Colorado Department of Natural Resources protest letter of Tres Rios Resource Management Plan

8/14/2019 Colorado Department of Natural Resources protest letter of Tres Rios Resource Management Plan

1/3

Board of Land Commissioners Division of Reclamation, Mining & Safety Colorado Geological SurveyOil & Gas Conservation Commission Water Conservation Board Division of Forestry

Division of Water Resources Division of Parks and Wildlife

STATE OF COLORADO

OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Department of Natural Resources1313 Sherman Street, Room 718Denver, Colorado 80203Phone: (303) 866-3311

Fax: (303) 866-2115dnr.state.co.us

October 21, 2013

U.S. Bureau of Land Management

Director (210)

Attn: Brenda Hudgens-Williams

20 M Street SE, Room 2134LM

Washington, D.C. 20003

RE: Final San Juan National Forest and Proposed Tres Rios Field Office Land

and Resource Management Plan (together referred to as the LRMP) and

Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS).

Dear Director Kornze:

The Colorado Department of Natural Resources (DNR) submits this document as part of the Bureau of

Land Managements (BLMs) protest process for the LRMP/FEIS. DNR is committed to working

collaboratively with both the BLM and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), as co-lead agencies in

development of this LRMP and FEIS. The deadline for filing a protest to apprise the BLM of ongoing

issues and concerns to consider before issuing a Record of Decision is October 21, 2013. Had the federal

government not been forced to shut down for the two weeks prior to the deadline for lodging anyprotest, DNR would have actively sought to address the issues and concerns identified herein before

and/or in lieu of submitting any protest.

We understand that BLM is considering an extension to this protest period in light of the federal

government shutdown and appreciate any additional time to discuss our concerns. Since formal

notification of any such extension has not yet been provided, we are filing this protest in order to

preserve our administrative remedies. With additional time, and now that the federal agencies are back

to full staff capacity, DNR is ready and willing to work with the BLM and USFS to resolve these and other

matters. Should we be able to resolve satisfactorily the issues raised herein, along with any other issues

that arise between now and the close of an extended protest period, we would look to rescind the

protest as appropriate.

DNRs protest focuses on issues relating to two of our Divisions: the Colorado Water Conservation Board

(CWCB) and the Division of Parks and Wildlife (CPW). DNR submitted a package of comments on the

Draft LRMP and FEIS from both divisions on April 11, 2008. Please find a copy of these comments

attached.

John W. HickenlooperGovernor

Mike KingExecutive Director


2/3

2

On behalf of these two divisions, we raise the following issues:

1) Minimum stream flows and reservoir elevation standards: Sections 2.5.18(a)-(d) and 2.5.22-23

of the Final LRMP identify standards for minimum stream flow and minimum reservoir levels

that run the risk of conflicting with state water law and the Memorandum of Understanding

between the BLM and DNR regarding management of water resources on BLM managed land in

Colorado (BLM MOU).See, BLM-MOU-CO-545. We recommend removing the LRMP

provisions that establish standards for minimum stream flow and minimum reservoir levelsidentified in LRMP Sections 2.5.18(a)-(d) and 2.5.22-23, deleting the words or should occur

from LRMP Section 2.5.18, and working with the CWCB to address any of BLMs minimum

stream flow needs. DNR would prefer the BLM change the flow requirements from mandatory

standards toguidelines, as that is how they were contained in the Draft LRMP.

2) Suitability Determinations under Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA): Section 3.23 of the FEIS

and Section 3.9 of the LRMP document determinations of suitability under the WSRA that

overlook or ignore the extensive collaborative stakeholder efforts, including the River Protection

Workgroup, the Dolores River Dialogue and the Lower Dolores Plan Working Group. These have

been created to inform the suitability analysis and/or develop alternatives to WSRA suitability

determinations. These groups have made substantial and demonstrable progress towards locally

driven consensus solutions for resource protection. We recommend including a re-opener

provision to initiate a plan amendment to accommodate recommendations from the

stakeholder groups.

3) Lease Stipulations for Wildlife Resources: Appendix H of the Final LRMP/FEIS contains a variety

of detailed lease stipulations to protect wildlife resources during federal mineral development

stipulations, and includes explicit criteria outlining when exceptions, modifications, and waivers

may be granted on USFS lands. These explicit criteria do not apply to BLM lands, and will only

be considered at the discretion of the BLMs Authorized Officer. BLMs discretion makes it

difficult for DNR to evaluate the effectiveness of stipulations for protecting wildlife resources

during development on BLM lands. We recommend that BLM adopt the explicit exception,

waiver and modification criteria identified in Appendix H for USFS lands as a way to providegreater certainty when assessing potential impacts of plan implementation on wildlife, including

species like Gunnison Sage Grouse (GuSG), desert bighorn, and mule deer.

4) Gunnison Sage Grouse: Section 3.3 of the FEIS states that LRMP implementation may affect, is

likely to adversely affectGuSG. Currently only 13% of the federal minerals underlying the San

Miguel Basin GuSG subpopulation are leased. DNR is concerned that the LRMP proposes leasing

the remainder with a No Surface Occupancy stipulation that is subject to exceptions,

modifications and waivers at BLMs discretion. We believe that selecting the no lease option

for new leases in GuSG occupied and unoccupied habitat, or adopting the exceptions,

modifications and waivers criteria identified in Appendix H for GuSG stipulations could help

achieve a not likely to adversely affect determination for GuSG.

5) Cortez and Durango Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMA):The Final LRMP describes

an increase in the size of BLMs Cortez SRMA by nearly 4,000 acres, and outlines a conditions-

based seasonal winter closure for both the Durango and Cortez SRMAs to protect winter range

and winter concentration areas for elk and mule deer herds. With the addition of these lands,

the Cortez SRMA covers all BLM lands within mule deer critical winter range north of U.S.

Highway 160 between Cortez and Mancos. This is an important wintering area and migratory

corridor for mule deer. DNR is concerned that SRMA designation


3/3

3

makes recreation management the predominate focus of land management activities in these

areas and is likely to displace mule deer populations. A conditions-based closure is not as

protective for mule deer as hard date seasonal closures. DNR recommends replacing the

conditions-based closure for these lands with a firm December 1April 30 closure, using only

the Cortez SRMA area identified in the Draft EIS, and/or allocating a portion of the Cortez SRMA

lands as a Wildlife Habitat Area for big game winter use.

We hope to have additional time to identify with the BLM agreeable solutions to these issues, and any

others not identified above. I appreciate the BLMs continuing efforts to work with the State to managethe use of Colorados natural resources and look forward to finding mutually beneficial and agreeable

solutions to these matters.

Sincerely,

Mike King, Executive Director

Colorado Department of Natural Resources

ENCLOSURE

CC: John Mehlhoff, BLM Colorado

Connie Clementson, BLM Tres Rios Field Office

Dan Jiron, USFS Rocky Mountain Region

Mark Stiles, San Juan National Forest

Documents

Colorado Department of Natural Resources protest letter of Tres Rios Resource Management Plan