APPENDIX 2

APPENDIX 2

WYOMING BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

(BLM) MITIGATION GUIDELINES FOR SURFACEDISTURBING AND DISRUPTIVE ACTIVITIES

INTRODUCTION 

These guidelines are primarily for the purpose of attaining 

statewide consistency in how requirements are determined for 

avoiding and mitigating environmental impacts and resource 

and land use conflicts. Consistency in this sense does not 

mean that identical requirements would be applied for all 

similar types of land use activities that may cause similar types 

of impacts. Nor does it mean that the requirements or 

guidelines for a single land use activity would be identical in 

all areas. 

There are two ways the mitigation guidelines are used in 

the resource management plan (RMP) and environmental 

impact statement (EIS) process: (1) as part of the planning 

criteria in developing the RMP alternatives, and (2) in the 

analytical processes of both developing the alternatives and 

analyzing the impacts of the alternatives. In the first case, an 

assumption is made that any one or more of the mitigations 

will be appropriately included as conditions of relevant actions being proposed or considered in each alternative. In the 

second case, the mitigations are used (1) to develop a baseline 

for measuring and comparing impacts among the alternatives; 

(2) to identify other actions and alternatives that should be 

considered, and (3) to help determine whether more stringent 

or less stringent mitigations should be considered. 

The EIS for the RMP does not decide or dictate the exact 

wording or inclusion of these guidelines. Rather, the guidelines are used in the RMP EIS process as a tool to help develop 

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

guidelines will be used in the same manner in analyzing 

activity plans and other site-specific proposals. These guidelines and their wording are matters of policy. As such, specific 

wording is subject to change primarily through administrative 

review, not through the RMP EIS process. Any further 

changes that may be made in the continuing refinement of 

these guidelines and any development of program-specific 

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

PURPOSE 

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

operations of all surface and other human presence disturbance activities as part of the statutory requirements for 

environmental protection, and (2) to inform a potential lessee, 

permittee, or operator of the requirements that must be met 

when using BLM-administered public lands. These guidelines have been written in a format that will allow for (1) their 

direct use as stipulations, and (2) the addition of specific or 

specialized mitigation following the submission of a detailed 

plan of development or other project proposal, and an environmental analysis. 

Those resource activities or programs currently without a 

standardized set of permit or operation stipulations can use the 

mitigation guidelines as stipulations or as conditions of approval, or as a baseline for developing specific stipulations for 

a given activity or program. 

Because use of the mitigation guidelines was integrated 

into the RMP EIS process and will be integrated into the sitespecific environmental analysis process, the application of 

stipulations or mitigation requirements derived through the 

guidelines will provide more consistency with planning decisions and plan implementation than has occurred in the past. 

Application of the mitigation guidelines to all surface and 

other human presence disturbance activities concerning BLMadministered public lands and resources will provide more 

uniformity in mitigation than has occurred in the past. 

MITIGATION GUIDELINES 

1. Surface Disturbance Mitigation 

Guideline 

Surface disturbance will be prohibited in any of the following areas or conditions. Exception, waiver, or modification of 

this limitation may be approved in writing, including documented supporting analysis, by the Authorized Officer. 

a. Slopes in excess of 25 percent. 

b. Within important scenic areas (Class I and II Visual 

Resource Management Areas). 

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

d. Within either one-quarter mile or the visual horizon 

(whichever is closer) of historic trails. 

e. Construction with frozen material or during periods when 

the soil material is saturated or when watershed damage 

is likely to occur. 

Guidance 

The intent of the SURFACE DISTURBANCE MITIGATION GUIDELINE is to inform interested parties (potential 

lessees, permittees, or operators) that when one or more of the 

five (1a through 1e) conditions exist, surface-disturbing activities will be prohibited unless or until a permittee or his 

designated representative and the surface management agency 

593
APPENDIX 2

(SMA) arrive at an acceptable plan for mitigation of anticipated impacts. This negotiation will occur prior to development. 

Specific criteria (for example, 500 feet from water) have 

been established based upon the best information available. 

However, such items as geographical areas and seasons must 

be delineated at the field level. 

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

analysis of proposals (for example, activity plans, plans of 

development, plans of operation, applications for permit to 

drill) and, if necessary, must allow for other mitigation to be 

applied on a site-specific basis. 

2. Wildlife Mitigation Guideline 

a. To protect important big game winter habitat, activities or 

surface use will not be allowed from November 15 to 

April 30 within certain areas encompassed by the authorization. The same criteria apply to defined big game 

birthing areas from May 1 to June 30. 

Application of this limitation to operation and maintenance of a developed project must be based on environmental analysis of the operational or production aspects. 

Exception, waiver, or modification of this limitation in 

any year may be approved in writing, including documented supporting analysis, by the Authorized Officer. 

b. To protect important raptor and/or sage and sharp-tailed 

grouse nesting habitat, activities or surface use will not be 

allowed from February 1 to July 31 within certain areas 

encompassed by the authorization. The same criteria 

apply to defined raptor and game bird winter concentration areas from November 15 to April 30. 

Application of this limitation to operation and maintenance of a developed project must be based on environmental analysis of the operational or production aspects. 

Exception, waiver, or modification of this limitation in 

any year may be approved in writing, including documented supporting analysis, by the Authorized Officer. 

c. No activities or surface use will be allowed on that portion 

of the authorization area identified within (legal description) for the purpose of protecting (for example, sage/ 

sharp-tailed grouse breeding grounds, and/or other species/activities) habitat. 

Exception, waiver, or modification of this limitation in 

any year may be approved in writing, including documented supporting analysis, by the Authorized Officer. 

d. Portions of the authorized use area legally described as 

(legal description), are known or suspected to be essential 

habitat for (name) which is a threatened or endangered 

species. Prior to conducting any onsite activities, the 

lessee/permittee will be required to conduct inventories 

or studies in accordance with BLM and U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service guidelines to verify the presence or 

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

modify operational plans to include the protection requirements of this species and its habitat (for example, 

seasonal use restrictions, occupancy limitations, facility 

design modifications). 

Guidance 

The WILDLIFE MITIGATION GUIDELINE is intended 

to provide two basic types of protection: seasonal restriction 

(2a and 2b) and prohibition of activities or surface use (2c). 

Item 2d is specific to situations involving threatened or 

endangered species. Legal descriptions will ultimately be 

required and should be measurable and legally definable. 

There are no minimum subdivision requirements at this time. 

The area delineated can and should be defined as necessary, 

based upon current biological data, prior to the time of 

processing an application and issuing the use authorization. 

The legal description must eventually become a part of the 

condition for approval of the permit, plan of development, 

and/or other use authorization. 

The seasonal restriction section identifies three example 

groups of species and delineates three similar time frame 

restrictions. The big game species including elk, moose, deer, 

antelope, and bighorn sheep, all require protection of crucial 

winter range between November 15 and April 30. Elk and 

bighorn sheep also require protection from disturbance from 

May 1 to June 30, when they typically occupy distinct calving 

and lambing areas. Raptors include eagles, accipiters, falcons 

(peregrine, prairie, and merlin), buteos (ferruginous and 

Swainson’s hawks), osprey, and burrowing owls. The raptors 

and sage and sharp-tailed grouse require nesting protection 

between February 1 and July 31. The same birds often require 

protection from disturbance from November 15 through April 

30 while they occupy winter concentration areas. 

Item 2c, the prohibition of activity or surface use, is 

intended for protection of specific wildlife habitat areas or 

values within the use area that cannot be protected by using 

seasonal restrictions. These areas or values must be factors 

that limit life-cycle activities (for example, sage grouse strutting grounds, known threatened and endangered species habitat). 

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

analysis of proposals (for example, activity plans, plans of 

development, plans of operation, applications for permit to 

drill) and, if necessary, must allow for other mitigation to be 

applied on a site-specific basis. 

3. Cultural Resource Mitigation 

Guideline 

When a proposed discretionary land use has potential for 

affecting the characteristics which qualify a cultural property 

for the National Register of Historic Places (National Register), mitigation will be considered. In accordance with Section 106 of the Historic Preservation Act, procedures specified in 36 CFR 800 will be used in consultation with the 

594
APPENDIX 2

Wyoming State Historic Preservation Officer in arriving at 

determinations regarding the need and type of mitigation to be 

required. 

Guidance 

The preferred strategy for treating potential adverse effects 

on cultural properties is “avoidance.” If avoidance involves 

project relocation, the new project area may also require 

cultural resource inventory. If avoidance is imprudent or 

unfeasible, appropriate mitigation may include excavation 

(data recovery), stabilization, monitoring, protection barriers 

and signs, or other physical and administrative measures. 

Reports documenting results of cultural resource inventory, evaluation, and the establishment of mitigation alternatives (if necessary) shall be written according to standards 

contained in BLM Manuals, the cultural resource permit 

stipulations, and in other policy issued by the BLM. These 

reports must provide sufficient information for Section 106 

consultation. Reports shall be reviewed for adequacy by the 

appropriate BLM cultural resource specialist. If cultural 

properties on, or eligible for, the National Register are located 

within these areas of potential impact and cannot be avoided, 

the Authorized Officer shall begin the Section 106 consultation process in accordance with the Wyoming Protocol to the 

National Programmatic Agreement. 

Mitigation measures shall be implemented according to 

the mitigation plan approved by the BLM Authorized Officer. 

Such plans are usually prepared by the land use applicant 

according to BLM specifications. Mitigation plans will be 

reviewed as part of Section 106 consultation for National 

Register eligible or listed properties. The extent and nature of 

recommended mitigation shall be commensurate with the 

significance of the cultural resource involved and the anticipated extent of damage. Reasonable costs for mitigation will 

be borne by the land use applicant. Mitigation must be cost 

effective and realistic. It must consider project requirements 

and limitations, input from concerned parties, and be BLM 

approved or BLM formulated. 

Mitigation of paleontological and natural history sites will 

be treated on a case-by-case basis. Factors such as site 

significance, economics, safety, and project urgency must be 

taken into account when making a decision to mitigate. 

Authority to protect (through mitigation) such values is provided for in FLPMA, Section 102(a)(8). When avoidance is 

not possible, appropriate mitigation may include excavation 

(data recovery), stabilization, monitoring, protection barriers 

and signs, or other physical and administrative protection 

measures. 

4. Special Resource Mitigation 

Guideline 

To protect (resource value), activities or surface use will 

not be allowed (that is, within a specific distance of the 

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

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

analysis of the operational or production aspects. 

Exception, waiver, or modification of this limitation in any 

year may be approved in writing, including documented 

supporting analysis, by the Authorized Officer. 

Example Resource Categories (Select or identify category 

and specific resource value): 

a. Recreation areas. 

b. Special natural history or paleontological features. 

c. Special management areas. 

d. Sections of major rivers. 

e. Prior existing rights-of-way. 

f. Occupied dwellings. 

g. Other (specify). 

Guidance 

The SPECIAL RESOURCE MITIGATION GUIDELINE 

is intended for use only in site-specific situations where one of 

the first three general mitigation guidelines will not adequately address the concern. The resource value, location, 

and specific restrictions must be clearly identified. A detailed 

plan addressing specific mitigation and special restrictions 

will be required prior to disturbance or development and will 

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

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

analysis of proposals (for example, activity plans, plans of 

development, plans of operation, applications for permit to 

drill) and, if necessary, must allow for other mitigation to be 

applied on a site-specific basis. 

5. No Surface Occupancy Guideline 

No Surface Occupancy will be allowed on the following 

described lands (legal description) because of (resource value). 

Example Resource Categories (Select or identify category 

and specific resource value): 

a. Recreation Areas (for example, campgrounds, historic 

trails, national monuments). 

b. Major reservoirs/dams. 

c. Special management area (for example, known threatened or endangered species habitat, areas suitable for 

consideration for wild and scenic rivers designation). 

d. Other (specify). 

Guidance 

The NO SURFACE OCCUPANCY (NSO) MITIGATION 

GUIDELINE is intended for use only when other mitigation 

is determined insufficient to adequately protect the public 

interest and is the only alternative to “no development” or “no 

leasing.” The legal description and resource value of concern 

must be identified and be tied to an NSO land use planning 

decision. 

595
APPENDIX 2

Waiver of, or exception(s) to, the NSO requirement will be 

subject to the same test used to initially justify its imposition. 

If, upon evaluation of a site-specific proposal, it is found that 

less restrictive mitigation would adequately protect the public 

interest or value of concern, then a waiver or exception to the 

NSO requirement is possible. The record must show that 

because conditions or uses have changed, less restrictive 

requirements will protect the public interest. An environmental analysis must be conducted and documented (for example, 

environmental assessment, environmental impact statement, 

etc., as necessary) in order to provide the basis for a waiver or 

exception to an NSO planning decision. Modification of the 

NSO requirement will pertain only to refinement or correction 

of the location(s) to which it applied. If the waiver, exception, 

or modification is found to be consistent with the intent of the 

planning decision, it may be granted. If found inconsistent 

with the intent of the planning decision, a plan amendment 

would be required before the waiver, exception, or modification could be granted. 

When considering the “no development” or “no leasing” 

option, a rigorous test must be met and fully documented in the 

record. This test must be based upon stringent standards 

described in the land use planning document. Since rejection 

of all development rights is more severe than the most restrictive mitigation requirement, the record must show that consideration was given to development subject to reasonable mitigation, including “no surface occupancy.” The record must 

also show that other mitigation was determined to be insufficient to adequately protect the public interest. A “no development” or “no leasing” decision should not be made solely 

because it appears that conventional methods of development 

would be unfeasible, especially where an NSO restriction may 

be acceptable to a potential permittee. In such cases, the 

potential permittee should have the opportunity to decide 

whether or not to go ahead with the proposal (or accept the use 

authorization), recognizing that an NSO restriction is involved. 

596