July 14 - Tour of Carrico Lake Allotment

 

Resource Advisory Council (RAC) Members Present and Category Represented:

Jon Hutchings (3) Public At Large
Dave Tattam (2) Wild Horse & Burro
Bill Upton (1) Energy/Minerals
Jeff White (1) Energy/Minerals

 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Representatives Present:
Mike Brown Public Affairs Officer, Elko Field Office
Duane Crimmins Wildlife Biologist, Battle Mountain FO
Bill Draght Rangeland Specialist, Nevada State Office
Dan Netcher Rangeland Specialist Battle Mountain FO
Doug Furtado AFM Renewable Resources, Battle Mountain FO
Helen Hankins Field Manager, Elko FO
Shauna Richardson Wild Horse Specialist, Battle Mountain FO
Jerry Smith Field Manager, Battle Mountain FO
Stephanie Trujillo Administrative Assistant, Ely FO

 

Other Attendees:
Lyndon Evans Carrico Lake Allotment Permittee
Steve Foree Nevada Department of Wildlife
Jim Gardner Carrico Lake Allotment Permittee
Bill Hall Carrico Lake Allotment Permittee
Kevin Kirkeby Field Rep, U.S. Senator Ensign
Shaun Mariluch Carrico Lake Allotment Permittee
Crystal Nelson Field Rep. U.S. Congressman Gibbons
Hank Fillippini Carrico Lake Allotment Permittee
Ray Salisbury Lander County Public Lands Advisory Council
Bob Schweigert Intermountain Range Consulting
Larry Tuskey Carrico Lake Allotment Permittee
Ray Williams Lander County Public Lands Advisory Council

 

8:00 a.m. Tour Departed Battle Mountain

- Doug Furtado served as tour leader and had everyone introduce themselves. He explained the reasons for the tour and the forthcoming Carrico Lake Rangeland Allotment Evaluation. Issues of concern include Rangeland Health, Riparian Areas, Wild
Horse Herd Management Areas and setting Appropriate Management Level, Livestock Grazing, and others. The Draft Evaluation is scheduled to be published next week and the Final Multiple Use Decision is scheduled to be published September 30, 2005. There are 566,000 acres of public land in the Allotment.

- Stop 1 – Reece River Valley. Range condition is an issue, area is very dry. The present state is not desired, perennial grasses are not abundant. Cheatgrass and halogeton are present at this site. This is a salt desert shrub area. Soil presence is dry and silty. Mormon crickets are present. BLM would like to reduce cheatgrass and fire danger.

The Allotment is being transferred to a new permittee, Ellison, who has agreed to a reduction of AUMs. Area is mid 0 ecological rating, 25% grass, looking at what will comeback if fire occurs (cheatgrass). Fencing is planned along watershed line; the process will be long term.

- Bob Schweigert asked several questions about the Land Use Plan and rangeland health.

- Jeff White commented that historical management has been year round.

- Hank Fillippini noted that the range is the best it’s looked in 60 -70 years.

- Stop 2 – This area has riparian concerns. This will be Ellison’s Ranch use area with the permit transfer. Fencing projects are not needed in this area due to the change in grazing. There are sage grouse values and chuckers in the area. This is the South Shoshone HMA; 247 horses were counted March. Appropriate Management Level (AML) has not been set yet, and is one of the objectives of the Evaluation. The goal for AML would be 50-60 animals. Streams are rated functional at risk. Closures have been done (three years prior) on top to protect aspen stands (only one in the allotment).

- Dan Netcher noted that this will be a sheep permit. He also discussed upland conditions.

- Bill Hall said that his plans are to eliminate hot season grazing and to do rotation south to north.

- Bob Schweigert discussed the issue of Standards versus the Land Use Plan and that there are two sets of rules.

- Steve Foree pointed out the preserving the health of the land is the bottom line.

- Stop 3 – Fish Creek Range. Hank Fillippini is the permittee. There is 4.5 miles of stream, goes all the way to the ranch. Ellison Ranching will be a sheep operation. Hot season grazing will be eliminated in this area. Main concentration of grazing is near ranch. Chemical treatment will be done on Salt Cedar (aquatic habitat suitable), will be sprayed in the fall (hand applied), and may require numerous sprays. Long term improvement, weather conditions will effect.

- Jeff White asked if "bugs" could be used to treat the tamarisk. The spray to be used will be "Habitat" which is safe for livestock.

- Cooperative Extension Agent Rod Davis discussed the Boot Strap program. It consists of 5 members who have done sagebrush rehabilitation and range improvement projects. The BLM and Cooperative Extension have joined to make this program possible. The members consist mainly of high school drop-outs. They are taught skills of work as well as interviews and completing applications.

- Stop 4 –Cottonwood burn area. There was no rehabilitation or grazing restrictions after the fire. The area is mainly halogeton and cheatgrass. Bill Hall proposes moving sheep here in early February. BLM would like to introduce forage kochia as a method of improving the range.

- Stop 5 – This area burned in 1999 (9200 acres). It has two pastures and is fenced. It was seeded with forage kochia and use was deferred on the pastures. Crested Wheatgrass is isolated throughout the area; a greater concentration of perennial grasses is desired.

- Hank Fillippini commented that if there is any reduction in his AUMs, the "war is on."

- Doug Furtado talked about working together for the Evaluation.

- Jeff White noted that he was pleased to see BLM and permittees working together.

Lunch Break 1:30 to 2:00 p.m.

- Stop 6 – Dry Canyon Summit. Not many fences in this allotment which is part of the Bald Mountain Herd Management Area

- Stop 7 – In the Bald Mountain Herd Management Area. BLM plans to fence the riparian area.

- Stop 8 – Area has grass used by Fillippini.

- Stop 9 - Riparian area, used by livestock, wild horses, and wildlife. This is a grass valley hydrologic area. Area will be fenced off.

- Stop 10 - Corral Spring Complex and Carrico Lake Plaza. Riparian area is of concern.

- Stop 11 – Cortez Joint Use Area. Fillippinis use the area. They want early use to get the cheatgrass. BLM plans to add fences here.

Final Stop - Carrico Lake Playa, Riparian area. Plans are to eliminate hot season grazing and fence. Discussion about the value of AUMs and the profitability and management of livestock operations.

Tour ended at 5:30 p.m.

July 15th - Business Meeting in the Battle Mountain Field Office

Resource Advisory Council (RAC) Members Present and Category Represented:
Jo Dean (2) Environmental Organization
Sheri Eklund-Brown (3) Elected Official
Vince Garcia (3) Native American
Dave Gaskin (3) State Agency
Les Hansen (2) Recreation
Jon Hutchings (3) Public At Large
Barry Perryman (3) Academia
Dave Tattam (2) Wild Horse & Burro
Bill Upton (1) Energy/Minerals
Jeff White (1) Energy/Minerals

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Representatives Present:
Mike Brown Public Affairs Officer, Elko FO
Gene Drais NEPA Coordinator, Ely FO
Doug Furtado Assistant Field Manager, Battle Mountain FO
Helen Hankins Field Manager, Elko FO
Dan Netcher Rangeland Specialist, Battle Mountain FO
Gene Seidlitz Associate Field Manager, Battle Mountain FO
Jo Simpson Chief, Communications, NSO
Jerry Smith Field Manager, Battle Mountain FO
Stephanie Trujillo Administrative Assistant, Ely FO
Jeff Weeks Assistant Field Manager, Ely FO

Other Attendees:
Bruce Flinn Project Manager, Ely FO
Jim Gardner Permittee
Gary McCuin Nevada Department of Agriculture
June McMillen Public Affairs Officer, U.S. Forest Service
Crystal Nelson Field Representative, Congressman Gibbons

8:05 a.m. RAC Chairman Vince Garcia welcomed everyone and called the meeting to order. Everyone introduced themselves.

 

I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

-Minutes from the prior meeting were reviewed and corrections were submitted by Sheri Eklund-Brown and Jo Simpson.

Sheri Eklund-Brown made a motion to approve the minutes with corrections. The motion was seconded by Dave Tattam. All in favor.

 

II. CARRICO LAKE TOUR DISCUSSION

- Jerry Smith discussed the tour held on the previous day in the Carrico Lake Allotment and asked if anyone had questions.

- Vince Garcia expressed his concern that the allotment has been overgrazed in the past.

- Jerry explained that his staff is not dwelling on what was done in the past, but what can be done now to get to where they want to be.

- Dan Netcher stressed that BLM has focused on building positive relationships with permittees. Problems have been identified and are being worked through; management of allotment will be conservatively.

- Vince Garcia and Doug Furtado pointed out this has been a good year for precipitation.

- Jerry Smith said the relationship between BLM and Fillippini has been controversial. There has been concern in the past about how BLM does allotment evaluations. There is the potential for lawsuit and appeal. After the water lawsuit, Hank Fillippini obtained grants to do fencing and improvements. The staff has spent considerable time on this issue, should be commended for their hard work apparent on the tour yesterday. The office and the new permittee have come to a lot of agreements. We commend Bill Hall and Ellison Ranching for eliminating hot season grazing. Fencing will not be needed and funding can be used elsewhere. We’re making good progress.

- Jon Hutchings asked what the role of the RAC would be.

- Jerry Smith stated that the RAC was founded to do Rangeland Standards and Guidelines; this is a primary role of the RAC. There are a lot of questions about the Standards and Guidelines - how does this work on the ground. Our tour yesterday was to show the RAC how we’re doing, how we’re implementing working with people, and time period. A lot of hard work is going into this project.

- Jeff White noted that the tour was well organized and well run. He commended all those involved. He also noted that there was some confusion/differences about conformity and consistency among the RMP, Standards and Guidelines, and the Land Use Plan. He asked for clarification.

- Jerry Smith said that the Land Use Plans are a contract with public to indicate how BLM will manage the public lands. Based on regulatory changes, we developed Standards and Guidelines for managing grazing. The first step is – are the Standards and Guidelines in conformance with the Land Use Plan? Bob Schweigert had it backwards. There are two options if the Standards and Guidelines do not conform with the Land Use Plan – either don’t use the Standards and Guidelines or amend the Land Use Plan. Battle Mountain, Ely, and Elko did a conformance review of the Standards and Guidelines and the Nevada State Office concurred.

- Helen Hankins noted that Bob Swaggart’s proposal is that the Land Use Plan has primacy over the local Standards and Guidelines and could be determined in court. But then, the national standards apply. The bottom line is that the permittee must show improvement. She does not think that the Land Use Plan and the Standards and Guidelines are that different.

- Gary McCuin asked for an example of the issue.

- Bill Upton noted that at Sand Moss Creek there was a difference in the riparian area.

- Helen Hankins noted that the signatory for the Standards and Guidelines is the Secretary of Interior, and that the signatory for Land Use Plans is the State Director.

- General discussion about primacy of Standards and Guidelines – RAC or National.

- Sheri Eklund-Brown asked if the new regulations for range are state or national.

- Helen Hankins replied that they are National, and that the implementation date is August 19.

- Jon Hutchings said this is a good example that shows that Land Use Plans need to be up-to-date.

- Jerry Smith stated that periodically amendments are made to Land Use Plans. The Shoshone Resource Management Plan (RMP) has a fire amendment and for communication sites, etc. Battle Mountain is scheduled to do its RMP in 2007 and Elko in 2009. RMPS cost about $12 million and take a long time to complete. For the current

Evaluation - it will be sent out to public next Friday, decision will be on or before December 30th.

- Dave Tattam asked if RAC members are on mailing list. The RAC members will be added.

- Barry Perryman commended the Battle Mountain office for the change of relationship with the permittees. "Good ideas are sold," he noted.

- Jim Gardner working with Ellison ranch was introduced to the group by Dan Netcher.

- Jerry Smith discussed the Fish Creek Complex and said it will be worked on with the same commitment as the Carrico Allotment.

- Bill Upton noted that he is interested to see the distribution of water and livestock in the evaluation - could be beneficial to whole area.

- Vince Garcia commented that there are other parties besides BLM and the permittees who want to eliminate grazing. Rangeland health has to be the concern. One good water year will not turn it around. AUMs may have to be decreased for the rangeland to improve and but then will AUMs be restored?

- Bill Upton said the talk is about the long term aspects. He wants to see milestones and benchmarks.

- Doug Furtado stated that we (BLM) are required to make significant progress. Once a decision is made, an interim plan and long term plan are made. We must have the infrastructure needed and intensive management from permittees.

- Dave Tattam asked about the timeframe for the improvements.

- Doug Furtado answered that they get about $200,000 per year and are looking for additional money from the state office and Washington office. Eureka County projects from last year are our number one priority; then these will become number one in Fall.

- Sheri Eklund-Brown asked how much does the N1 Board contribute.

- Jerry Smith noted that it’s the N6 Board and they contribute nothing. They have contributed to one project over the years.

- Doug Furtado stated that the N1 Board in Elko County is very proactive, and the N6 is not as active.

 

III. ELY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE

- Gene Drais passed out a handout which is a shortened version of his presentation. The Ely RMP moves Ely away from management by allotments, resources, and resource uses to management by watershed and ecological systems. There will be improvement of vegetation. The RMP incorporates national policy for fire and oil & gas. The RMP manages sagebrush habitat for sage grouse, provides lands for disposal, and it provides forage at levels to accommodate vegetation.

- Vince Garcia asked what the advantages are of managing by watersheds versus by allotments.

- Gene Drais responded that it makes more sense to manage by watershed as it affects all resources. The Lincoln County Land Act of 2002 required disposal of 13,000 acres north of Mesquite. The Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation and Development Act is incorporated into the RMP. White Pine County is working on a similar bill that will be included in the RMP.

The Ely District manages 11,400,000 acres including White Pine, Lincoln, and a small portion of Nye County. Areas of Las Vegas and Mesquite are growing. Coyote Springs will be developed in the next 10-15 years and a population of 50,000 people is expected. Population growth is affecting many areas with recreation, OHV, etc.

- Dave Tattam asked about the location of Coyote Springs.

- Gene Drais said between Clark and Lincoln counties. Scoping with the public was held in April 2003. Meetings were held in Ely, Caliente, Mesquite, Las Vegas, Reno, and Tonopah. There are 14 cooperating agencies who are involved at different levels. White Pine, Lincoln, and Nye counties are concerned with the availability of public lands. He also discussed alternatives. Alternative D was prepared by the Idaho High Desert group and it has changed somewhat.

- Jeff White asked if this is the first time BLM looked at a complete alternative from an outside group.

- Gene Drais responded that he is unsure if it is the first, but its okay for groups to submit information. This plan deals with all resources, not just issues. OHV designations will be made.

- Jon Hutchings noted that grazing can be eliminated for resource reasons and asked if it can be done by an RMP?

- Gene Drais said there must be resource reasons. They have opened the rest of the District to oil and gas leasing with some exception areas being closed.

-Vince Garcia asked where SNWA is in this – is the pipeline dealt with or will the RMP need an amendment.

- Gene Drais said that Bruce Flinn will answer this; the corridor is evaluated in general terms.

- Jon Hutchings asked about setting standards.

- Gene Drais said that an RMP is an allocation of resources; what lands are for grazing, for OHV, etc.

- Dave Tattam asked if the grazing areas that are taken out, are these areas that are unfit.

- Gene Drais replied not unfit, but may be better suited for other uses.

- General discussion about big game allocations.

- Gene Drais commented that big game allocations are not being made.

- Jon Hutchings noted that BLM can reduce AUMs because of resource concerns, but can’t close an area to grazing because they want it to be used for something else.

- Barry stated that livestock uses are different, unsuitable for grazing, and not just because of the wildlife.

- General discussion about closing areas to grazing. Does BLM have the authority to administratively close an area to grazing?

- Dave Tattam said that is how it was done in Clark County.

- Gene Drais commented that when allotments that are relinquished then they can be made available for forage reserves.

- Jon Hutchings asked about BLM authority to close allotments.

- Helen Hankins said she will provide the reference regarding authority for closing areas to Jon.

- Barry Perryman said that BLM could make a case that an area is unsuited for grazing and he understands in the south hot country that areas like that may not be suitable for grazing. What are those areas?

- Gene Drais said "if relinquished." BLM did close portions of allotments for the desert tortoise in 2000. BLM received public input and amended plans.

- Gary McCuin said if grazing rights are relinquished, what about water rights that the permittees still hold water right. BLM has to deal with those rights before turning into a grass bank.

- Discussion about water rights, grass banks, relinquishments and beneficial uses.

- Gary McCuin discussed takings and the State Water Engineer.

- Helen Hankins said it may not be BLM’s responsibility for the water rights.

- Jon Hutchings said he’s concerned about interest groups who pressure BLM into regulating out grazing and allotments become annual leases.

- Sheri Eklund-Brown asked about the Mary’s River Allotment. It was set aside because riparian objectives were not met. It was closed, not reopened and now it is a wildlife refuge.

- Helen Hankins responded said BLM acquired Mary River allotment in a land exchange in 1992. The Environmental Assessment recommended riparian closure (12,000 to 20,000 acres) until specified objectives are met. It was reviewed last year and some, but not all, objectives were met. In 2007 BLM will evaluate again and if objectives are met then BLM will then go back to F&WS and develop an agreement for Lahontan Cutthroat Trout habitat. It is not BLM’s intention to close forever.

- Sheri Eklund-Brown said it has been thirteen years.

- Helen Hankins commented that when the allotment was acquired it was flat dirt, now there are willows, etc.; but the objectives are not met yet.

- Jon Hutchings noted that it was private land BLM acquired and lands under the Taylor Grazing Act.

- Gary McCuin said that grazing allotments can only be changed through the Land Use Plan and there has to have specific reason.

- Helen Hankins said that BLM will provide information about statutory and regulatory authority for closing allotments and mail it to RAC members in the next two weeks.

- Gene Drais reviewed land disposal process – they must meet criteria and be identified lands, prioritized in the RMP. The RMP will be mailed July 20th; the Notice of Availability will be in the Federal Register July 29th, and comment period through November 28th. There will be public meetings held in October in the same locations as meetings were held for the Draft RMP.

9:35 a.m. Chairman Garcia called for a break

9:45 a.m. Chairman Garcia called the meeting back to order

 

IV. CLARK, LINCOLN, AND WHITE PINE COUNTIES GROUNDWATER DEVELOPMENT PROJECT EIS UPDATE

Bruce Flinn discussed the Southern Nevada Water Authority’s (SWNA) Clark, Lincoln, and White Pine Counties Groundwater Development Project.

- Sheri Eklund-Brown asked when the deadline to comment is.

- Bruce Flinn said it is Aug 1st. The comment period was extended to August 1st. They received 7,500 comments with some from foreign countries. Nine scoping meetings were held with over 700 in attendance, with Utah having the largest numbers. Six meetings were held in Nevada and three in Utah. The people in Utah are paying close attention to the project – the Governor’s office, counties, and delegation are very interested.

Last September, BLM received the Right of Way (ROW) application. In February, BLM received ROW applications from Lincoln County for the Coyote Springs Development. This spring, BLM received a ROW application from Lincoln County for the Tule Springs Development.

On June 10th BLM received a third ROW application from Lincoln County for several areas in Lake Valley and Patterson Valley for water development. The question is would Lincoln County’s proposals be separate or interconnected with SWNA. If the Lincoln County ROWs are part of SWNA, then BLM will have to re-do scoping and back up. There would be a data disparity – SWNA has collected data and Lincoln County has not. This would be a cumulative impact under NEPA … the question is would there be one EIS or three? Ely will brief the Nevada State Office and Washington Office. A lot of sorting out is going on now.

Bruce has turned in his notice and is leaving the end of November. This will be a five to seven year process and BLM needs a larger contractor. BLM is setting up records now anticipating a lawsuit. There will be a 90 to 120 day period of rethinking. Is this a regional project? The scope of the project has changed. There are 16 hydrologic basins now, not 8. There are 5 flow systems, not 2. Three states involved now – Arizona, Utah, and Nevada … and potentially California.

- Gary McCuin commented that he hopes this doesn’t get chopped into so many pieces that lose sight of the cumulative effects.

- Bruce Flinn said that BLM needs a core management team to make sure the analysis flows. This is bigger than most water projects in the last 30 years. There are 300 wells, 1600 miles of pipeline, 2 million acres, and a water war.

- Barry Perryman commented that someone will earn their NEPA money on this project.

- Helen Hankins said that the fear in eastern Nevada is that ranches will be sold for this reason, to make money.

- Bruce Flinn said replied that there are three buckets: 1 - Existing water rights; 2 - Pending water rights; and 3 - Future water rights. The speculation is this (water) is an undervalued commodity.

- Jon Hutchings commented on consideration of external costs, these are not able to be evaluated.

- Bruce stated that they had planned on a socio-economic team to look at impacts of rural versus urban. They will develop a strategy paper in August with ENSR and they will complete scoping.

- Gary McCuin asked if we can be a cooperating agency or participate in the process.

- Bruce Flinn responded that they are wrestling with cooperating agencies, and how people can participate in the process. NDOW was offered cooperating status and just last week withdrew their status; they may come back to the table. SNWA would like to see it revisited.

10:10 a.m. Chairman Garcia announced the Public Comment period is open.

- Helen asked if there is a Department of Water Planning. In 20 years, there will be 1 million people from Minden to Reno. The state as a whole needs to look at these issues, this is more then just a SNWA issue.

- Dave Gaskin said that a department does not exist.

- Jo Simpson commented that at the last legislature, State Water Engineer Hugh Ricci gave a briefing.

- Barry Perryman commented that water rights are being filed for under Highway 395 and I-80.

- Jon said western Nevada is far more complex that southern and eastern Nevada.

- Vince Garcia added where are the votes coming from - it has become a marketing tool for water right ownership … there are political implications.

- Bruce Flinn said this is not just a Nevada problem. Drought is driving Colorado Springs and El Paso into building pipelines and retiring agricultural land.

- Sheri Eklund-Brown asked what the tribal involvement in cooperating agency status is.

- Bruce Flinn said that BIA initially said yes, then said no later. No tribes have asked to become cooperating agencies.

- Jo Dean recommended that the RAC read the book Cadillac Desert.

- Bruce Flinn said that groundwater is a nationwide issue.

- Helen Hankins said Elko BLM will be looking at water rights in the Field Office area and looking at how BLM manages for beneficial use for other resources.

- Sheri Eklund-Brown asked if a county could file for water rights.

- Helen Hankins stated you would have to prove beneficial use. NDOW can file.

 

V. RANGELAND MONITORING PARTNERSHIP UPDATE

Rangeland Partnership - Handout distributed.

- Jon Hutchings said that he, Rick Orr, Barry Perryman, Gary McCuin and others are working together. They are getting the MOU in place, developing how to implement this on the ground - there are various roles of all parties. The Public Lands Council and BLM did an MOU for Cooperative monitoring.

The Draft Implementation Protocol for Cooperative Rangeland Monitoring was put out for comment. Hutchings followed the handout and reviewed the changes in the draft protocol document – the objectives, RAC roles and responsibilities, BLM’s role, summary, background; identifies what is to be accomplished.

Cooperators involved are in the process of revising the rangeland management handbook. Recommendation is to develop a checklist to work with the BLM on the scope of allotment goals and put together a template checklist. Once completed it will be sent to the Field Managers for approval. One criticism is that we’re making this more complicated than it needs to be – it doesn’t need to be more complicated.

- Jerry Smith commented that there are groups watching this process (Western Watersheds) and referred to the court case against BLM in Idaho and Simplot where Western Watersheds believes that the BLM is wrongfully monitoring. Do we need to do a conformance determination with our Land Use Plans and do we need to do some sort of NEPA process.

- Helen Hankins remarked that this is a procedure to collect data and since when do we do conformance evaluations or NEPA for a procedure to collect data?

- Jon Hutchings asked Dough Furtado about objectives and monitoring in the evaluation.

- Doug Furtado stated that the technical recommendation is to identify objectives, what monitoring is going to be done. This is being integrated now and would be used as a monitoring plan.

- Jerry added that the idea is to be successful. It is a federal action. We need to take a hard look at this and need a rationale why NEPA was not done or a conformance determination in case Western Watersheds asks.

- Barry Perryman asked how to begin the implementation of the plan and in which district will it be done. We need a pilot program in an area that does not have key areas and objectives already set.

- Jon Hutchings commented that the pilot can be done under categorical exclusion.

- Helen Hankins added to look at what Idaho did and did not do. Permittees should be required/encouraged to receive monitoring training. If data received does not meet standards then go back to the permittee.

- Gary McCuin said that you cannot require a permittee to receive training, it is an individual call.

- General discussion about training and who must take it.

- Doug Furtado said there has been limited involvement and we need to use a simplistic approach. NEPA is not needed unless there is an action. We should send the agreement out to the public.

- Barry Perryman said that data only shows if objectives are being met or not.

- Jon Hutchings commented that we need to create a template and a data validation method and do a pilot project.

- Gary McCuin said if the RAC agrees in concept then it will be sent to the BLM Nevada State Office.

- Dave Tattam said this is a great idea.

- Vince Garcia added that the reason for permittee monitoring is to relieve BLM staff workload.

- General discussion about the use of the handbook, data collection, and credibility of the data monitoring.

- Jerry Smith commented that this is good as it will help permittees and will help BLM. However, he is concerned about legal possibilities and technicalities. We need to look at public consultation. Pilot programs are good to hammer out bugs.

- Jo Simpson said that Duane Wilson can help facilitate this at the national level.

- Helen Hankins said she appreciated the RAC’s involvement and asked are we good for the RAC to approve.

Dave Tattam made a motion to approve the Draft and forward it to the BLM with a target to be implemented. Jeff White seconded the motion.

- Vince Garcia asked for discussion of the motion.

- Bill Upton suggested that using the term "partnership" is good, it puts the risk on all parties.

- Jon Hutchings summarized Rick Orr’s comments:

- Simplicity

- The Pilot – is it open to everybody? The pilot approach is the most suitable.

- Rangeland talk book of 1982

- BLM’s responsibility – BLM has the ultimate responsibility and cannot abdicate its authority.

- Vince Garcia commented that if data from the permittee is not used, then BLM should have to write down why it was not used - appropriate or not appropriate.

- Helen Hankins said when BLM receives data, it will be evaluated then.

- Jerry Smith stated that when the BLM range staff and permittees meet each year, that would be perfect time to review this information, we need more and better communication.

- General discussion about communication between BLM range staff and permittees and training.

The motion was voted on and all in favor.

- Barry Perryman informed group that Aug 3rd and 4th is field day at the Gunn Ranch, and the 4th is the permittee Monitoring Workshop. There will be a flyer.

- Sheri Eklund-Brown discussed the letter from the RAC with recommendations for the SWNA project.

- Jon Hutchings said he was absent when he was appointed to the sub-committee. Hutchings read the new letter.

- Barry Perryman discussed his students’ study in Death Valley concerning of pup fish problems. The springs are connected to aquifers.

- Dave Tattam added that the pup fish were a concern and went to back burner during Yucca Mountain.

- Jo Dean motioned to accept letter. Les Hansen seconded the motion.

Discussion:

- Sheri Eklund-Brown added that the letter is very well written and conveyed by Jon.

- Helen Hankins said that if letter is addressed to Gene Kolkman then cc the State Director.

Vote taken, motion passed all in favor.

- Jeff White added to change the name to Amy Lueders as State Director of Nevada.

 

VI. MINING UPDATE

- Dave Gaskin said they have moved into a new building, south of Carson City by NDOT. They are working on Gold Quarry, Emigrant, bond updates. The Standard Unit Costs Model is about to be implemented.

 

VII. FIELD MANAGERS’ AND DISTRICT RANGERS’ REPORTS

- Sheri Eklund-Brown noted that in the manager’s report, Elko County is paying $1 million … not "in-kind."

- Helen Hankins said that it can be rewritten.

- Jerry Smith talked about last night’s OHV meeting and asked Les Hansen to give a summary.

- Les Hansen gave a briefing of the ATV meeting held last night. A few people showed up. Most trails are existing. A few concerns were expressed related to lambing from the Ellison Ranch. This could be solved using a courtesy closure. There were no negative responses.

- Jerry Smith discussed the Boot Strap program with the Cooperative Extension, they received sage grouse money from the University and Cooperative Extension. Six youth are building sage habitat improvements. It is a very positive program, get things done on the ground. It started with $60,000 and is now at $325,000 +. It’s for kids who have not had a job. They learn to do a resume. Rod Davis is running the program.

- June McMillen gave the Forest Service update. The Canyon Creek prescribed burn has been cancelled and is on the back burner. The Forest Service travel management OHV/ATV project is underway on the Humboldt. The project involves closure of national forest lands unless routes are designated for OHV/ATV travel. Public comment is being accepted. In the Ely District, Forest Service staff is available to the public every Thursday from 3:00 to 6:00 p.m. They’re asking people to come into the office and identify routes on maps and to comment on both motorized and non-motorized travel. This process will begin in Wells, Elko, and Winnemucca in the next two weeks.

- Jeff White asked for clarification about motorized mountain bikes.

- Vince Garcia asked if this was coming from the national level.

- June McMillen said yes this is a national directive; there will be designated routes for motorized. This may change based on comments.

- General discussion about emergency closures and definitions’ terminology – roads, ways, 2-tracks, etc.

-Jeff White added that BLM ran into a mountain bike issue.

- Jo Simpson asked what about Austin.

- June McMillen said that she is not sure.

- Jerry Smith said that some two tracks become an issue if closed, but when three routes go to same point, not as much.

- Sheri Eklund-Brown suggested that the term ‘road closure’ needs to go.

- June McMillen invited the RAC members to come anytime to look at maps, but staff is available at specific set times. A press release will come out announcing the times.

- Jo Simpson offered to have OHV added to the Tri-RAC agenda.

Jeff White motioned to adjourn the meeting. Leslie Hansen seconded the motion. All in favor.

 

Meeting adjourned at 11:45 a.m.

 

Date Approved: Approved by:

Minutes by Stephanie Trujillo and Mike Brown