and no 

complementary 

management from 

overlapping ACECs.

Alternative III ranks fourth 

for management that 

would maintain the 

existing ORVs and 

tentative classification. 

Impacts from 

management in this 

alternative are essentially 

identical to Alternatives I, 

IV, and V, with only a 

variation in 

complementary ACEC 

management.

Alternative IV ranks third 

for management that 

would maintain the 

existing ORVs and 

tentative classification. 

Impacts from 

management in this 

alternative are essentially 

identical to Alternatives I, 

III, and V, with only a 

variation in 

complementary ACEC 

management.

Alternative V ranks first 

for management that 

maintains the existing 

ORVs and tentative 

classification. Impacts 

from management in this 

alternative are essentially 

identical to Alternatives I 

and VI, with only a 

variation in 

complementary ACEC 

management.

Alternative VI ranks fifth 

for management that 

would maintain the 

existing ORVs and 

tentative classification. 

Impacts from 

management in this 

alternative are essentially 

identical to Alternatives III, 

IV, and V, with only a 

variation in 

complementary ACEC 

management.

Impacts to the Wilderness Study Area (WSA)

Because the WSA would continue to be managed consistent with Management of Wilderness Study Areas (BLM Manual 6330), wilderness characteristics in the WSA would continue to be maintained or 

enhanced.

If WSA lands were 

released other 

management associated 

with the Area of Critical 

Environmental Concern 

Same as the No Action 

Alternative.

If WSA lands were 

released other 

management associated 

with the WSR corridor 

would provide indirect 

Same as the No Action 

Alternative.

Same as Alternative II. Same as the No Action 

Alternative.

Same as the No Action 

Alternative.
Chapter 2: Summary Tables Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

•

•

•

•

•

•

• •

•

•

• • • • •

•

•

2-460

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

(ACEC) and Wild and 

Scenic River (WSR) 

corridor would provide 

indirect protection of 

wilderness characteristics 

on 100% of the WSA 

lands.

protection of wilderness 

characteristics on 97% of 

the WSA lands.

Social and Economic Features

Impacts to Social Conditions

The No Action Alternative 

would have negligible 

effects on quality of life for 

stakeholder groups in the 

planning area. 

Alternative I would result 

in an increase in the 

quality of life for 

stakeholder groups in the 

planning area.

The rancher 

stakeholder group 

would have a 

decrease in their 

quality of life.

The dispersed 

recreationist 

stakeholder group 

would have an 

increase in their 

quality of life.

The hunters and 

fishermen 

stakeholder group 

would have an 

increase in their 

quality of life.

Alternative II would result 

in varying impacts on 

quality of life for 

stakeholder groups in the 

planning area. 

The rancher 

stakeholder group 

would have an 

increase in their 

quality of life, unless 

wind energy 

development occurs. 

The dispersed 

recreationist 

stakeholder group 

would have a 

decrease in their 

quality of life.

The hunters and 

fishermen 

stakeholder group 

would have a 

decrease in their 

quality of life.

Alternative III would result 

in varying impacts on 

quality of life for 

stakeholder groups in the 

planning area.

It is difficult to 

determine an overall 

change in the quality 

of life for ranchers 

and dispersed 

recreators under 

Alternative III.

The hunters and 

fishermen 

stakeholder group 

would have a 

decrease in their 

quality of life.

Alternative IV would result 

in varying impacts on 

quality of life for 

stakeholder groups in the 

planning area. 

The rancher 

stakeholder group 

would have a 

decrease in their 

quality of life.

The dispersed 

recreationist 

stakeholder group 

would have an 

increase in their 

quality of life. 

The hunters and 

fishermen 

stakeholder group 

would have an 

increase in their 

quality of life. 

Alternative V would result 

in a decrease in quality of 

life for stakeholder groups 

in the planning area. 

The rancher 

stakeholder group 

would have a 

decrease in their 

quality of life. 

The dispersed 

recreationist 

stakeholder group 

would have a 

decrease in their 

quality of life.

The hunters and 

fishermen 

stakeholder group 

would have a 

decrease in their 

quality of life.

Alternative VI would result 

in varying impacts on 

quality of life for 

stakeholder groups in the 

planning area.

It is difficult to 

determine an overall 

change in the quality 

of life for ranchers 

under Alternative VI.

The dispersed 

recreationist 

stakeholder group 

would have an 

increase in their 

quality of life. 

The hunters and 

fishermen 

stakeholder group 

would have an 

increase in their 

quality of life.

Impacts to Economic Conditions

The Cattle Ranching and 

Farming Sector 

employment at initial 

implementation would 

increase by 7%. At full 

implementation 

employment would 

increase 1% to 16%.

The Cattle Ranching and 

Farming Sector 

employment at initial 

implementation would 

increase between 6% and 

16%. At full 

implementation 

employment would 

increase 4% to 14%.

The Cattle Ranching and 

Farming Sector 

employment at initial 

implementation would 

increase between 30% 

and 40%. At full 

implementation 

employment would 

increase 31% to 43%.

The Cattle Ranching and 

Farming Sector 

employment at initial 

implementation would 

increase between 18% 

and 29%. At full 

implementation 

employment would 

increase 19% to 29%.

The Cattle Ranching and 

Farming Sector 

employment at initial 

implementation would 

decrease between 1% 

and 8%. At full 

implementation 

employment would 

decrease 4% to 11%.

The Cattle Ranching and 

Farming Sector 

employment at initial 

implementation would 

decrease between 9% 

and 16%. At full 

implementation 

employment would 

decrease 10% to 16%.

The Cattle Ranching and 

Farming Sector 

employment at initial 

implementation would 

increase between 10% 

and 26%. At full 

implementation 

employment would 

increase 5% to 19%.
Jarbidge Proposed RMP/Final EIS Chapter 2: Summary Tables

Comparison of Environmental Consequences

2-461

No Action 

Alternative Alternative I Alternative II Alternative III Alternative IV Alternative V Alternative VI

(Proposed RMP)

Recreation visitor use is 

expected to increase 

employment and income 

by 5%.

Recreation visitor use is 

expected to increase 

employment and income 

by 5% to 10%.

Recreation visitor use is 

expected to increase 

employment and income 

by 0% to 5%.

Recreation visitor use is 

expected to increase 

employment and income 

by 5% to 10%.

Recreation visitor use is 

expected to increase 

employment and income 

by 5% to 10%.

Recreation visitor use is 

expected to decrease 

employment and income 

by 5% to 10%.

Recreation visitor use is 

expected to increase 

employment and income 

by 5% to 10%.

Impacts to Economic Conditions

The opportunity for wind 

energy development in 

the southeast corner of 

the planning area has the 

potential to result in 

positive impacts relative 

to current levels of wind 

energy development, 

although these effects are 

contingent on 

development actually 

occurring.

No change in impacts 

from expected wind 

energy development is 

anticipated since this 

alternative is amongst 

those alternatives with the 

lowest amount of acreage 

with expected wind 

energy development 

areas; consequently 

development in the 

planning area is not 

anticipated to change.

Same as the No Action 

Alternative. Same as Alternative I. Same as Alternative I. Same as Alternative I. Same as Alternative I.
This Page Intentionally Left Blank